Cyberpunk 2077

LukeTbk said:
If this run well enough looking like that enough on the original 2013 playstation/Xbox.... that feel like a lot of work.
Click to expand...
The twitch stream from the other day showed the Xbox One X version. It looked solid. But the framerate was not solid. They did not show the PS4 or Xbox One versions.
 
Still happy with what I see even after the delays. They only thing I don't really like are the refused lyrics to chippin in, sound and energy is great but the lyrics are just wrong in my eyes. Like the older versions better.
Pretty nit picky and if that is the only problem I have with the game when it finally gets here that will be awesome.
 
game-world and gameplay look great but I still feel the graphics are a bit underwhelming for a 2020 AAA game...the 7 year development time shows...I'm hoping it's a case of them holding back the eye candy videos
 
polonyc2 said:
game-world and gameplay look great but I still feel the graphics are a bit underwhelming for a 2020 AAA game...the 7 year development time shows...I'm hoping it's a case of them holding back the eye candy videos
Click to expand...
It's not a standard triple AAA title in the sense of wanting best in class graphics. What you're describing is essentially why Cloud Imperium Games choose its engine for Star Citizen.
Some level of prioritization had to be given to asset streaming. A major CP2077 feature is no load screens for full immersion. Based on what I've seen it's more than good enough. It seems to do the best when there is a high level of attention of detail placed into lighting design. And it doesn't look as good in full daylight scenes.

However, that also isn't considering things in motion. I have a sneaking suspicion that the game will feel better and better while in motion due to just having better and more varied animations. Including things like combat and not just dialog - as well as the high variation in death animations.

And of course part of this is just straight style too. Doom Eternal has fantastic graphics, but people may not like its style - I foresee that some will not like CP2077's 80's/90's neon glow.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
It's not a standard triple AAA title in the sense of wanting best in class graphics. What you're describing is essentially why Cloud Imperium Games choose its engine for Star Citizen.
Some level of prioritization had to be given to asset streaming. A major CP2077 feature is no load screens for full immersion. Based on what I've seen it's more than good enough. It seems to do the best when there is a high level of attention of detail placed into lighting design. And it doesn't look as good in full daylight scenes.

However, that also isn't considering things in motion. I have a sneaking suspicion that the game will feel better and better while in motion due to just having better and more varied animations. Including things like combat and not just dialog - as well as the high variation in death animations.

And of course part of this is just straight style too. Doom Eternal has fantastic graphics, but people may not like its style - I foresee that some will not like CP2077's 80's/90's neon glow.
Click to expand...

what makes you say it's not trying to have best in class graphics?...Witcher 3 had amazing graphics and CP2077 seems like a natural evolution of that title...if Cyberpunk 2077 had come out 3 years back then it's graphics would be considered best in class...as it is now I think it looks a bit worse then Deus Ex Mankind Divided and that's a game with a similar style
 
Cyberpunk has a plastic look and feel to people and some other things. A pretty common problem for a lot of games for whatever reasons. In particular, the people standout. It looks pretty good overall though. Can't see the final game changing much but stuff always looks different in real time compared to a compressed video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
polonyc2 said:
what makes you say it's not trying to have best in class graphics?...Witcher 3 had amazing graphics and CP2077 seems like a natural evolution of that title...
Click to expand...
Because they never have.

polonyc2 said:
if Cyberpunk 2077 had come out 3 years back then it's graphics would be considered best in class...
Click to expand...
Part of what I tried to explain is that a good chunk of this is subjective (I admittedly didn't do a good job). The only way to be "objective" about how technologically advanced or un-advanced an engine is is by dissecting the technology used to render a scene in its engine (and how good it's able to do those things). Everything else is subjective. That's just the style and the look placed on top.

I brought up Doom Eternal as an example of this. It is an incredibly technologically advanced engine pumping some of the best images capable - but that doesn't necessarily stop people from liking it or disliking it based on style. Even extrapolating this much you can see where the placement in terms of technology was used in CP2077. And that may not necessarily be in what you're considering to be "pure graphical fidelity". Streaming assets being among them (which includes massive map sizes and view distance).

