Have graphics began to stagnate ?

>implying gens mean anything anymore

The PS3 and PS4 are LITERALLY the same console in different resolutions. Imagine being able to run FFX on the PSX, it would be unthinkable. There were no shared titles. PS3 and PS4 basically have the same library, games get released on both simultaneously. We absolutely have stagnated, there are no leaps anymore.

Name one thing in CoD1 that was lost in transition to CoD2 due to controllers. One thing.

>Diminishing returns.
No game is anywhere near this point

holy shit did they remaster this game again? so its a remaster of a remaster?

the three weapon slots system

compared to what
they diminishing returns began years ago and we've already had a resurgence in anti-realist visual design in response to stagnating photo-realism in games
really confusing question it's like someone asking "is punk dying?" in the middle of the 1990's
like where the fuck have you been lol

Attached: heavy.jpg (322x322, 23K)

I'd say they are.
If not in tech, then in viable manpower that can make use of it. Only so many hours you can get an artist to plug into sculpting something while deferring constantly back to the AD.

Recoil was reduced by 90% so the game was playable on controllers. This bled over to PC as they have the same ruleset. This made the PC version casual trash.
Here some more:
Grenade indicators (Because of shitters playing on TV's not being able to hear grenades land)
Lower time to kill because controllers can't sustain aim without loads of aimlock
Slower movement speed because controllers can't aim quick enough

No. The real problem is making it run good on consoles and pc toasters.

don't think you understand the phrase

Graphics are good enough and have been for years
It's time to focus on TECHNOLOGY

Were reaching the point where high resolution textures are irrelevant and original art styles, flatter textures, and simpler models are going to reign.

>"This time realism will finally lose its appeal" says increasingly nervous man

this already happened for a few years
what the fuck is going on ITT are you guys literally zoomers

No it hasn't. Average and even top tier hardware is just still too shitty to render high resolution textures, lightning etc in real time

They didn't.

Attached: 20190731030916_1.jpg (3840x2160, 1.35M)

>Have graphics began to stagnate ?

Not as much as gameplay has. Most major franchises/sequels are just expansion packs that reuse assets and mechanics. Call of Duty has been using the same sound clips for Russian voices for over a decade now. Ubi games are even more obvious .

I am still amazed at how AI haven't improved even a fucking bit since 2005

Attached: FEAR Combat Community 1.jpg (1791x1306, 314K)

>ITS JUST RESOLUTION HURRRR
Pic related is a late-PS3 game in 4k.
You're telling me games still look like this?

Attached: 20190723172340_1.jpg (3840x2160, 1.4M)

>s, but I would say that journalists ruling over the voice of consumers for so long made a stigma against "reinventing the wheel"

It's not the journalists. Mot of them will lap up whatever companies put out because their livelihood depends on it. This is the result of companies trying to wring every cent out of consumers. They eschew "innovation" because it's expensive and huge changes to game formula have a chance of making less money than the projected result of selling millions Far Cry 6.

no, graphics have ruined games more than controllers. Graphics have turned vidya into a business and now all that matters is dumping as much money into something to make it look amazing and everything else gets thrown to the wayside, which in turn means profits mean the most.

If you really wanna be a faggot about it, PC elitists caused more harm than anything, but pointing the finger at singular thing is retarded.

Attached: 1518035683266.gif (250x190, 1.84M)

t.

Attached: 36188749_10215250882761310_7383105015830806528_o.jpg (1229x1229, 84K)

wow you are smart as fuck dude
i also hate graphics in visual media, lol, fuck visuals!
i also hate technology getting better. technology shouldnt progress, games should still look like they were made in 1998 despite the much better hardware that exists now.
now that would save gaming!

Attached: 1543342822331.png (1035x813, 1.56M)

AI wont improve until the base skill level of the general consumer base improves. Which will be never.

You seem to only be able to comprehend things at a high school level. I didn't say technological advancement is a bad thing, but you're completely delusional if you don't see the bureaucracy behind a bunch of games suffering because graphics come first.

Maybe you just grew up and realized that not every video game that's coming out is good or fits your taste.
Not every game with shit tier visuals is a good game.

>Graphics have turned vidya into a business and now all that matters is dumping as much money into something to make it look amazing and everything else gets thrown to the wayside, which in turn means profits mean the most.
timbres have turned music into a business and now all that matters is dumping as much money into something to make it sound amazing and everything else gets thrown to the wayside, which in turn means profits mean the most.

