A deep dive tech interview with Digital Foundry.
The Coalition are just wizards and God tier devs. Microsoft literally assemble the avengers. Hats off to them.
?? Stop reaching, they did a good job on this one game. But they’re far from God tier developers.....whatever that means.
The Coalition did such an amazing job with this game. The press surrounding the game after it's released has been nothing but great thus far.
Coming from a guy that has a Switch and plays PS4... this game has me considering Xbox bro. Just the advertisement itself looks amazing.
the games good, really good, but its not god tier at all, waaay to many cut corners to get that 60fps https://www.youtube.com/wat...
I have notices this myself. The game lacks punch and physics. It is not game breaking but previous Gears games had more physics and weight that made the gameplay very epic. Chainsawimg enemies in this one feels like a slideshow and doesn’t feel as brutal as before. The sound design also took a hit... it is details like those that made Gears of War so epic to play and with Gears 5 I am not feeling it at all
yeah it deffo lacks the impact that the older games had, rod and co did do a really good job though and its something fans can suggest as an improvement for the next one, im sitting down with my wife tonight to go through the campaign, looking forward to finding out whats going on with the queen etc, its the biggest question i had when finishing the original trilogy,
yeah ive seen some of them, that takes nothing away from what the video shows, everything else has been toned down, its not a slight against the game, just the truth of how they hit 60fps.
Yet it still look awesome, and you’d really have to nitpick to find those “cut corners”.
really? so the indestructible world isnt noticeable? even though it was a pretty big feature in 2 and 3? a feature that could have an effect on game-play and tactics missing, and noticing it is nit picking? i dont think so. the bullet holes and blood that last 3 seconds isnt noticeable? the non reactive or little reactive water and plants is noticeable, so is the bad reflection work, missing lights, pre baked shadows and the now very non reactive world compared to past games, ill say it again though, its a good game, that looks pretty and runs fantastic, but you can clearly see where they sacrificed to get to that 60fps, its not nit picking to point these very obvious things out.
Ah, thanks for sharing that video. The fruit part was hilarious.
Yes more concrete and benches are destructible in Gears 1 and it has some other smaller attention to detail like sand bags and cans reacting more realistic. But Gears 5 also has dynamic weather systems that have their own physics on weapons and cover. Ice and sand stone cover can be broken and in cases where there is a storm it can be used against enemies. Ice stalagmites that can be shot down on enemies. There is still plenty of destruction and physics going on in 5. Not to mention all weapons have their own unique recoil patterns in 5. The tech going into 5 is way beyond what Gears 1 could do. Sure sand bags would spill sand and you can shoot cans over, but was there dynamic snow and sand patterns that are multi layered? Was there 60fps? Was there massive levels with vehicle physics? You can nit pick little details, sure, but Gears 5 is leaps and bounds more technical than Gears 1-4. Things were also more gritty and "beefy" in Gears 1 as well because it was a slower and darker game. Gears has changed quite a bit in tone even in Gears 3, everything was faster and brighter then Gears 1 and 2. Its still visceral, it is still gory, it is still chunky and gruesome...
its still gears man without a doubt, but the things pointed out cant be deflected, the engine is missing features of the older games, not just from one, but from 2 and 3 too, and some of them are big, the added stuff does not take away the missing, i dont think it effects the overall game, but its defiantly noticeable, also doesn't excuse the poor lighting and shadow work in places, or the reflections and other inconsistencies, but cutbacks are expected to reach 60fps, it is what it is.
@Iretrouk Gears 2 and 3 weren’t developed by the Coalition, so you can’t expect everything to be the same to the past games. Also, to maintance 60fps in this graphic-heavy game something obviously have to give.
regardless of who makes it, its missing stuff from the first games in the franchise, use whatever excuse you like to feel better about it, but it changes nothing, it also doesnt excuse the 3 second blood or bullet holes or missing light sources, the now very unbreakable world is a big thing too. ive already said these cuts were to get to 60fps, the games great, but has it flaws, nothing wrong with pointing them out.
"Man I'm really enjoying Gears 5. The gameplay is polished, the new modes are good, the single player tried some new stuff. Overall The Coalition did a really good job-" "EXCUSE ME!!!?!?! CAN I BLOW PART OF THIS BENCH UP LIKE IN GEARS 2?" "... I'm not 100% sure but I don't think so-" "WHAT?!?!? THIS GAME IS TRASH" That was literally the video you posted. Amazing how people who are the most obsessed with technical aspects of the game seem to be console players. Like if this was such an issue why are you settling for second rate hardware lol? Let's also acknowledge it took a meme channel to make people notice this. No one noticed this until a fucking meme channel pointed it out. Obviously people werent bothered by this.
Gears 5 is great. but, God tier devs, really?
Let me guess nd and Santa Monica are God teir their devs to you with their 30fps 🤔
Sonyslave Naughty God is leagues above Coalition. Theres no competition. Lmao. Its like comparing CD Projekt Red to EA
I'd say so *if they can keep the momentum.* I wouldn't yet place them along the likes of Naughty Dog, but they 'could' get there eventually if they keep hitting home runs like Gears 5.
Sonyslave3 Or Santa Monica because they have a better single player experience? It's a shame that you Xbox guys only seem to care about 60fps, you're missing out on some amazing games.
@Sonyslave3 Lol ND should not even be brought up when comparing it to the coalition lol. ND is in another realm.
So if Sony delivers more and better games then what are they to you? Or are you just wearing your blind fanboy glasses?
Lol... Naughty God is league below. You are the blind fanboy
@tucky https://www.metacritic.com/... https://www.metacritic.com/... https://www.metacritic.com/... https://www.metacritic.com/... Naughty Dog > Coalition Blind fanboy
Releases one good game. “oMg! tHeY aRe wIzArDs!”
Realistically speaking to be on God Tier you need to be a creator, Coalition just took an already established franchise and they try some new stuffs but never achieve the Greatness of the first Gears trilogy that define a generation, that goes for 343 also who almost ruin the Halo Universe that Bungie made for them. 60fps & 4K doesn't define a generation, is just possible because of the hardware. To be in God tier is more than reaching technical achievements, if that was the case then games like Order 1886 and Ryse would be on God tier too but they are not, Games like God of War, Zelda Breath of the Wind, The Last of Us or Super Mario Odyssey are.
Base xboxone runs the single player 30 fps, multiplayer is 60 fps with scaled back graphics on base.
By having mostly baked lighting and scaling down physics and physics objects. Not saying that's bad, it's just a fact. Still enjoying it on my PC, but people are really exaggerating how good it is in the technical aspect, it's pretty dang good, but people are really acting like this has broken new ground and is damn near the second coming of jesus, and it aint.
As if most games had a noteworthy physics systems this gen. You literally need double the power to run the same exact game at 60 fps vs 30 fps so yes, Gears 5 with its level of graphical fidelity + 60 fps broke new ground for console gaming and for those that like to talk about PS4 games, the PS4 Pro wouldn't be able to run the X1X version without making compromises. What The Coalition achieved with this game is an impressive tech feat so credit where credit is due.
It's not that much if an impressive tech feat though when there's barely any display of physics at all and many visible sacrifices were made to get it to run at 4K(dynamic btw not native) 60fps. And you're right "most games" did not have noteworthy physics, but this is supposed to be one of MSs flagship titles, it's supposed to be better than "most titles" and if it isn't, than it doesn't deserve THAT much credit. Overall it looks pretty dang good, but there are tons of small things that are very lacking (skin shades look a bit plasticky l, water is just flat plain with terrible reactions, plant life is static and often isn't even animated, baked shadows has some inaccuracies, decals like blood and bullet holes disappear after like 3 secs as does debris, etc) that add up to an experience that just feels "pretty good". like I said, it's not bad and I'm still enjoying it but it's nowhere near as good as people are raving about.
both forza 7 and gt sport have hit the same fake 4k with 60fps, with much more physics and graphical effects going on.... jus sayin
Well even the X drops frames so of course with the ps4pro being almost 2 tf weaker wouldnt run it the same. There is nothing wizard like about using your power on framerate and resolution over other things. This is just a case of a developer using their power to target 4k60 and less on physics and the small stuff.
Scaling down physics? Dynamic weather storms that alter weaponry, cover systems, and vehicle physics. Realistic snow and sand physics that have multi layered effects. Sprawling open levels with vehicle physics. Being able to shoot ice on the lakes and drop enemies through it. Shoot down ice stalagmites to take out enemies... yeah some superficial things like extra concrete doesnt break or sand pour out of bags, but there is so much more going on in 5 as well as hitting 60fps during all this. As for baked lighting, sure, not sure what's wrong with that though since there isnt a dynamic day and night cycle. The lighting and shadow work is still gorgeous.
Most of what you've listed aren't even physics, and you listed vehicle physics twice. Yes I've seen the ice and stalagmites, but they are pre made destruction animations, only physics are a small percentage of the ice bits that roll around but most just stick to whatever surface they hit and don't move more like a simple particle system(this was even said by the dev's themselves and commented on by digital foundry coined as "Swift Destruction") guns being affected by weather is a parameter not physics, Vehicle physics sure I'll give you that, but it's far from complex, we've had vehicle physics affected by weather since the PS2/Xbox may be even before. And again READ MY COMMENT I literally say there's nothing wrong with that, they prioritized framerate first , and resolution a close second. In order to do that some sacrifices have to be made,and I'm fine with that. What bothers me is people losing there God damn minds pole riding the claim that it's somehow the new peak of gaming graphical technology, and it really isn't, but it's still damn good, just not THAT good.
Physics? FFS a Wii U game, BoTW, has a physics engine and a level of interactivity between the player and the objects in the world that puts any PS4 or X1 exclusive to shame wich btw is something that I find absolutely hilarious. As for sacrifices, every console game makes sacrifices and cuts corners in order to achieve their level of graphical fidelity. For example the vast majority make the sacrilege of sacrificing 30 fps wich in terms of hardware power represents a much bigger sacrifice than having static plant life or not having real time shadows. Running a game at 60 fps vs 30 fps is literally double the amount of hardware power and when you take that in account then yes, Gears 5 is an impressive tech feat... for console gaming.
So sacrificing framerate for graphics and physics is no technical feat, but sacrificing physics and graphics for framerate is? Also again most of you seem to be coming at me like I'm saying it's bad, I'm not saying that, I'm just saying I don't agree with the claim that it's "the best looking game ever" or "the new technological standard for AAA games" don't see how it can be when there's so many obvious visible sacrifices to accomplish it. Like its above average for sure, but it's not setting a new standard imo besides in its dedication to maintaining its framerate and higher res. BUT I STILL LIKE IT! Jesus people here act like you can't criticize a game unless you hate it.
"So sacrificing framerate for graphics and physics is no technical feat, but sacrificing physics and graphics for framerate is" What part of "literally double the amount of power" don't you understand? Physics? I just told you that a Wii U game shits from a great height on any PS4 or X1 exclusive in terms of physics and interactivity. Tech wise there's nothing special or noteworthy about what PS4 and X1 exclusives are doing in terms of physics. Hell a game that was released 12 years, Crysis, has a physics engine that puts most current gen games to shame. Ok, you don't agree that it is a technical standard for console gaming. Then surely you'll be able to point out other console games with this level of graphical fidelity running at 60 fps right? I'll be waiting.
Devil may cry V, Forza motorsport 7, grand turismo sport, residential evil 2, Battlefield 1, DOOM, Hitman, Wolfenstein 2
https://media3.giphy.com/me... Aside from BF1 none of those games matches the graphical fidelity of Gears 5 and maintains a steady 60 FPS unless you're talking about PC versions however BF1 reaches 4k on the X1X through checkeboarding while Gears is able to reach native 4k even if it has dynamic resolution.
In your opinion, I think DMCV looks better in nearly every aspect, better character models with better shaders for skin, better particle effects, better lighting (hell gears 5 doesn't even have self shadowing half the time)more use of physics, better quality physics, and far more action on screen while still playing smooth. But I'm done with this convo, you guys are clearly too bias for this subject, peace!
