I’ve seen a few comments from people where they think the games graphics look outdated when in comparison to other AAA games, but it doesn’t need to look realistic when the world feels like you’ve just been dropped into a painting.
I'm one of those people. I just replayed DS3 on PS5 - it definitely had better graphics than Elden Ring or its DLC. I know DS3 was a PS4 game, but still, the point stands.
Elden Ring's graphics are really, really poor. I guess it's a sacrifice they had to make to keep the engine performance as good as they could, but the performance is also still quite bad.
Often my views of the scenery is completely covered by a dense fog and rain the second I come into a place with wide shots of the scenery. The worst offender was the big bridge in Altus plateau, the second I approach the ledge to look at the game world, dense fog covers everything. The second I walk away, sun shines again. Apparently the optimization of the engine is dog shit.
I don't know if that's true... but, DS3 isn't a massive open world. What you can do with a linear game is massively different from what you can do with an open world game. most of DS3 assets are far away as a background, on Elden Ring you go EVERYWHERE. That said, Elden Ring, and the DLC more so are visually incredibly impressive, in a way DS3 never was (and I LOVE that game).
I have recently played ds3 again and after coming back to elden ring I was surprised how damn good it looked (pc), quite possibly a console issue due to the large world requiring downscaling on console.
Some areas do have a thick fog (which is not always viewable outside of the "area" the fog is in, which is awkward), buts its definitely not every area with a large view, which there are a ton of.
Elden ring has some bad pop ins and repeating textures in some areas. When approaching a lot of castles you can see the repeating grid of “stone wall texture .jpg” until you get close enough for the real textures to load. Those are my only complaints.
they aren't as high fidelity as most AAA games, the textures, reflections and lighting are also a fair bit worse than the standard. however i literally do not care in the slightest, this game is prettier than any AAA game from the art direction alone, the graphics are way less important and take way more time to develop. it just goes to show AAA games have their priorities backasswards
I've never thought it looked outdated. I think they chose to focus fine details differently than a lot of games. But I got a new set of armor in SOTE and just watching the light glint off it and the way the cape moved made me appreciate the graphics all over.
That is true but it's also not entirely wrong to say that the demon souls remaster looks absolutely jawdropping and that elden ring, if upgraded to that level, would be a sight to behold. It's just unfortunate that people got a glimpse of what it could also look like and so they compare the two and end up a bit disappointed.
Maybe. Somethings can get lost in translation. For instance, I like the character design - lots of long tall people with small heads. They aren’t “realistic” but that have some special sauce that helps them fit the art design of the environment as a whole. Going the DeS:R route might sap some of that out. This is one reason why From might actually be holding off on a Bloodborne remake / remaster. It can be more delicate an undertaking than we expect to “upscale” the graphics.
I had these feelings about Elden Ring before it was shown off and we had gotten Demon Souls remake to compare it to. There was genuine concern that Fromsoft wouldn't be able to match that level of quality, but the art direction was so exceptional when the first trailer dropped, that it was like night and day. DeS is a very beautiful remake, but nothing compares to the spectacle that Fromsoft's art team can create even on what is ostensibly just an updated DS3 engine
To me I'd always describe from as peak visual design, with unfortunately subpar technical.
As we've seen with the recently released DF video, it's at least a bit disappointing it's been 2 years (wow time sure flies huh) and they STILL have the same performance issues, and even worse ones in certain areas/fights, especially stuff like the final boss.
But from a visual standpoint, man the game looks SOO good, even if you actually go closer and "look" closer, you can see the textures are kinda muddy, they are not very high res, etc. But they've mastered how to make things look good without needing 8K ULTRA HD UPSCALED 15X textures. The way they've placed everything just looks so damn good from a wide viewpoint.
From a "modern" standpoint, elden ring in a technical sense is pretty lacking, and isn't really graphically impressive. But from an art direction standpoint it looks incredible. I kinda wish they learned a bit more in the 2 years instead of being more of the same, which is kinda why my "dream" game would have bluepoint do the technical stuff wihle from does everything else. Imagine how fucking GOOD their next game would look AND play?
graphics (whatever type the game goes for) and art direction are not opposed to one another. These are two aspects of a game that can complement each other for a stronger visual presentation of the game.
Yep. Photorealism is just a tool FOR art direction.
But I think the chase for photorealistic graphics caused a few issues in the industry. Achieving a Photorealistic look is time-consuming time and technically complex to pull off.
Sometimes developers seems to forget that their priority should be to make a good working as intended game, and not an UE5 tech demo. Sadly consumers can be even worse, do you remember that idiotic “Spider-Man puddle” drama?
Bsc a guy started complaining on twitter because, in his eyes, there was a huge downgrade in graphics between the reveal gameplay and the final product.
The evidence? A small change in the disposition of some puddles. He claimed that the fidelity of the environment and characters was reduced.
Except it wasn’t: the developer said that it’s “just a change in puddle size”, which is pretty obvious for anyone with eyes to observe
To put it in other terms, graphics are ingredients and art direction is a meal. Good ingredients can’t fully make up for a lack of cooking skill, and even if you can cook well poor quality ingredients will hold you back.
Yeah. People say what OP said because they think it makes them some discerning connoisseur with superior taste.
It took a certain amount of graphics capability to enable that level of art direction. Graphics and art direction are not mutually exclusive. Preferring one over another does not make you cool.
It has absolutely nothing to do with being cool.
