Originally Posted by MonarchX
To rate graphics, you only need EYES with good vision. Just about every Fallout 4 review mentions subpar Fallout 4 graphics along with most people here. What other proof do you need? Some pro graphics experts who's eyes see differently?
You need eyes with good vision, and you need an eye for detail which these reviewers don't have. They, like most gamers, don't know what they're looking at. Blindly following what they say isn't proof. With that being said, Fallout 4's graphics seem to be inconsistent, with some areas looking much better than others. This guy
posted good screenshots for reference.
Originally Posted by MonarchX
HD textures in Fallout 4 would not replace its poor model detail, facial detail, world detail, animations, foliage (although I do realize Fallout world has no lushy grass). There are textures in Witcher 3 that look bad too, but not as many. It also comes with AA, better than any FXAA or SMAA or MSAA in deferred lighting games. Fallout 4 uses newer TAA that doea remove temporal Aliasing better, but at the cost of heavy blur. The worst things in Fallout 4 is its old engine that is so closely tile-based that it reminds of LEGO bricks. There is barely anything custom, fluid, and cohesive in it, just like in Skyrim and other Fallout games.
Point out some of this poor model detail, world detail (what exactly does this mean?), and animations. You're just pulling these things out of your ass. They might actually be true, they might not, you didn't even evaluate before saying this. TAA can be very nice, post-sharpening may be required and it may actually be included for all we know. None of the Fallout 4 screenshots I've seen have been excessively blurry, unlike Witcher 3 with its chromatic aberration.
Also, post an example of Fallout 4 having repetitive lego-like environments due to its tile based construction. What do you mean by "custom, fluid, and cohesive?" These are all blanket statements. The game world of Skyrim and Fallout 3 are some of the most detailed; texturing could look more detailed at least in Skyrim and Fallout 3 because of the tile-based nature like you mention, but textures aside they put a lot of detail into every square inch of Skyrim, Fallout 3, and hopefully Fallout 4. You won't find areas that are just blatantly empty, every interior location you find for example is uniquely detailed and tells something about events that transpired there and/or people who were once there. No other open world game does this so well.
- EDIT: Let's evaluate these two screenshots. In this one
there aren't any models to look at up close, although the tree on the right looks very good, as does the overall lighting and post processing of this area. Grass looks more or less average by 2015 standards. Now in this one
we really see that classic Gamebryo view distance LOL. Pretty nice lighting effects (look at the lit barrel), awful textures and flat 2D windows on the buildings to the right, wow. So yes, some very large, obvious models look 10 years outdated (those buildings).Edited by boredgunner - 11/10/15 at 7:03am