SonicMage117

I want Bethesda to stay alive just because I love the horror franchise they publish, I have a hate/love relationship with Skyrim, loved Oblivion, didn't care for the others too much. I enjoyed FO4 more than FO3 except for the Minecraft crap. Most stupid thing ever, seeing people post what they've built lol

Good to know, but can't take your opinion too seriously either, the fact that you keep trying to excuse Shadow's downgrades and try to make me look crazy by pointing out its flaws is laughable. Hopefully you understand that this has nothing to do with not liking the series, I've stated many times on the threads here that I much prefer the new trilogy over the older ones as they give story - that's the reason I play them anyways. Overall, I much prefer Shadow over Rise and the original for a few different reasons, preference is irrelevant but we can't disagree with the video simply because we choose to avoid the truth. What is the truth? If only you'd be honest with yourself and watch the video, you'd see that the compromises for this were actually because the engine was demanding, too much so for higher end pc's to handle so they took away much of the fog effects, smoke, etc, lowered the detail of Lara's model (no, this isn't a design choice, it's not an artistic choice, it's a performance choice), animals move worse, equipment texture is lower resolution in detail. It's not all bad, the advancements in Shadow Of The Raider were water, volumetric lighting and explosions. Literally everything else was either same level of quality or worse. You may excuse the compromises by saying it's a change of environment if you wish, I'm a realist, it's not that you won't change my mind because I'm stubborn and assuming, it's because I already had the proof - I don't mean to sound rude but proof by tangible evidence is far greater than word of stranger - I mean this respectfully. Anyway, nice of you to wait up online for me, I appreciate the convo. Time for me to get ready for bed now. Have a good night

I like Bethesda, I want them to succeed, I just really want 76 to fail, the game itself because, well, no other reason than it's different and I don't like it. I like their other Fallouts, Elder Scrolls, etc.

I want 76 to bomb as well but who are we kidding, a bad Bethesda game will still sell like crazy and get a 9 or 10 from ign.

If I remembered correctly, engines that are designed to take advantage of pc hardware aren't used for console games later.... I guess if you consider multiplatform engines that way you could be right. Seems like id Software pushed console limits even more than pc which is why I said it. If your argument is: "the engines were designed first on pc so they were made to take full advantage of your pc" then you could probably say that about every engine. Are you one of those angry folk that blames consoles for holding back pc gaming from flourishing to it's full potential? Self shadowing is specifically what I was talking about... As shown here.https://youtu.be/80guchXqz14 Yeah, it took many trial and error, something that doesn't happen with console exclusive in-house engines. They somehow manage to avoid that broken process. Don't forget to acknowledge the fact that the animation was crap though ans the post-effects were really bad as well. That's why the time consoles caught up, this was fixed and other engines got the package, it's also why there came Cryengine 2. This happens with most third party engines which aren't funded properly or are designed to run multiple games or on multiple platforms, that's the issue. You remember wrongly. And here's the proof, a framerate test: https://youtu.be/B4ocPKdyD7Y Yes. I am right, the evidence shows it clear as day. I have two pc's, one which is far more powerful than my PS4 and the other is mid-tier/medium spec (still better than a PS4). I don't play console games for the graphics either, I bought my PS4 specifically for exclusives, knowikg that it would collect dust mostly until a first party game would release, the fact that Sonys exclusives have had amazing graphics this gen is a plus and a nice thing for any PS4 owner, I take it you are not a PS4 owner, couldn't see you not acknowledging this fact if you were. On PC I play everything from 2D pixel platformers to more graphically demanding games but What does any of that have to do with appreciating the fact that Sony's killing it with their exclusives graphically due to superior development tools? And why does that have to factor in how you or I enjoy our games? And why would you expect me to appreciate Shadow Of The Tomb Raider's new lighting when it does worse than it's predecessor at merely every angle, when you can't appreciate that Sony exclusives are only getting better, and then there is always an excuse to make it seem that the progress is irrational or non-legit when proof shows otherwise? This seems a bit double standard.

