Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

How the hell did R* make a game this good looking?

82 replies to this topic
SocalZHP
  • SocalZHP

    Yeah buddy

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2011

#31

Posted 24 November 2013 - 02:24 AM


My main gripe however is the low framerate which makes for blurriness when driving, but that was unavoidable, this game is brilliant for graphics.

This. 


oCrapaCreeper
  • oCrapaCreeper

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2013

#32

Posted 24 November 2013 - 02:38 AM

The entire map can be seen in one frame, I really don't know why people are saying the draw distance is low.

  • MOGGYASAURUS likes this

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#33

Posted 24 November 2013 - 02:44 AM Edited by AceKingston, 24 November 2013 - 02:44 AM.

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.


ninjaontour
  • ninjaontour

    Squeak Slayer

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013
  • Ireland

#34

Posted 24 November 2013 - 02:44 AM Edited by ninjaontour, 24 November 2013 - 02:45 AM.

The game is probably the best looking game on this gen considering its magnitude. Look at saints row iv, San Andreas looks better than that crap.
Gtav just reminds me of uncharted 3 graphics wise.

 

Crysis 3 would beg to differ.

 

Also, SRIV looks a thousand times better than this game... oh, wait. I'm playing on PC.

 

BACK TO SLEEP, PEASANTS.


DaRkL3AD3R
  • DaRkL3AD3R

    Big Homie

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#35

Posted 24 November 2013 - 02:58 AM

 

The game is probably the best looking game on this gen considering its magnitude. Look at saints row iv, San Andreas looks better than that crap.
Gtav just reminds me of uncharted 3 graphics wise.

 

Crysis 3 would beg to differ.

 

Also, SRIV looks a thousand times better than this game... oh, wait. I'm playing on PC.

 

BACK TO SLEEP, PEASANTS.

 

 

 

1. Crysis 3 is a glorified corridor shooter.

2. SRIV on PC might have the shaders, resolution and frame-rate advantage on PC, but it simply does not have the artistic and engine advantage. Wait for GTA V PC then compare PC - to - PC

3. Look at my signature. Go f*ck yourself for being a troll.


fish61324
  • fish61324

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#36

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:01 AM Edited by fish61324, 24 November 2013 - 03:02 AM.

 

 

The last of us has far better graphics.



True but is waaaaaaay smaller

 


LOL Are you serious?
GTA V (Not mine it's -EvilFuture- picture) 10/10
13874645.jpg
The Last of Us 8/10
13874648.png

 

The Last of Us looks NOTHING LIKE THAT!!!! NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!!! 


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#37

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:06 AM Edited by AceKingston, 24 November 2013 - 03:06 AM.

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.

 

I'll elaborate on what I said ^ there, here:

 

Far Cry 3:

 

Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg

 

GTA V:

 

GTA_V_13524245038808.jpg

 

The difference is quite noticeable and Far Cry 3 ran much better, even on consoles.


Crumplet
  • Crumplet

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2012

#38

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:14 AM

I'm totally with you man, R* did an absolutely outstanding job with these graphics, especially the lighting on the cars, it's absolutely beautiful.

I remember when this game first came out and I was playing as Michael walking around Rockford Hills with the sun shining over the pavement and reflecting on his skin, and i stopped walking and looked around, feeling completely blown away by everything.

Imagine if Naughty Dog and Rockstar Games combined forces and made an open world game....

just-a-spaz
  • just-a-spaz

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2013

#39

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:18 AM

The lighting impresses me the most on this game. The draw distances are really good (on PS3 anyway) and I hardly ever see a blurry texture or pop-in (blu-ray version).

 

I'm more impressed by GTA V than I am with The Last of Us.

 

Yeah, there are some anti-aliasing issues, but it doesn't look too bad on a TV... it's more noticeable on a computer monitor. Also, it runs like butter for me. It's almost always running at 30fps.


just-a-spaz
  • just-a-spaz

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2013

#40

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:21 AM

 

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.

 

I'll elaborate on what I said ^ there, here:

 

Far Cry 3:

 

Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg

 

GTA V:

 

GTA_V_13524245038808.jpg

 

The difference is quite noticeable and Far Cry 3 ran much better, even on consoles.

 

 

Far Cry 3 may have looked okay and ran okay, but Far Cry 3 has tons of screen tearing. Damn that game was ugly as hell due to the screen tearing. I also dislike how much ambient occlusion is used in Far Cry 3. AO is much better in GTA V.


Irrational
  • Irrational

    Federação das Américas

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2011
  • Brazil

#41

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:53 AM

 

The game is probably the best looking game on this gen considering its magnitude.

 

That's a bold statement. It may be one of the best looking open-world games on the consoles, yes. But it's hardly the best looking game this gen, on the 360 we have Halo 4 looking better than V, on the PS3 we have Beyond: Two Souls looking better than V, and on the PC we have Crysis 3 and Metro: Last Light looking better than V.

The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#42

Posted 24 November 2013 - 03:57 AM

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.

 
I'll elaborate on what I said ^ there, here:
 
Far Cry 3:
 
Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg
 
GTA V:
 
GTA_V_13524245038808.jpg
 
The difference is quite noticeable and Far Cry 3 ran much better, even on consoles.
Did Far Cry 3 have a city? Did Far Cry 3 have a big range of vehicles? Did Far Cry 3 have airplanes? Did Far Cry 3 have different types of land besides Forests and Mountains?
I love Far Cry 3 but the reason why it looked and ran better is because it didn't push the limits of the consoles.

SonofUgly
  • SonofUgly

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2011
  • None

#43

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:14 AM

The lighting is good, but other than that it's really limited... and the framerate is absolutely terrible. Here's a capture of GTA V from a DEX tool on PS3, slightly compressed because of mediafire:

z0q58bz8lsvls96fg.jpg

And a few uncompressed shots here. Jagged 720p @26fps really isn't that amazing.


lightningun
  • lightningun

    ...Rage...

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012

#44

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:15 AM

 

The game is probably the best looking game on this gen considering its magnitude.

 
That's a bold statement. It may be one of the best looking open-world games on the consoles, yes. But it's hardly the best looking game this gen, on the 360 we have Halo 4 looking better than V, on the PS3 we have Beyond: Two Souls looking better than V, and on the PC we have Crysis 3 and Metro: Last Light looking better than V.
Note, I said considering its magnitude. It's pretty damn close to best looking.
And to those people saying the draw distance is bad or the framerate is slow, maybe you ought to spend some money on an up to date console because I don't see any jagged edges, low framerate, or low draw distance on my game.
Far cry 3 is slightly better looking, but all it has to render are tree and rocks, like every fps game. I respect all your opinions but facts are facts.

TonyMontanaCDL
  • TonyMontanaCDL

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2013

#45

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:20 AM

I didn't realize the 360 and PS3 ever looked "bad" even older games like GTA IV still look impressive the consoles today.


mastershake616
  • mastershake616

    The Wolf of BAWSAQ

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013

#46

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:22 AM

and the terrible and low-res ground textures (especially on the xbox version), and the ridiculously low draw distance, etc. This game has his pros and cons visually speaking.

 

But I agree that R* has made a very good job on a 8-year-old hardware.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. So stop talking. 


Mark Ramier
  • Mark Ramier

    The Lone Modeller

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2011

#47

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:26 AM

Short draw distance? poor frame rate? jagged edges? seriously I am playing a different game from everyone else because all of that is the opposite of what I am experiencing. 

 

The game looks phenomenal on my monitor, and I know the difference as I play PC games on an eight grand system all the time.

Care to list your hardware?


Hghdra
  • Hghdra

    Trees talk... But they ain't very interesting

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2013
  • None

#48

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:39 AM

It looks amazing, but if you compare it to, say, Forza Horizon, that looks like a PC spec game, No Jaggies, had a lil' to many shaders but it looked amazing. Though, GTA has more to render.


GTA564
  • GTA564

    gta>

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2013
  • None

#49

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:43 AM

About the jagged edges
people who have a TV with a native 1920x1080 resolution play the game at a lesser quality
my tv have a native resolution of 1280x720 And the game looks just great

twc97
  • twc97

    Herbalistic

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2013

#50

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:55 AM

I really like the clouds when theyre covering the moon , looks majestic as f*ckkk

  • John Smith and stobe187 like this

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#51

Posted 24 November 2013 - 05:58 AM Edited by AceKingston, 24 November 2013 - 05:58 AM.

 

 

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.

 
I'll elaborate on what I said ^ there, here:
 
Far Cry 3:
 
Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg
 
GTA V:
 
GTA_V_13524245038808.jpg
 
The difference is quite noticeable and Far Cry 3 ran much better, even on consoles.
Did Far Cry 3 have a city? Did Far Cry 3 have a big range of vehicles? Did Far Cry 3 have airplanes? Did Far Cry 3 have different types of land besides Forests and Mountains?
I love Far Cry 3 but the reason why it looked and ran better is because it didn't push the limits of the consoles.

