Graphics look out dated or just me?

[Samurai×Mo]

Any settings to make the game look better or is this the best it can do?(got it on highest settings)
I'm not sure why but it just looks out dated to me.

[Weird Potato]

Originally posted by Puttness:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3253205647
I see multiple shades of green and plenty of shading going on here. I guess you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Some of y'all are just hellbent on claiming the game looks bad, but I just don't see it. All I see is an absolutely beautiful game with incredibly realistic lighting.

Dude, clean your eyes out. The trees are all the same shade of green with no randomness or variation what so ever. Forests of cloned trees. All the same type of tree. No artistic sprinkling of other species, just.... green trees.

[The Ultimate Despair]

Not every single games needs to break standards in terms of visuals.
The game is plenty gorgeous and has an amazing art direction.

[JohnTravoltage]

Originally posted by Weird Potato:

Originally posted by Puttness:

What a dumb argument. Grass and trees are green, what more do you want? There's literally white trees, purple flowers, etc. so you must not have played much. The shading changes depending on the weather and time of day just like in the real world.

The prebaked lighting thing is just dumb, what, like raytracing it would be automatically better? The prebaked lighting in this game is the best I've ever seen because of how close it looks to real life. You're either trolling or haven't touched grass in years because anyone whose actually spent a lot of time outdoors can recognize how good the lighting is in this game.

WOOOOOSH

If you "touch grass" so much, then you would notice how vegetation and trees have shades of color, not one singular color. There's dirt, and gradiation of colors, not just one singular color. In this game the forest is either green, or red. That's it. No variation of shades, just one or two colors. Seriously, wtf is that?
Yes I know there are white and purple flowers, how does that refute my point? And if you deny what RTGI or RT shadows does to lighting, then you have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you blind?theres plenty of shading happening with the grass that causes a ton of colour, and the actual dynamics of the grass/weather and the various foliage is more than most games, combined with pretty good screen space shadows etc. which gives a lot of depth to it.

I don't think theres actually any other game out there that gives that much of a dynamic sense of weather/grass density as this. Just because the grass blades are relatively simple, doesn't mean it looks bad.

Its a compromise that gives them freedom to do way more with the grass than they could otherwise.

Not sure what your point on colours is since most games don't really have varying overall forest/vegetation colours past white/green/yellow for winter summer autumn (if that). This game has white purple blue green red yellow basically every colour for forests lol.

I would be interested in seeing a comparison shot between another game and this (or better, a comparison video) to see what the problem is cus I just don't see it.

[⛧jakey⛧]

Originally posted by The Ultimate Despair:

Not every single games needs to break standards in terms of visuals.
The game is plenty gorgeous and has an amazing art direction.

Agreed, I also find the artystyle of this game very pretty. This game looks better than most, it looks beautiful at 4k with max settings on a oled monitor.

[CorruptedMichael]

Originally posted by jakeʸvil:

Originally posted by The Ultimate Despair:

Not every single games needs to break standards in terms of visuals.
The game is plenty gorgeous and has an amazing art direction.

Agreed, I also find the artystyle of this game very pretty. This game looks better than most, it looks beautiful at 4k with max settings on a oled monitor.

God I wish i could see this game on an Oled monitor! Also OP the game looks amazing! The textures arent super high res like other games, honestly a missed opportunity for the PC port but thats why we can mod bois! Art style is everything honestly.

[djcarey]

Farcry 1 (2004) version tho.

[viperwolf02]

Some of you act like this game broke boundaries, its only 4 years old. Many PC games have more details in the environment. It was brought to PC and not offering anything I can tell that separates it from a console game. It plays, looks, and feels like a console. The water i s bland, the sand is bland and alot of if it is copy paste. It reminds me of the UBISUCK games like Black Flag graphics. Even back then the water still looked better and the environment had better elements. (not saying BF sucked bc I enjoyed it and rogue very much).
The color saturation is a little much but, it was the art style they went after. They did a good job with that.
The only reason Im still playing the game is bc I paid $60 and I can play as a Japanese samu...........or whatever he is now. SO far no magical lasers shooting out my Katana.

Maybe it was awesome for a console, but its just meh for a PC. I really wish I would of played this game before rdr2 though, that game will ruin what you expect from open world games.

Its just my opinion and its good other people disagree and enjoy the game for what it is.

[jenius]

Originally posted by Samurai×Mo:

Any settings to make the game look better or is this the best it can do?(got it on highest settings)
I'm not sure why but it just looks out dated to me.

Totally agree, and the one who are saying it is great or it is ok to 2020(when the game was released on PS) are just blind or haven't played games for the last 10 years.

[jenius]

Originally posted by Puttness:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3251908245
Someone tell me how these are "dated" visuals. Everything maxed, DLAA, no upscaling or FSR. 1440p ultrawide. Steam compression blurs the image but nothing I can do about that. Click on the image for the full res version, and tell me how that looks dated, cause it doesn't.

Lol, take a look at the stone textures. The are 10 years old

[Tarv]

Originally posted by viperwolf02:

I really wish I would of played this game before rdr2 though, that game will ruin what you expect from open world games.

Or how about not setting the bar of your expectations at the level of a game that took 2000 people over 8 years to make with 540 Million dollars? Industry leaks have shown that's not a sustainable model for most devs. Rockstar is a unique exception.

[djcarey]

Anybody actually playing this in 4k + instead of 1080p/1440p?

Lolol

[viperwolf02]

Originally posted by Tarv:

Originally posted by viperwolf02:

I really wish I would of played this game before rdr2 though, that game will ruin what you expect from open world games.

Or how about not setting the bar of your expectations at the level of a game that took 2000 people over 8 years to make with 540 Million dollars? Industry leaks have shown that's not a sustainable model for most devs. Rockstar is a unique exception.

I simply said I wish I would have played it before, I DID NOT COMPARE IT. You picked one thing to try and compensate for the games short comings. Well I would not say short comings, it was just over hyped.

[Jamie]

Oh yea the graphics are soooo bad lemme tell you...clown.

[John Wick]

LOL what the ♥♥♥♥ do people expect. This game looks perfect

[Anonyma]

if you on nvidia do DL-DSR on 4k in nvidia control panel. then use dlss to bring back down. it make texture a lot better. for console they do some weird lightweight texture made for 4k so the consoles can run on 4k tvs. problem for many games

another thing that can help for some is tick both setting on high dpi settings on the .exe's properties