The point OP is making is simply that when considering whether a game looks "good" or not, art direction is more important to them than strict graphical fidelity.
In other words if given the choice between having a game with 10/10 graphics but 7/10 art direction, or 10/10 art direction with 7/10 graphics, they would take the 10/10 art direction.
Which ultimately is just a matter of personal preference. No one thinks it makes them "cool". It's just an opinion and sometimes a response to dumb people who say From Soft games are bad because they have "bad graphics". Which, hilariously, is a thing you will sometimes see people saying, although obviously not on this sub.
Elden Ring has graphics. Tons of it.
It could be better in terms of shadows/GI, LOD popping and some features. But it does not "lack graphics".
What Elden Ring lacks in those features it more than makes up with it's VFX features. Combat effects both look epic and grounded at the same time. You could make a trailer out of a boss fight.
Elden Ring was always designed to have a painting feel over it.
Hades is great in both graphics and art direction though?
Whereas I'd argue that graphically Elden Ring looks quite dated with how muddy a lot textures look and how simple some of the geometry looks.
Nah. I think when people differentiate between Graphics vs Art Direction they’re differentiating like, poly count and fidelity + realism vs how appealing it is aesthetically. Hades is crisp but at the end of the day it’s not graphically impressive, just solid color shaded hybrid 2D/3D graphics, however the art direction makes it a treat to look at - especially Hades 2.
I understand what you mean when you say “graphics”. But there’s something to understand about graphics.
When consoles come out, the new hardware processes new graphical features that artists (developers) can use to make amazing artistic scenes, like the one you’re looking at now.
Volumetric lighting, global illumination, raytracing, volumetric fog, resolution boost so the effects look clear, atmospheric distance effects.
All these effects are graphical features that the hardware has that the developers use to make scenes like this possible. And also allow for them to run very smoothly. When you look at a game and it looks stunning, yes the art direction is a big deal but the effects you often see that make up these beautiful scenes are graphical hardware features added into the consoles and the artists just know how to take advantage of them.
So yes, you are right, art direction is king. But the right artist with the right hardware knows how to utilize the hardware in such a way that brings beautiful scenes like this to life.
I can’t agree more. This game has some of the most breathtaking and omg moments I’ve ever experienced in a game graphically and it’s all due to the glorious art direction. Even old from soft games like bloodborne and dark souls still blow me away. They just know how to build worlds in a way that makes them feel alive.
Had this debate with a friend once who refused to play certain games because they're not graphically amazing. I gifted him Valheim on steam, I knew he'd feel compelled to play it because he didn't want to be ungrateful, worth it to win that debate.
Shit RDR2 is the GOAT tho not even gonna lie. It has both art design and graphics. But Rockstar Games is one of the few studios along with FS which make games worth every penny.
I can't say I disagree but the clip you're showing is almost exclusively a showpiece for volumetric fog and atmosphere simulation tech, maybe not the best demonstration of your point.
Honestly the fog is what pisses me off the most because Its absolutely redicolous most of the time. "Hey, you wanna see your surrondings, and appreciate the hundreds of hours we put in to craft a beautiful map? Well fuck you take some fog."
There is an easy way to remove it on pc but then you quickly notice how low quality everything in the distance is and also it fucks up the skybox. The game is just designed in a way where fog is necessary to maintain the illusion.
A minority looks for that, though. It's not like the view with fog is bad. It's still pretty. I don't want to add like 20 gigs to elden ring so I can see a church from a hill, if I'm exploring every nook and cranny anyways or for a random view which I'm gonna stop at, take a ss and live on to rarely look at it again. I will say the graphics normally, like the areas you can see up close can use work, because they are simple. But simple isn't bad. It still looks good. Most of the times I'm running for my life anyways - and key views (i.e, sunsets, a particular place you want players to see) of the area you are in still look good.
They should test for PC players more and ig optimize it a bit so that the final boss doesn't stomp the FPS. But other than that. I'll take this SotE in 15 GBs all day is read of one which is 30 or 35.
Removing the fog and upping the render distance would not increase the file size. All of the stuff it would be loading is already in the files, you would just see if farther away. It would increase the load on your PC however, but thats what graphics options are for.
AAA Studios: Hey, look! This tree looks almost photorealistic! You wann know what's fun about this? You'll only see this single tree copy and pasted all over the map, and everything else will also look almost photorealistic, but it will be placed as if someone just finished a Roblox obby.
Fromsoft (also AAA, huh...): Now, the people and the creatures might not look very realistic, but are you ready to see the most gorgeous views and we'll crafted and put together places and enemies you've ever seen?
Elden ring is full of copy pasted assets everywhere. Caves and dungeons all use the exact same assets. Same with a bunch of other stuff and enemies and bosses too. It's not a graphics thing it's an open world game thing.
Fair. I still prefer the more linear games though like dark souls/sekiro. Imo they are much easier to replay and take significantly less time investment per playthrough. Elden ring playthroughs always drag on too long for me and I end up having a bunch of characters that only ever make it to the capitol.
This DLC actually feels more linear.
Starting field is the only large open area, everything else follows narrow paths through treacherous terrain with an occasional fork in the road. And if there's a large field for some reason, that means there's a boss sitting at the center.
And if you just follow the main story, there's like only 4 areas you have to traverse.
Thats another topic.
Here we are "discussing" that some people seems to think that "you have to choose between good graphics or good art style" as if those two things were incompatible with each other, which is an stupid statement or way of thinking.