Yes.

PS2 graphics were substantially better than PS1 graphics. PS3 graphics were substantially better than PS2 graphics. However, PS4 graphics really aren't that much better than PS3 graphics

Attached: wowitsnothing.jpg (290x350, 30K)

>Not every game with shit tier visuals is a good game
I never said that either, why do you keep strawmanning? There's nothing inherently wrong about advancing graphics, but the way this industry is run is completely ass backwards, you have companies like MS rushing to make a """super""" xbox when they can't even put games out that aren't shit, if you can't see the flawed logic in that then you missed the entire point of my post. It feels like you just got defensive and wanted to show me how much smarter you are than me.

Attached: 1501016320176.gif (320x240, 1.62M)

You must be blind if you think that.

based

Or maybe games just look better now because the hardware got better and there is no agenda to push graphics in order to make the gameplay worse?
Not to mention that people who work on visuals aren't gameplay designers or directors.

MS games weren't good in the first place lmao.

scratch that, last gen games looked better!

Attached: c59bab4c4596086e593a251eda109670.jpg (1913x1011, 777K)

Yeah now here's a pic that hasn't been compressed to shit.

Attached: yaj15aml0dl21.jpg (1920x3045, 2.15M)

>Graphics have turned vidya into a business

Attached: no-brain-activity-ia-0-40852013.png (500x349, 39K)

As much shit the WiiU gamepad and joycons get gyro unironically throws in a huge skill curve other shooters desperately need.

Hell Epic nerfed the shit out of gyro because other players were complaining about aim bots when it was actually gyro controls

Seriously just rip a page out of Splatoon 2
Have 2 sensitivities
One stick one gyro
Y is the reset camera button
Make thumbstick press reload or just make it automatic

Bam fixed shooters

so fucking true, the ONLY difference here is the compression, now lets just ignore that both of these are compressed, ITS THE COMPRESSION!!! (gts looks much better btw)

Attached: f4cc7dc3878db8d1d5149f5a02cece8f.jpg (1918x1013, 708K)

>shitty color filter and more shadowy areas (which only are because of the placement of the sun) = better graphics

What a turbonigger you are.

New consoles need to come out because the current one have dogshit CPUs that're holding back stable frame rates.

Yeah dude, it's just a color filter! These look exactly the same.

Attached: 90627b16b71adc41cf3f4230405a08d0.jpg (1913x1007, 755K)

The right looks miles better. Are you blind? The color tones, the terrain, the shadows, the lighting, the clouds are a million times better.

-_-

That's exactly the point of his post tho. Why do they need to stabilize framerates when they don't even have games worth playing on their console? Ms is fuckin irrelevant and a new cpu isn't gonna change that

>""""photo mode""""

maybe read more than my obviously sarcastic post? im replying to the guy blaming the difference on compression.

It's both of them you fuckwit.

don't forget the disgusting regenerating health meme

Fuck no. Look at how much better they've gotten in just under 10 years

Attached: rdr1.jpg (1920x2160, 1.29M)

>Have graphics began to stagnate ?
>began
They began to stagnate in the 360/PS3 era when multiplatform engines became commodity.

Attached: 1429395326604.jpg (500x615, 91K)

>Graphics have turned vidya into a business.
This is such a ignorant post. Vidya was always a business, brainlet. What's lowering the quality is mismanagement and greed from out of touch executives. Your whole point falls apart when you're aware there are plenty of games with great graphics as well as gameplay.

now post an actual 360 screenshot

Yes but that's only because of forced parity between console and PC. Had things been evolving normally, video cards would be able to handle a fuckload more than the current standard.

Attached: maxresdefault (1).jpg (1280x720, 324K)

youtube.com/watch?v=o0c4GVsdZ7A

look at all these buzzwords

Why did you post a 2017 game?

Yes, thanks to consoles.

>make AI samart
>normie cries because video games beat his ass
>make AI brain dead
>normie jerks off over how great they are at video games
yes, a true mystery.

the generational leap is coming in like... months
surely the upgraded performance of new generation of consoles is going to contribute to the visual fidelity race

>What's lowering the quality is mismanagement and greed from out of touch executives
That was exactly my point you stupid faggot. I never said there weren't good games with good graphics, but they're definitely not the majority. and all games with shit graphics aren't inherently better. Learn to read you fucking autist.

