Its an awesome trailer.

Indeed I do, my dear. Amazing works of art tend to hang around in memory quite well.

I liked the trailer. Finally put my mind at ease. Though I look forward to some actual in-depth gameplay footage at E3.

You're applying a double standard using crysis as an example of graphical superiority and then arguing that Fallout 4 has to deal with a profusion of havoks physics enabled objects.Crysis 3 has even less objects to render than the witcher 3, yet you disparage the witcher 3 for having less physics enabled objects than Fallout 4...

Also I disagree with the assertion that crysis 1 looks better than vanilla W3.
This shouldn't permit a Bethesda to publish and BGS to develop a game that looks dated by contrast when we consider the vast wealth, talent and time spent on Fallout 4.They should have the ability to create a game that can at least compete in this domain with the witcher 3 even with the extra physics enabled objects, they clearly don't.

Which is slightly discombobulating (can I use that word, or will you become irrate?) considering that when Fallout 3 released it probably was at the apex of RPGs in terms of graphics, there wasn't an RPG of a relatively similar scope with better graphical fidelity if memory serves me right.

Typed on Phone, excuse grammar.

Edit:
The Witcher 3 isn't even close to being static, whether it's the dynamic weather system, the trees billowing under the force of the wind, or the countless things you can walk into and knock over.

You can even kill off species of animals, of which actually hunt and eat.Sure you can pick up more carrots in Fallout, but there's so many complex systems and variables in the witcher 3.

Two things prevent this from being a reality.

1 - Bethesda's over world is unbroken while TW3 has area's that are seperated with loading screens. It's not a true persistant open world like Bethesda's games are.

2 - All the objects and NPCs in the world are persistant meaning they don't reset themsevles to a default position when you leave the area like pretty much any other game ever made.

Sure they have the ability to add such graphic fidelity to thier games and they would be great for the first few hours but would ultimately cripple the game at a caertain hour mark because the change data never stops growing in a persistant world.

We can have 1000 hr game saves or we can have really awesome graphics but we can't have both, not this in generation. Especially not with the baby step that was taken with the latest one.

1 - Apart from every loading screen between interior and exterior spaces, such as entering buildings?

Fallout 4 may be truly seamless, but that's just speculation at this point.

2 - There's plenty of documented incidents of storage containers that have reset and people losing their loot.

I'm not saying Fallout 4 should be at the apex of graphics (for RPGs) but it's surprising just how inferior it is to the WItcher 3 in this regard, especially considering the time and money Bethesda has.

That was the whole point of the comment............. to point out how utterly absurd the comparison is, and how its equally as absurd as the TW3 and Fo4 comparison is.

No it wasn't.

Fallout 3 got [censored] all over for muddy graphics, low resolution textures, poor animation, TERRIBLE NPC face modeling, and countless other graphical problems. Bethesda games have NEVER been the apex of graphics at the time, ever.

The only Bethesda game ever truly considered REALLY good look for its time was Morrowind, and Morrowind was still bad at pure graphics, but made up for it with a slightly... I don't know what to call it as cartoony would be wrong.... but maybe a "mystical" art style. Which is what Fallout 4 seems to be doing as well.

None of that has to deal with anything close to a non-static world.

And none of the thing you listed take up ANYWHERE near the amount of graphis and processing power as having to render hundreds, if not thousands, of non-static objects that are physics enabled like Bethesda games do.

Never saw the point in having so much clutter movable, personally.

So the point of your argument is to contradict it?

The Witcher 3 still has innumerable variables that it has to process for, such as: hair, foliage, wind, independent tree movement, fluid transition between interior and exterior spaces, objects that can be interacted with (though lower than that of Beth games) and a functioning wildlife hierarchy.

Also you evaded my question, what RPG was similar in scope yet graphically superior to Fallout 3 within a 6 month period either side of release?

There's a clear distinction between being at the apex of graphics (a relative term) and having "perfect" graphics, sure Fallout 3 had derisory character models and textures in some places, but I refer back to the question at the start of this paragraph.

Immersion and believability in the game world.

It also allows for rather interesting situations like how in Skyrim, you could drop a high valve item like a diamond, throw it into a group of bandits, and then they would fight themselves over who get it. These are so much dynamic and emergent gameplay that arises from it, so long as you think about what can you do with it.

No? It's to point out the absurdity of comparing two games who are really nothing alike besides being open world. Might as well be comparing an MMO to TW3 at this point as well.

-The hair thing caused MASSIVE performance problems, almost breaking the game entirely for AMD graphics cad users, and I can only think god they aren't making the same mistake in Fo4. Tomb Raider and TW3 should be the death kneel for such idiotic thing.

-Wind effecting foliage and tree movement is, again, not demanding at all. Not to mention one can see trees being blown by the wind in Fo4's trailer.

-The interior/exterior transition didn't take much of a tool as you could combine like 20 of them to get the amount of content as you could inside one of Skyrim's interior spaces.

-A million times lower, like GTA levels low, which is a MAJOR factor in this discussion.