Which ones? I know the history well because I was one of the ones in line for the 9800pro and X800 XL which came bundled with Doom III Half Life 2. I don't remember either being made specifically designed to take true advantage of pc hardware though, not anymore than ease of use for developing on consoles. I remember ATi cards being coupled with Doom 3 because id had a partnership with ATi, that was when lighting and shadowing first became a thing bit there were alot of issues with it. Engines before that aren't really worth mentioning as developers on consoles such as PS1, N64 and what not were doing polygonal techniques far better than pc. Crytek made maybe the biggest advancement in game engines with the CryEngine, and look what happened there. People with high end pc's couldn't run the game stable for years. I still remember the jokes of "Far Cry/Crysis killed Nasa's supercomputer" back in the hay day. Most great game engines start on pc but take a bit to turn up well. Source Engine was more of a stable one but one that nobody saw potential in, probably because of limitations. Xbox One is literally a closed Windows machine. It's dedicated tools are not in the same bracket of definition as PS4 and Switch which is why I don't really mention it. That aside, the only exclusive I can think of that it actually has is Sunset Overdrive (Great game btw). I always found it strange that Microsoft spent so much energy on making a the XBX when they should have put all those efforts towards acquired exclusivity deals among developers. I suspect Microsoft will do well with next gen, as it were. When did I try to apply these film to attributes to games? You asked me a question, I answered you. The simple fact is that a developer who says "We want our game to have a more cinematic feel" is not the community trying to befoul the games with excuses, that was an initial vision for what they were going to create in the first place. If we want to get super technical, some streamlined games are in fact, interactive movies so I could definitely see how developers would use this as a vision instead of the usual media press meme. So I'm not the one that's comparing games to movies, developers are and in case of a game such as The Order 1886, it worked well for them. And why the worry? When you play The Order 1886, you don't see or feel any choppiness that you would from a game designed to run in 60fps, the optimization is much better than that but only if it fills the original vision. I agree with the half the power statement but lighting doesn't make the game and pc games are full of compromises of their own. Here is my opinion: You can literally get away with so much and that nVidia HairWorks? Trash? Yes it is. Bloom? Thankful that Spider-Man PS4 had the option to turn it off. If we're being honest, some of what we're paying for is overkill, some effects don't fit some games well while others it does Now the pc eletism/autism (call it what you may) within me is telling me to ports also usually require more power to run a game as well and to look good as the console version but that is another thing for optimization and that's excused by the background apps, spankware and so on. And now this has nothing to do with preference, artistry or opinion. My 1080ti is put to good use but it's strange that a $300-400 can produce comparable graphics in the first place - even though most is smoke and mirrors, not like we'll see proof of the smoke and mirrors anyway unless someone hacks the game, that is. I mean, we can talk about excuses of how pc games can and should look better than potato console games but since the proof of otherwise is easy to find, those excuses all fall to ash. Again it's not about hardware, somehow we keep getting back to who has the bigger penial advantage, that's irrelevant, it's about what's produced and to what end. Software tools are the miracle of this gen and with good reason. If I was wrong then alot of pc users wouldn't own a PS4 or Switch for exclusives and consoles would already be dead. After all, PS4 is the preferred platform for showcasing a game in 4K right now.