Forget about graphics, has there been a single game or genre that has emerged since the PS3/360 era that wouldn't be technically possible without the hardware since? I'm not talking about resolution, textures or fucking RTX, but name (1) game that couldn't in its fundamental state couldn't be made for PS3 or 360.

Attached: 1535234986120.png (185x182, 48K)

>the generational leap is coming in like... months
But last gen and current gen games literally look the same! Nothing will change!

Attached: 51ae55a09e0854ce6ad974fe91a19a39.jpg (1918x1006, 986K)

witcher 3? thats a lot of data to put on PS3/360, not sure if they could handle it

uhh....

It runs on Switch so why not?

I just don't get who cares so much about graphics in the first place? They're a nice bonus, but I'd prefer to have basically everything else (gameplay, art style, sound design, etc) over graphics.

Who genuinely wants a 100% realistic looking game? It's boring; and it will NEVER be as good as actual real life. Just go outside, maybe get into photography if you want it to be so realistic. I prefer art style of games over realism. And if you're playing any game for long periods of time (especially MP games); the graphics just don't matter after a certain point; the gameplay and all that matters more.

Really anything that got re-released onto the bone and piss4. GTAV, destiny, etc. Yeah it "ran" on the 360/ps3 but not well.

Id like to see fun vidya with lower polygon counts but with crazy good textures.

Attached: DEATHCLAW.jpg (450x599, 108K)

>good graphics = muh realism
A good artstyle will look better when the graphics are good at the same time.

Maybe don't say completely retarded things like
>graphics turned vidya into a business
then people won't think you're a complete retard.

This without good gameplay it’s pointless just another Netflix show except you’re holding a controller

I’d rather have everything look like a PS2 game forever if that means the gameplay is top notch

Attached: EB8D3369-F342-4C8F-ADD7-0D68FE90213F.gif (410x226, 2.65M)

>I just don't get who cares so much about graphics in the first place?
Normies.

If dwarf fortress was the standard for video games I guarantee you there would not be a trillion dollar video game industry.

>name (1) game that couldn't in its fundamental state couldn't be made for PS3 or 360.
MGSV had a shit ton of stuff cut, like active warzones to make it run on last gen, which is the reason why it felt unfinished and empty to so many people.

Graphics are fun and you Amish gamers can go fuck yourself with this cringy garbage.

remember when ps3 games look like this?

Attached: 1.bmp.jpg (1280x720, 750K)

Sure but an artstyle is what is doing 90% of the work. The graphics are only the finishing touches. You can't have a bad artstyle while having amazing graphics, it just won't work/translate as well. But if you have a great artstyle with the graphics behind it supporting it, it will look amazing for years to come.

if you can't extract that retarded business execs and """"investors"""" don't care about anything but graphics from my statement then you're the fucking retard. I am well aware vidya is a business, it's not meant to be literal you robotic fuck.

so does BoTW have a shit artstyle?

Attached: 1564925302154.jpg (196x167, 12K)

Compare the average last gen game to the average modern one and you'll see a pretty huge difference, it's not as noticeable since you're used to it but stuff on 360 looks like fucking garbage

Call of Duty is a really bad example since it's famous for reusing the same ancient engine and assets, and cutting corners everywhere to maintain a consistent 60FPS

Yeah. I do.

Attached: 1325219602263.jpg (1920x1080, 388K)

I've had more fun playing games that support 2 face buttons, start and select and a dpad than about 99% of PC focused games, I say this as a primary PC user too.

hahaha

Attached: 8e5eb42beeb7cbb6f0a050c487b4f4da.jpg (1917x1000, 866K)

>cutting corners everywhere to maintain a consistent 60FPS
as much as I dislike CoD I have to respect them for not compromising on 60fps

It's not like FEAR had a great AI to begin with, developer just went to be more creative with what they've had

Stagnate in what way? We see diminishing returns on polygonal improvements more and more, but higher resolutions let us see those models in better detail, it's also a much higher power requirement because you're rendering more at once.

