I bet if it's a console exclusive you hermits would start parading all kinds of grassgate wouldn't ya? It just shows how hypocritical hermits are.
gpuking's forum posts
@zaryia said:
@gpuking said:
Drake's backyard has more foliage and grass than this. But hermits gotta make up a "king" somehow right lol
This game manages to look better than UC4 but with 10x the scale and double the FPS. BF1 completely shits over UC4 (which isn't even the current graphics king) by a considerable margin.
Look, the whole "Awkwardly pretend PC doesn't have the best graphics." act got old with PS3. Now it's just kind of sad. It's been 10 years, you're never going to have graphics king. Just stop.
@pdogg93 said:
same old engine, same old graphics. I'm stoked to play it, but come on... Graphics king it is not.
What looks better?
1440p of Ultra grass lacking settings tho!
It's funny coz you're the only one who's pretending BF1 looks the best lol.But you're right about one thing tho, they are indeed not even close since UC4 looks worlds better.
Actual gameplay graphics.
Far Cry 4 PS4
Graphics king indeed /s
@miiiiv said:
@gpuking said:
I assume we're still talking about consoles since it's what this topic is about? in that case ND definitely edges out Crytek on consoles. When someone talks about technical achievement one must take into account a lot more than just techniques, iq and framerate must not be overlooked! Imagine ND is rendering UC3 at subHD, mid teen fps, low res textures everywhere and ghosting, they would have pumped out tons more effects. Not to say UC3 is short of fancy techniques itself. Stuffs like volumetric lighting, shadowing, movable levels (cruiser level, airplane), fancy sand, fire and water shaders are something absent in the console version of Crysis 3. Not to mention the native 720p and steady framerate that actually keeps the game playable. All said and done UC3 is more impressive technically in actuality. Just because you invented some rendering techniques doesn't mean you can implement them well in your game without sacrificing many other things such as resolution, fps and etc.
id software invented 3d fps, yet plenty of games look better than current gen Doom nowadays.
From what I've seen (only played crysis 3 on 360 briefly, since I primarily game on pc ) and tried uc 2 and 3 briefly as well, I thought they were about on par. I guess you could say that ND did a better job since the frame rate is more stable at higher res, but Crytek had to work on 3 different platforms simultaneously, if it wasn't for the poor performance in crysis 3, I would say that Crytek beat ND on last gen consoles.
And poor subHD resolution, two huge areas where they sacrificed a lot in order to get to where they were on consoles. But no point arguing between those two tho since the best visuals of last gen consoles are found in God of War3 and Ascension, both game beats UC3 and Crysis 3.
It's over guys, no crytek game has ever exhibited as much detail as UC4.
Real time cutscene shots
Log in to comment