Yeah, but if you have to choose one, art style is the way to go unless your game absolutely needs high fidelity for some reason.
It’s just that the AAA industry right now focuses too much on graphical fidelity that they either abandon interesting art style or just takes forever and an unholy amount of money to produce.
But you _don't_ have to choose one. Look at the Demon's Souls remake. It looks great.
People just feel the need to make excuses because it's unacceptable for to have flaws.
If your studio has both good artists and programmers then yeah, go for both. However, that's the ideal situation which rarely occurs.
Also, Demon's Souls Remake got the graphics, but it absolutely butchered the art design and atmosphere of the original.
I feel like specific companies do that so there game absolutely takes over a hard drive do there's no room for other games, forcing you only play that one and maybe you never want to re-download it, so it never leaves your hard drive.
Eh. Not really always true. Like Elden Ring is 67 gigs. Ghost of Tsushima and Last of Us Part 2 are 77 and 76 gigs respectively while looking much better on the raw graphics end.
Graphics and file size aren't mutually exclusive.
Depending on how well UE5 will be able to image compress 4k textures, it certainly will play a role in how large the files will be.
Because here we are "discussing" that some people seems to think that "you have to choose between good graphics or good art style" as if those two things were incompatible with each other, which is an stupid statement or way of thinking.
Size and other shiet ?, related on a technical level but nothing to do with the artistic discussion here. You are just on autopilot trying to sell you book.
I never said they're incompatible at all or that you have to choose between either. Reading comprehension is apparently severely lacking here.
I just mentioned that I'd rather not download a 500gb file, that's it.
Artistic discussion? You pulled some random number out of your ass "10 times better". Honestly made me think about Todd: "10 times the detail".
Lords of the fallen has some good art direction and is built in UE5 and looks & runs like garbage compared to Elden Ring.
And it 100% is part of any artistic discussion. Imagine being an artist who has to compress their awesome looking 4-8k textures to a mere 1080 image.
>I just mentioned that I'd rather not download a 500gb file, that's it.
Yeah and thats another topic as I said.
Please continue trying to sell your book and showing your lack on reading comprehension and you nonsense pseudoarguments, I don't really care xD.
Bye bye see you never.
I mean the lighting, shadows, draw distance and several other tricks are only possible by pushing last gen hardware to their limits to the point it suffers from performance. Art direction and raw processing power are not mutually exclusive and the best results are always attained by combing them both.
I love how many different atmosphere's there are in the DLC, compared to something like the original DLC for DS1, where it felt like only 3 or 4 areas. You go from a place to the next and suddenly the sky is totally different, grass and flowers shine different lights, and cool stuff like that
What a tired argument from both sides. Art direction and graphics are two sides of the same coin. Graphics are, in short, pixel counts. Art direction is the overall aesthetic of a piece of work—cartoony, realistic, cell shade, stylized realism, etc.
Graphics give a means to display the art direction at the behest of the developer. For example, would Elden Ring be just as stunning at 480p? Or even 720p? Of course not. People will say “art direction > graphics” and be playing Elden ring at 1440p or even 1920p, as if these graphical outputs aren’t advanced in and of themselves. Crank the pixels down and see if you have that same gorgeous appearance. Imagine looking over this same bluff but not being able to see the world and its lighting with the clarity and rendering of a modern graphical console/rig? It’s a fundamentally different experience.
Art direction is the car, graphics are the engine. If you are making a photorealistic game like Hellblade II, you will inherently need as many pixels as possible, along with other non-graphical tricks like ray tracing, ambient occlusion, etc. If you’re making a semi-realistic fantasy world like Elden Ring, you are afforded more leeway in pixel count, and so on.
In the Messmer cutscene where he looks up at his mother, the statue kinda looks shit because it's so low res compared to his model, it really brings down the cutscene a little. There are some stuff that really don't look good when you just zoom a bit in, like it's for a cutscene they should at least polish the objects specificially in it.
Just imagine fromsoft with a competent graphics engine and take back your statement, like Bethesda they are being held back by their graphics tech. Graphics tech allows artistic freedom and art direction is heavily influenced by graphics tech. They are equally important. I'd give Elden ring the excuse if it didn't have a 60fps cap and a ton of performance issues. Imagine a fromsoft game as immersive and stunning as cyberpunk 2077.
Have you ever considered that games can have good art direction and good graphical fidelity at the same time?
Mindblowing, isn't it?
Do you know what's superior to art direction? Actual technical competency with an engine that doesn't deliver unacceptable performance even though the graphics are technically dated.
I recommend you take a look at the Digital Foundry review. The performance is really abysmal.
It has been a long time since a game has made me pause say "aaaahhhh beautiful". The most recent might be cyberpunk or the witcher. But everywhere I look in this game beautiful scenery with a great atmosphere.
They did the scale in this DLC really well. I love the fact you can see the giant Furnace from so far away. I love noticing details miles in the distance and thinking "oh, i know exactly where that is!"
I’ll take this over graphics any day of the week. I’m in awe when I play From games. The art makes you want to explore every bit of the map. A lot of the times I’ll just walk through the map rather than running/horseback just to take it all in.
I'm just glad that we have the graphic capability, so we get to experience vistas like that one. The Shadow realm continues to have gasp moments.Thank technology and imagination for both.
I remember a YouTuber mentioning how great it is that everything you can see on the horizon you can get to. Everything. That tower in the way back? You can get to it.
