Graphics Disparity between Open World and Linear games have been nearly eliminated this gen

I think RDR2 is the best looking console game, but the XBOX is a lot more powerful than the PS4 Pro, and if TLoU2 looks like it did in the demo, it is a substantial leap beyond RDR2, on a console significantly inferior in graphical compute performance.

So no.

I think that the sheer cost of production for these large open world games is the reason why they look better than the majority of third party titles on the market. Sure, someone like Naughty Dog are always going to push the graphical boundaries for the entire medium but it's really these large open world games that are raising the floor.

Nothing looks better than RDR2. I just can't believe how they pulled that out. The world is amazing and alive.

Tonky said:

Elaborate on gamey? Because Spider-Man's character models in particular looked very natural and realistic to me. More-so than RDR2:

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not even close. Tbf i doubt S-M is even aiming for super realism, but the skin alone makes it look plasticky.

I cannot understand how people can claim Peter Parker, Mary Jane and Yuri look good in comparison to the other games.

leng jai said:

I cannot understand how people can claim Peter Parker, Mary Jane and Yuri look good in comparison to the other games.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I think in terms of materials, textures and character models, Spider-Man looks better. However, everything else I'm willing to concede looks better or comparable in RDR2. Peter, Mary Jane, Aunt May, Yuri and Miles all look better than Arthur but Arthur's model is impressive considering everything the game is rendering.

Travaughn said:

You all have got to stop it. RDR2 is not some visual tour de force aesthetically speaking. There are many games that look better than it but may not be as expansive or as complex in terms of tech but I wouldn't say that it's an eye catching game. Visually I think it's about on par or maybe slightly better looking than maybe MGSV which is great considering everything under the hood but it shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as RE2, DMC5, Horizon, GoW, GoT, Spiderman, U4/TLL, TLoU2, Detroit or Control. That's just some nonsense personally speaking.

This reminds me of people saying that GTA5 was one of the best looking games last gen and it's like, was it really? Did GTA5 really stand out amongst the Killzones, Uncharteds, GoWs, Resistance 3, Gears, Halo, TLoU when you omitted how big GTA5 was and judged it purely on how it looked? I'd argue no but maybe my opinion is in the minority.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Seriously?

zsynqx said:

Seriously?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Read further into the thread, I recanted what I said. I revisited MGSV after stating that and I was wrong about that. RDR2 still doesn't look as good as the upper crust of graphics imo still.

I'm going to say no OP. If RDR2 and AC:O came out towards the beginning of the generation when UC4 and them were releasing, you might have a point. However, when you play something like RDR2 and AC:O and then go back to say God of War, you see that open world games have a ways to go. We haven't even seen Cyberpunk, TLOU2, Ghosts of Tsushima, etc.

Arthur is coming for Kratos.

RAM also helps

Philly Cheesesteak said:

I'm going to say no OP. If RDR2 and AC:O came out towards the beginning of the generation when UC4 and them were releasing, you might have a point. However, when you play something like RDR2 and AC:O and then go back to say God of War, you see that open world games have a ways to go. We haven't even seen Cyberpunk, TLOU2, Ghosts of Tsushima, etc.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I've literally just played God of war. What looks better than red dead in God of war?

RDR2 is astounding. The only area i think its lacking a bit, compared to the epicness of everything else, is character faces/lip sync. Its still very good, but IMO it falls just short of all other visual aspects. I've had a number of wow moments this gen, mostly Sony 1st party titles it must be said and this ranks up there with them. I don't have one I can say is "tops", but I can give you 10 that equally impress the hell out of me. R* raised the bar for open world visuals on a technical level. Amazing.

Nah, even RDR2 still have its rough spots which depends on weather, time of day and location. Character model too isn't top of the class. I think the greatest RDR achievement it's the wealth of meaningful content, even simple interactions have so much attention to it. It's still a monumental achievement when it comes to visual considering it's massive scope but it's not on par on curated experience like GoW, and Detroit.

RDR2 is shaping up to be my 2nd GotG after Nier: Automata

DrDeckard said:

I've literally just played God of war. What looks better than red dead in God of war?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's just my personal opinion, but the character models, environment, lighting, etc. By all means, RDR2 is a great looking game, but overal I feel God of War looks better than it. Your opinion may vary.

ShutterMunster said:

Arthur is coming for Kratos.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I feel that sequence was definitely on par visually with the auction scene in Uncharted 4.