-And again wildlife hierarchies have NOTHING to do with tools of graphics and processing power.

I didn't evade anything, I purposefully didn't answer it because its irrelevant to the point. It doesn't matter if one did or not, Fallout 3 still looked like ass, and even if one had been made, no one, besides the people wanting to find problems in it, would care about the graphical difference because all those people understand the differences between the games, and how those differences effect graphical fidelity.

1 How many bugs will this demanding level of processing be culpable for?These bugs have the ability to rip the play out of their immersion.

2 This could be done without such a holistic and supererogatory approach (if you don't know what these words mean that's not my fault), Assassins Creed 2 had a feature where you could throw money and attain the same effect of people scrambling to the floor for it, without having to process every single cabbage at the same time.

Not to meddle with what ever it is that's going on between you two, but you too gotta understand that while people most likely well understand what you are saying, having your posts look like as if you're reading the dictionary while posting and finding the most uncommon and complex ways to say simple things often makes your posts read very heavy and pretentious. No offense, just an observation. Carry on.

1. Few, if any at all.

2. I found it amusing that you have taken to trying to insult my intellect almost every post now just because I, and a few others, pointed out your unnecessary use of the thesaurus. Well, it makes the posts interesting to read I guess, so.... eh.

As for the actual point made, devs can't think of every possible use for every single item while making the game, thus, they can never design a system like AC2's that can take full advantage of them all. Its better to give players the ability to pick up basically anything they want, so long as it wouldn't ruin the navmesh too badly, and let them toy around with it to see what kind of things they can do.

There's a clear continuum of games and the amount of physics enabled objects they have to render.

Crysis 3 is at the polar opposite end of this continuum from Fallout and the Witcher, it's almost hyperbolic in contrast.

- Are we really going to get into a debate over performance issues between Bethesda games and the Witcher 3?I've seen nothing to suggest that these problems are endemic across all 3 platforms like many of Fallout's performance issues were.

- Can independent tree/wind movement be seen in the trailer? Sincere question, the only scene where it looks like it may is with the brahmin and the pylon and I still don't think it does.

- Stats or this just sounds like pure arrogation (interior vs exterior spaces retort).

- The Witcher 3 at a glance has significantly more variables and objects, in GTA you're lucky if you can enter a 3rd of the buildings.

You did evade my question, I'm not asking for your opinion.I'm asking if there is a game of a similar scope to Fallout 3 with better graphics released around the same time?

Yeah I agree Fallout 3 did look like "ass" in some aspects but that's completely irrelevant to the question I'm positing, which you've failed to answer.

Fair observation and point accepted but I'd also say why should I care?I mean this in the most sincere way possible in this context.

If someone finds my/our diction pretentious, well so what ?

You shouldn't care unless you want to (though, there is the thing that you are communicating with several people here, not just possum). But it seemed to me as if you did, since you did put the "(if you don't understand my words.../can I use these words...)" part in at least two of your more recent posts here. In any case, you do as you see fit for yourself.

1 You're asserting that these objects are demanding in regards to performance (eventuating in lower graphical quality as evidenced in the Fallout games) and yet claiming that some of the most-bug-laden games ever with relatively poor performance across every platform has little if anything to do with these physics enabled objects stressing the processing power of it's platform?

2 It's not unnecessary, language is as much an art form as it is a vector of information

It's not even as complex as developing a system like AC 2's.We can have the same effect by just dropping the item from our inventory and watching people fight over it as it falls to the ground, without requiring the ability to pick up the object and toy with it.

That is exactly the point.

-Crysis 1-3 has basically NO moveable objects, and has the best graphics.

-TW3 has many more, and has worse graphics

-Bethesda games have even more, and have worse graphics then the above 2.

-https://www.google.com/search?q=witcher+3+perforamnce+problems&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=witcher+3+performance+problems

Its been having plenty of performance problems on all platforms. It was so bad on the Xbox they introduced a 30FPS cap, lowering the max FPS by 10, to get a more consistent frame rate without such massive noticeable drops, and even then its still suffering large numbers of texture popin while on horseback,

-Yes... you can see trees moving in the wind around 1:35 when the PC is exiting the vault's elevator door.
-I don't think anyone has actually has actually gone through and tested, it was a comment based on my observations of the numbers of static/nonstatic objects in both games per building.

-So.... exactly like TW3 where 2/3 of the buildings in every town outside the tutorial area are locked and cant be entered? Especially in Novigrad whre it drops down to seemingly less then 1/6.

-No, but no game of a similar scope has released in 6 months of Fallout 4 either.

The bugs have to go with general poor coding skills on Bethesda's team, not the number of physics objects on the screen. Also, have you seen the buglist of an MMO? or Witcher 3? or hell, even GTA? Bethesda games are only equally as buggy as they are, less in some cases. I know its the hip cool meme to say "LE BUGS!", but they really are no more buggy then games of roughly equal scope.

