@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man
Dat open world graphics king
It's all well and good that there is 11 mill polys per frame, that's amazing, but the LOD distance and pop in is an eye sore because of this. I'd rather it had been less poly intensive per frame to kill the pop ins.
No , it doesn't render 11 million polygons per frame . That title is misleading , read the article . The engine draws those polygons but doesn't render until character gets closer . Which means that , those are total polygons on entire map and not all of them are there when you look at distant objects . There are only few polygons to make the geometry of distant object similar to actual one . When you get closer , more polygons are rendered and added to it and it becomes more detailed . Meanwhile , polygons in area behind you , are reduced as you move further away .
Exactly. But cows will continue having a circle jerk over just the title of the thread. I can bet none of them even read the damn article, not even the gpuking himself.
Not only that but he copy pasted comment from NeoGaf about Star Citizen Cruiser , without doing any research about the game itself . The thread was pretty weak from the start , for discussion because of that comparison . Not to mention that nowhere in the article it says that all of those polygons are rendered at the same time . Actually it clearly states that , problem do occur when player moves faster and engine fails to render extra polygons at same speed , which results in blurry textures and terrible pop ins , and someone already posted pics about that glitch in this thread .
@Cloud_imperium
The game indeed renders 11 million polys per frame if you climb on the roof and get a panorama view of the entire city, there are more than enough spots to get those shots, so there's absolutely no cheating.
http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/04/14/infamous-second-sons-characters-are-120000-polygons-11-million-rendered-regularly-by-the-engine/
It says :
As stated in last point , doesn't look like 11 million polygons are rendered here .
Oh dear, that looks absolutely terrible. I'm sure this is the worst case scenario, but gawd.
Hermits are such hypocrites, they would pick the worst looking Infamous shot to troll while accuse others of cherry picking Crysis 3 shots, this really disgusts me.
Nice shots I_can_haz. Anyway these Infamous shots look better than any crysis shots posted here.
infamous is pushing an order of magnitude more polys than any currently available pc game. that part is not up for debate. will star citizen push more? who knows, altho i doubt it. the cruiser comparison is pointless, tho not for the reasons pc fanboys are bringing up. the 7 mil polys the cruiser is made up of will never all be displayed at once. in order to even see the entire carrier youd have to be far enough away and at that distance not using any lod models would just be poor optimization. thatd be like using the number of polys the entire city in infamous is made up of at lod0 and passing that off as the games poly count in any given scene.
I assume you have proof to back up that statement. How many polys per scene are Battlefield 4, Crysis 3 or AC4 pushing on PC?
Furthermore, I just have to laugh at the way you cows now act like polygon count is the most important aspect of real-time graphics when it is actually well down the list. Once you reach several million polygons per scene you start to enter a point of serious diminishing returns. It also matters a lot how the artists use those polygons. The polygon count itself doesn't tell you all that much about how good a game will look.
I mean, Infamous SS is apparently pushing upwards of 11 million polys per scene yet you still get objects that look like this:
When you consider how aggressive the LOD changes are in this game and how simplistic the models become I think that polygon count could have been used more effectively.
"This drastic case of diminishing returns is caused by numerous factors. The most simple explanation is that, visually, there is a much bigger difference when you jump from 500 to 5,000 polygons per object, rather than 5,000 to 50,000."
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/167673-ps4-and-xbox-one-the-diminishing-returns-of-next-gen-console-graphics
Hermits are such hypocrites, they would pick the worst looking Infamous shot to troll while accuse others of cherry picking Crysis 3 shots, this really disgusts me.
Nice shots I_can_haz. Anyway these Infamous shots look better than any crysis shots posted here.
"claims hermits pick cherry picked screens."
"Points cherry picked screens."
lol
Wow closer objects have more detail who cares. Still graphics king. And you can cherry pick a shitty screengrab from any game at any setting.
Crysis "very high" looking like a PS2 game
yea man the closer the more detail
lol that's cute
Mmm yeah you like that
Dude . That looks nowhere near as good as screenshots that he posted . It is a complete joke that you even tried . At least post some decent pics .
Question is how does that even look good? Rowe looks blurry and lacks detail.
Lighting probably. It's not zoomed into the character, but you can notice the improved detail on the wall with different lighting.
Still not as good as these textures shown in above pics .
Lighting is just a distraction . It doesn't make textures look better .
