this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
591 points (95.4% liked)

Games

16822 readers
1116 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] icesentry@lemmy.ca 36 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Elden Ring had great art direction, but I wouldn't say it had great graphics.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It had great graphics, and its art direction elevated the graphics. It looks equally as good as any other game that released the same year.

Elden Ring certainly is a long leap from King's Field compared to other games when that launched. For as fun as King's Field was, its graphics were bad, even for the time.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 33 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

It looks equally as good as any other game that released the same year.

Elden Ring is pretty, but this simply isn't true.

When it comes to applying advanced modeling and rendering tech, fromsoft are amateurs.

Most famously, they have no clue what they are doing with shell texturing.

And the reason Elden Ring was a stuttery mess at launch on windows, was that they couldn't figure out that doing directx shader compilation on the fly without caching, is a terrible, terrible idea.

[–] leavemealone@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I totally agree with you, while Elden ring looks very nice, it is far from state of the art graphics, demons Souls PS5 show what it should look like if it went that way. I am happy they didn't and instead focus on gameplay and game zones. I really think a lot of game producers go for the extra graphical fidelity instead of focusing on game contents. Dragons dogma 2 recently is stunning production wise, but as much as I adore the game, I wish they went the Elden ring road and had a huge world with tons of stuff to do.

[–] KuraiWolfGaming@pawb.social 3 points 6 months ago

Certainly looks better than the average indie game. And before you come at me for saying that.

Indie is often touted as "better than AAA". But in order for that to be the case, they need to at least offer something similar first. But most indie games are so far removed from even the average AAA game, that its basically apples and oranges.

AA, or mid-tier, is really where its at. Some of the best games in recent years have all been from the AA space. Even ones that launched rough like Elden Ring and Cyberpunk.

They are still leagues above the average indie game that most people here and "the site that shall not be named" tend to list off as their favourites.

So yes, Elden Ring indeed does have great graphics. Not the most cutting edge, but at least it looks like it belongs in the same generation as its competitors.