Not really, Witcher 3's map total is 20% larger then Skyrim. Its not that much bigger.

Whats more, most of the Witcher's gameworld is static unmovable objects, which means they can spend more GPU and CPU power on pure graphics, whereas any house in a Bethesda game can have hundreds of physics enabled objects, giving them less CPU and GPU power to use on pure graphics.

I find it sad we are in 2015 and people still don't understand this level of basic stuff about games.

5 star post.

Middle group gets dismissed as trolls for having legitimate concerns way too much, I have no idea how some people are so okay with settling with mediocrity, especially in those facial animations. We love the game and series as much as everyone else but we also want the games to be as good as they can be so that includes calling out the problems when we see them so they can hopefully fix them and at the end of the day have a better game overall.

dude u should go back to Witcher and look the map again, u get lie alot on the Witcher, Most of the map are full with nothing, NPC are concentrate near the settlement, and then u have huge part of the map with nothing, yeah it look nice bc u see tree and rocks and whatever, but there is nothing, is worst on maps like Skellege, u have sooo much water that the the actual play map is really small.

Hmm I do not understand the fuzz, really. The game could look better, and I myself am torn whether I find them a sufficient upgrade from skyrim, which looked good enough in 2011. What I saw from Fallout 4 concering graphics pondered from photorealistic (red rocket station) to papier-machée (concord houses). Animations are the same, I ahev seen Dogmeat and a Behemoth on roller skates and quite decent super mutants and raiders.

All in all it is alright, I guess, but will pass final judgement on wednesday.

Edit: Bethesda really was about Graphics before Morrowind and Oblivion were top-notch at their time.

Exactly It's like some people just worship bethesda and don't think for themselves like smart customers.
Maybe they want Beth to have horribe animations and an engine that is 13 years old, but I don't.
It's like they think eveything beth does is perfect, just like backwards flying dragons !

I agree. I have been playing gamesas games going back to a time before many people on this forum were born. Daggerfall used 2D sprites. No matter what direction you approached them you were always looking at their front side... I still loved the game and fully appreciated the depth of the RPG experience despite the relatively crude graphics.

So, fast forward to today. It doesn't make me a hater to worry a little about facial animations, which to me at least are jarring. I'm still likely going to love the game. And by the way, even if I ended up hating FO4, who cares? It's a game. Not your family member. Folks should not get so worked up over a corporation's product. Remember, we're talking about a product, and a digital one at that. It's an entertainment made to create profit for a corporation. If someone hates a video game, it doesn't reflect much of anything on you, the person who loves the video game. It means absolutely nothing.

I want to see people complaining about mods before the game is even released ehehehehe.

I'm with you OP.
The graphics could have stayed the same. Hell they could have released it on last gen, and it wouldn't be a detractor for me. I have about the same amount of time in the last two games, but reversed.
That said, the graphics are better than last gen.
People who play PC and are complaining about graphics need to remember that the only footage we have seen is console.
Maybe look at the console pre-release footage for Skyrim for comparison, as opposed to comparing late cycle (modded) Skyrim for PC to F4 console footage.

Any rate, people can hate on the graphics all they want. No skin off of my nose.

I just want to point out that the arguments that Bethesda never cared about graphics is total nonsense. Morrowind and Oblivion, for the time they were released had great graphics. NPC faces for Oblivion were strange, but everything else was great.

So you consider yourself a "true fan" of Fallout or Bethesda? I'm guessing it's the former because a true fan of Beth would have seen all of the making of's and would probably have a greater understanding of how the engine is designed largely around moddability. There is a reason why no other developer can match the level that Beth has achieved and that is because it's a 10 year multi-billion dollar task to create such an engine from scratch. It is entirely possible that Beth is on this path as we speak but they haven't had the resources to under take such a venture for more than 4 years so if they are making a new engine from scratch then we got TES 6 for sure and possibly FO5 left on this one before the new one is ready for primetime.

Graphics are really only important to me when they allow good art design. Fallout 4 may not have the craziest texture resolutions or draw distance of releases in this console generation, but it has some of the best art Ive seen.

Not sure if it will beat Fallout 3 for my favourite overall art, but I think people put too much emphasis on raw graphical power instead of harnessing that power towards more interesting and unique ends than photo realism.

well yeah ofcurse they care, but they never compete for the top of graphic, the same year Oblivion came out was the year of Gear of War. So oblivion wasnt the best on graphics back then.

Not really.

Missing people who thinks there is things more important to improve before graphics.

It's moddable, and it's great but once you start putting a lot of mods in you start to realize some things, don't know if you ever used TES V EDIT but I have and files from bethesda contain dirty records which can hurt stability of the game strangely.
I want you to realize something, not everything people say is true, take a look at a youtube video called "spears impossible to implement due to engine limitations" and tell lies tell me sweet little lies lol (you'll get that once you watch the video).

And I watched the making ofs, my personal favorite moment of all of them was when Todd was talking about Skyrim's main theme, how it came to be to be more exact.

But I also want to note that this engine is 13 years old and It's problems became obvious when skyrim had problems on the ps3 and some Obsidian developer that worked on F:NV talked about them.