Sorry for the late response, my wife and I just watched India Eisleys new movie "Look Away" which was a pretty neat but I warn you horror/pychological thriller but I warn you guys, India Eisley does remove her clothing articles more than a couple times lol Unfortunately, it is actually. That's the whole point of developers calling their games next gen and the expectations of next-generation software alike. If it was dependable on pc like you said, then we wouldn't have to wait on pc for graphics to shift in tide. If the developers acknowledge this, no reason why we shouldn't either. For cameras: 24fps = cinematic and natural 30fps = mid-ground and meh but made a benchmark lol 60fps = crisp and sharp https://youtu.be/-vyxdm5aIOk Not sure if you were aware of this or not but Discovery Channel films their professional video at 30fps and edit 60fps shots for slow-motion in parallel with 24fps or less when you see animals running on water, humming birds and such. 24fps is and will always be the go-to for cinema though, because 60fps looks absolutely horrble when trying to make a high action movie with something like explosions or what have you, this is not going to change unless you see a 3D movie which is still going to be split in half per eye anyway - dual lens cams. I like the lighting, the game is beautiful, don't get me wrong and possibly my favorite of the new trilogy because they went all out with the environment. I think that is probably the main thing consoles suffer from as lighting and shadowing is so gpu taxing in a detailed photorealism aimed game. Perhaps that is a ram issue or a gpu heat issue. However, I was just disappointed with the quality of animations and the downgrades in Shadow Of The Tomb Raider. The game is still great though. My go to when talking about impressive lighting in a pc game is perhaps a game that doesn't require much gpu power, a game that I stumbled on a couple years ago, it uses real time lighting with reflective map on 2D sprites on isometric perspective. This is even a bit more impressive than what Deadfire did, and Deadfire is truly impressive to this regard as well. https://youtu.be/BGTF_1J_Rvs How do you feel about the second one? Drive club the PS4 exclusive was a wreck but after two years of updates, it turned out quite nicely. Steange experiment for Sony and whatever the dev was.

I didn't mention Quake III because this wasn't about which format had the best multiplatform version of the game, in fact the only reason I even mentioned Soul Reaver is for the fact that PC simply doesn't get the "best" version even though there's available superior hardware. The point is that for every superior version/port of a game thats available on pc, there is one also on console to comtrast it. This has been true for nearly every generation and it's just one of the reasons why pc can't and never will kill off consoles (regardless of trolls who claim "consoles will never die because idiots will keep buying them). Another reason is because the way the ecosystem works, engine/graphical evolution only pushes towards new console generational releases, that alone says alot. Yet pc gamers tend to claim that consoles are holding back pc from excelling in this area, ironic huh? We should get nVidia and ATi (or amd now) to make less gpu's and better drivers so developers won't be afraid to gamble making better games on pc but then pc's would become a console lol Not really... For example; A camera that features 60fps video capture is quite pointless unless you are shooting in slo-motion. 24fps/30fps is natural. This very same variable applies to cinematic gaming when a developer opts to vreate a cinematic game where storytelling and natural animation is needed, maybe you'll argue this if you're a fighter pilot who trains 12 hours a day in a 300fps simulation, and that's where games that run at higher than 60fps come in, such as first person shooters like Quake and Unreal Tournament where animation doesn't matter but response time does. There is a PS4 exclusive that runs at 24fps, The Order 1886, to name one was a disappointment but that shame had nothing to do with 24fps with th framerate but rather the limited environment and interaction and very short game play it offered. Visually, like Detroit, it offers some very nice graphics and detailed textures which I still have yet to see Xbox One X and pc to match. I think that's why first party development teams set their aim to games at a much earlier stage. Now in console exclusives, it tends to be 30fps for the single player campaign and then 60fps for the mulitplayer. I don't think most people realize a game is running at 30fps when it's designed to in engine and animations are tuned for it. It is possible to have buttery smooth animation at 30fps, if anything last generation proved that. I have played some games on pc though, that were made to be played in 60fps and woulf hurt my eyes and make me nauseated when playing them in 30fps, it's definitely noticable but that's where the development process and engine use differ. In no world is 30fps better but perhaps developers can be masterful trick our brains into thinking 30fps is as smooth (it's happened). As far as inferior hardware, well, they rolled with ancient laptop gpu's/apu's equal to a 1050ti and they're doing rather well with what they have I'd say. I understand exactly what it is but again, this isn't about stylization, that wasn't even remotely what I wasn't talking about. Then why mention all the games you did in one as the same? Far Cry 5, Shadow Of The Tomb Raider, and whatever else you compared to the Sony exclusives I mentioned... Hmmm.. When did I mention aliasing, unrealistic and higher contrast? You compared the games I mentioned to newer games and now that I posted the video comparison links, it just sounds as if you're making excuses and trying to claim I don't know what I'm talking about. Simple as that really. Keep in mind, Steam and GoG are my main platforms and I only really use my PS4 when a new exclusive (that I want comes out). I wouldn't say that counts me towards being biased for console at all. Additionally, I enjoy my pc games much more, but again, just wanted to give credit where it was due. Uncharted 4 still surpasses Shadow Of The Tomb Raider at any rate, on any stance. The video proves that, if you want I guess you can try to excuse it by remedying the loss with implying Uncharted 4 cuts alot of corners, though as the othe video I linked you to states that Shdaow Of The Raider is the real corner cutter here. Uncharted 4 doesn't hate it's mistakes and bad textures, why are we punishing consoles for that when the developers deserve praise for it?

