Has Cyberpunk achieved the most "non-core" graphics? (Cyberpunk 2077)
and is it better than in the 2nd?InboxM
Taa is a modern type of anti-aliasing, it has been in all games for 5 years already, in your wretched rdr 2 it is also present)
Dartflame
In punk, the textures are a cut above what the rakstar had in their wretched rdrk, because in punk it is banal there are very few vat textures, and that minuscule is only somewhere in very hidden places, in rdr, vague textures can be observed next to normal where the main action takes place)
Oh, these comparisons, rdr2 is nature, and any schoolchild will make a beautiful nature on anril. Cyberpunk is a stone jungle, an incredible work of level designers, visually this game is exactly the next gene, but the gameplay ...
and any schoolchild can make a beautiful nature on anril,
but by the time it technically works at the level of interactivity and rdr2 and gta5 environments, it will already be a super-schooler.
A small spoiler, the game has good graphics. The video from December 13 on Xenon is a provocation, 1440p compressed to 1080p with a YouTube shit codec, the graphics are far from the same as the dude's. This is immediately evident from the font of the texts, there is no such soap on ultras. Put on his video 0:31 everything will become clear.
Grimganga
The people just do not understand that games have begun to do the minimum for widescreens. And on ancient monitors, the game looks more than ugly.
Alex Kayfoviy ca
n't you see that he is playing on a gamepad? there, and walking for gg was brought in, unlike Claudia
Dartflame
What are the textures in RDR2? These are what? What is better than rock stars, it is in physics and simulation of the world, well, nature itself turned out. But not textures ...
Igorek89
Agree. All the same, the ways of "sofa experts" are inscrutable. RDR 2 has fantastic work with virtual lighting. In RDR 2, phenomenal work with shadows in the context of the number of objects that cast them. In RDR 2, an outstanding physical model. In DDR 2, LOD has been tamed, so the draw range (including shadows) is amazing. DDR 2 has the best animation for PC gaming. Actually, these are the fundamental components of the success of RDR 2 in visual terms, but the quality of textures leaves much to be desired, as well as the clarity of shadows, which is understandable due to the range of the huge drawing and the amount of details in the frame.
Cyberpunk has similar components of success, the main of which is also lighting, but already in conjunction with RTX, with an abundance of neon, it is simply chic. Cyberpunk also has excellent animation in dialogues and staging of these very RPG dialogues. Cyberpunk has the best sci-fi location design I've ever seen in an open world game, like it's a linear adventure (The Witcher 3 in 2015 felt the same way). Textures in Cyberpunk are in perfect order if we are talking about ultra + disabled DLSS, but this requires not even 3070, but 3080 for 1080p.
In general, both of these games are perhaps the most technologically advanced, and nothing better on the horizon is yet to be seen among PC games.
Whaler on the moon
Thanks for the detailed answer! Greatly continued my thought. I still did not mark the rockstar lighting simply because the design lighting from RDR2 is practically on the same level as calculated physical with ray tracing (although, by the way, the surrogate buffer is also nothing) in CP77 and it's not even about neon. Simply because the nature and physics of ray technology in itself makes everything much more realistic than any designer (if we are talking about realistic settings and games, and not conceptual art projects like the journey, okami, abzu and TP). Here is a parsing of the graphics on YouTube from the Digital laboratory from where it is clear that even during the day the illumination from clouds and clouds in cyberpunk is calculated physically and just mentally it feels natural and realistic, as well as in RDR2, where this feeling exists thanks to the RS programmers.
"Cyberpunk has the best sci-fi location design I've ever seen in an open world game, like it's a linear adventure" - and that was just off the hook! Yes, in action films from rockstar and other games, the scenes are furnished in a chamber and as cinematic as possible, as if you compare theatrical films from masters like Bay / Cameron / Jackson and, say, the series "Breaking Bad", where the scenes are technically simpler and therefore insanely natural and atmospheric. At 31, I already choose the latter and cp77 answers me with this.
The main prosser of cyberpunk expectations is super real world simulation and physics. For me, from the developers of the Witcher - to wait for the level of GTA euphoria is somehow completely naive. Rockstars cherish this technology like the apple of their eye, after which even ragdoll jerking in Yubisov's valhalla look like bad manners.
Dartflame The screen is
taken from the Gamedebate site about the parsing of RDR2 graphics, you can check it yourself, if you don't believe me.
Igorek89
Yes, I don't care who got the screenshots from, I bought the game and played it on a pc in 2k resolution with ultra graphics settings and I know perfectly well what kind of texture quality there is)
Dartflame
Well, if you don't care, sit and play. I brought you a screen from gamedebate with a parsing on the RDR2 graphics - imagine people got confused and made a detailed comparison of all graphics settings in the screenshots. And you, besides your words, were simply too lazy to present proofs ... Does he know what quality there is ... Did rockstar do any other RDR2 for you? Not like everyone else or what?
These games, in principle, cannot be compared according to "next gene graph or not". There are nature, fields and forests, in another game the city is just packed full of details, reflections, highlights and other things. Purely in terms of the level of "beauty", both are good, you look directly "wow" in one or the other game. Further, taste.
For example, I like kp2077 much more.