Open World can get closer, but it'll never catch up solely due to the fact that to make open world games work, you have to budget out your perf, CPU and RAM to hold CurrentTile + AllNeighborTiles at all times to ensure smooth transitions and accomodate world streaming. This will always mean you can pack more into a linear or controlled-progression game's world than an open, free roam game because in linear games, you can precisely know your RAM, CPU, etc usage at all times and dump the last area out completely with a loading screen or a controlled hidden load via some sort of world/plot device. You simply can't match complexity of a tightly controlled when the area just past you also has to accomodate the area just past that being loaded in as well, and you're letting the player bring assets -with- them between those locations, like vehicles/horses/etc.

leng jai said:

I cannot understand how people can claim Peter Parker, Mary Jane and Yuri look good in comparison to the other games.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Pete has no idea what you are talking about:

ShutterMunster said:

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not quite there yet...



I'm posting this, because someone on my Twitter page mistook this SotC pic for RDR2 and asked me why my game looks better than his. ;) I tried to explain for some time how to enable resolution mode in the game settings instead of 60fps performance mode. Of course he couldn't find it, because we were in different games...

Detective said:

Nothing looks better than RDR2. I just can't believe how they pulled that out. The world is amazing and alive.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I believe because they did GTAV before. The answer is:
An incredible hard working talented team.

They keep raising the bar with every release.

ShutterMunster said:

Arthur is coming for Kratos.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Lol. That looks nice.

I don't think what makes the difference is OW vs linear games. It is budget & talent mostly.

There are tons of linear games that don't look good.


If Naughty Dog next IP is an OW, it still will be one of the best looking games of the gen.


Oh... and DETROIT BECOME HUMAN is the best looking game of the year. But not enough popular to win it (Awards are mostly a popularity contest).

Couscous said:

Detroit looks way better than RDR 2 though so I don't agree with you completely.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Can't be serious? RDR2 is quite easily better looking then Detriot, UC and Horizon, you just need to witness the change in lighting and effects during a storm to conclude that it is, its another level. I've not played GoW so can't comment.

OP good point you make, didn't think about openworld, which are far more demanding are the most technically accomplished visually.

Dp.. sorry.

-

Tyaren said:

I'm posting this, because someone on my Twitter page mistook this SotC pic for RDR2 and asked me why my game looks better than his. ;) I tried to explain for some time how to enable resolution mode in the game settings instead of 60fps performance mode. Of course he couldn't find it, because we were in different games...

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Now that is quite hilarious. :)

Prine said:

...you just need to witness the change in lighting and effects during a storm to conclude that it is, its another level.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

In my play session earlier I stood on one of those large rock formations in the middle of the Heartlands, overlooking a lot of the game world. A thunderstorm happened. And it really just happened, because clouds formed and everything got really dark in 5 seconds. That was weird. From my outlook I could see that the thunder storm had clear edges a few in-game kilometers to the west and then to the east. It just stopped in a clear cut line with sunshine beyond that. Which was also weird. The storm lasted barely a minute and dissolved within 5 seconds again. It all looked extremely weird and wonkey. Maybe this is all "on another level", but different weather conditions and their transitions can look considerably more convincing in other games and not make me go like: What the...is my game breaking? O:

Flux said:

Are you implying SOTC looks better than RDR 2? I think SOTC looks great but I don't think it's on RDR's level. Same with whoever mentioned MGS 5.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

comparable? well, they both have horses and RDR2 horses gallop all over SOTC Remake's quadruped,

Serenity Lotus said:

Now that is quite hilarious. :)

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It actually was. :) Full story in the comments:

Flux said:

Are you implying SOTC looks better than RDR 2? I think SOTC looks great but I don't think it's on RDR's level.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Someone saw an image of SotC, thought it was RDR2, and asked for help/advice because his RDR2 didn't look as good. That is what I am saying.

Tyaren said:

It actually was. :) Full story in the comments:

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That turned out even better than I thought. Especially the point of him watching the video and still thinking it was about RDR2, lol.

Thanks for the good laugh. :)

etta said:

It's okay fam, the best looking game of the generation is on Xbox. No need to lose any sleep.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Thank you for at least being upfront about the sad platform warring that's the undertone of this whole 'debate'.

Prine said:

Can't be serious? RDR2 is quite easily better looking then Detriot, UC and Horizon, you just need to witness the change in lighting and effects during a storm to conclude that it is, its another level. I've not played GoW so can't comment.

OP good point you make, didn't think about openworld, which are far more demanding are the most technically accomplished visually.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Can't you be more specific? Most of the conversations seems too abstract. My opinion is that character models and ambient detail / geometry, as well as general asset quality are obviously better in Detroit...like very clearly higher fidelity Lighting overall I think is better in RDR 2, although it can be very nice in Detroit to. The difference is it is more dynamic in RDR2. Scale in RDR2 is obviously far greater, and the have done a fantastic job of making the environments feel convincingly representative of the real things, relative to most other open world games.

