Next gen game graphics are hugely unimpressive

[PoolCleaningRobot]

*Looks at game play from the Last of Us
*Looks at game play from Killzone Shadow fall

I dunno, they look different to me. This gen the big change seems to be textures, for the ps4 and xb1 it looks like lighting and physics will be the big change which is good cause I find those elements more interactive than textures (unless the game's environment needs it like a jungle).

I agree with your op and I think the biggest improvement this console gen should be how we make games so we can have good effects without breaking the budget. Then maybe we can see some indi games that are more than platformers

I can't wait until you need a 40' (not 40") screen to tell the difference between graphics settings.

PC gamers will still insist they can tell and complain if a game only has 200XMSAA instead of 202X.

Probably the same pc gamers who scoff at the idea of the next gen consoles being unable to play in 4K. The idea of someone wasting perfectly good processing power to play in 4K on a 20" desktop monitor makes me shake my head in sadness

Edit: I derped and I didn't read the op cause it was long as fuck. I changed my post to say I agree

 

[Soxafloppin]

The differences kind of get smaller as graphics get better though as well.

But yea, I agree with what you say about Launch titles.

 

[mohit9206]

See we have been spoiled by PC games.PC ports of current gen games look much better almost like next gen stuff.So next gen graphics wont wow us coz we already see such good graphics on the PC.Its console only gamers that will be impressed more than PC gamers.

 

[loc978]

I'm down with the diminishing returns thing. More power this gen won't see a giant leap in graphical fidelity because we don't have much improvement to be made with brute force. At this point the power is there, it's all up to the game designers to use it effectively.

What I'm looking forward to is larger open worlds with more interactivity, more NPCs with smarter scripting, better physics engines... That's really where the limited power of the PS3 and 360 did their damage. Maybe we won't need to mod the shit out of ports [http://newvegas.nexusmods.com/mods/46355/?] to get reasonably sized and populated cities [http://newvegas.nexusmods.com/mods/38056/?] in games this time around.

 

[Requia]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

 

[Hagi]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

 

[Requia]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

 

[Hagi]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

 

[Requia]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

If you do that, it's no longer an APU architecture.

 

[Hagi]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

If you do that, it's no longer an APU architecture.

So now you're saying the XBone and PS4 aren't using an APU architecture?

Because both of them do have a dedicated GPU.

Pro-tip: before you reply, read what you wrote, go to Wikipedia and check if it's actually correct before hitting the post button.

 

[Lightknight]

We're beginning to get to a point where the graphics are good enough and we need to start focusing more on physics and AI. Don't get me wrong, there's still some nice room to grow graphically but we're at a point where you can never see the type of steps we've seen these past 20 years again. You can only eventually reach realistic and that's it. We may have a "we have arrived" moment or we may not because of a gradual climb. But even when we do get to the "realistic" graphics we will eventually get used to them and then no graphics will be "mindblowing".

But, in the era where nigh perfect graphics exist, suddenly games will have to survive on their stories and character development. That will be a real golden age. Especially as super advanced game engines start to be available to even indie developers.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Reducing loading times would be nice. Many games have very little in terms of loading times, but they still exist and in some they are pretty bad. Bringing all loading times down would be a nice little addition.

Terrible load times are, for the most, the price of playing directly off optical media instead of installing it to HDD. HDDs, even the slowpoke 5400rpm HDDs in current gen consoles, have a much higher data transfer rate than any optical media does. Combine that with the tiny amounts of RAM current gen consoles have, so that loading has to be done more often and you get the current situation...

So yeah, the next gen consoles having fat stacks of RAM and switching over to installing games to HDD rather than playing off the disc (iirc) should see shorter loading times and less often than what you get from a current gen console. It might take some console oriented developers a bit of time to adjust to the new surplus of resources.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

It doesn't look much more impressive because that's how graphics work when you get into this territory.

I really wish I could find the image again, but it was portraying how 3D modelling progresses as you introduce more triangles into the models. There were several models of a head shown -- one using 60 traingles, one using 120, one using 600, then 6,000, then maybe one using 60,000. The point of the image was showing that at first, doubling the number triangles at 60 triangles is enough to greatly improve the quality of the model, where as decupling models past 6,000 triangles barely makes a difference.

And it's simply willingness of the developers. Why spend tons of resources on making graphically advanced assault rifles when they'd rather put it toward having better physics for the assault rifles?

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I really wish I could find the image again, but it was portraying how 3D modelling progresses as you introduce more triangles into the models.

Pssst... it's back one page in this very thread.

 

[Xangba]

My insignificant thoughts? WHO CARES? Graphics are more than sufficient as is, so please can we use that extra power to maybe create more elaborate games rather than prettier ones? More people, more places, more things going on at once, ect. If graphics are slowing down then it is a good thing. That ridiculous focus drains a huge amount of money from development. We don't need shinier graphics, they have advanced enough. We need more game.

