thinking the castrated version of witcher 3 is even in the same league as the order when it comes to graphics and technology is the fucking definition of deluded. hermits are hilariously sad.
Nah, it's Sony fanboys that have always had delusions of grandeur and who think their console is some kind of super computer. I don't even own a Nintendo or Xbox console, but at least those guys for the most part like their consoles for the right reasons and are realistic about their consoles' limitations.
And, yes, we know you are going to do your damnedest to play up the whole downgrade thing because you think it somehow invalidates The Witcher 3's graphics, but you're wrong. Downgrade or not, the game still looks incredible.
And, of course, you are going to use more supped up photo mode shots of The Order 1886, because you know it doesn't look all that impressive much of the time when you are just playing it.
Here are some more realistic screenshots of The Order 1886:
Those are screenshots I took while playing the game. And, no, they're not the most flattering pictures, but they are realistic. That's the way the game actually looks much of the time while playing it. In motion it does look better and I do acknowledge it is one of the better looking console games on the whole, but it's definitely not this insane graphical monster that you make it out to be. Look at those textures. Look at the flat lighting in much of the game and the relative scarcity of shadows from direct lighting. Aside from the nice shiny specular reflections on the leather and metal on the character models and some environment objects, thanks to physically based rendering (which The Witcher 3 also has), most of the other textures are rather meh. Now, it's all hidden behind a massive amount of film grain, blur, chromatic aberration and depth of field effects, and that seems to really fool a lot of people. But just looking at what's actually being rendered in terms of the graphical composition it's not the most impressive game around.
Log in to comment