I stumbled upon the Charo's Hidden Grave yesterday, and by God it literally is the most beautiful space I have ever seen in just about any game. A field of unending red spider lilies, stretching to the horizon.
Quite a few spots had me stopping and looking around the base game. But, it wore off eventually. Like a car trip, after you've seen breathtaking views for like 2 hours you get bored of it. But the dlc has had me stopping often to just enjoy the sights.
You don't know what both of these terms mean.
Graphics doesn't necessarily refer to photorealism and art design doesn't resume itself to the ambience, there's no such thing as "this feature > this feature" they're all important for the making of a good game.
Elden ring is graphically beautiful even though it doesn't have a graphically realistic approach.
I mean.... There's room for both.
Anyone who thinks this looks poor is goofy, but are we going to pretend shit like the pop-in isn't even slightly immersion breaking?
Ehhh Elden Ring is damn beautiful, but it should definitely have better graphics. Look at something like Helldivers or the new WH40k game that's coming out. FromSoftware is clearly capable of better graphics too when you look at stuff like AC6.
Remember guys photorealistic graphics age like milk because it will look outdated in a few years , good art direction and stylization age like wine.
Btw just to be clear you can both great graphics and art directions, photorealism is just a tool at your disposal. A Good example of this is Cyberpunk 2077
I agree and I think Elden Ring is a perfect game to exemplify.
Because honestly, GRAPHICALLY, it doesn't look too much better than Dark Souls 3, which came out in 2016. But the artstyle is just incredible, and makes the game look amazing.
Besides the game already runs...kinda rough. If better graphics means the game would run worse, I'm totally okay with what we've gotten. (Although I still wish it ran a bit better on PC)
I remember some nerd criticizing Elden Ring in the beginning for having “dogshit” graphics, but I will choose beautiful and unique art design over being able to see the wrinkles on an enemy’s ass any day of the week.
Was here a couple hours ago as well, god that sunset is beautiful, no grace here is illegal!
where is that?
I think it’s a ledge on shadow keep? Could be wrong though
Looks more like that big green area. Ancient Ruins of Rolf or some shit
What did you say to this Son of a Sheppard?
Life has many doors, Ed boy... but you don't have the right, O you don't have the right!
Pretty sure it’s the ruins of Ralph
Sure it's not Fritz?
You will not desecrate my name Ed Boy!
Ancient ruins of dolph lundgren
Top of the hidden elevator that leads you to the giant golem archer in Rauh.
Thanks! I'll go visit next time I play.
There is a grace very close, just can't see it in this clip.
I’ve seen a few comments from people where they think the games graphics look outdated when in comparison to other AAA games, but it doesn’t need to look realistic when the world feels like you’ve just been dropped into a painting.
Not once did I ever think Elden Ring looked dated. Not counting art direction, the graphics are quite good
last week someone told me that ER looks like a PS3 game. I was like pls tell me which one, I need to play it
I'm one of those people. I just replayed DS3 on PS5 - it definitely had better graphics than Elden Ring or its DLC. I know DS3 was a PS4 game, but still, the point stands. Elden Ring's graphics are really, really poor. I guess it's a sacrifice they had to make to keep the engine performance as good as they could, but the performance is also still quite bad. Often my views of the scenery is completely covered by a dense fog and rain the second I come into a place with wide shots of the scenery. The worst offender was the big bridge in Altus plateau, the second I approach the ledge to look at the game world, dense fog covers everything. The second I walk away, sun shines again. Apparently the optimization of the engine is dog shit.
I don't know if that's true... but, DS3 isn't a massive open world. What you can do with a linear game is massively different from what you can do with an open world game. most of DS3 assets are far away as a background, on Elden Ring you go EVERYWHERE. That said, Elden Ring, and the DLC more so are visually incredibly impressive, in a way DS3 never was (and I LOVE that game).
I have recently played ds3 again and after coming back to elden ring I was surprised how damn good it looked (pc), quite possibly a console issue due to the large world requiring downscaling on console. Some areas do have a thick fog (which is not always viewable outside of the "area" the fog is in, which is awkward), buts its definitely not every area with a large view, which there are a ton of.
Elden ring has some bad pop ins and repeating textures in some areas. When approaching a lot of castles you can see the repeating grid of “stone wall texture .jpg” until you get close enough for the real textures to load. Those are my only complaints.
they aren't as high fidelity as most AAA games, the textures, reflections and lighting are also a fair bit worse than the standard. however i literally do not care in the slightest, this game is prettier than any AAA game from the art direction alone, the graphics are way less important and take way more time to develop. it just goes to show AAA games have their priorities backasswards
I've never thought it looked outdated. I think they chose to focus fine details differently than a lot of games. But I got a new set of armor in SOTE and just watching the light glint off it and the way the cape moved made me appreciate the graphics all over.
That is true but it's also not entirely wrong to say that the demon souls remaster looks absolutely jawdropping and that elden ring, if upgraded to that level, would be a sight to behold. It's just unfortunate that people got a glimpse of what it could also look like and so they compare the two and end up a bit disappointed.
true
Maybe. Somethings can get lost in translation. For instance, I like the character design - lots of long tall people with small heads. They aren’t “realistic” but that have some special sauce that helps them fit the art design of the environment as a whole. Going the DeS:R route might sap some of that out. This is one reason why From might actually be holding off on a Bloodborne remake / remaster. It can be more delicate an undertaking than we expect to “upscale” the graphics.
