agean u dont know, so u cant compare, i dont care about proximite or no, or time, since Fallout Nv happen after Fallout 3, but since u cant see any mutant color on any of the trailer u dont know if are the same from DC, or check this out, the Institute is there and we know they are involve and alot not just synthectics, so probabbly this mutants are a new breed or maybe something else, u dont know.

U just cant go and said they look bad bc they dont look the same as other game, on those standard i really dont know how u like alot from the Witcher 3, when it didnt look close to anything on 2 or 1.

The game play is the thing.

Fallout is not Elder Scrolls with so much natural beauty so I'm glad they put other more important things in front of cutting edge graphics.

Weather, better combat, better AI, better companions and factions, better modding tools, weapon customization, settlements, and so one.

I can even understand the logic.

Why bust our asses on graphics when the modding community is going to redo every thing we do any way?

I mean with ENB Skyrim looks way better than when it launched even without any graphic mods.

Especially when the Console community is also going to be able to access the graphic mods.

And the individual players will be able to fine tune the F4 graphics to satisfy their visual requirements while still running on their equipment.

Consoles won't be getting graphics mods. They won't be able to run HD textures because the game is already optimized to use console hardware and ENB is third party software that won't work.

PCs, on the other hand, will definitely get the benefit of making Fallout 4 look a lot better. I cannot wait.

Hmm. Looking at the FO3 pic, it looks all sorts of misproportioned - especially the monumental pyramid-shaded neck that has a face growing out of it. Of course (again) part of that is the image itself - the arms & legs look foreshortened due to the positions they're in.

I'll agree that some parts of the behemoth in the FO4 pic look misshapen, like they've decided to embrace the "mutant" part of it - so it's not as symmetric/etc. Still, I'd need to see a clearer pic (like, a neutral-pose, well-lit shot from a modeling program) in order to really judge.

Still not sure I'd call any of that "cartoonish" though. It doesn't remind me of a cartoon - there've been misshapen-style mutants in sci-fi and fantasy illustration since the 50s and before.

Cancerous, mutations aren't typically very symmetrical, you would think, being an uncontrolled growth and all. Misshapen, different sized limbs make sense in that regard.

It's proportioned, but poorly scaled (look at the fire hydrant). I prefer the new look anyways. There's a pretty distinct look and style going from a regular super mutant to a behemoth. One looks more "human," albeit still somewhat misshapen and grotesque, the other looks http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/catalog/product/600x620/99060209187_TrollwithStoneClubNEW01.jpg with amplified FEV side-effects (elongated limbs and more mass). The Fo3 behemoths were just regular mutants scaled up with very little to distinguish them.

From the looks from the footages, not the cleanest, but also fits the game as well, thus I am fine with the graphics. Big thing for me is the lighting, which is a huge +1.

I was actually pretty excited about the graphics. I'll be honest, while probably technically superior, TW3 seemed to me to be focused mostly on the wind animations. That's not a bad thing in and of itself, but I didn't feel that the graphics were really all that great. Nor were they horrible. I was mostly reminded of Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor. Maybe a little more crisp. DA:I was a big disappointment in terms of the animations and general feel of the controls. It was also annoying in that every section of the world was rife with collectibles. That is one of the most annoying content short cuts I can imagine. Instead of doing something interesting, we instead chase down sets of items through a respawning world. No thanks. I want to play TW3 more but I have not much been in a fantasy mood.

With the footage I've seen of Fallout 4, I see a lot of environmental goodness but some fuzziness around the character models. This is especially true in the E3 presentation where Nora is standing in the doorway asking about her favorite men. The character model is downright blurry. Not sure if that is an artifact of the streaming tech, being played on a console, or overall poor character models. I'll have to judge for myself once the game comes out. The clothing and hair still looks really stiff. I would love to see BGS apply physics to those things. The animations look a little less stiff than Skyrim. I especially liked how the mole rats responded. It is a little thing, but how they sort of tumbled over and then sprang back up was pretty cool. The Dodging Deathclaw of Destruction was also a welcome sight.

So funny you mention the wind. When I was playing TW3 I was like oh wow this game is so beautiful. Naturaly I took screenshot after screenshot, but on reviewing those pics I was like wow this game looks... ok. That's when I realized it was all in the wind. When I first saw Fo4 (the trailer I guess and the E3 presentation) my second thought (after OMG Fo4) was that the graphics were sub par. After rewatching everything... a few dozen times I really really like Fo4s graphics. My anticipation grows every second.

Visually it looks fine, impressive even to me. It's more than passable, and passable was all I was expecting from Fallout 4.