 

[Fox12]

I actually disagree. There was a noticeable difference graphically between PS2 and PS3 for me. I remember being hugely impressed by the Final Fantasy 13 trailer (before it came out and I realized it was utter trash) because oh how much better the graphics were. Uncharted also blew my mind at that time period. The same can be said for the PS1 and PS2 conversion.

That said, graphics don't matter to me. I still play classic games and 16 bit Indie titles, so what matters to me is art direction. Fez is visually superior to Call of Duty because the art design is vastly superior, and doesn't age as badly. I would love to hear AAA developers spouting off about art direction, but that won't ever happen. Just deliver well written stories, and we'll get along well game industry. How about another The Last of Us quality narrative?

 

[lacktheknack]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

If you do that, it's no longer an APU architecture.

Protip: Communicating entirely in flippant one-liners will make you say contradictory things.

1. In context, you claimed that consoles use APU, but PCs do not.

2. You then snarked that using only APU will result in low framerate.

3. You then said that having a graphics card means you're no longer using APU architecture (??????).

4. Consoles use graphics cards. See 1.

If you're going to make claims, please bother to back things up before you end up cutting your argument off at the knees.

 

[Fox12]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

If you do that, it's no longer an APU architecture.

So now you're saying the XBone and PS4 aren't using an APU architecture?

Because both of them do have a dedicated GPU.

Pro-tip: before you reply, read what you wrote, go to Wikipedia and check if it's actually correct before hitting the post button.

Gah! So many words! So many words I don't understand!

 

[Requia]

Erm...

You do know that the architecture of next-gen consoles is just normal PC architecture right?

Everything in there is just slightly modified parts of completely normal hardware that you'd find in any PC. A platform that most devs will have extensive experience with.

I'd say the much more likely reason these games don't look as good as they could is that they're being rushed out for launch releases.

There are no gaming PCs that run APU architecture.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pages/consumer-desktops.aspx#1

Really? You couldn't even be bothered to do a simple Google search before making a silly claim like that?

Enjoy your 6.5 fps.

Do you even know what an APU is? It's simply AMD's variant of Intel's HD Graphics. Nothing more, simply a CPU with an integrated GPU on the same chip. Just like pretty much any i3, i5 or i7 Intel processor, 4th generation core CPUs don't even come without them anymore.

Which is to say you don't have to use that GPU... You can have a dedicated GPU in your machine for gaming...

If you do that, it's no longer an APU architecture.

Protip: Communicating entirely in flippant one-liners will make you say contradictory things.

1. In context, you claimed that consoles use APU, but PCs do not.

2. You then snarked that using only APU will result in low framerate.

3. You then said that having a graphics card means you're no longer using APU architecture (??????).

4. Consoles use graphics cards. See 1.

If you're going to make claims, please bother to back things up before you end up cutting your argument off at the knees.

The XB1 and PS4 don't exist yet. In 3 months time there will be these fancy new chips inside the XB1. It will have 8 cores (current AMD GPUs have 4), and feature a integrated 768 core GPU, its still an APU, but its a radically scaled up model that hasn't ever been released to the public, and AMD ha made no such announcements. This is critically different from the usual CPU+GPU PC model, because it shares the same RAM between graphics and system processes, a model only found in integrated graphics setups, which can't run the majority of AAA games (and often, even when the game's graphical settings go low enough, there's no QA support for it, though that's more common with Intel graphics alone).

 

[Hagi]

The XB1 and PS4 don't exist yet. In 3 months time there will be these fancy new chips inside the XB1. It will have 8 cores (current AMD GPUs have 4), and feature a integrated 768 core GPU, its still an APU, but its a radically scaled up model that hasn't ever been released to the public, and AMD ha made no such announcements. This is critically different from the usual CPU+GPU PC model, because it shares the same RAM between graphics and system processes, a model only found in integrated graphics setups, which can't run the majority of AAA games (and often, even when the game's graphical settings go low enough, there's no QA support for it, though that's more common with Intel graphics alone).

Wrong again.

The OS and other background processes on Consoles only take up part of the main RAM, unlike a PC where it can potentially take up 100%.

Over half of the available RAM will be dedicated to the game being run. Which means that any halfway competent developer will dedicate part of that memory to graphics. This will be memory purely and only reserved for Graphics.

This is why the setup will behave just like a normal PC that developers are used to. Which is the entire point of them choosing to go with this hardware instead of staying with the PowerPC architecture the PS3 and XBox 360 used. To make the development process a lot easier so devs won't have to deal with potentially quirky hardware that'll take them years to get the 'most' out of.

Just because they're on the same chip does not make the GPU the same as the integrated graphics that you're 'familiar' with. You actually have to look at the technical specifications and the design of the system they're part of before you can go make silly claims like you're making.