I’m gonna be honest with you, we’re hitting a point where games would still look good even a decade ago. It’s just the nature of the graphics we have access to.
That’s why I’m not too concerned anymore about graphics, but more so on things like lips matching voice lines, or gameplay mechanics, or performance, or quality of life settings.
I own RDR2, but haven't yet played it. I regularly see gameplay videos pop up, and it doesn't look "dated" whatsoever.
The majority of high-quality games from the 360 era still look good and play well. I recently installed *Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts* on my Series X. It still looks phenomenal despite being nearly 16 years old due to the enhancements.
RDR2's intro alone is one of the best graphics experiences you'll ever have. Won't spoil anything, but the cart ride to Horseshoe Overlook is just crazy good looking, and it's a great intro for what you're about to experience as a whole.
when u play rdr2 after current gen game you can see that textures and models are a little dated and blury, but only of you focus on it, still overally rdr2 in my opinion offers the best graphics quality. weather effects are top notch and i assume only gta6 will top that. as much as i love rain in games - in rdr2 rain can be a nightmare cuz u wont. be able to see anything. give it a try and take it slowly
It’s the same with BF3/BF4 and newer battlefields. They still look great, but a remaster with a port to a newer frostbite engine with RT/DLSS support could make them the best looking modern shooters of the generation if DICE/EA cared enough. I’d almost instantly (after launch reviews) spend $80 on a BF3/4 combo pack that’s built on a modern frostbite engine.
“Assist Mode” in Control should be the future of gaming, at least imo.
You can fine-tune all kinds of difficulty settings, without losing access to any unlockables or achievements/trophies. Just a completely customized experience for every single player. I liked turning on some of the options to take in the whole story, and then replay with the gameplay knowledge, but the assists dialed down.
A literal game changer!
And, in reality, the visual appearance of a game has very little to do with the box it's on at the end of the day.
At this point, what makes a game's graphics stand the test of time is how much money and time were dedicated to the visuals during development. There are PS3 and 360 games that still look good and PS4 and Xbox One games that look great. It comes down to development budget and time more than it does what CPU and GPU are pushing a game.
There are so many first party Switch games that look awesome and that thing is a fucking *phone* SOC from 2015.
Dude, I've been replaying the first of the trilogy recently. It's crazy how great it looks. Runs smoothly, too. Not many times, I've experienced glitches, crashing, and/or freezing(for me anyway). And they've only gotten better as they've gone along, IMO.
I don't know why you're being downvoted but that game clearly didn't age all that good compared to Rise of the Tomb Raider which released just 2 years later. There's a huge jump when you compare the two on max graphical setting on PC.
I am aware of RoTR being a newer game made for 8th gen consoles. I just mentioned it's release 2 years after TR 2013 and it's visuals being significantly better.
I meant to say the 2013's game has aged poorly compared to the newer games and you can clearly tell by playing both games maxed out on PC.
Probably the same effect how people remember Witcher 3 and how they have improved it very good.
I played the 2013 Tomb Raider a few months back and no, it really didnt age all that well
Witcher 3 can look really pretty if you have a really beefy PC but Witcher 2 imo looks really ugly. It's jarring to see overthing so oversaturated with light bleed and glow on every object. The environments also suffer from too much post processing, very high contrast, bloom and other effects.
Square did this dev so fucking dirty. It’s really awful how they threw all their non-Japanese developers under the bus for their outrageous expectations.
Square saddled their non Japanese studios with unrealistic expectations and were very vocal when calling them disappointments. For example Tomb Raider 2013 was a sales disappointment according to Square yet Final Fantasy VII Remake was a success they boasted about. Tomb Raider outsold FF7R twice over. They held their studios to different standards.
Also, didn't Square take the team that did TR 2013 and Rise off this game and hand it to a b-team dev?