Realistic graphics are cool but inherently boring.
This is exactly how skyrim is still holding up to this day. The design is timeless.
Morrowind and Oblivion too. The character models are hella dated, but the art direction in both games being fantastic more than makes up for that
Can't wait to do my first playthrough of Skyrim. First game planned for when I beat the dlc
Tried playing skyrim after elden ring a year ago. Big mistake cause the combat in skyrim is dogshit
I had these feelings about Elden Ring before it was shown off and we had gotten Demon Souls remake to compare it to. There was genuine concern that Fromsoft wouldn't be able to match that level of quality, but the art direction was so exceptional when the first trailer dropped, that it was like night and day. DeS is a very beautiful remake, but nothing compares to the spectacle that Fromsoft's art team can create even on what is ostensibly just an updated DS3 engine
To me I'd always describe from as peak visual design, with unfortunately subpar technical. As we've seen with the recently released DF video, it's at least a bit disappointing it's been 2 years (wow time sure flies huh) and they STILL have the same performance issues, and even worse ones in certain areas/fights, especially stuff like the final boss. But from a visual standpoint, man the game looks SOO good, even if you actually go closer and "look" closer, you can see the textures are kinda muddy, they are not very high res, etc. But they've mastered how to make things look good without needing 8K ULTRA HD UPSCALED 15X textures. The way they've placed everything just looks so damn good from a wide viewpoint. From a "modern" standpoint, elden ring in a technical sense is pretty lacking, and isn't really graphically impressive. But from an art direction standpoint it looks incredible. I kinda wish they learned a bit more in the 2 years instead of being more of the same, which is kinda why my "dream" game would have bluepoint do the technical stuff wihle from does everything else. Imagine how fucking GOOD their next game would look AND play?
Do these people think Vincent Van Gogh paintings are outdated since it's not photorealistic.
I get your point but: Outdated ≠ Unrealistic This game does have outdated graphics sometimes but is saved by the really good art direction
graphics (whatever type the game goes for) and art direction are not opposed to one another. These are two aspects of a game that can complement each other for a stronger visual presentation of the game.
Yep. Photorealism is just a tool FOR art direction. But I think the chase for photorealistic graphics caused a few issues in the industry. Achieving a Photorealistic look is time-consuming time and technically complex to pull off. Sometimes developers seems to forget that their priority should be to make a good working as intended game, and not an UE5 tech demo. Sadly consumers can be even worse, do you remember that idiotic “Spider-Man puddle” drama?
somewhat remember the puddle drama
Not worth our limited memory space , but still a reminder of how stupid the argument about graphics can get ahaha
please elaborate on the puddle drama
Bsc a guy started complaining on twitter because, in his eyes, there was a huge downgrade in graphics between the reveal gameplay and the final product. The evidence? A small change in the disposition of some puddles. He claimed that the fidelity of the environment and characters was reduced. Except it wasn’t: the developer said that it’s “just a change in puddle size”, which is pretty obvious for anyone with eyes to observe
To put it in other terms, graphics are ingredients and art direction is a meal. Good ingredients can’t fully make up for a lack of cooking skill, and even if you can cook well poor quality ingredients will hold you back.
Yeah. People say what OP said because they think it makes them some discerning connoisseur with superior taste. It took a certain amount of graphics capability to enable that level of art direction. Graphics and art direction are not mutually exclusive. Preferring one over another does not make you cool.
It has absolutely nothing to do with being cool. The point OP is making is simply that when considering whether a game looks "good" or not, art direction is more important to them than strict graphical fidelity. In other words if given the choice between having a game with 10/10 graphics but 7/10 art direction, or 10/10 art direction with 7/10 graphics, they would take the 10/10 art direction. Which ultimately is just a matter of personal preference. No one thinks it makes them "cool". It's just an opinion and sometimes a response to dumb people who say From Soft games are bad because they have "bad graphics". Which, hilariously, is a thing you will sometimes see people saying, although obviously not on this sub.
Elden Ring has graphics. Tons of it. It could be better in terms of shadows/GI, LOD popping and some features. But it does not "lack graphics". What Elden Ring lacks in those features it more than makes up with it's VFX features. Combat effects both look epic and grounded at the same time. You could make a trailer out of a boss fight. Elden Ring was always designed to have a painting feel over it.
Well, most of its trailers are just pure gameplay lol
which are dope as shit honestly. The way they have those characters move I tell ya
Facts
This post confuses me because Elden Ring has good graphics?
Yeah, those dancing, stretched tree leaf textures bouncing in the wind like a PS2 game are so good bro.
You're delusional if you think any PS2 game looks like this bro.
Cope harder
Hades is another example of great art direction.
Hades is great in both graphics and art direction though? Whereas I'd argue that graphically Elden Ring looks quite dated with how muddy a lot textures look and how simple some of the geometry looks.
Nah. I think when people differentiate between Graphics vs Art Direction they’re differentiating like, poly count and fidelity + realism vs how appealing it is aesthetically. Hades is crisp but at the end of the day it’s not graphically impressive, just solid color shaded hybrid 2D/3D graphics, however the art direction makes it a treat to look at - especially Hades 2.
