Why so many different opinions of gta v's graphics

[Shane_Dbns]

Some say its good, others say it's bad and some say its nothing special. Why do so many gaming sites have very different opinions on the graphics?

[ShotGunRain]

Maybe different people different taste in games and different standarts.

[Jack94]

Those who said the graphics were bad probably have bad eye sight

[IDredMan]

IGN.

[ceerup]

graphics dont mean anything to me, i just popped in max payne 2 after playin max payne 3 and i was fine with it, still one of my fav games today

[RSoha]

They will be fine. Red Dead and Max Payne had great graphics.

[RandomNoun]

Those who said the graphics were bad probably have bad eye sight

More likely to be the other way around, logically.

 

 

 

But I don't mind. If it's as good as RDR I'll be more than satisfied.

[Grand Theft Savage]

Some say its good, others say it's bad and some say its nothing special. Why do so many gaming sites have very different opinions on the graphics?

'Cause some are tolerant and others a graphic whores

[L.S.P.D.]

I thought the GTA 5 was great

[MuffinCapBackBlue]

Some are honest and some are ass kissers simple as that

[Buntuntuntuns]

It's because some of them are used to linear set pieces with moody lighting such as in MP3 and Uncharted, you simply can't do that consistently with an open world game.

 

eg

 

 

Edit: thats probably a bad example because it's not actually gameplay

[matt_be]

I personally think that Rockstar sent out multiple PS3 Dev Kits with GTA V loaded on them, but different versions. Some versions may have been earlier builds, while others were more recent builds.

 

I seriously doubt that Rockstar sent ONE dev kit around the world to show off GTA V. They probably sent out multiple kits running various versions of GTA V.

[RandomNoun]

I'm expecting it to look a bit dated. I'd by far rather have a much broader game than have sharper visuals.

 

I've been hoping for ages that developers would concern themselves less with the visual technology of games and concentrate more on the content. But I guess, when it comes to this market, nine consumers out of ten will go for the better looking screenshots in the end.

[kesta195]

Different expectations. Some people (idiots like IGN) expected The Last of Us-like graphics just because we are at the end of the console cycle. Others (sensible people like CVG) expected graphics noticeably but not dramatically better than GTAIV. The latter is what they got.

[DeafMetal]

Graphics whores somehow expect seven year old hardware to compete with $2000 rigs running Crysis.

[Maglev]

Because it's bad compared to an average gaming pc today and the new consoles.

But for the old hardware as the ps3 and xbox360 it looks pretty good.

[From B With Love]

The other thing to remember I think is a lot of these guys are also seeing next gen graphics as well as computer graphics which would somewhat influence their overall view of game graphics all around not just gta.

[sasuke78200]

Graphics are like taste, we don't have the same that's why.

Edited May 29, 2013 by sasuke78200

[LSSDLSPD]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

[GTAaLEX117]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

http://i.imgur.com/b3VsJ8E.jpg

Yeah, low quality Youtube video screenshot with different lighting versus in-game screenshot.

This is probably the worst comparison I have ever seen.

[wwinterj]

Why do so many gaming sites have very different opinions on the graphics?

...because everyone has a opinion.

[Maglev]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

http://i.imgur.com/b3VsJ8E.jpg

Whats so ridiculous about it?

It just shows screenshots are touched up.

[Survious]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

Not a big fan of IGN either...game play > sound > graphics in my mind.

[Shane_Dbns]

Why do so many gaming sites have very different opinions on the graphics?

...because everyone has a opinion.

You'd expect there to be a majority of people saying one thing and a minority of people saying something else but EVERYONE has a Different opinion

[GTAaLEX117]

 

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

http://i.imgur.com/b3VsJ8E.jpg

Whats so ridiculous about it?

It just shows screenshots are touched up.

That's about as accurate and touched up as this:

 

Probable hater voice: "As you can clearly see, in-game Niko looks much worse than Niko in the pre-release screenshots"

[Druffmaul]

It all goes back to 1994, when stupid twerps fought to the death over which had better graphics: Final Fantasy VI or Donkey Kong Country.

[Maglev]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

http://i.imgur.com/b3VsJ8E.jpg

Whats so ridiculous about it?

It just shows screenshots are touched up.

That's about as accurate and touched up as this:

http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/A...dComparison.jpg

 

Probable hater voice: "As you can clearly see, in-game Niko looks much worse than Niko in the pre-release screenshots"

Yeah okay its a bit exaggerated but screenshots are still touched up.

[Cilogy]

I think most of us on GTAF agreed that, just like GTAIV, R* redesigned the character textures to make them look better at some point last year. Take a look at the early Michael versus the Michael in the most recent character trailers. I think that's the case here with this screenshot of Trevor.

 

It seems IGN likes to complain just for the attention, but I also think it represents two different schools of thought:

 

1. The group that cares more about top-of-the-line graphics, otherwise it cheapens the game

2. The group that cares more about gameplay and the overall experience

 

I'm in the second group. In fact, to be perfectly honest I wouldn't even give two f*cks if GTAV had graphics similar to IV or earlier, I will still play GTAV for years on end and love it.

 

 

 

[GTAaLEX117]

It's all IGN look how they're comparing f*cken ridiculous.

http://i.imgur.com/b3VsJ8E.jpg

Whats so ridiculous about it?

It just shows screenshots are touched up.

That's about as accurate and touched up as this:

http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/A...dComparison.jpg

 

Probable hater voice: "As you can clearly see, in-game Niko looks much worse than Niko in the pre-release screenshots"

Yeah okay its a bit exaggerated but screenshots are still touched up.

It's kind of the same thing if you ask me. Different resolution, different lighting, different builds.

[LSSDLSPD]

 

I think most of us on GTAF agreed that, just like GTAIV, R* redesigned the character textures to make them look better at some point last year. Take a look at the early Michael versus the Michael in the most recent character trailers. I think that's the case here with this screenshot of Trevor.

 

It seems IGN likes to complain just for the attention, but I also think it represents two different schools of thought:

 

1. The group that cares more about top-of-the-line graphics, otherwise it cheapens the game

2. The group that cares more about gameplay and the overall experience

 

I'm in the second group. In fact, to be perfectly honest I wouldn't even give two f*cks if GTAV had graphics similar to IV or earlier, I will still play GTAV for years on end and love it.

I agree the gameplay screen in no way represents the actual game

just shows you at what extent IGN will go to disappoint you.

(

Edited May 29, 2013 by LSSDLSPD