2. Language is about as close to art as games are.

It doesn't need complexity in design to allow for more possibilities. In fact, some of the most simple things have the greatest number of uses. Which is just another reason to leave it as it is, more options in-game + less time spend coding unnecessary complex system that do less = win/win

So what your suggesting is that Bethesda remove the aspects of it's open world game that defines it so it can have higher graphic fidelity. No thanks.

Thankfully with Todd Howard as exectuive producer, no stock holders to answer to and a track record of half again increasing revenues with each new title this will never happen.

- The Witcher 3 does not look graphically inferior IMO (comparing vanilla versions).

Again you've evaded my question, what RPG is similar in scope and graphically superior to Fallout 3, released within a 6 month time frame preceding or proceeding Fallout 3's release?Bethesda was at the apex of graphical fidelity for RPGs, Bethesda can do it.

- I can't comment on novigrad I've not been there yet.But I'd also like to remind you that Fallout 3 has a considerable amount of inaccessible buildings, especially in downtown D.C.

- The Witcher 3 is of presumably similar scope as Fallout 4 from what we can infer and speculate.

2 I don't even know where to begin

Can you offer some sort of reasoning as to how this is so?This is such a nuanced and loaded question, that it could be interpreted in a manifold of ways with a profusion of different philosophies.

- That's why I'm advocating the ability to just drop an item from our inventory and attain the same effect and abolish the ability to essentially play with every item.

Not at all, I'm saying that it's essentially a superfluous feature that is degrading performance and graphical fidelity for no reason (from what I can infer).

-It does to me, ESPECIALLY when it comes to NPC modeling. The facial texturing and animations in the Crysis series are basically unmatched even to this day. Witcher 3 does that disgusting thing there it makes it look like they splashed oil on everyone.

-I explicitly answered your question.

"-No, but no game of a similar scope has released in 6 months of Fallout 4 either."

-And Fallout 3's buildings also have a million times more moveable object i them compared to Witcher. It balances out quite well.

-Having beat the game, with all MQ and side quests done, and every single point of interest visited and completed, I can say that while W3 may have a larger world then Skyrim(not sure since I dont have the tools to open up te engine and check how it counts cells and whatnot), it rally doesn't have the scope of a Bethesda game, as least not in terms of world interaction. TW3 is closer to GTA, or Saints Row 3/4 then Fallout 3/NV/4 or Skyrim in terms of scope.

-Just dropping the item would cause everyone to run to you to try to get it, which sort of defeats the purpose of throwing it into a crowd from a distance to cause a distraction.

It's not superflous, it's defining. No other game in the industry has anything even remotely close to it. In no other game can i collect trinkets and take armor and weapons right off my person and display them in my home. When this is gone from the game it will no longer be the Bethesda open world that was founded with the release of Morrowind.

The things that define a BOWG can not be changed.

1. Blank slate character creation

2. Unbroken true open world main overland

3. persistant npcs and objects

4. physics based world clutter

Everything else is up for alteration but leave those 4 things alone please.

Id like to add my own interjection. I have played witcher 3 for over 80 hours thus far on ultra (well draw distances and shadows are on high but.....), and to be able to compare it to the fallout 4 I must first explain how I feel about the graphics of the witcher. This is to say I feel the witcher is one of the few game where it has its ups and downs on how good it can look. Sometimes it doesnt look that great, sometimes it looks meh and sometimes its so good it makes me want to cry. The only indicator ive found that makes a different is sunlight interacting with the world makes a drastic change and for the sake of my claim we will say this "the best" witcher 3 moments.

Now compare these to fallout 4 I would argue that environment fidelity is roughly the same, maybe witcher 3 has an slight edge but they both look roughly the same. Next and I believe I already stated this earlier, is that animations look roughly the same as the previous fallouts so witcher has fallout beat in this area. Next is character models I haven't seen enough to be able to compare but sake of argument lets give witcher this too.

How do the worlds compare when all these things are put together well for the most part I would say that witcher 3 is a mostly static world, some NPC's move around some don't, and most you cannot interact with. Most item interaction is looting from a crate or box so there are not alot of non-static items displayed in game. This is where the witchers world divates from fallouts, binary or static worlds vs non-static worlds. The witcher does have a very active and lively environment but I dont think we can argue that it is more static then fallouts. In fallouts world mostly all items are non-static and displayed in the world and most npc's are kill-able requiring the game to keep tabs on all of these things once you load in. Whereas in the witcher hardly any of the NPC's are killable and most NPC's in novigrad are just static placeholders like a hut or a cart.

So there is a difference between world and enough of one to warrent a difference of graphical quality but even then (as a just said above) the witcher only beats out fallout by animations and character models and mabye a tad in the world department if you really want to push it (I would say they are equal). Where as fallout brings more to their world than binary objects. Now whether less is more or more is less is up to reader.

I'm fairly satisfied. I'm really satisfied with the trailer.

Thing that made me go hmmm

1. Memory Den

2. Old galleon with "modern" engines

3. The zeppelin

4. Diamond City Surplus . . .here I come

5. Loved the nail bat sign for Swatters