snip, i guess the white noise doesn't happen through the entire video
[QUOTE=endorphinsam;45569548]this is a really obnoxious video and the transitions between the two versions with the white noise and static is annoying as hell 0/10[/QUOTE]
Okay, now watch it past 1:30 seconds.
[QUOTE]They say they improved the lighting engine in the game... but the lighting engine looks untouched.[/QUOTE]
Proceeds to show a massive difference in the lighting engine.
[QUOTE=Xion12;45569643]Proceeds to show a massive difference in the lighting engine.[/QUOTE]
Seems to me they only doubled shadow resolution and improved draw distance.
Which should amount to changing 2 numbers.
[QUOTE=etrius0023;45569645]Seems to me they only doubled shadow resolution and improved draw distance.
Which should amount to changing 2 numbers.[/QUOTE]
Even if they changed just those 2 variables, the difference is huge and it shows. But the truth is that they did more than that, because the PS3 version's lighting was practically fullbright at times, while the PS4 version has proper shadows and shading.
[QUOTE=Xion12;45569694]Even if they changed just those 2 variables, the difference is huge and it shows. But the truth is that they did more than that, because the PS3 version's lighting was practically fullbright at times, while the PS4 version has proper shadows and shading.[/QUOTE]
that's mostly attributed to the improved color balance bringing out whatever shadowed details there already were
anyone who expected massive improvements to the 'lighting engine' is pretty silly. it's mostly a static environment so it'd make no sense to "upgrade" to a more dynamic lighting solution because dynamic bounces are absurdly expensive and for what? To have it look worse and less accurate than the baked maps?
edit: actually nevermind, i changed my mind
The main problem with TLoU for me was the aliasing when upscaled to 1080P. It really ruined the game for me on the PS3 because every single leaf/blade of grass had jagged lines and it was awful. They got rid of that and it looks better than before and plays better than before.
Also the multiplayer/single player DLC being included is great. Traded in my copy for $25 so I got my copy for $25. It's easily worth the cost of upgrading and it's really what a HD port should aspire to be.
[QUOTE=Xion12;45569643]Proceeds to show a massive difference in the lighting engine.[/QUOTE]
thats not how it works
increasing the resolution of the shadow maps isn't using a "massively different lighting engine" it's changing a number
the shading and shadows are basically the exact same, the only difference in graphics is 1080p, 60fps, higher res shadow maps and better color balance
didn't everyone always say that 1080p/60fps is a big deal
[QUOTE=Ezhik;45573617]didn't everyone always say that 1080p/60fps is a big deal[/QUOTE]
They are very welcome improvements, yes, but people who believe they overhauled any sort of "lighting engine" or massively improved the graphics are just plain wrong.
[editline]2nd August 2014[/editline]
I wont lie, it looks better, but it helps to know what you're talking about with these things!
This video is cringeworthy in the way of him using graphical terms and then interpreting/understanding them wrong and making wrong assumptions. He really shouldn't take about technical aspects of 3D graphics.
I don't see how anyone could have seriously expected a huge improvement just because of a generation jump on a game designed for the previous one - that said Last of Us does look really good for what it had to run on.
The game is simply 1080p with changeable 30 or 60 frames per second with slightly better sound quality and better color balancing. There is no change in shadow quality unless you're playing on 60 FPS or 30.
[QUOTE=Ezhik;45573617]didn't everyone always say that 1080p/60fps is a big deal[/QUOTE]
Sadly yes they are big deals now, when they shouldnt be at all and it should have been standard years ago.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;45574059]Sadly yes they are big deals now, when they shouldnt be at all and it should have been standard years ago.[/QUOTE]
Playing devil's advocate, the fact that these games are running on a $400 box should really set expectations because it's not some $1500 PC. I'd love to see 1080@60hz but sometimes the hardware just can't do it at the visual quality they desire. I really like what TLoU did. It gave them the option to lock it at 30 to get slightly better shadows/anti aliasing or you could play at the unlocked frame rate (60 solid)
what's the point of letting the video go to 1080 when the video itself is compressed to shit for youtube?
[QUOTE=Hogie bear;45575314]what's the point of letting the video go to 1080 when the video itself is compressed to shit for youtube?[/QUOTE]
Because 1080p with Youtube compression is still clearer than 720p with Youtube compression.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.