Here's How BioShock Would Look on CryEngine 3
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The screenshots are small, and some of the differences may be too subtle for some people, but there's a distinct difference in small details. Most of the improved visuals come from the addition of tessellation and higher resolution textures as well as higher AA.
If we had images from the original game and these side by side, you'd start noticing the difference. It's not supposed to be a mind blowing difference, it's supposed to be a difference in the smaller details, which is precisely why the Cryengine is so awesome.
If we had images from the original game and these side by side, you'd start noticing the difference. It's not supposed to be a mind blowing difference, it's supposed to be a difference in the smaller details, which is precisely why the Cryengine is so awesome.
It's so awesome because you can only see a difference if you look really really hard? I'm...not seeing the point.Waaghpowa said:
Without a picture of the original to compare it to I can't really tell if this is an improvement.
"I can't tell the difference" would have sufficed.wintercoat said:
Sometimes small details are all that are needed to make the difference in visual comparisons. Whether you care or not is irrelevant and not being able to tell the difference does not mean there is none at all.
There definitely is a visual difference from the original and this one. As I've already posted.
Yeah, but if it takes scrutiny to see, scrutiny that, as it seems the majority of people just don't care to give to the graphics of the games they play, than it's literally just needlessly pandering to a small percent of your audience at large expense.Waaghpowa said:
This isn't supposed to be pandering to a small audience because it wont get made using the engine. It's a simple technical "What if" and people don't seem to get it. They just say "It's about the game, not the graphics". The point is to show how things could be improved, and what's wrong with improving a game you enjoy? Being perfectly happy with something is fine, but wanting it to be better doesn't make you a bad person.wintercoat said:
Example: I'm happy with my cheese burger but it would be awesome if I had some blue instead of cheddar.
Even if that blue costs an extra 5 dollars?Waaghpowa said:
Speculation is fine, but considering the amount of graphical pandering that has been happening over the past few years, even at the expense of stability, too much speculation, especially about games that look great already and would only get a small boost from a stronger engine, gives big game companies the wrong idea.
Companies already have the wrong idea and assume that the "average" player just wants something shiny with the depth of a spoon or are simply willing to pay for the same game over again in HD collections. I see nothing wrong with speculation and in some cases, the speculation comes true at no cost. Take STALKER Call of Chernobyl for example. Good game, lots of people on this site alone would agree that it's great, but it doesn't look the greatest at times. There's currently modders who are working to recreate the entirety of the game in Cryengine 2. Necessary? Hell no. Awesome? You bet your fucking ass it is.wintercoat said:
P.S Blue cheese is totally worth the 5 dollars.
Nah, blue's only worth 2. Now munster...Waaghpowa said:
I personally didn't like the original high def graphics mod that was made for STALKER, but to be fair, that was mostly the heavy use of motion blur. I hate motion blur. Damnit, now I want to play STALKER again, and my disk broke last month.
And while yeah, big companies already are idiots, drooling over a few pictures of increased graphic fidelity of a game which already looked great kinda tells them they're not all that wrong, reinforcing the idea that all we want is the shinies.
With the next console generation coming sometime in the next couple years, it's really something we as a community need to move away from, otherwise we're gonna end up with another generation of overbloated games that need to use every trick in the book just to run at 20 fps.
Honestly? Why?
Bioshock was the first real game that made me realize how high def the graphics had gotten for this current generation of games. Before, I wondered why we needed an updated system when PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox did just fine. Playing Bioshock made me realize just how amazing we could make graphics look.
This? It's slightly more detailed. Slightly. Not a huge amount, not a mind-blowing amount, just... Slightly.
I wonder why publishers think they need to keep shelling out prettier and prettier games when we really kind of hit our graphical peak about 3 years ago.
Bioshock was the first real game that made me realize how high def the graphics had gotten for this current generation of games. Before, I wondered why we needed an updated system when PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox did just fine. Playing Bioshock made me realize just how amazing we could make graphics look.
This? It's slightly more detailed. Slightly. Not a huge amount, not a mind-blowing amount, just... Slightly.
I wonder why publishers think they need to keep shelling out prettier and prettier games when we really kind of hit our graphical peak about 3 years ago.
Wow that looks really, ermm, unimpressive. But lets face it even if each pixel had secretly been a picture of Joss Whedon filming series 2 it's wouldn't be a massive improvement to the game for me. Bioshock was a example of a game that had both an excellent aesthetic and excellent graphics but I still played it for every other reason.
Gameplay > Aesthetics > Graphics. That aside BS was a very simplistic if not weak game.Dark Messiah was alot better and even it was half assed.