One small tiny thing annoys me personally, when you hotkey a weapon in morrowind and mid combat quickly select it the game might freeze for half a second, so is the case for oblivion, both new fallouts, and skyrim. I'm personally worried about save bloating too, some guys save on ps3 rose to over 200MB once, that is not normal.....

That being said the game is not out yet and we'll see how it turns out, if i can squeeze out 60fps with my 670 I'll be happy enough I supposse.

No, the problem is that the highlighted things are subjective. They're things that you think. I don't even know what "looks sub 2012" is supposed to mean, because I'm not such a total graphics snob that I've carefully boxed up each type of graphics effects and each quantity of polygons/texture sizes into "years".

I look at Witcher 3, and think that it looks great. (I still don't buy it, because I can't stand Geralt and am not a fan of the combat system). I look at GTA 5 and think that it looks great. (Don't buy it, not in to driving or playing criminal scum). I look at FO4 - at least the bits I've seen - and think it looks great.

I don't place them in competition to each other, I don't say that one is "bad" or "substandard" because it doesn't have the same shaders/polygons/sylistic flourishes/stubble.

This whole "you don't meet MY (subjective) standard of what Good Graphics are, therefore your game is lousy/you should be ashamed/you're losing some competition" thing just comes across as so stupid and shallow. Internet Tough Guys? looking at pictures of models and saying "meh, not good enough. wouldn't **** her". /eyeroll

u have 0 clue of what a game of 2012 look like, and u are one of the many that got fool around by the Witcher cleaver use of labyrinthine design. Is more love how u go crazy about Witcher 3 but dude be real and look a little around u. That game is made to lie to u.

F4 graphics are what they need to be for a 2015 open world game that allow u to move everything around.

And Witcher 3 graphics are good for a story driver multi region game.

wait... where does Witcher 3 look "leagues better" than FO4?

the strength of Witcher is in the character models and faces, which is a weakness of Bethesdas games... but the rest is roughly the same?!

Fallout has better lighting, a better and more realistic sky... the textures will be roughly the same

having played Witcher 3 and seeing the screenshots from Fallout, there is really not that much difference?

not to forget how terrible the performance of Witcher 3 was...

the game had it's strengths in its story, but the whole technical part of it, wasn't really that special

One question if you don't mind, did you play on console or on pc ?

PC

and all the Fallout videos, with their outdated textures, are console videos, as far as I know

the few PC screenshots that were leaked, looked all great in my opinion

On this I couldn't disagree more. The last patch for Skyrim completely broke lip syncing in the game, and once you notice it you just can't unsee it. Someone made a cake anology upthread; this is like looking at most beautiful cake you can imagine, so nice that you don't want to cut it, and then seeing a cockroach walk across it when you finally do pick up the knife.

Then I will say, that it is very demanding, but not terrible, and the textures are very good, same goes for the rest of the world, however its tough if you want to compare these games considering that the witcher doesn't offer half oft the interaction that bethesda games offer you.

One thought creeped into my mind, at first I thought that they're not relasing more footage because they don't want to spoil anything for us.
Maybe they're not relasing footage because the game is possibly a litte underwhelming ?

TW3's environments, atmosphere, etc are better then FO4 so far that I've seen. Also if you had terrible performance with TW3 it was either your PC or you trying to play the game with settings beyond what your PC could handle.

I was pretty salty at Witcher 3's performance because it didn't scale well on Kepler cards ^^

I had 40fps on Ultra and no matter how far I went down, it always stayed below 60...

Witcher 3 is so far the only game, that wasn't able to reach 60fps, while all other games as GTA5 are able to run at very high at 60+

there were tons of complaints on Nvidia forums about this Kepler issue and it really ruined the game for me :/

the graphics itself look really good, but so do the Fallout 4 videos in my opinion

I actually care more about having 60fps, than having great graphics to be honest

and it's actually hard to have an 'underwhelming' gameplay in my opinion ^^

it's a Fallout after all... even if it would be another F3, New Vegas game in the same engine, it would still be an amazing game and would still beat most of the other games for me

they have already shown a lot at E3 and I don't really want to see more quests or locations, before having played it myself :/

I tell you to watch the making of vids for Morrowind on and you tell me to watch those stupid hater vids that use out of context bytes to make fun of Beth.

I started playing Beth games in 2002 w/MW and have been closely following development and modding thier games since 2005. I am more than familiar with what is under the hood. Beth never told us any straight up lies and that is the truth. During OB's dev cycle they did however have to remove nearly half the game in order to get it working properly on all platforms but they learned from that mistake and have yet to repeat it.

Nah, they're building tension and pvssyr...and are having to do very little (all the while saving tons of marketing dollars) in order to get everyone rabid about it. No such thing as bad press anymore...and I have to say very few people that will buy this game will have read anything about it, or seen anything about "leaks" on Reddit, or gamesas Forums for that matter.

They've said they were going to market differently. You're looking at it. It's probably more about confidence in their products, based on past performance of those products, than anything.