JSawyer

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:23 am

Anyone else out there hoping some of what the NV mod did shows up in the new game?
User avatar
Tikarma Vodicka-McPherson
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:15 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 5:44 am

i garuntee that some will. heck settlements were probably inspired by mods. however if its the jsawyer mod that is in the game nd not optional? i likely wont be replaying the game as much until i can mod it to be a bit less harsh. i perfered project nevada

User avatar
Alba Casas
 
Posts: 3478
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:31 pm

Post » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:23 pm

Jsawyer.esp did more to improve New Vegas than hardcoe Mode ever did, IMO. Great little plugin. Not sure how much of it applies to Fallout 4 though.

User avatar
~Amy~
 
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:38 am

Post » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:17 pm

Perhaps. Mods have influence Beth for years. Even Sawyer himself said that they were influenced by some FO3 mods. One thing I want Beth to do is to learn from the Metro series. That game is way ahead of Fallout in terms of visuals by miles - even in some gameplay mechanics. And don't be surprised if Beth learn a few things from Metro Last Light.

User avatar
Princess Johnson
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:44 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:52 am

>A liner FPS with small levels divided by loadscreens has better visuals then a massive seamless open world that has far more content, and far less loading screens.
That is to be expected.

User avatar
Solène We
 
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:04 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:01 am

Yes, I know. But open worlds and visuals are becoming very advanced every year. To have an open world with the visuals of Metro is something that we will see in the next 5-7 years. But Beth has been behind in the visual department for a while anyways since other older open worlds games have had more advanced shaders than TES/FO. FO4 is going to be the first Beth game with volumetric lighting(godrays). Hopefully they implemented SSAO aswell. In fact SSAO makes a bigger visual difference than volumetric lighting.

User avatar
Amber Hubbard
 
Posts: 3537
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:59 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 6:20 am

name a 2011 or earlier open world game with volumetric lighting, SSAO and god rays. I'm curious, it seems i'm missing out. Skyrim, released in 2011, was Bethesda's last game. If you claim they were behind the average tech curve by listing these features, i'm eager to learn, which open world games did implement those at the time. I have abolutely no doubt that the next TES in 5-7 years will look better than the currently latest Metro game.

User avatar
Roddy
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:50 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 5:00 am

Well, for starters, Just Cause 2.

User avatar
Lil Miss
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:57 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 2:53 am

Just Cause 2 is an entirely different kind of game. Its closer to GTA then TES, in that its a mostly static world, where NPCs dont have complex schedules, and most things don't have tru physics support, whereas Bethesda games do, and thus, have to spend more resources on that.

User avatar
Nicole Coucopoulos
 
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:09 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:07 am

Engines are evolving. Beth is learning how to integrate advanced shaders into the Creation engine. The Witcher 3 is as new as FO4 and they have proven that you can integrate advanced next-gen shaders along with advanced schedules and physics. It is all on how well the engine is programmed. Just Cause 2 has moved on with JC3 and has created not only more advanced shaders but also scripting and physics. I'm glad Beth is also exploring the capabilities of their engine; with Skyrim Beth discovered that they could implement dynamic lighting even though it was archaic looking and limited. With FO4, godrays finally enters the scene not to mention better gameplay mechanics by the looks of the presentation.

User avatar
Bones47
 
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:15 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:10 am


Fair enough. Though i think Just Cause 2 is missing god ray, at least with off camera sun. It may be that FO 4 will have them, though at this point it's hard to tell from the trailers, what is dynamic, and what was handplaced and animated.

I think we can also add MGS 5 into the 2015 comparison. It's hard to compare graphics between the 4 (Witcher 3, MGS 5, JC 3 and FO 4) due to different graphics styles/interpretations and two being just available in trailers (including youtube compression). e.g. Witcher 3 focused on hair and cloth physics, putting a lot of emphasis on showing them, cloth even gets zoomed in on in dialog. Bethesda on the other hand made it really hard to spot the hair and cloth physics in the trailers. And while d-dog (MGS 5 dog) looks technically better than dogmeat at first glance, i've seen people claim Bethesda implemented shell-texturing on it's fur. I don't know, i have the feeling they downplay their graphics a bit; maybe after the Witcher 3 graphics complaints. Witcher 3 is a very beautiful game, but it still got flack for looking more pretty in the trailers. And that was before steam introduced their money back policy and batman arkham city was taken off the store. So maybe they approach the release with a bit less bells and whizzles about the graphics. It may not be behind the curve (as much) in terms of engine muscle when compared to the other three, as it seems from looking at the current pre-release bits.
User avatar
Jonathan Montero
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:22 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 8:10 am