RDR2 is the most visually impressive game I've ever played. It might have less detailed textures or something than a linear game but as a whole scene it's unmatched.

RDR2 is far more visually impressive than Spiderman or God of War. Not only the lighting looks better (and dynamic), the world has lots of interaction and more details than any linear game I've played recently. I'm not a big fan of the game or R*, but they did an amazing job creating a world that big and detailed, runnind in old and not so powerful systems. The draw distance is amazing too, it's hard to notice popping in this game.

Spider-Man has equally great lighting and shading compared to RDR2. they are just set in very different kind of environments.

And i just find God of War to be far more impressive aesthetically.

ShutterMunster said:

Arthur is coming for Kratos.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

While we're comparing old bearded men...

Sorry Red Dead. Character does not hold anywhere close to this level of detail.

Tibarn said:

RDR2 is far more visually impressive than Spiderman or God of War. Not only the lighting looks better (and dynamic), the world has lots of interaction and more details than any linear game I've played recently. I'm not a big fan of the game or R*, but they did an amazing job creating a world that big and detailed, runnind in old and not so powerful systems. The draw distance is amazing too, it's hard to notice popping in this game.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Only really the lighting you mentioned has relevance to the visuals, well the details as well. I absolutely don't agree that RDR 2 has more detailed environments than God of War...the latter is a linear game and has more environmental uniquencess than RDR 2. However, RDR2 does an incredible job considering it is much larger in scale. So I am probably more impressed overall by RDR 2 in that regard. Otherwise, I think those games you listed have better character models, and I think that Spider-man has better asset quality overall / modelling. In terms of Scale, RDR2 is bigger, but Spider-man has a lot of vertical scale.

It nettles me a bit that many always seem to make categorical statements on here. I believe that there is no single game that people can say is categorically better looking than others. Games excel in different areas, and while you can prefer the look of a game and be more impressed with it, it is better to be able to define which areas are more impressive, and also to concede that it may not surpass other games in all areas. Certainly that is the case for RDR2 as it is as much for a game like Detroit.

Why so serious about this? RDR2 look stunning, but I have to admit that in terms of texture, it is not the best.
BUT RDR2 graphic is the most full-fill consistent in term of openworld from art direction, to anything else like details of animation, reflection, water physics, etc.
BUT (again) RDR2 was made by nearly over 3000 people, with 5-6 or even more than 7 years to make, with a very giant budgets.

So the investment for RDR2 or even GTA V still far and much higher quality than any other openworld game. Imagine if HZD get that big budgets with that amount of talents to work with. I think it is even look better than RDR2. But still, HZD is very beautiful, lack of some interactive to the environment but texture quality to the amazing particle effect, machine animations and high quality model characters are still impressive.

Carn said:

Been playing God of War again after a recent amount of hours in RDR2 and sorry op, no, open world games aren't getting closer. In the end, an open world game has to spread a lot of resources around compared to a linear game. But both look a ton better this gen to general improvements in rendering.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Make no mistake, RDR2 is the best looking game out right now, by a country mile. The only area they might be on par with other games, or beaten for that matter, is character models and faces, but that's it.

Travaughn said:

You all have got to stop it. RDR2 is not some visual tour de force aesthetically speaking. There are many games that look better than it but may not be as expansive or as complex in terms of tech but I wouldn't say that it's an eye catching game. Visually I think it's about on par or maybe slightly better looking than maybe MGSV which is great considering everything under the hood but it shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as RE2, DMC5, Horizon, GoW, GoT, Spiderman, U4/TLL, TLoU2, Detroit or Control. That's just some nonsense personally speaking.

This reminds me of people saying that GTA5 was one of the best looking games last gen and it's like, was it really? Did GTA5 really stand out amongst the Killzones, Uncharteds, GoWs, Resistance 3, Gears, Halo, TLoU when you omitted how big GTA5 was and judged it purely on how it looked? I'd argue no but maybe my opinion is in the minority.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I totally agree with you. I played the first hour of RDR2 and found it pretty underwhelming after all the hype. Like, it doesn't look bad, but it's not a looker either. To be honest I even find the environments in SotC to be better looking.

Why did this turn so much into a RDR2 vs. everything thread? Actually, it only proves the OPs point.
We're seriously discussing if huge open world games are currently the best looking games overall. We should embrace that!

By the way, holy shit at early morning fog in Saint Denis in RDR2....

GTAce said:

Why did this turn so much into a RDR2 vs. everything thread? Actually, it only proves the OPs point.
We're seriously discussing if huge open world games are currently the best looking games overall. We should embrace that!

By the way, holy shit at early morning fog in Saint Denis in RDR2....