Just as another example you can look at all the titles made in Unreal Engine. The technology on how good the rendering is largely stays the same. And that's more or less the only objective measurement you can use. Everything else is just what is placed on top - textures, how things are lit, and the choices in which graphic API extensions are chosen are all things placed on top. And because of this you can have games that you subjectively feel looks better or worse while using the exact same engine.

What you're describing really is whether or not you like the design of things. But for this discussion we can just say those things are one in the same, even though they really aren't.

EDIT: I also think it's problematic for your thinking and developers in general to be on this sliding scale. "If it came out 3 years ago..." I don't think any game dev can win with that mentality. Then the only game companies that can really place an emphasis like you want is EA making a Battlefront title every 2 years and a COD title in-between with an engine that is only designed to look great (Frostbite) at the cost of everything else.

CP2077 is already massive - they have significantly larger maps, more people, cars, objects, etc than virtually any and every other game prior - but it also still has to live up to some crazy standard that you have in your head. How can a company reasonably be expected to do that? Hire another 200 people to do engine design as well as asset creation and map creation and lighting design to try to meet an impossible cutting edge standard in everything all the time always?

I know some people will interpret this as SIMPing for CDPR, but honestly I think that there has to be some level of reason placed on expectations. Everyone already has insane expectations that can't be met. And I think "graphics" (design) are among them.

polonyc2 said:
as it is now I think it looks a bit worse then Deus Ex Mankind Divided and that's a game with a similar style
Click to expand...
Great. And this is your opinion and position. Which is fine. I'm just saying you and I have zero control over what this company produces. If that is unacceptable to you then like all things you vote with your wallet.

I personally don't feel like DX:MD and this game have very much in common at all in terms of style, other than they both obviously derived from Cyberpunk, have trans-humanism, and are set some place in a dystopian future. But I could just as easily draw parallels between this and any other Cyberpunk based property like Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell. From a graphical perspective DX:MD and DX:HR both have a very particular style that I don't think any other titles have, including CP2077. There is a lot of focus in angular design (armor is a clear example), the difference between the haves and the have nots is more distinguished (they all dress in modernized Victorian clothes with things like ruffled collars, corsets, and lace), there is a strong emphasis on yellow being through-out its pallet. Those are very different stylistic choices in comparison with CP2077 which is way more 80's, neon, punk, and just more colorful in general.

Personally I think even from a technological perspective CP2077 is superior to DX:MD. And for reference I'm a big DX:MD fan. But clearly as I've been describing we all have our subjective opinion about this.
 
Last edited:
I think it looks fantastic, especially give most of what has been shown is console.
 
polonyc2 said:
game-world and gameplay look great but I still feel the graphics are a bit underwhelming for a 2020 AAA game...the 7 year development time shows...I'm hoping it's a case of them holding back the eye candy videos
Click to expand...
My thoughts are this:

1. its an open world game. Concessions have to be made on visuals, in order to be able to keep things streaming in. And its an open world with details and freedom unlike most anything we have seen. I mean, it looks like you can go inside of most buildings, for one thing. Which hasn't ever really been a thing. Also, any given area is packed with details. Lots of objects and people everywhere, making these places feel like real, functioning places. Its a lot of stuff to keep coming in and out of memory.

2. its cross-gen. So, with the above in mind, the base quality of the assets has to be lower, in order to fit the capabilities of the last-gen hardware. Especially those Jaguar cores.