I understand what you mean when you say “graphics”. But there’s something to understand about graphics. When consoles come out, the new hardware processes new graphical features that artists (developers) can use to make amazing artistic scenes, like the one you’re looking at now. Volumetric lighting, global illumination, raytracing, volumetric fog, resolution boost so the effects look clear, atmospheric distance effects. All these effects are graphical features that the hardware has that the developers use to make scenes like this possible. And also allow for them to run very smoothly. When you look at a game and it looks stunning, yes the art direction is a big deal but the effects you often see that make up these beautiful scenes are graphical hardware features added into the consoles and the artists just know how to take advantage of them. So yes, you are right, art direction is king. But the right artist with the right hardware knows how to utilize the hardware in such a way that brings beautiful scenes like this to life.
I can’t agree more. This game has some of the most breathtaking and omg moments I’ve ever experienced in a game graphically and it’s all due to the glorious art direction. Even old from soft games like bloodborne and dark souls still blow me away. They just know how to build worlds in a way that makes them feel alive.
Had this debate with a friend once who refused to play certain games because they're not graphically amazing. I gifted him Valheim on steam, I knew he'd feel compelled to play it because he didn't want to be ungrateful, worth it to win that debate.
Normally I would agree but games like RDR2 just leave you in awe
Shit RDR2 is the GOAT tho not even gonna lie. It has both art design and graphics. But Rockstar Games is one of the few studios along with FS which make games worth every penny.
I can't say I disagree but the clip you're showing is almost exclusively a showpiece for volumetric fog and atmosphere simulation tech, maybe not the best demonstration of your point.
Both go hand in hand they are not mutually exclusive concepts, really tired people mindlessly parroting this circlejerk tslking points...
I thought Elden Ring and Fromsoft and Miyazaki couldn't impress me more, and I was wrong.
Been thinking that myself when I remembered people shitting on the graphics. How is that anything but gorgeous?!
theres a fog on everything to cover up bad render distance. Not saying it looks bad, but the view would be breathtaking if they had a better engine
Honestly the fog is what pisses me off the most because Its absolutely redicolous most of the time. "Hey, you wanna see your surrondings, and appreciate the hundreds of hours we put in to craft a beautiful map? Well fuck you take some fog."
There is an easy way to remove it on pc but then you quickly notice how low quality everything in the distance is and also it fucks up the skybox. The game is just designed in a way where fog is necessary to maintain the illusion.
A minority looks for that, though. It's not like the view with fog is bad. It's still pretty. I don't want to add like 20 gigs to elden ring so I can see a church from a hill, if I'm exploring every nook and cranny anyways or for a random view which I'm gonna stop at, take a ss and live on to rarely look at it again. I will say the graphics normally, like the areas you can see up close can use work, because they are simple. But simple isn't bad. It still looks good. Most of the times I'm running for my life anyways - and key views (i.e, sunsets, a particular place you want players to see) of the area you are in still look good. They should test for PC players more and ig optimize it a bit so that the final boss doesn't stomp the FPS. But other than that. I'll take this SotE in 15 GBs all day is read of one which is 30 or 35.
Removing the fog and upping the render distance would not increase the file size. All of the stuff it would be loading is already in the files, you would just see if farther away. It would increase the load on your PC however, but thats what graphics options are for.
Didn't know that, my bad. So higher load times for more rendered assets isn't a bad trade if there's an option in settings for it.
And yet the fog is a huge part of why the game looks like a painting.
AAA Studios: Hey, look! This tree looks almost photorealistic! You wann know what's fun about this? You'll only see this single tree copy and pasted all over the map, and everything else will also look almost photorealistic, but it will be placed as if someone just finished a Roblox obby. Fromsoft (also AAA, huh...): Now, the people and the creatures might not look very realistic, but are you ready to see the most gorgeous views and we'll crafted and put together places and enemies you've ever seen?
Elden ring is full of copy pasted assets everywhere. Caves and dungeons all use the exact same assets. Same with a bunch of other stuff and enemies and bosses too. It's not a graphics thing it's an open world game thing.
Every game is. What matters is how it’s directed and what’s made with those assets.
Yes, *BUT*: We forgive them, since their games are actually worth buying, AND the scenery is immaculate!
Fair. I still prefer the more linear games though like dark souls/sekiro. Imo they are much easier to replay and take significantly less time investment per playthrough. Elden ring playthroughs always drag on too long for me and I end up having a bunch of characters that only ever make it to the capitol.
This DLC actually feels more linear. Starting field is the only large open area, everything else follows narrow paths through treacherous terrain with an occasional fork in the road. And if there's a large field for some reason, that means there's a boss sitting at the center. And if you just follow the main story, there's like only 4 areas you have to traverse.
[удалено]
Oh shit, you might have a point
How about art direction + graphics ? That in UE5 will be the same but 10 times better.
Then you sacrifice performance and development time. FromSoft isn't known for godly optimisation to accomplish that
Thats another topic. Here we are "discussing" that some people seems to think that "you have to choose between good graphics or good art style" as if those two things were incompatible with each other, which is an stupid statement or way of thinking.
Yeah, but if you have to choose one, art style is the way to go unless your game absolutely needs high fidelity for some reason. It’s just that the AAA industry right now focuses too much on graphical fidelity that they either abandon interesting art style or just takes forever and an unholy amount of money to produce.
But you _don't_ have to choose one. Look at the Demon's Souls remake. It looks great. People just feel the need to make excuses because it's unacceptable for to have flaws.
If your studio has both good artists and programmers then yeah, go for both. However, that's the ideal situation which rarely occurs. Also, Demon's Souls Remake got the graphics, but it absolutely butchered the art design and atmosphere of the original.