JC2 does have godrays but there are different styles of godrays. If I recall, JC2 godrays shader is the type one can see when you're looking at the sun. Other types of godrays lets you see the sun shafts even when you're looking away from the sun like in S.T.A.L.K.E.R Clear Skies, or depending on the time of day like in Far Cry 4.

As for FO4, I'm pretty sure its godrays is going to be global(which is the normal thing to do)and not done for specific places. If not, then that would be very awkward and plain lazy to be frank. But you're right, we must wait and see. If there's ONE thing I've learned about early game presentations and that's to take everything with a grain of salt - thanks to Todd Howard for that.

User avatar
Katharine Newton
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 12:33 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 11:37 am

I disagree, their games are 5-10 times the size of most games when they released.

And despite this huge difference their games were 1 tick down from the best looking games out there. Name a few multi plat games in 2008 that had any depth and looked that much better than FO3?

Or games that topped oblivion in 2006.
User avatar
Brandon Bernardi
 
Posts: 3481
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:06 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:25 am

Frankly, FO3 like Oblivion were good looking games for their genre but nothing really visually impressive. Skyrim was worse since it was outdated by 2011 standards. I don't know if there were other open world games that were visually as good as Oblivion in 2006 but there were certainly other games in other genres/platforms more graphically advanced than Oblivion. Lets face it, TES/FO3 are more famous for their gameplay, for being open world games where you do and be whatever you want than for amazing visual technology. They have always been more than one "tick" down graphically. Morrowind was actually more current in its technology than Oblivion/FO3/Skyrim were. The water shader of MW specially when it was raining was a sight to behold at that time no matter what game genre.

Anyways, as for depth, well, that will depend on what depth means to you. Some people think New Vegas had way more depth than FO3 despite being smaller and barren.

User avatar
Jessica Raven
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:33 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:48 am

Not until I see what the base game is like. I am hoping they implemented the fun aspects of hardcoe mode, and junked the hunger/thirsty/sleepy bits. I *hope* they use food to regain health (hopefully stims will be rare and expensive), and water to get rid of rads (More slowly, but far more cheaply then rad away - basing that off of fallout shelter)

User avatar
Jesus Lopez
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:16 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 9:46 am


Talk is, that was just a new recently invented water shader and Morrowind happened to be one of the first to release with it implemented. during the following months a lot of games would release with water looking exactly the same. on the other hand, the animations in Morrowind were more ugly than in other games at the time.

I think Bethesda games were always beautiful in their art direction and world design, and being one or two steps back in shader technology was never much of an issue (to me), and is easily excusede by the amount of interactivity and NPCs with varied daily schedules they add to their games. Animation is where i wish they would shorten their gap to the leading edge more. It feels like this is the part where they are lacking three to four steps behind. Though watching Dogmeat down and maim a feral ghoul was still very satisfying, as were the Deathclaw attacks in the trailers.
User avatar
Flash
 
Posts: 3541
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:24 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:36 am

No, just no.

I am very tired of these posts claiming that Bethesda lags behind in visuals when the opposite is actually the case.

Oblivion and Crysis were THE games used for benchmarking graphic cards in 2006 and shortly afterwards. NVidia basically developed SLI tech specifically because Oblivion was such a huge hit seller and people wanted to be able to play it more smoothly than normal GPUs allowed. Go back and read various reviews of graphic cards at that time and you'll see that Bethesda has always pushed the envelope with their releases. In fact, Oblivion was pretty much the ONLY game on the shelves in 2006 with recommended CPU of 3.0 GHz. Oblivion's water, grass, and trees were the major hits for processing and most machines just could not handle it. This was really where the start of splitting machines between general/productivity use and high-end/gaming/video editing use began as far as the OEMs were concerned.

