Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: New screen shots, deluxe edition revealed. | Forums

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    22
    The crappy draw distance could be the fact that those screens are more cutscenes rather than gameplay to focus viewer attention on the ghosts instead of the environment. Same thing for the fogginess in some of the screens, so I've still got my hopes up. Some of those screenshots did look really good.

    Just hope and pray that it at least runs well
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifty_98 View Post
    The crappy draw distance could be the fact that those screens are more cutscenes rather than gameplay to focus viewer attention on the ghosts instead of the environment.
    And you could be a trolley car if you had a wheels and a bell... Sure the picture could be anything, they could be CGI or PFM; but the only 'fact' is that all the shots of the PC game official/unofficial are a DOF blur fest, with post processing effects that look like they're more intended to conceal (like the R6: Vegas) then 'enahnce' anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shifty_98 View Post
    Same thing for the fogginess in some of the screens, so I've still got my hopes up. Some of those screenshots did look really good. Just hope and pray that it at least runs well
    Don't get me wrong, I want to like this game, I'm a PC tactical realism Fan that actually likes a lot of the game design ideas presented in the console marketing copy, and finds the idea of TPP appealing -- but take a look at some of the console content here on Gamespot -- and the best shots that 'might' be from the PC version of the game that are not even as good as some of the worst shots from console. Then if you just factor in a few of the remarks from posters like Mikeseoz (edited for brevity):

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikeseoz View Post
    ...PC gamers are nothing for them.

    Just think about the lack of info and the time left (Copy and Paste from Console), SMELLS PORT version (they just going to make it look better than console due the pc graphic advantage), but it will be 100% PORT, so

    No Dedicated Servers (you will use UPLAY with the awesome nicknames you got there lol)
    No Mod tools
    No Steam

    More info will come soon lol
    And consider the fact that we only have one officially acknowledged screen shot barely a month before the game goes on sale that isn't objectively better looking in any regard then anything we've seen for console, deja-vu-o-rama and my enthusiasm is starting to tank...

    Last edited by hoak; 05-08-2012 at 11:49 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #23
    Mmmmm, I thought I wouldn't get a bite. lol
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #24
    Senior Member GuZZ33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,441
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifty_98 View Post
    the fogginess in some of the screens,
    GRFS PC version uses volumetric fog. Fog gives levels/maps much more atmosphere i think .
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by GuZZ33 View Post
    GRFS PC version uses volumetric fog. Fog gives levels/maps much more atmosphere i think .
    Sure volumetric fog can look nice, but notice that the lion's share and emphasis of the PC 'features & benefits' is of the post processing flavor -- and like most post processing and deferred render effects are again being used to ridiculous excess in the PC screen shot(s)...

    This is just more ammunition for the worry being expressed of 'cheap port' where DirectX 11 'enhancements' are just used as fast cheap and dirty means to cover poor PC render optimization, crummy low poly and low resolution console assets -- yet allow the marketing bullet point claim of 'enhanced DirectX 11 render features'...

    An Xbox 360 has less processing capability then some cheap netbooks -- so I'm neither surprised or disappointed by any Developer/Publisher that takes this approach, but, that there is no mention of features that are virtually universally regarded as definitive PC centric features: server browser, mod tools, dedicated servers -- is not cause for much optimism...

    Last edited by hoak; 05-09-2012 at 06:41 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #26
    Senior Member GuZZ33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,441
    Quote Originally Posted by hoak View Post
    Sure volumetric fog can look nice, but notice that the lion's share and emphasis of the PC 'features & benefits' is of the post processing flavor -- and like most post processing and deferred render effects are again being used to ridiculous excess in the PC screen shot(s)...

    This is just more ammunition for the worry being expressed of 'cheap port' where DirectX 11 'enhancements' are just used as fast cheap and dirty means to cover poor PC render optimization, crummy low poly and low resolution console assets -- yet allow the marketing bullet point claim of 'enhanced DirectX 11 render features'...

    An Xbox 360 has less processing capability then some cheap netbooks -- so I'm neither surprised or disappointed by any Developer/Publisher that takes this approach, but, that there is no mention of features that are virtually universally regarded as definitive PC centric features: server browser, mod tools, dedicated servers -- is not cause for much optimism...

    Good stuff mate, i can understand your concerns for the lack of more PC news, in-game PC screenshots, PC gameplay, PC Multiplayer Features etc. I think the XBOX 360 beta looks great on my HDTV and PC monitor mate, so i know the PC version of GRFS will look great too. But, what i like may not appeal to others though?.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by GuZZ33 View Post
    Good stuff mate, i can understand your concerns for the lack of more PC news, in-game PC screenshots, PC gameplay, PC Multiplayer Features etc. I think the XBOX 360 beta looks great on my HDTV and PC monitor mate, so i know the PC version of GRFS will look great too. But, what i like may not appeal to others though?.
    Well that's the thing, for me, and I think most PC tactical realism Fans it wouldn't matter if the game was delivered to the PC on DirectX 8 with stencil shadows and box stock ported console assets. I think all the emphasis on graphics and render is just a marketing distraction, and a cheap one at that per 'conceal vs enhance'... Most tactical realism Fans are more concerned with game design or the ability to tweak and mod it for what ti lacks...

    Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we'll have a PC version of GR:FS in any form, but, I could be a lot more excited knowing it came with mod support, knowing it would then have a larger audience that included some of my friends and acquaintances and GR:FS would be more then $60 in disposable fun that gets played widely for 90 days and is forgotten till some DLC rolls out, is played for another 30 days after that and abandoned entirely...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #28
    Senior Member Compassghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,567
    I've never been a fan of depth of field. Sure, it's "realistic" but purposely blurring the components around your focus makes something that looks good look bad. The only saving grace we have is that we can play GRO with no buy-in.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassghost View Post
    I've never been a fan of depth of field. Sure, it's "realistic" but purposely blurring the components around your focus makes something that looks good look bad. The only saving grace we have is that we can play GRO with no buy-in.
    It's not even 'realistic' unless the FPP represented is actually a camera as the human eye focuses instantly to what ever you has your attention. The game forcing focus on a specific DOF is not only not realistic from a human FPP or TPP, it's not even to scale -- as there is already effects of eye accommodation at work in 2D flat projection of 3D games which you can see at work right on this web page by focusing intensely on one letter at the center of the page, and noticing that all others are blurred.

    Adding DOF and blur to a game is only 'realistic' if the perspective of the game is to be portrayed from some kind of film or movie camera, not the human eye, as you're just adding forced errors of accommodation that we can't accommodate for in real time, on top of flat focus limitations that already exist as a feature of how we see -- which is also why it gives so many people headaches as what they're seeing in DOF saturated games is incorrect...

    Last edited by hoak; 05-09-2012 at 10:13 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #30
    Senior Member Compassghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,567
    Oh, headaches! Hello Oblivion and Skyrim and Fallout 3. For some reason, you're the only games that give me migraines!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •