The problem has been so many uploaded pictures with compressed files the uncompressed ones for ps4 look great and for pc it will be a tad better for the people with a high end gamer pc.

No links!

The requirements are similar to Witcher but that game is extreamly simplistic, good and pretty but it is extreamly basic compared to even FO 3. The NPC's were generic and the looting was basic.

Requirements are that high because of Volumetric Lighting and Shadows.

That is your big graphics upgrade, eats the most FPS if you try to ramp a feature like that up, its why there is a major difference between this game and Skyrim/Fo3/FNV those previous titles still offloaded shadowing to the CPU. More on lighting big difference here see previous titles placed at most 3 placed light sources, an Ambient Light, and maybe 1 up too at most 3 but rarely Shadow Casting Light sources.

Volumetric works entirely different from that you can see that the shadows in the leaked footage are leagues better in Fo4 which although a lot of people are quick to overlook these actually cost a lot in computer resources to render in real time. Closest example of this your going to see in a Beth game is to remove its shadows altogether in favor of ENB effects with post processing.

Anyway its a big step forward but its easy to not notice unless you have had to live with aweful shadow renders in all of your games for a long while.

Other than that the rest is pretty much wet surfaces and I believe your clothes get moist after being in water/rain, that isn't light on your resource pool either, nor will the new weathers most likely.

I think the biggest critics are going to be heavy mod user's, as they have been spoiled with graphics modifications that go way above and beyond what modern games can even realistically offer for visuals. I know this cause I have effectively modded my Skyrim above and beyond what a non-modded Witcher 3 installation could expect eye-candy wise. Best reason to upgrade hardware isn't game specifications its the demand of after market modifications for visuals and yes these files are quite stunning.

Still looking forward to the game irregardless of visuals not beating out what people put out in modifications, kinda crazy to assume a company could afford to do so in a realistic since. All of the work has to be directed, paid, and all kinds of documentation red tape yada yada, but when its people that are not under company time doing it there is most certainly an amount of freedom that a big company cant really compete with.

Like I've said, I am very critical of this game for a multitude of reasons, but graphics quality is not one of them. But then again, I really don't want clear, precise or cutting edge. I prefer a washed out look with quality, custom assets that give the game world real texture and grit. It feels and graphically looks Fallout-ish.

I'll have to wait and see the animations on my own system to judge those honestly, but to me they're serviceable.

I have to say again though, sound effects (one of my personal pet peeves with FO3 and NV) has taken a massive leap forward. Man, these weapons (including energy weapons) sound like no $#!+ firearms now.

No complaints...but some mechanical content from New Vegas that I wanted and have it taken to the next level, but instead was apparently cut out...that's another story.

I wasn't aware of the recent leak footage and even though I haven't seen them because they have been taken off, boy, the comments on the net about the visuals are BRUTAL. Jeez, I felt sorry for Beth and wanted to defend them but I don't want to join a site just for that. But hey, Beth eventually is going to laugh all the way to the bank and FO4(pc version)will eventually mature visually and in other areas as usual. If I had to choose between a great looking game with no or partial modding support and a mediocre looking game with fantastic modding support, I'd choose the latter any day.

We should not be surprised that the game looks the way it does. After all Skyrim had all the same issues that we are seeing here. Poor animation, lip syncing and AI. This game is just a continuation of the way that Beth builds a game. The low texture detail is probably an indication of the direction of the industry. Open world games now require so much processing power that something has to give if they want to maintain frame rate and no screen tearing. Many games are going this direction with their art.

Despite this I still think the game looks and feels fantastic. Why? Because the role play elements, world building, number of weapons/upgrading, combat and audio is superb.

Example. The latest video in the train tunnel. The ghouls look very ordinary but the shooting game play absolutely rocks!

Did you see the E3 pic compared to the gameplay leak coming outta the vault and looking at the town?!?!? Wtf is that [censored]. Sorry B-soft please tell me it's that way simply cause you kept day 1 patched locked? Dude if not, it's basically playing PS3 crap.

Needing to stop every 35 second while the game loads the next area you were walking too. Skyrim was great but damn.

Yeah, I've been to certain sites and forums when trying to get a better understanding of this supposed graphics fiasco. And honestly, it's just coming from the same nitpicking crowd of people who are overly fanatic about a game's visuals to the smallest detail. Which I would consider a minority over the people who care very little about graphics and just want to play the game, like most people.

Me personally, I'm in the latter. The visuals of a game have always been my last concern to affect, if at all, my overall enjoyment of the game itself. If someone cares that much about the graphics go play a game like The Order 1886 and see how far those spectacular visuals get you.

And even then, as for Fallout 4's graphics, they look perfectly fine to me and unquestionably better than previous Bethesda games. But I'm not someone that demands a whole lot from a game's visuals anyway.

Well, 2011 graphics would be Skyrim, and this game looks way better than Skyrim graphics.

Have people forgotten what FO 3 looked like? Because it looks leaps and bounds better than that.

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/scale_super/gamespot/images/2008/300/reviews/913934-939933_20081027_002.jpg

http://www.digital-digest.com/blog/DVDGuy/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/fallout3_screenshot.png

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/1/1e/Dogmeat_FO3.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120310172022

Why would anyone expect a graphical milestone from TES or FO titles made by Bethesda, if the past showed they never were milestones? And before you claim it, Oblivion also wasn't a milestone by that time. It's just how one of the forum users said, Todd Howard is just an expert in selling you new graphical features, that have been achieved long ago by other games.

I never played TES and FO because of the graphics. I was always interested in the immersive appearance, the coherence of the world, and the abundant number of gameplay functions.

Sorry, but the game is no better than Skyrim in graphics or animation. Go check out the metro tunnel game play. Shocking texture and very bad animation during the forced dialogue system. You will see for yourself shortly. What the game does have is fantastic combat, upgrading, world building system and audio, but not graphics, animation or AI. They are as bad as people are saying.

I've seen some leak pics and I don't understand why people are angry about the visuals. The ones I saw looked beautiful. The clothing of the pc with its well defined wrinkles; the textures of the weapons like metal parts shining correctly with the lighting; the wet puddles on the ground; the mysterious atmospheric fog in one area; and the nights looks just perfect - not too bright nor too obnoxiously dark. There was a tunnel scene that looked very atmospheric with correct lighting and penumbra. And if I'm not mistaken, FO4 has a "wet" shader that makes the ground wet. If that is true, it would be the first Beth game to have it.

Dang, people are freaking unreasonable. It has beautiful graphics and a step forward from Skyrim.

Sure looks a lot better than Skyrim to me, and I'm pretty critical of BGS. I can't comment on animations or AI, because I am not going to watch any leaked videos.

Agreed. If anything this will be the best looking FO game.

Not sure who this is directed at. I am not being unreasonable, just presenting my opinion on what I see.

I love the character generation, the massive number of weapons and upgrading, the multi level design, the insane combat and the audio that absolutely nails it.

But the low resolution texture is a step backwards for Beth and the animation during dialogue is oh so bad.

Heck, even Mass Effect did that better in 2007.

No my friend, it wasn't directed at you really. But for everyone here. Granted, the graphics in those pics aren't a huge step forward from Skyrim like it was from Morrowind to Oblivion and Oblivion to Skyrim, but the "step forward" is more in the nuance. As for the texture quality, one will know for certain when we dissect the game. I remember Skyrim having a lot of 512x512 textures and I know because I opened the texture data files. Hopefully, if indeed FO4 has a lot of low-res textures, Beth comes up with a HD texture pack even though us pc players really don't need it because of the modders.

For me video games are like cake. The core elements (being gameplay, story, characters, and customization) are the delectably rich and moist cake itself. The graphics are the icing and decorations. It can look like [censored] but if it's still delicious and I want seconds then its a good cake.

Regarding the graphics and animations. VS a modern day release, they're not great... Sub-par, almost, muddy, and plastic looking with awkward movements and janky animations... However, compared to Fallout 3, they're a /cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cbade88bede8f8fdf0a0a2a5ac rocket ship ride away in terms of improvements. Just remember Fallout 3. That almost blocky deathclaw that would run towards you in a straight line with that awkward gate of his, do his leap attack, glitch, float in the air slightly, and you would merely slide backwards across the ground without chaning stance whatsoever... Now, imagine that same deathclaw, with graphics twice as good, realistically bobbing and weaving as he runs towards you, dirt being flung into the air as he lowers himself into a back swing that knocks you off of your feet, and you recoil as you try to get back up. That's what I'm seeing while playing. Now, VS a modern day triple A graphics /cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83f4ebc3f1e6 game, they're not great, but VS previous BGS games, they're absolute bounds ahead...

Remember how a gun is draw in FO3? Remember how it would sit static as you ran and the such? Remember the horrible animations, and the way your character porly handled weapons, and how they would always glitch out? Now imagine smooth, natural looking animations and transitions, with the weapon bobbing as you moved, channging stance as you sprinted, recoiling when you fire it like a proper firearm, instead of just shaking in place like in FO3. Remember how in FO3, while strafing left or right, or character would often be doing the forward jogging animation because there were basic, limited animations? In FO4, think like Skyrim, but improved. As you strafe, your body turns, your torso can remain straight as your hips and legs sway and your arms stretch with a melee weapon. It's very nice to look at, and you're actually able to play the game in third person. It's not like FO3 at all.

yeah, I have run into a such complainer myself, one of his gripes was poor lip syncing. It is a game, while it would be possible to get lip syncing epicly right by hiring deaf people to check the work, if they can read the lines from the lips of the characters, then you got it right. I wont be looking at the lips of the characters.

They may not be as good as they could be but I like how Bethesda is less focused on making it graphically beautiful than they are in actually creating a great game. Personally, I like the way they look. I actually still play Fallout 3 with its base graphics, only using a minor SweetFX tweak to make the textures a bit sharper. Honestly, Bethesda's games have an amazing charm to them, and part of that charm is the graphical style.

Looks like skyrim with a sheen on some models.

HOWEVER, if the game is as good as morrowind or better it can look like pong for all i care. I hope this is Bethesda's best game ever , then and only then will these 2011 gfx be excused.

It's sad that people claiming Witcher 3 as standard for modern games... Witcher 3 is not the standard for modern graphic. Witcher 3 is the game with the best graphic up to date. It would be like saying in your school the one guy with the best marks would be the standard... or like Obama is the Standard for every American.

The graphics might be atmospheric but it doesn't look good compared to any recent triple A game. If you've played any recent open world games, like GTA 5 or Witcher 3, you are treated to an almost infinite view distance, 2k textures, bloom lighting effects, high quality water ripples, etc. These games also feature seamless interiors (without loading screens) and dynamic weather conditions where rain actually stops beneath roofs, things that never worked in any Bethesda game.

The thing is, it's almost 2016 and FO4 is stuck on the same (upgraded) engine as Oblivion, using a grid rendering system and probably still having loading screen segmented interiors. This is reflected in the screenshosts, low quality textures, lack of ambiant occlusion and also a lack of busy environments, it seems the engine still struggles to put over a dozen dynamic NPCs in a single cell.

Now, this does not mean the game will be bad or look bad. But if you're looking at it objectively, you can't really say these graphics are top quality or even high quality for 2015.

The stakes are higher and the bar has been raised, not by Bethesda, but by the competition and that's a fact you can't deny.

Lol, I think you're barking the wrong tree my friend. In fact I'm one of the few people in these forums who is defending TW3 graphics among other things because the TW3 is like a dirty word in these forums. People are saying that TW3 has average graphics, or that Skyrim beats TW3 in graphics. Too bad you weren't there with me to defend TW3. ^^

But anyways, don't forget I wasn't saying that FO4 has cutting edge graphics like other games now, I was talking about graphics within all of the Beth games.

I think it looks good enough. The animations are way better, for the most part as well. Still for the quite steep requirements it is a bit sub-par. I mean yes it is open-world, the engine has to work harder, but then the optimization is not done properly (or it is like Battlefront, which had really steep requirements, but nevertheless ran on Ultra with my now rather average rig).

Still have you guys seen some of the fights Dogmeat was involved in and in particular the Behemoth fight? While the Muties generally move better, Dogmeat and the Behemoth run around like they are on rollerskates as soon as they move faster. Quite strange and it really caught my eye because the rest looked decent.

Why not find something better to complain about?

Like the weather, radroaches or old cheese?

"there's no shadows"

"that wall looks like plastic"

"it's one week until 10th of november!"