This https://www.youtube.com/wat... comparable with this https://www.youtube.com/wat... ? Oh my... and mind you that's the PC version of DMC5 with everything on max vs Gears running on the X1X. Anyway it's just not my opinion. It's also Eurogamer's opinion "Gears 5: the tech showcase that sets new standards for Xbox One" https://www.eurogamer.net/a... wich to me is a sign that my current lenses are still good to go.
I praise the game wittingly or unwittingly but, it is funny how there was no money allotted to PC gamers like you in context of a much better version.
I mean since stupid Microsoft is making this big PC push with all the pr statements about the PC crowd. Makes me angry that you have to settle for basically the same thing.
Would love to see 60fps become more common next gen.
Can wait to see what their new IP is going to look like.
I like how a game that got an 86 on metacritic is Xbox's best game XD
Who say it is the best? Care to show me?
Isn't it on PC as well?
Why do the same old commenters say the same tired old lines Everytime Xbox gets a game, no matter if it is absolutely stellar like gears 5, or not, like crackdown? Do they not realize how disingenuous they sound? FUN FACT: I've played gears 5 on x1x, and it's the best looking game I've played this gen on both platforms. I've played god of war, Ive played Spiderman, I've played hzd, and all are beautiful in their own right. But gears 5 is better looking. AND it plays at 60fps!? It should look better ofc, because of the power disparity between the consoles and the time between releases. But to say it isn't is laughable. Another FUN FACT: JUST BECAUSE I LOVE GEARS DOESN'T MEAN I DONT LOVE/LIKE ANY OTHER GAME ON ANY OTHER PLATFORM. THAT WOULD BE RIDICULOUS.
I am playing it on PC and the game does look amazing, but it is not the best graphics like some are saying and exaggerating. It looks like any UE game with more tech. Nothing groundbreaking... you know what make games look better? Arts styles, and with Unreal engine if you see one game you’ve seen them all. But, Gears 5 still an achievement for keeping the FPS solid, especially how great they ported the PC version. Horizon ZD on Pro still holds up and Death Stranding is looking just as good and they are both open worlds without the power of the X
“and with Unreal engine if you see one game you’ve seen them all. ” I did not know that Days gone, Fortnite, rocket league and Gears 5 are all the same art style and look the same. Crazy
I'd say that's fair - and this game definitely doesn't have the best graphics. The way The Coalition decided to use their resources was brilliant though and I think that's what Digital Foundry any many are trying to say. They have a high frame rate game with good resolutions - the max being 4K. The graphics are great when you consider the whole package and who doesn't love 60fps? What the Coalition has managed to do is hit a very happy medium.
Well...for one, throwing in a metric of consideration being frame rate, as opposed to just relying on if it's the best looking kind of makes the argument falter. If you want to say it's the best looking game at 60fps, then that's a completely different matter of the best looking game. Second, best looking is subjective, and while there are quantifiable measures for technical achievement when it comes to graphics, no one is actually talking about those metrics, and if they were, or even knew how to measure those metrics, which DF does yet for some reason doesn't go into for comparisons sake, gow5 doesn't actually come out on top...at leadt by metrics I would use. I think gears5 certainly can be in the running for being one of the best looking games this gen, and overall, the devs put together a great package. They sacrificed some things to get to 60fps, but they arent things I would nitpick in the bigger picture. I also wouldn't hold it against them for a general review of the graphics quality. I may bring them up in a very technical discussion, but probably not around here because people around here cant have those kinds of discussions without it becoming a console war race to the bottom
They cut alot of corners to get 60fps and dynamic 4k. It still looks good though.
Everyone here here arguing about which console and dev is better and I'm just sitting here thinking: A strong woman in the lead (by the looks of things, idk never played the games) and I've not seen any pro-articles about it, or comments saying it's forced/pandering. Meaning that this has been done right. People don't have a problem with female protagonists at all if it's not shoved in their faces about how brave and different it is.
The game does look amazing and plays great. I'm a huge gears fan and this is steps above #4.
More devs need to be able to create beautiful games and target 60fps too. 60fps really needs to be the new standard.
The HDR is great in gears 5 on par with HZD
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.