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Simpy because it is a new game released and it looks great. This will happen again when Ghost of Tsushima releases and also The Last of Us 2. It has happened before as well with Uncharted 4, etc. There is nothing new here.

nelsonroyale said:

Simpy because it is a new game released and it looks great. This will happen again when Ghost of Tsushima releases and also The Last of Us 2. It has happened before as well with Uncharted 4, etc. There is nothing new here.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I just find it nonsensical and I'm a sucker for graphic comparisons.
Dunno, I think the last time I was so satisfied with gaming was in the PS2 era. Never mind if RDR2, Horizon, God of War, Spider-Man, BoTW, Mario Odyssey, GT Sport, Forza Horizon and so on, we're blessed.

RDR2 looks amazing but I don't consider it to be the best looking game of the generation. All that being said, I agree with you 100% OP. There used to be a night-and-day difference in graphical fidelity between linear games and open-world games. Now something like Horizon Zero Dawn can hang with the likes of Uncharted 4 or God of War. Sure there's still a noticeable difference but in previous generations open world games and non-open world games almost looked a generation apart.

nelsonroyale said:

Only really the lighting you mentioned has relevance to the visuals, well the details as well. I absolutely don't agree that RDR 2 has more detailed environments than God of War...the latter is a linear game and has more environmental uniquencess than RDR 2. However, RDR2 does an incredible job considering it is much larger in scale. So I am probably more impressed overall by RDR 2 in that regard. Otherwise, I think those games you listed have better character models, and I think that Spider-man has better asset quality overall / modelling. In terms of Scale, RDR2 is bigger, but Spider-man has a lot of vertical scale.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

After playing both Spiderman and RDR2, I think that the world interaction in RDR2 is far better. Not only your character gets visual marks doing everything: if you fall on mud, you'll get dirty, if you carry a corpse, you'll get all bloody, etc..., but the interaction with vegetation, other NPCs etc... is far more pronounced. For me, this is an important thing about visuals. GoW looks great, but the environments are only a beautiful landscape, the interaction is almost inexistent in the game (besides enemies of course).

The textures are not especially good in RDR2 (try to play in FPS mode), but if we put togehter the great lighting, great world interaction, great attention to details, lack of prominent popping, good character model, seamless open world... all together is far more impressive than other games.

Prine said:

Can't be serious? RDR2 is quite easily better looking then Detriot, UC and Horizon, you just need to witness the change in lighting and effects during a storm to conclude that it is, its another level. I've not played GoW so can't comment.

OP good point you make, didn't think about openworld, which are far more demanding are the most technically accomplished visually.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Lighting and draw distance are the only things that RDR 2 does better than Detroit. Everything else from asset quality, textures to character models are superior in Detroit.

Probably because there's about 2 linear games.

Toriko said:

Hmm. I think RDR2 looks so much better than God of War. He'll I don't think God of War looks as good as UC4 even

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

For characters and detaiks, GOW looks gene ahead of RDR2.
I'm pretty sure you didn't play GOW on 4KHDR.

But the landscape in RDR2 is better.

Toriko said:

Hmm. I think RDR2 looks so much better than God of War. He'll I don't think God of War looks as good as UC4 even

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The main problem with RDR2 in the Pro is that the image looks soft compared to GoW or Spiderman. This helps to mask the not so good textures, but considering that most people will play using the third person camera, this is not a problem at all most of times. World interaction is far better than Spiderman IMO. It's nothing as crazy as BotW (you can burn the grass or cut tress in that game), but it's impressive considering the long draw distance and the good graphical fidelity.

Tibarn said:

After playing both Spiderman and RDR2, I think that the world interaction in RDR2 is far better. Not only your character gets visual marks doing everything: if you fall on mud, you'll get dirty, if you carry a corpse, you'll get all bloody, etc..., but the interaction with vegetation, other NPCs etc... is far more pronounced. For me, this is an important thing about visuals. GoW looks great, but the environments are only a beautiful landscape, the interaction is almost inexistent in the game (besides enemies of course).

The textures are not especially good in RDR2 (try to play in FPS mode), but if we put togehter the great lighting, great world interaction, great attention to details, lack of prominent popping, good character model, seamless open world... all together is far more impressive than other games.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Okay agree with many of your points. Disagree with the strength of your conclusion. In my opinion it is far from being far more impressive than other games. In fact, I feel that the flashiness and cinematic direction of Spider-man packs a lot of visual punch...How this comes together in cutscenes impresses me more graphically than in RDR 2. Also, as I said I think the modelling / asset quality is better in Spider-man, as well as some of the material shading. Metal in particular is excellent.

Just want to emphasise though that overall, RDR 2 is a spectacular looking game that has an open world full of character. Playing it alongside say AC Odyssey...the strength of Rockstar's design is evident.