 

 

Good point but it did push the limits to a far extent. It combined GTA Hitman, Skyrim and Call of Duty in one and that is no mindblowing.


MOGGYASAURUS
  • MOGGYASAURUS

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2008

#52

Posted 24 November 2013 - 10:15 AM

I totally agree with the OP. I've been playing it nearly every day since it's release two months ago and it still blows me away. I've been taking it online this past week and just hovering above the city in a chopper... Man. Beautiful. 

 

What I can't understand is why so many people seem to be complaining about jagged edges, aliasing and whatnot. It's the ARTISTRY of the game world that is what is important. I mean, just LOOK at how much content and detail within that map which is running at (in my experience at least) almost always a consistent frame rate. It's just mind boggling to me how Rockstar have achieved this. It is absolutely the most attractive looking game of this past generation for me. 

  • saintsrow and John Smith like this

twc97
  • twc97

    Herbalistic

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2013

#53

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:25 PM

 

 

 

Far Cry 3 looked better and ran much better, though.

 
I'll elaborate on what I said ^ there, here:
 
Far Cry 3:
 
Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg
 
GTA V:
 
GTA_V_13524245038808.jpg
 
The difference is quite noticeable and Far Cry 3 ran much better, even on consoles.
Did Far Cry 3 have a city? Did Far Cry 3 have a big range of vehicles? Did Far Cry 3 have airplanes? Did Far Cry 3 have different types of land besides Forests and Mountains?
I love Far Cry 3 but the reason why it looked and ran better is because it didn't push the limits of the consoles.

 

 

Good point but it did push the limits to a far extent. It combined GTA Hitman, Skyrim and Call of Duty in one and that is no mindblowing.

 

 

far cry did have stunning graphics and smooth gameplay.. but on picking sides ? not sure which is actually better.. in farcrys case id say there are diverse animals , plants , etc. obviously gta did push the pocket a bit more though


mitchskaterr
  • mitchskaterr

    Gamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2013
  • Netherlands

#54

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:29 PM

It's gonna look good till GTA 6 comes out. I bet it will.

YY1Ei7b.jpg

NEW KIDSSS :D!!

on topic: yea it look's great, but i gotta admit the AA make's it look so bad sometimes. Still really impressive!


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#55

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:35 PM

 

 

The last of us has far better graphics.



True but is waaaaaaay smaller

 


LOL Are you serious?
GTA V (Not mine it's -EvilFuture- picture) 10/10
13874645.jpg
The Last of Us 8/10
13874648.png

 

LOL you make me laugh fanboy. That picture isn't even how the game looked like. 

 

the-last-of-us.jpg


John Smith
  • John Smith

    Cynical Prick

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2012

#56

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:35 PM

This video describes what words cannot:

 

 


mobe
  • mobe

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2006

#57

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:42 PM Edited by mobe, 24 November 2013 - 07:43 PM.

Why would they loose money? If GTA Online is going to have a life beyond next year then its going to have to be available on the PS4 and Xbone. Rockstar will do it I'm sure. What interests me is what sort of incentives are in place to make everyone want to double dip on it. 

 

Rockstar will eventually release the game on next gen consoles. They'd be stupid not to.I

IMO, they'd be smart not to. A lot of people who already own the game wouldn't want to buy it twice. They'd lose money.

 


kvic
  • kvic

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2008

#58

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:59 PM

On hardware this old?! Seriously, even after one month this game keeps on impressing me. The clear blue water (and dem waves) against the beautiful hills. The sunsets... oh the sunsets. 

I know there is nothing new about anything in this thread but am I the only one who's still getting his mind blown by the visuals, even after a month?

I agree the water does look great as with the sun's rays but that's about it.


Katve
  • Katve

    Lost in Liberty City

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2012

#59

Posted 24 November 2013 - 08:00 PM Edited by Katve, 24 November 2013 - 08:00 PM.

I was positively surprised by framerate and graphics. They are not perfect but Rockstar did great for old hardware.


SavageSalad
  • SavageSalad

    #nojetpack

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Sep 2013

#60

Posted 24 November 2013 - 08:48 PM

Flying a helicopter over the water and watching how the the sunlight dances around so perfectly on the surface...how the f*ck did they do that? 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users