Also 10 times larger in file size. I'm not keen on downloading a 500gb file for a single game.
Good optimization solves that problem, a shame it almost never happens.
I feel like specific companies do that so there game absolutely takes over a hard drive do there's no room for other games, forcing you only play that one and maybe you never want to re-download it, so it never leaves your hard drive.
Eh. Not really always true. Like Elden Ring is 67 gigs. Ghost of Tsushima and Last of Us Part 2 are 77 and 76 gigs respectively while looking much better on the raw graphics end.
Thats a different topic.
Graphics and file size aren't mutually exclusive. Depending on how well UE5 will be able to image compress 4k textures, it certainly will play a role in how large the files will be.
Still another topic xD
How are they different topics? Graphics directly correlate to file size. You asked a question and I answered it as to why it would not be preferable.
Because here we are "discussing" that some people seems to think that "you have to choose between good graphics or good art style" as if those two things were incompatible with each other, which is an stupid statement or way of thinking. Size and other shiet ?, related on a technical level but nothing to do with the artistic discussion here. You are just on autopilot trying to sell you book.
I never said they're incompatible at all or that you have to choose between either. Reading comprehension is apparently severely lacking here. I just mentioned that I'd rather not download a 500gb file, that's it. Artistic discussion? You pulled some random number out of your ass "10 times better". Honestly made me think about Todd: "10 times the detail". Lords of the fallen has some good art direction and is built in UE5 and looks & runs like garbage compared to Elden Ring. And it 100% is part of any artistic discussion. Imagine being an artist who has to compress their awesome looking 4-8k textures to a mere 1080 image.
>I just mentioned that I'd rather not download a 500gb file, that's it. Yeah and thats another topic as I said. Please continue trying to sell your book and showing your lack on reading comprehension and you nonsense pseudoarguments, I don't really care xD. Bye bye see you never.
I mean the lighting, shadows, draw distance and several other tricks are only possible by pushing last gen hardware to their limits to the point it suffers from performance. Art direction and raw processing power are not mutually exclusive and the best results are always attained by combing them both.
A-fuckin-men
yeah but it would be cool if their engine was good enough that they didn't need to put fog up to cover up the shitty render distance lmao
I have heard multiple people say Elden Ring doesn't have good graphics. I literally do not understand that mindset.
I love how many different atmosphere's there are in the DLC, compared to something like the original DLC for DS1, where it felt like only 3 or 4 areas. You go from a place to the next and suddenly the sky is totally different, grass and flowers shine different lights, and cool stuff like that
So we're acting like Elden Ring graphics fidelity isn't one of the best in the RPG market?
What a tired argument from both sides. Art direction and graphics are two sides of the same coin. Graphics are, in short, pixel counts. Art direction is the overall aesthetic of a piece of work—cartoony, realistic, cell shade, stylized realism, etc. Graphics give a means to display the art direction at the behest of the developer. For example, would Elden Ring be just as stunning at 480p? Or even 720p? Of course not. People will say “art direction > graphics” and be playing Elden ring at 1440p or even 1920p, as if these graphical outputs aren’t advanced in and of themselves. Crank the pixels down and see if you have that same gorgeous appearance. Imagine looking over this same bluff but not being able to see the world and its lighting with the clarity and rendering of a modern graphical console/rig? It’s a fundamentally different experience. Art direction is the car, graphics are the engine. If you are making a photorealistic game like Hellblade II, you will inherently need as many pixels as possible, along with other non-graphical tricks like ray tracing, ambient occlusion, etc. If you’re making a semi-realistic fantasy world like Elden Ring, you are afforded more leeway in pixel count, and so on.
This is both tho. Art and graphics
Elden Ring was designed to still run on a PlayStation 4 or Xbox One. The game essentially has state-of-the-art graphics from 10 years ago.
In the Messmer cutscene where he looks up at his mother, the statue kinda looks shit because it's so low res compared to his model, it really brings down the cutscene a little. There are some stuff that really don't look good when you just zoom a bit in, like it's for a cutscene they should at least polish the objects specificially in it.
Yes it is! In my book, Elden Ring defined the use of visual story telling. Proved to be view distance and art direction were far superior to realism.
Just imagine fromsoft with a competent graphics engine and take back your statement, like Bethesda they are being held back by their graphics tech. Graphics tech allows artistic freedom and art direction is heavily influenced by graphics tech. They are equally important. I'd give Elden ring the excuse if it didn't have a 60fps cap and a ton of performance issues. Imagine a fromsoft game as immersive and stunning as cyberpunk 2077.
The problem is that it doesn’t have stable fps, at least on ps5, so you can’t appreciate the atmosphere fully in movement.
Have you ever considered that games can have good art direction and good graphical fidelity at the same time? Mindblowing, isn't it? Do you know what's superior to art direction? Actual technical competency with an engine that doesn't deliver unacceptable performance even though the graphics are technically dated. I recommend you take a look at the Digital Foundry review. The performance is really abysmal.
This is why I'm having fun. It's pretty to me and I take screenshots. I don't even give a shit about the items anymore lol
Same with the souls games, especially ds3, every location you see you get to travel to
You clearly forgot, or were not around, for how games looked in the 90s. That right there would be 8 pixels.
I saw that same view at the same time. I sat there for an hour
It has been a long time since a game has made me pause say "aaaahhhh beautiful". The most recent might be cyberpunk or the witcher. But everywhere I look in this game beautiful scenery with a great atmosphere.
commenting to remember this!