Crysis was created purely to see if it could be done (i.e., a game where pretty much everything had physics). It was more of a tech demo than a game, per se, and it was nowhere near as good a seller as Oblivion because of that fact. The result, of course, was that it showed that such a thing could be done with enough processing power as well as restricted game design (e.g., linear shooters are great for such technical feats). That's also why it was used along with Oblivion as a gold standard for any new graphics card that was released. NVidia did use a couple of other games to benchmark their cards, of course, but these two were the top-end, most-demanding titles.

Any game developer is aiming for mass market, not tech demo quality. Or perhaps it would be better to say that any game publisher is doing this since it is the publisher that funds the development. We cannot compare software made for restricted market, high-end workstations to mass market PCs and consoles, for example, as that would be comparing apples and oranges (i.e., two products with totally different goals and associated markets). If someone happens to have the money to afford a high-end workstation for their personal use, that's great, but such a person cannot claim that any game developer is behind the curve with visuals and effects that would be fine on their hardware but cannot be effectively done on the majority of the mass market machines available/in use. That would be like claiming that GM or Toyota lags behind Ferrari in automobile performance. It's a pointless comparison.

User avatar
Chloe Mayo
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:59 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:17 am

Only because a game is use to benchmark a graphic card doesn't mean necessarily the game has advanced visuals. Oblivion was foremost used because of the huge amount of processing data used within an open world. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why Nvidia decided to do SLI for it. Also, Oblivion was a bigger seller than Crysis because TES already had a fan base and Crysis was a new ip and was a PC exclusive and there was virtually no PC at that time that could have run Crysis with everything maxed out and with good fps. Like we all know already, open worlds with highly advanced visual technology like in Crysis or Metro is almost, if not, completely prohibited. But that is changing fast because of the immense popularity of open worlds nowadays, not to mention that consoles have a new generation of technology that will let devs push the console tech better than ever before. The Witcher 3 is a good example that high tech visuals can be achieved along with a complex open world environment.


FO4 is looking like its going to be the most advanced Beth game to date in terms of gameplay mechanics and visuals. By no means I'm expecting cutting edge visuals but I'm expecting, however, better tech than we had in Skyrim. Although, at the end of the day, what makes a Beth game is the overall gameplay experience and the modding tools they have created for their games.

User avatar
Misty lt
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:06 am

Post » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:07 pm

I guess it depends on what "things" in particular.

If it adds to my enjoyment of the game, they can borrow from mods all they want.

User avatar
Rebecca Clare Smith
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:13 pm

Post » Tue Dec 01, 2015 9:32 pm

Well, Horizon and Witcher3 have better gfx than FO4. Both are open world.

An argument can probably be made for AC:Unity and BattleFront as well.

User avatar
james tait
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:48 am

See

Witcher 3's gameworld is 99% static objects, and NPCs with no real complex schedules, to waste CPU and GPU power on. OFC it will have better general graphics, it doesn't have to do as much in other areas.

User avatar
MR.BIGG
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:51 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:58 am

I believe many who have really played TW3 will disagree.

User avatar
Jessica Raven
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:33 am

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 8:26 am

Maybe this is the wrong forum for this, but on my part I'm tired of people dismissing Crysis as just a tech demo. Ignoring the horrible story, it's one of the most innovative FPSs I've played (back then "innovative" was the cool word), with great emphasis on player's creativity. Nanosuit was actually power armor that did something other than increased health. Multiplayer had large maps with vehicles, aircraft, supersuits, freeze rays and nukes. Also, I'd hardly call a game with levels as large as Skyrim's Holds linear.

User avatar
Mandi Norton
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:43 pm

Post » Tue Dec 01, 2015 10:35 pm

Have you actually played Witcher 3 for even a minute, or is that too far beneath you to even consider? If you're just going to relentlessly trash every single game out there that isn't developed by Bethesda, then at least pretend you have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

User avatar
Petr Jordy Zugar
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:10 pm

Post » Wed Dec 02, 2015 11:58 am

Well that went off topic quickly.

Request a moderator to either clean this up for the topic it was intended for or to just lock it.
User avatar
Tai Scott
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:58 pm

Next

Return to Fallout 4