Congratulations on FF16 being a huge success

[Mosha]

I would legitimately make an eye doctor appointment if I were you. And someone for the thoughts in your head.

tbf PS3 is properly Stormpeaks being hyperbolic BUT I would say it doesn't look that much better than FFXV (PC version with the texture pack that being said)

[CStrife912]

Thank you for your concern, I'm okay though I have the right to my opinion, however looking at how you cant accept that others have a different opinions than yours, I'd be more worried if I was you

You said above there are no wrong opinions yes and no it’s more uninformed personally. Like if I showed you a ton of games on ps3 that look worse even ps4 games you likely wouldn’t concede. There are other aspects here yes 16 isn’t up there with best so far this gen but it’s art direction will carry it like it does with 14. 14 while not being overly pretty is carried by ok textures and good art direction. FFX being your fav is questionable jkjk it’s good I’m personally a FF9 lover. But what 16 does is for around 90% or the time runs in real time… you couldn’t do this on a ps3 or as they’ve said on a ps4 (you couldn’t real time but you could pre render or video format cutscenes to mask loading I suppose) but that didn’t match what they wanted to portray.

The main gripe I have is they have decided to use ray tracing by default which is a notorious performance hit/slog on ps5 and series x. Yeah it makes the PBR rendering and lighting look really nice most of the time but they could have gained so much performance and resolution increase just going with a more traditional lighting/shadow method. Hopefully their fixes alleviate this somewhat down the line but with games like Zelda and Elden ring releasing and being fps dropping prone etc then their would be some double standard those same people moaning here.

tbf PS3 is properly Stormpeaks being hyperbolic BUT I would say it doesn't look that much better than FFXV (PC version with the texture pack that being said)

To be fair 15 does still look good and man I remember that having like 3 performance modes on ps4 pro lol. 16 does win over it though with better lighting and character models. My main issue with ‘console’ 15 was the like flicker hair bloody ugly that was

[Mosha]

To be fair 15 does still look good and man I remember that having like 3 performance modes on ps4 pro lol. 16 does win over it though with better lighting and character models. My main issue with ‘console’ 15 was the like flicker hair bloody ugly that was

Yeah, when you run that game maxed-out Hairworks was a massive eye sore for the game.

[Deo14]

tbf PS3 is properly Stormpeaks being hyperbolic BUT I would say it doesn't look that much better than FFXV (PC version with the texture pack that being said)

AAA gaming in general didn't have significant graphical evolution since first half of 2010s. Witcher 3 is from 2015, FFXV is from 2016, DMC5 from 2019, all of those could easily be released today and would still be praised for their graphics. We've just hit soft cap and everything has diminishing returns. Problem is that latest games for some reason require things like RTX4070+, even though those games look like regular ~2016 titles.

[Stormpeaks]

You said above there are no wrong opinions yes and no it’s more uninformed personally. Like if I showed you a ton of games on ps3 that look worse even ps4 games you likely wouldn’t concede. There are other aspects here yes 16 isn’t up there with best so far this gen but it’s art direction will carry it like it does with 14. 14 while not being overly pretty is carried by ok textures and good art direction. FFX being your fav is questionable jkjk it’s good I’m personally a FF9 lover. But what 16 does is for around 90% or the time runs in real time… you couldn’t do this on a ps3 or as they’ve said on a ps4 (you couldn’t real time but you could pre render or video format cutscenes to mask loading I suppose) but that didn’t match what they wanted to portray.

The main gripe I have is they have decided to use ray tracing by default which is a notorious performance hit/slog on ps5 and series x. Yeah it makes the PBR rendering and lighting look really nice most of the time but they could have gained so much performance and resolution increase just going with a more traditional lighting/shadow method. Hopefully their fixes alleviate this somewhat down the line but with games like Zelda and Elden ring releasing and being fps dropping prone etc then their would be some double standard those same people moaning here.



To be fair 15 does still look good and man I remember that having like 3 performance modes on ps4 pro lol. 16 does win over it though with better lighting and character models. My main issue with ‘console’ 15 was the like flicker hair bloody ugly that was

I can agree with most of what you said but in the end it's a little bit like asking someone if they like X game, for example if you ask me if I like those NBA games or Fifa, I'll tell you that damn it sucks, because I just dont like it and I dont like sports, that's basically the same for me and FF16, to me the graphics dont look very good and also I really dislike the combat as I said that came after FFX, it's too "real time" for me, I prefered to have turn based at my own pace.

Also I agree about ray tracing and stuff, it's all about the "shiny" but in exchange the performances are worse and in some cases people have to use performance mode which in the end makes it worse than it would be.

AAA gaming in general didn't have significant graphical evolution since first half of 2010s. Witcher 3 is from 2015, FFXV is from 2016, DMC5 from 2019, all of those could easily be released today and would still be praised for their graphics. We've just hit soft cap and everything has diminishing returns. Problem is that latest games for some reason require things like RTX4070+, even though those games look like regular ~2016 titles.

I agree tbh, there was that one game that came recently (maybe even from SE I dont remember) that required the latest intel cpu's to even work and an rtx 4k, and then I looked at the trailer and I was like "really you need this much of a computer for.. this ?"

[Deo14]

Speaking of PS3 graphics:

[Mosha]

AAA gaming in general didn't have significant graphical evolution since first half of 2010s. Witcher 3 is from 2015, FFXV is from 2016, DMC5 from 2019, all of those could easily be released today and would still be praised for their graphics. We've just hit soft cap and everything has diminishing returns. Problem is that latest games for some reason require things like RTX4070+, even though those games look like regular ~2016 titles.

Yeah, it gets super uncanny valley if you push further, these days it's more about objects in a scene and lighting/shader stuff than raw graphical fidelity maybe the only exception to that rule is games with machines rather than Humans/biological things as the player entity. But even then a lot of the big selling points for those games have become more about the simulation than graphics over the years "Look how our tyre dynamically cools when it hits a puddle on the track meaning a loss of grip for the player" for example. Ace Combat 7 and its volumetric clouds being another.

[Stormpeaks]

Forspoken? That game had ludicrous system requirements. Like absolutely insane asylum requirements for what it offered graphically. I also remember its suggested RAM was like 24 or 32GB. I know games are gonna get to the point they want you to have a $3k+ gaming PC, but Forspoken was not the one.

I am not sure really, but it was a game that had absolutely crazy minimum requirements and the game looked absolutely terrible lol

[Larirawiel]

AAA gaming in general didn't have significant graphical evolution since first half of 2010s. Witcher 3 is from 2015, FFXV is from 2016, DMC5 from 2019, all of those could easily be released today and would still be praised for their graphics. We've just hit soft cap and everything has diminishing returns. Problem is that latest games for some reason require things like RTX4070+, even though those games look like regular ~2016 titles.

Unfortunately it is true. The newer games have vastly increased minimum requirements without a real graphical improvement. I guess, the lack of proper optimization is the reason for it. Good performance is a so called "non-functional requirement". And non-functional requirements are usually not a selling point and there is not much budget for them.


Cheers

[Rufalus]

This is true. There was a major leap in graphical quality from PS1 to PS2, and that era of video gaming is really the last time we had that big of a leap.

Plus one more. PS3 is big jump over PS2. But the PS2 gen was the first time they could push enough polygons to have realistically proportioned characters in full 3D environments, so maybe that felt like a more impressive jump. I was actually arguing for them to extend that gen even longer with a PS2 Pro kind of thing, including a hardware upscaler, HDMI and network features. I'm so off topic but anything is more interesting than talking about FF XIV right now.