I suppose if you guys want to put words in my mouth or mock me but I'd have to be a fool to say otherwise since so much evidence supoorts what I've been saying hehe Mocking me doesn't make the proof of videos like this somehow vanish or become irrelevant but have fun! Though, I mean, this is a Crpg forum meaning that most members here are biased towards pc. I am truly neutral and just giving credit where it's due.

It's not cost of graphical fidelity, it's a development choice for the platform, when people have a low end pc, they have a choice to up the graphical settings by lowering framerate or resolution so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. If people have no problem running a cinematic experience game like Detroit, that doesn't make the game somehow graphically inferior to a pc game with lower quality texture just because that pc game has the abikity to run in 60fps or an unlocked frame rate, that's the eletist mindset that always ends up backfiring on the master race community. I'm curious, can you explain how exactly how I'm wrong instead of the usual "I can't accept it so you're wrong" per forum reply? This has nothing to do with stylizing the graphics, I'm not talking about comparing a static cel-shaded console game to a photo-realistic pc game maxed out but 2 games from the same genre, with the same graphics style, the same features but one is a 2016 exclusive title, the other is a AAA multiplatform third party game. I take it you're not going to watch the videos I recommended since you've made up your mind Uncharted 4 came out in 2016 and is still better looking and possessing more fidelity than Shadow Of The Tomb Raider. Stop lol Just because time has passed, doesn't mean that third-party developers have evolved their techniques, dev tool software have updated so of course it wouldn't be true for right now. Uncharted 4 having a further draw distance, more reflection shaders, detail in general, better texture mapping than Shadow Of The Tomb Raider maxed out on pc isn't a lie or an exaggeration, anybofy with eyes can see it: https://youtu.be/N-WTHlM2fN0 Point being that first party resources do so much for the developer, more than pc gamers care to admit. You want a game to hold up well for years after it comes out? Get Sony or Nintendo to publish your games, don't go multiplatform because you'll be regressing rather than progressing. Another example of how third party tools are at disadvantage on pc are the Assassins Creed fiasco, there are many more but I just pulled one out of the hat. This is why first party support is so important. Right now Spider-Man is the best looking game I've seen on the market, and I've been playing Shadow Of The Tomb Raider on max settings on pc and no, it doesn't look all that better than Rise Of The Tomb Raider. You're lying to yourself if you think that it didn't have downgrades (comparing from the last game) worth mentioning... https://youtu.be/pjznpFYcCGo ^For example, her face, equipment and clothes are actually less detailed in Shadow Of The Tomb Raider. So that is a thing, console exclusives from Nintendo and Sony are naturally getting better, I'm talking about exclusives from PS4 Pro specifically, Xbox One X is basically a low-end pc with pc dev tools, it literally runs Windows 10. That's far different from the superior dev tools that Sony and Nintendo give their first party studios and/or third party who offer exclusive support.