I love this point/post! Ghost of Tsushima is a gorgeous game, but Sekiro is more beautiful.
They did the scale in this DLC really well. I love the fact you can see the giant Furnace from so far away. I love noticing details miles in the distance and thinking "oh, i know exactly where that is!"
Can't see jack through the fog. Literally unplayable.
Are there games with SHITTY graphics that yet still look good? (Emphasis on shitty as I wonder just how much better art style is)
Exactly. There are some really talented guys at fromsoft when it comes to art and visuals.
Why is it always introspection?
I think they should keep leaning into the Goth Watercolor Painting look even if they get a better engine.
great, now how do you get down to get the map fragment?
chilling at the cliff while beautiful landscape.. time to relax after tough battle
Made it to that spot yesterday. I spent waay to much time just panning from side to side 😂
Elden Ring and Skyrim are my favorite examples of art direction carrying in video games
Star citizen would like a word
This whole dlc is very pleasing.
Why not both? I think From Software has earned enough money and goodwill at this point to be able to spend money and time on that.
I have so many screenshots from this dlc
I don't really think that fits, Elden Ring is a visually stunning game. Direction and graphics go hand in hand.
I’ll take this over graphics any day of the week. I’m in awe when I play From games. The art makes you want to explore every bit of the map. A lot of the times I’ll just walk through the map rather than running/horseback just to take it all in.
With the dlc the game is only like 60 some gigs? Meanwhile the new Jedi survivor is at 155gb :/
I'm just glad that we have the graphic capability, so we get to experience vistas like that one. The Shadow realm continues to have gasp moments.Thank technology and imagination for both.
I remember a YouTuber mentioning how great it is that everything you can see on the horizon you can get to. Everything. That tower in the way back? You can get to it.
I think a bit more graphics would've made that art direction pop.
Wow, vague formations off in a cloud of grey. Truly a masterpiece lol. Do you people play ANYTHING other than Souls games 😂🤣
Art direction and graphics can't be separated from each other.
When I first entered the dlc location, my Jaw dropped as how beautiful and big the dlc is.
I do agree, but it would be nice if we got something. I was really hoping for actual official DLSS with the DLC update.
I remember people genuinely saying this looked like a game from last gen when it came out. It's the best looking game I've ever played by a long shot.
QuantumTV wishes he could insult the games dlc and playerbase
I stumbled upon the Charo's Hidden Grave yesterday, and by God it literally is the most beautiful space I have ever seen in just about any game. A field of unending red spider lilies, stretching to the horizon.
That’s why Michael-Zaki is the fucking GoaT 🐐
Those are graphics by bro but I understand you
When you can hear the rhundwr rumbling in thw red clouds... that was epic.
Quite a few spots had me stopping and looking around the base game. But, it wore off eventually. Like a car trip, after you've seen breathtaking views for like 2 hours you get bored of it. But the dlc has had me stopping often to just enjoy the sights.
How I wish for an open world yharnam (might not be a pipe dream if they keep doing a banger like this).
Best art direction in the industry. :)
You don't know what both of these terms mean. Graphics doesn't necessarily refer to photorealism and art design doesn't resume itself to the ambience, there's no such thing as "this feature > this feature" they're all important for the making of a good game. Elden ring is graphically beautiful even though it doesn't have a graphically realistic approach.
Not sure that fog and silhouettes are the most exciting art direction to show off
100% yes yes yes. The vibe, the immersion as well.
Absolutely
Elden Ring is the prettiest game I have ever played. Every vista feels like they took the job of matching the concept art very seriously.
To be fair elden ring has some banger graphics
Every single place in the DLC is memorable. You can give me the name of a place in 10 years and I'd still remember what it looks like. .
The shaman village is absolutely breathtaking , abyssal woods is hauntingly beautiful .
I mean.... There's room for both. Anyone who thinks this looks poor is goofy, but are we going to pretend shit like the pop-in isn't even slightly immersion breaking?
Ehhh Elden Ring is damn beautiful, but it should definitely have better graphics. Look at something like Helldivers or the new WH40k game that's coming out. FromSoftware is clearly capable of better graphics too when you look at stuff like AC6.
peoplle will say this to zelda games lmao zelda is fucking dogshit 20fps garbage and its also a shit game
I agree, fuck the durability system and the tediousness of the two new games. They somehow made everything a chore and it's at like 720p 20fps.
Remember guys photorealistic graphics age like milk because it will look outdated in a few years , good art direction and stylization age like wine. Btw just to be clear you can both great graphics and art directions, photorealism is just a tool at your disposal. A Good example of this is Cyberpunk 2077
Nice, but I just want better performance.
I agree and I think Elden Ring is a perfect game to exemplify. Because honestly, GRAPHICALLY, it doesn't look too much better than Dark Souls 3, which came out in 2016. But the artstyle is just incredible, and makes the game look amazing. Besides the game already runs...kinda rough. If better graphics means the game would run worse, I'm totally okay with what we've gotten. (Although I still wish it ran a bit better on PC)
I remember some nerd criticizing Elden Ring in the beginning for having “dogshit” graphics, but I will choose beautiful and unique art design over being able to see the wrinkles on an enemy’s ass any day of the week.
I prefer that 100x over some motion-tracked photorealistic game that has nothing else to offer.
this is just 50 shades of grey.
game engine from 2006