It's alway something. If a trailer is too fancy and the players who buy the game see that the graphics aren't up to the standard a 2 year old trailer promissed, they're angry (yeah, mr Witcher, you know i'm talking to you) and if a trailer is realistic in terms of what kind of graphics are to be expected, they're also angry.

The graphics are reasonable. Let's just wait to see the finished product to know why those graphics aren't spectacular. The bigger the world, the more content in it, the more you can interact with things in this world, the amount of quests, the amount of spoken lines etc,...this might be why the graphics are reasonable instead of superduper-out-of-this-world-crisp. There is always a reason for things like this. And starting to complain like a little kid who thinks their lollypop isn't quite big enough before he has even purchased it, is kind of useless.

It's always better to get a product that lives up to the advertisemants than a product that is only a shadow of the advertisemants.

The graphics are fine.

This is the internet people always complain no matter what

It's been 8 years since Fallout 3 was released, and we're on a new generation of gaming consoles. The trailer for Fallout 4 doesn't look like the game's made that much of a graphical leap during that time, and so some people are surprised andslashor disappointed by this.

I'm actually really impressed with the graphics.

Although that may just be because i'm stuck on ps3 and a laptop that struggles to play Oblivion on low settings.

True, no way to please the internet with the exception of cute cat pictures.

For me they are fine, escpecially consider we can assume it will be the free roaming sandbox Beth games always are, if ya want pretty graphics, feel free to pick up the intractable corridor Order 1886

There is a hell of a difference, maybe people are comparing the graphics here to the graphics seen in a heavily modded 3/NV? Fire up 3/NV on the PS3, 360, check how bad the textures are and then look at the trailer for 4.

I think it does make quite a leap. The biggest difference between previous console gen and this one is lighting, size, textures and foliage. And only one of those (lighting) can be somewhat judged based on that trailer and imo the lighting has improved very much. All the rest remains to be seen. I've seen people compare this trailers graphics to games limited to corridor crawling with mute NPC's, i think it's silly.

Let me guess, you're still having fun playing those games, right? I mean, graphics are fun and all, but do they need to be top of the line to enjoy a game? Don't think so.

To me a good game has good gameplay and a good story. Something that svcks you in and then you realize its 0200 and you have to work tomorrow.

Graphics are nice but good graphics do not make for a good game, especially a RPG like Fallout. Eye candy in Crysis when you will play through only once is fine. But a good Fallout game should have more steak than sizzle.

Using the Skyrim engine just means that the bugs should all be known and handled and that it is easily modded. That all sounds like great things to me. I could not care less about consoles, next gen or otherwise.

I'd take content over graphics any day. As long as the game is full of decent content, I'm happy.

A big lesson of recent times is to honestly show the game, not over-spin a marketing hype.

(Watch Dogs / Witcher 3).

Looks like Bethesda are doing the right thing.

The graphics look good to me, but then I still regularly play Vanilla Fallout 3 and NV (XBox 360) so I can see the improvement.

True. Even between Skyrim and this trailer the upgrade is formidable. You might be right about comparing this to modded versions of previous games. It's seems that people always expect above ultra graphics for a vanilla game, things you usually only see in mods.

After digging around and finding a less compressed version of the trailer, I admitted that it did look better than the first time I saw it on youtube on Bethesda's official channel... which makes me wonder why you'd release it on that if the quality is going to be so much lower and unrepresentative of your finished product.

I can play today Morrowind vanilla no probs. For its time it had great graphics. I don't feel like a jerk though for expecting modern graphics from a big studio releasing a very anticipated installment in a legendary franchise in 2015.

For today the graphics in the Fallout 4 trailer look dated, X360 tier. If you look at the hardware specs between last and current console generations you may wonder wth have they done all this time, where did all the money go because it's clearly not in the engine, animations or character models. The Witcher you're pointing at did apply a downgrade indeed, but don't forget what levels of visual fidelity we're talking here. The early trailers had amazingly surrealist graphics, and the downgrade left us with "only" great graphics. I would totally love such a "downgrade" in Fallout 4 so I could get Witcher 3 actual graphics in Fallout 4 actual game. Also, the animations and facial animations in Witcher 3, do you really expect anything like that in Fallout 4?

People don't understand what's involved in developing not just a game, but an engine to create the game in. They see other games released, which might look rather nice, using different game engines, and then think Bethesda should simply be able to pull the next-super-gen-console-awesome-wow-perfect-amazing engine out of their [censored], just to look 'as good as' or better than the last released game they saw. These are the expectations of the entitled. It's even worse that people seem to expect a developer to use another engine, even if they're halfway through developing a game with their own engine, just for the sake of more 'realisitc' graphics (btw stunning the gaming world with realistic graphics (often at the expense of game content) isn't what Fallout games or Bethesda's games have ever been about). This "we need better graphics!" [censored] is sickening...

most likely because the trailer is never really meant to be showing of the games muscles, that′s what the E3 thing this Sunday is for.

I'm sure some people aren't happy that it's not blowing them away but I think most of the people talking about it are just disappointed that the graphics are dated compared to other games that are already out (Like the Witcher 3).

Personally I think Witcher 3 level of graphics just means I have to make a really powerful PC. The graphics look solid and affordable to run so I'm happy with it.

Well, FO3 was pretty ugly for 2008 too. Skyrim was not the best looking game in 2011. It would've been a surprise if BGS could pull off stunning graphix this time. I don't get it why you complain about other people's expectations, though. FO4 will be compared to The Witcher Wild Hunt and Deus Ex Mankind Divided by all the reviewers and that's very tough competition.

I am not worried about textures resolution, it can be easily fixed with texture-mods, but that terrible LOD distance...this is something!

I'm not that concerned with graphics, but it is always nice to have good graphics. If the graphics had remained at Skyrim quality i would have been fine with that.

Yep, looks fine to me.

I really hate those fancy trailers which have "not actual game footage" in small print at the bottom. I want to see what I'll actually be playing!

The only thing I noticed were the flat textures on the dog and characters. There was no hair animation. Overall the game looks good though, and the backgrounds look incredible. Bethesda can render robots and backgrounds nicely.

Here's what I don't get. People complain about graphics and how "it's 2015" and then a game like dark souls comes along and it's hailed as the next Messiah. There's no accounting for taste I guess although I'm convinced some people can never be satisfied.

People who play this game already know the graphics look great for what the game is.