I think rather than 'stagnating' devs are at a crossroad where they go for the more menial improvements in higher res (IE 4k support for games outright/developing 4k textures as native), or they go for basically no improvements, but maybe futureproofing in higher poly models.

oh no no nooooo

Attached: 8cd02cc525590b0439cc048e8d9c8778.jpg (1917x1011, 813K)

The last big jump was the 360 era.

Lighting is the most important thing when it comes to visuals.

I can't believe that in a medium revolving around interactivity, visuals are the biggest focus in the industry

Even worse I can't believe people are actually buying this shit and enabling these practices, normies were a fucking mistake

Attached: 1550479067426.jpg (1000x522, 339K)

agreed, literally no difference

Attached: e943e08e6657c6a889c426ebbcb390c4.jpg (1916x999, 783K)

It's Call of Duty. It's always a weak effort since it sells equally well.

normies are inevitable.
Unfortunately they're also easily parted from their money so that makes them profitable to attract and retain.

Stagnate no, but we have definitely reached a point of diminishing returns years ago. Other than that we're currently nearing the end of a console generation, so things looks especially stagnant now.

>Ironically VR may up the standard again.
VR is very demanding in terms of performance and current headsets are limited in image quality due to the hardware of the headsets themselves (resolution isn't quite high enough, optics aren't perfectly sharp and they're currently lacking things which could make the problems go away, such as eye tracking with foveated rendering and variable focal length). Before a huge push for VR graphics can be made, the image quality the headsets can provide needs to improve, plus we need way faster graphics cards. I have an OC'd 2080 Ti and I can't push all games to 144FPS on my Index and I'm not even talking about something with incredibly fancy graphics either.

Personally I have no trouble believeing that a medium that relays most of its information visually also puts heavy focus on that aspect.

GWAFIXS is not the same as a well executed art style, and is often inferior.

Books, comics, movies, all relay information visually, yet you don't see anywhere near the focus on visuals in them. Very rarely do people buy books/comics/movies for the novelty of the visuals, whereas it's one of the main deciding factors in videogames, which I think is the result of the childish mindset of the demographic/audience.

>normies
Just take a look around at all those le pc masteracers talking about pixels density and shit, because that's the only thing you can discuss about good looking games.

Nowadays it is, but raytracing is still hard and that's going to be the next real leap, that I expect we'll see with the next gen of consoles. We got the cards for PC, but I think there'll be some jerryrigging to make it possible on a budget. That or they're getting budget prices because of their relationships.

Damn you're mad af lmao

Yes, I'm mad that the best looking games on the market are unplayable shit.

Are they still using the same shitty engine from 2008?

Not that big of a difference.

Its the end of the console generation, of course it will stagnate. We still haven't even been able to achieve 60fps 1080p on anything but the Xbone X

no, the big gimmick of the new Modern Warfare is that they're completely re-making the engine to be more in line with current gen shooters (i.e., Battlefield)

meant to reply to

Well if OP is a legit screenshot then it looks fucking wank.

Most modern open world games with detailed environments (Witcher 3, AC Unity/Odyssey) wouldn’t be possible to have on Xbox 360/PS3 unless you’d cut massive amounts of detail and life away from their worlds. I guess that you could have the same locales and missions, just with less NPCs and such, but the game would feel very different.

Well, Witcher 3 is coming to Switch, isn't it? I don't think a Switch is significantly faster than PS360, but it does have more RAM, which will certainly help with just displaying more shit in an open world game.

>DX9 AA truck driving simulator has better graphics than literally any AAA game in the past 8 years

Attached: ats_20190801_220133_00.png (1920x1080, 1.71M)

No. Technology has. Nothing that's cheap enough for the regular consumer runs well enough for greater graphics.

>ctrl+f "optimization"
>0 results

Yes but not due to technical specs. Flagship games have less stylishness to them and mostly go for boring realism.

Quit being a poorfag and buy some better equipment.

that's cod4 remastered not the new one

How many fucking times are they going to remake the same fucking thing?

What do you mean. I get one result.

All of these babies in here arguing about their consoles.

Console gaming has held back the industry for years. You should all kys.

If it was up to me, I’d just have every console zoomer killed off.

Attached: 20190801232203_1.jpg (3840x2160, 2.17M)

meh, it's not a big enough leap compared to generations before

Nope, it's actually the opposite since you need higher frame rates at higher resolution.

and that would be a good thing

VR.

So why are the few pc exclusives you get still turn based garbage?