It's not opinion to say that a weak-end console gets good enough optimization which keeps art/graphics in exclusives up to par with AAA multi-platform games. This has been been hit and miss in the past but for this generation, it is especially true. I'm guessing you don't own a PS4 Pro or a high end pc, because you're basically feeding me a lie, one that's specifically already proven wrong by this generations games. If everybody who didn't own these consoles and a high end didn't agree with what I'm saying then maybe it could be registered and dismissed as bias/opinion but you've already dismissed the Soul Reaver video which proved games could look better on consoles due to developing tools, keep in mind there is a sacrifice, 60fps is sacrificed to 30fps whoch is the catch bit that's how this cheat for performance vs fidelity is often granted. Okay, I'm going to go a bit further with this I can literally see more detail, from pores on characters faces and threads on clothing in PS4 games on like Spider-Man, Uncharted 4 and God Of War than I can on any AAA multi-platform PC on ultra settings. If you fimd it hard to believe, I'd recommend doing a side by side comparison on 4K screens or a Digital Foundry video to see what I'm talking about... Or you can learn more by watching, in which explains what I've been saying in a better way: In which most pc gamers still, for some reason, have a problem accepting that PS4 exclusives are the only games that get get upgraded since E3 reveals. Again, this is due to developer tools. Familiarity with old equipment and stability development process trumps new hardware with a differentiation to speed but consoles have have always been falsely locked into the other side of this, even moreso now because they have x86 architecture which doesn't really change anything for how Sony's development tools work for exclusive titles and how development tools bring about milkimg the hardware. Sony literally keeps their most advanced dev tools for exclusivity deals as they always have. The graphical/detail upgrades for Spider-Man in the video isn't a lie, especially when playing in 4K is a great testemant to these statements. This indicates that the human eye cannot pick oyt the things that lack (the reflections on mirrors, cars and the buildings are static, literally) but they do pick out the greater details that are on oar with the high end pc running a game at maximum settings, and some details in the console exclusive outdoing actual detail. Ialways found this to be quite interestimg but as said before, new tricks and techniques are being created, developed and so on.

How exactly did I contradict myself? If you don't know anything about console optimization vs pc optimization then I suppose that may make it hard to understand. Most pc eletists do indeed have a hard time accepting that a $300-400 console could somehow have games that are on par with a high end pc but that's due to the parent company (Sony and Nintendo) giving first-party (and in some case third party studios) superior development tools to the teams. You don't have to agree with it, just ask developers or research on youtube developer interviews and you'll see it's true. And yet in the same era, high end pc's was not able to do the lighting and texture mapping work that consoles could. PC wasn't always ahead of the curve, here's what I'm referring to: https://youtu.be/q0WsS8R93_Y ^Sega giving superior tools to a third party studio is a great example, and there are many more. Optimizations have always gone a long way. But I was talking about this generation, pc's are seeming to be more and more like a lamborgini without wheels and you have consoles that are like a ford focus but they seem to win the race in these terms. If you compare one of Sony's latest exclusives in 4k with one of pc's greatest looking games at 4k in ultra settings, the poor pc game would probably not look as good or the PS4 would be on an evel level with it. What does it prove? That software isn't limited by hardware, from a technical standpoint, on paper it is but in coding, it isn't - it's never been. We just didn't have the tools until recent and that makes all the difference in the world. I don't doubt that the PC version of the new Metro will blow away any third party AAA console game away but by the time that comes out, Sony will probably have a better looking exclusive coming out. They just keep getting better and better. Right now as it stands, Sony is ahead of pc in graphics on a ultra-low end gpu, as someone who plays on a 1080ti, my consoles still blow me away Luckily though, gaming isn't the only thing I do on my pc so I don't ever feel too depressed about it or regret my purchase, plus I like to play everything, even colorful 2D indies so that puts the horsepower to good work too.

That hasn't been possible for a very long time. Not since the 90's. Consoles really fell behind when the 360 was released. Just in terms of resolution and frame rate PC has been way ahead. Lets be realistic here, high GPUs have cost as much as consoles in that time as well. On PC you can either crank up our fps to 144+ or set it to 60 and play at 4K. Consoles targetted 30 for a long time. What may be confusing you is that exclusives obviously can't have PC comparisons, and artistry does not equal fidelity.That's only true from a buyers perspective if we are counting polygons per pixel. Perhaps you didn't read the whole context but it's no longer about shaders, pipelines, polygons, resolution and all these things that pc gamers are usually obsessed with when buying a new gpu. Rather now, it's about what developers bring about while developing new techniques when developing art styles. This is mainly why a PS4 game can look as good as as a ultra-high end pc. Developer tools and great artists can go a long way and optimization whether in graphics or performance is something that even the best pc games often lack. Sony and Nintendo are a shining example of publishers who care enough to fund their developers enough to optimize in the right way, squeezing every drop of power, milking a console by its "potential" teet. That's probably why PS4 games are on top of the list for graphics as of now. I mean, we have yet to see a 4K game on PC which looks as good as a PS4 exclusive at 4K and even when it does, it lacks the higher quality animations and what not. That's the power of creating in-house engines, superior funding, great artists and highest optimization teams out there. Pc will never have that, unfortunately. I mean, we can dream...