3. Plastic people: its much more difficult to pull off some of the really advanced shader techniques in an open world game. Because at any given moment, you could have a lot of assets and characters on screen at once. If you wanted to do something like Sub-Surface scattering, to give some extra realism to their skin: that's an expensive effect. And they probably wouldn't be able to support it on that many characters at once.
With open world games, I think its more demanding to find that balance, where they can deliver a consistent visual quality and aesthetic. Cyberpunk is likely relying on some cheaper effects, but everything looks like it belongs together. Strong art and smart use of those older/cheaper effects.
Additionally, Cyberpunk is canonically and aesthetically about highly artificial aspects of life. Many people are wearing super gaudy, bright, plastic/synthetic clothing. And also people replacing their natural bodies with plastic and metal. Some of the characters you see whom look particularly shiny, are because much of their body is an artificial product. and that artificial body is also probably draped in plastic garments. Again, there is a consistency there with artificial materials. And it seems CDPR ran with it, for their visual aesthetic. And it kind of works out, when scaling down for last gen hardware. It would be nice if the dirt/desert area looking more naturalistic in terms of the visual impact of the dirt and vegetation. But that would probably require assets which don't scale down as well.
 
Anyway, I think Cyberpunk has a solid look to its visuals, overall. I mean, look at how bad Watchdogs Legion looks, and doesn't even have a 60fps mode on next gen consoles...
 
3080 required for 4k RT play

EnRvD_eXYAAjlg-.jpg
 
Flogger23m said:
Cyberpunk has a plastic look and feel to people and some other things. A pretty common problem for a lot of games for whatever reasons. In particular, the people standout. It looks pretty good overall though. Can't see the final game changing much but stuff always looks different in real time compared to a compressed video.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing. The people looked like plastic and their clothes looked like latex. Everything had an odd shine to it. I feel like we saw this a lot back in 2013ish when the last gen of consoles came out. Not so much anymore. I wonder if this was somehow a purposeful design choice?

I certainly won't let it diminish my experience, and maybe it'll be better when not seen through the lens of a compressed, 1080p youtube video, but I sure wish it didn't look like that.
 
polonyc2 said:
according to that chart a 2060 for 1440p...I'm still trying to pick up a 3080 but I wonder if I can get away with my current GTX 1070
Click to expand...
Well that's 1440p ultra. I bet with some tweaks, you could get a 1070 doing pretty well at 1440 and not lose a whole lot from all ultra settings.

A 1070 is generally a little bit behind a 1660ti
 
polonyc2 said:
according to that chart a 2060 for 1440p...I'm still trying to pick up a 3080 but I wonder if I can get away with my current GTX 1070
Click to expand...
got a 1080 still, dont think i will get my hands on a new card until the game comes out, guess my current card will have to do. makes me sad
 
I upgraded from a 5960x & 980ti to a 5800x & 3080 specifically for this game. Looks like the cpu upgrade was unnecessary, and could of gotten away with a cheaper gpu. At least with this setup I'm hoping to get 100fps @ 1440p with rt on
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Click to expand...

At second 143 ()

Call it almost identical, when the character shadow on the ground, the car shadow on the ground (the hood being raised influencing that shadow shape, the part of the shadow casted only by the mirror being softer than the rest of the shadow in one example and not the other, etc...), the car metal and glass does seem different (for the later it seem exaggerated in both case for under the hood amount of reflection)
 
polonyc2 said:
Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing Not Available on AMD Radeon at Launch

(2) Marcin Momot on Twitter: "@valiantfury_ Not for the release but we are working together with AMD to introduce this feature as soon as we can." / Twitter
Click to expand...

This, unfortunately, was expected. And has been done for every Nvidia / AMD partnered launch since the illusion of proprietary tech began. Still annoying AF. Lord knows when I'll be able to get my hands on a 3090 (or be willing to pay the scalper prices) anyway. Will probably just have to see how my 2080ti handles this game at 4k, and consider the annoyance 1st World problems.
 
Frraksurred said:
This, unfortunately, was expected. And has been done for every Nvidia / AMD partnered launch since the illusion of proprietary tech began. Still annoying AF. Lord knows when I'll be able to get my hands on a 3090 (or be willing to pay the scalper prices) anyway. Will probably just have to see how my 2080ti handles this game at 4k, and consider the annoyance 1st World problems.
Click to expand...

you could lower the resolution to 1440p...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top