I never said it was, stop being so insecure.
Even with the lighting change Rowe still looks like crap
Right click open in new tab.
You can count the threads, so...unless you want to be able to zoom into the atoms I'd say that's pretty good for an open world game.
Yeah, it's decent, but it doesn't blow me away. Even Dead Space 3 had similar detail in the fabric of the character model.
@I_can_haz: this is the reaction you guys have when you see crysis 3 on pc vs infamous :)
lol
Wow nice. Claims herms cherry pick screenshots. Finds the worst, ugliest possible screen on low settings. I'm assuming this is what BF4 on PS4 looks like.
lol
Wow nice. Claims herms cherry pick screenshots. Finds the worst, ugliest possible screen on low settings. I'm assuming this is what BF4 on PS4 looks like.
cherry picking? you mean joining the first 63 player server i could find, and simply taking a screen on ultra settings? good to know how you really feel about a so called pc graphics king
First Infamous SS shot's I've taken. It's truly amazing knowing this is not edited to look better as a screen shot cause this is exactly how it looks when I click to begin playing again.
@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man
Dat open world graphics king
somebody tell me, how do I get that jacket?
Question is how does that even look good? Rowe looks blurry and lacks detail.
Lighting probably. It's not zoomed into the character, but you can notice the improved detail on the wall with different lighting.
Still not as good as these textures shown in above pics .
Lighting is just a distraction . It doesn't make textures look better .
I never said it was, stop being so insecure.
Even with the lighting change Rowe still looks like crap
Right click open in new tab.
You can count the threads, so...unless you want to be able to zoom into the atoms I'd say that's pretty good for an open world game.
Yeah, it's decent, but it doesn't blow me away. Even Dead Space 3 had similar detail in the fabric of the character model.
Bad company 2 is older and has detailed thread too
Nobody cares. Point is people too cheap to buy a console to supplement their computer are acting insecure and making asinine comments, especially now that there's threads everywhere with awesome looking photo mode screenshots.
more so called "cherry picked low" screenshots (actually ultra with 4x trssaa)
yeah real next gen here boys!
@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man
Dat open world graphics king
somebody tell me, how do I get that jacket?
I got mine with the limited edition. It comes with a DLC code. Once you type in the code on your PS4 it opens extra missions. Complete all the extra missions and the jacket is yours :D
more so called "cherry picked low" screenshots (actually ultra with 4x trssaa)
yeah real next gen here boys!
A. This is multiplayer, it's pretty well known the multiplayer for BF3 and 4 doesn't look close to as good as singleplayer.
B. No one really brought up BF4 anyway.
C. You're definitely still picking bad screens intentionally and it's pretty obvious.
post a screen from the same spot on the map if you think im fudging the settings. took some sp screens just to shut down ur other argument
post a screen from the same spot on the map if you think im fudging the settings. took some sp screens just to shut down ur other argument
Thanks for proving the point? Those are all far more detailed than your other screenshots from multiplayer. Also here's some better multiplayer screens that better represent what the game looks like. I'm not bothering to reinstall the game, but these prove the point, and most of them are from the PS4 version except the last one. They look better than what you posted in every area but the crappy resolution. I don't know how you even got your water to look that bad if it really is ultra, which I doubt honestly. Even gamespot's beta screenshots look better than yours.
Not that it makes a difference anyway, no one was talking about BF4. Making this point is a wasted effort.
your last shot is with the resolution slider cranked waaaaaay up. im not going to post unplayable screens. my screens are native 1920x1200 ultra settings w/ nvidias trssaa at 4x
lol if you say so, but I think the images speak for themselves, and the last image is 1080p from the PC version, hardly cranked way up. Your shit just smells, there isn't much getting around it at this point. Here are the specs this shot was played at.
nah that screen is 100% taken with the resolution slider at 200. i just went and checked that exact area.
1080p ultra
200 resolution scale
easy to see which one matches up exactly with your pic
Amazing graphics for an open world game...
All these screencaps , were taken using this technic...
This is In-game !
This game looks nuts.
Just so crazy that this amount of detail and fidelity its already being rendered and current gen began not even 5 months ago.
4 blocks are rendered with 48 MiB high resolution texture packs that are streamed separately.
FAR LOD uses baked imposters.
I guess that's why everything seems to blur or disappear in the background
Dat next gen pop-in
Log in to comment