Unreal Engine 4

I don't want to jump to any conclusions from a couple of hard to make out screenshots but UE4 will literally be the worst thing to ever happen to game graphics technology.

I could do better with a C64 and a stack of tapes.

Can't tell the difference.

Another year, another UE tech demo, another set of hopes raised unreasonably high by visuals we won't be seeing in-game.

Overlord 3. About time too.

Sure these have been done already.

Not mpressed by UE4.

I just can't wait for a game that actually looks as good as it does in these doctored screens/videos that are impossible to render in real time. Even Crysis on max doesn't look as good as some of the early screens made out.

cooldawn wrote:Sure these have been done already.

Not mpressed by UE4.

Same.

The thing is, I'm sure that technically UE4 is all very wonderful. But we're well passed the point that I, for one, can appreciate much difference.

I want my gameworld's far more dynamic these days. I want to be able to punch guys through walls, smash a table over their head and then beat them to death with one of it's shattered legs.

If a AAA game can't even offer the level of material simulation of Minecraft, what point is there in it?

Visuals are meaningless now. I'm satisfied with how games look. Sure, fancy graphics are pretty cool for the first 10 minutes but you get used to it really quickly. We need gameplay altering technology. BF3 is doing that with its destruction, Crysis the same, but we need that to be taken 'next gen' in the same way they keep trying to do with graphics. Too bad revolutionary new gameplay technology can't be pictured on the back of a box.

smurphy wrote:Visuals are meaningless now. I'm satisfied with how games look. Sure, fancy graphics are pretty cool for the first 10 minutes but you get used to it really quickly. We need gameplay altering technology. BF3 is doing that with its destruction, Crysis the same, but we need that to be taken 'next gen' in the same way they keep trying to do with graphics. Too bad revolutionary new gameplay technology can't be pictured on the back of a box.

Thankfully, we're doing away with boxes so it'll be less relevant.

Most games on Steam, for example, have a short gameplay video which is way more useful for judging a game.

smurphy wrote:Visuals are meaningless now. I'm satisfied with how games look. Sure, fancy graphics are pretty cool for the first 10 minutes but you get used to it really quickly. We need gameplay altering technology. BF3 is doing that with its destruction, Crysis the same, but we need that to be taken 'next gen' in the same way they keep trying to do with graphics. Too bad revolutionary new gameplay technology can't be pictured on the back of a box.

Theres still definitely room for increased detail and better effects over current console gen stuff.

When you get to Battlefield 3 on PC at max you might have a point, but current consoles aren't there.

That is a point. As graphics keep getting better, it certainly lowers my tolerance for graphics that aren't up to par. For example RDR has always looked crap to me, or Mass Effect 3 had some really stand out ugly bits.

smurphy wrote:That is a point. As graphics keep getting better, it certainly lowers my tolerance for graphics that aren't up to par. For example RDR has always looked crap to me, or Mass Effect 3 had some really stand out ugly bits.

That seems to be the exact opposite of what you just said. So you don't mean that?

Amazingly beautiful games = You get used to how good they look quickly and it's no longer exciting
Ugly games = You never get used to their ugliness and it's always annoying

smurphy wrote:Amazingly beautiful games = You get used to how good they look quickly and it's no longer exciting
Ugly games = You never get used to their ugliness and it's always annoying

I don't think I agree with either of those things.

Really good looking games still take my breath away even after I've played them for 60 hours and even though I don't think either of the games you mentioned actually are ugly, I've played some pretty bad looking Wii games which ended up not bothering me one bit.

smurphy wrote:Ugly games = You never get used to their ugliness and it's always annoying

What about Minecraft?

Minecraft isn't ugly.

smurphy wrote:Visuals are meaningless now. I'm satisfied with how games look.

Really? So sooooo much better to come and you are done now??

Can't help but feel somewhat disappointed by those screenshots. I've seen better screengrabs of mountains from Skyrim, the close-ups look like something fairly mediocre running in UE3 and the other shot is basically Bloom: The Picture.

Delusibeta wrote:Can't help but feel somewhat disappointed by those screenshots. I've seen better screengrabs of mountains from Skyrim, the close-ups look like something fairly mediocre running in UE3 and the other shot is basically Bloom: The Picture.

Funny you should mention that, i actually showed the mountain screenshot to a friend he was like "What's that? DLC for Skyrim?" :lol:

They do seem to lack that...'wow' factor that the first Unreal 3 screenshots had. I can only assume that maybe these are screen grabs from the tech demo or something.

Unreal Engine 4

Who is online

Affiliates