(True) Exclusives are great for the consumer and the industry for a number of reasons. The most obvious is competition, it pushes each console parent company to push themselves and this also ricochets to the pc population of indie/aaa exclusive studios who only evolve because consoles exists in the first place. The second being choice and social variation, you get different fanbases, communities built up because of an exclusive - Zelda, Halo and most recently Spider-Man are all phenomenal examples of this fact. Another great thing about exclusives is the ability to show the community that hardware isn't that important as pc eletists suggest, the fact that a "weak" console can run games that look as great as high-end pc's (thanks to optimization and advanced developer tools precisely made for the console of choice) is not only a great feat for the developer and console parent company but a great testiment that developers don't rely on hardware but software updates to get better looking games. Lastly, exclusives offer validation for buying a "stupid plastic box" though pc eletists will get angry when you bring up the fact that their ports are better than pc ports 95% of the time. So much for master race. And that's coming from someone who's primary is Steam and GOG hehe Anyway, I think those are reasons enough to why console exclusives should and WILL always exist. Though we do have PSnow (which is by every point, horrible) which allows you to run games on your pc at a variating fps, yeah, that bad. So avoid the crap official branded Sony emulation which is equally as horrible as ay other emulator on pc out there. They never learn.

You're just saying that because you're mad and jealous that Herman Munster isn't in this one. He died, get over it... Everyone knows Stephen King movies are still legit

Hmmm... I doknow that Henry Cavill was a huge gamer way before he was Superman. In fact, when he got the call to confirm his role for Superman, he ignored it because he was playing World Of Warcraft. I seem to remember that he was always a huge fan of the Witcher series, even owns the three games and books to boot. If I recall correctly, he tweeted to someone that his dream role was Geralt of Rivia and that he'd rather do that than Superman (this was before he quit Superman, guess he wasn't to happy with DC or WB).

In the words of Geralt himself: "Have Priscilla fill the role. In my book youth and good looks trump talent and experience." When picking who to play the part of thr princess in the drama/theatre quest.

I also think stories of witches are far more interestimg than stories of warlocks. Salem witch trial makes the warlock netherlight crucible look like child's play for example.

And who would you have liked as Ciri? The cat is not so dapper after all

She doesn't look younger than Eva Green though lol Hope she does good, looking forward to it. Also... Emma Watson would have made a great Ciri.

Hmmm... Not gonna lie, can't say I'm too excited about that choice. Not because I have never heard of the actress but because I don't get a Yennifer vibe from her. Maybe her acting and the makeup will convince me though. I would have loved if this was our Yennifer though....

I think he was referring to: https://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/272270/

There a many dlc and side missions to open, you shall see

Or you and the others can choose NOT to acknowledge its existence and let everyone else enjoy the new entry. Seems like the more reasonable option than to keep the dev from doing something like this. Nobody's twisting y'alls arms, it's as easy as keeping off YouTube to avoid spoilers for a new movie or game I'm really curious to see what they'll do personally, hopefully it's good *says a prayer*

I have a high end pc, a mid end pc and a PS4. I feel like I'm missing out by not having a Switch. So many amazing Japanese games with English subtitles/vocals that make it to Switch but never make it to pc. It's very sad for pc gamers indeed. Add to that Zelderz, Bros Smashin Bros, Mario AC Odyssey edition and more. Exclusives are totally worth the money spent on a console though, usually the best games of the year. One thing we can all agree on though is that they'll never stop making consoles as consoles help to push pc forward anyway.