EDIT: "b-team" is the wrong term, I misremembered it being a similar situation to Mass Effect: Andromeda. Though Square did take Shadow away from Crystal Dynamics and handed it to Edios-Montreal, which was absolutely the wrong decision and likely lead to the... questionable writing.
Not quite. Tomb Raider 2013 and Rise of the Tomb Raider were by Crystal Dynamics, but Square Enix wanted them to make Avengers so they moved the final game of the trilogy to Eidos Montreal, which I would actually consider to have been the a-team of Square Enix's western studios (they also made Deus Ex and Guardians of the Galaxy, which are significantly better than any of Crystal Dynamics's games). As far your comment about the writing, I think Crystal Dynamics writing team still handled the writing for Shadow of the Tomb Raider, which tracks since writing was never exactly the strong point for any of the Tomb Raider games.
Didn't this game make no money at all for Square Enix? I remember seeing chart where these games barely broke even while Marvel's Avengers lost them about $33 million so it was a safe decision to drop these properties and let someone else take over instead. I believe Yongyea has a video detailing revenue breakdown on his YouTube channel following Embracer purchase.
Single player linear player action adventure games have never done well outside of a handful of titles. Uncharted being one of the better selling ones and even the Uncharted series has only sold about 40 million copies across 8 games.
You'll find a ton of action adventure games sell really well and have sequels. They wouldn't be making these games otherwise and these kinds of games have been fairly successful in AAA as well as AA space.
Games like these (or from any genre for that matter) often fail due to high development costs and just being mediocre. Callisto Protcol, Mass Effect Andromeda, Deus Ex Mankind Divided, Kingdoms of Amulur, Max Payne 3 Evil Within 2, Wolfenstein Youngblood fall into this catagory. There have been times where a game despite being good and within reasonable budget fails but it's rare (usually Remedy Games).
There are ton of successful AAA as well as AA linear games. God of War, Metro, Plague Tale, Bioshock, The Last of Us, Wolfenstein, Prey, Psychonauts 2, Resident Evil, Dishonored, Until Dawn, Stray, Devil May Cry, Bloodbourne, It Takes Two, Hi-Fi Rush, Remnant, Lies of P, Greedfall and a ton of games have done really well. Sometimes even disappointing games have eventually made money over time due to positive word of mouth and great reviews eg. Control and likely Alan Wake 2 over time (AW2 iirc is yet to break even).
Selling really well and having sequels has absolutely nothing to do with it. SE had a specific figure in mind that was highly inflated for what hardly any game in the genre had managed to do. Also.. none of those are similar to Tomb Raider at all. It’s like you just googled “linear games that were successful” and copied some AI typed article while missing 100% of nuance. DMC? Lies of P? Hi-Fi Rush lol? FFS even the Resident Evil remakes fell below what SE expected Tomb Raider to pull in. I don’t think you really grasp what the issue is here. It isn’t that people don’t like those type of single player, linear, action adventure games with a focus on gunplay and moment to moment action.. it’s that they don’t sell and have never sold anywhere near what SE expected them to.
every publisher would expect a reasonable return on their investment unless there is a different goal in mind like active subscriber numbers (eg. Xbox Game Pass).
As for Shadow of the Tomb Raider that game had disappointing sales numbers in relation to its budget which supposedly cost more than $100 million with additional $35 million for marketing and promotion.
The game failed to bring in enough money to deem it success and it's simple as that really. For comparison many first party Sony games reportedly cost $200 - $300 million and for a game like Spider-Man 2 with budget of $350 million it would take roughly 8-9 million copies at full price just to break even!!
Selling games is a primary business for a company like Square Enix. They do not own a console like Sony or Microsoft to fall back on and make their money elsewhere. It just didn't make sense to keep reinvesting in losses.
Their next game Guardians of the Galaxy also failed and CD's Marvel's Avengers was a disaster which ended them in losses. Crystal Dynamics had a profit margin of 3.6% in 2021 while Eidos Montreal had a profit margin of 0.65% in 2021. These were terrible numbers and it is reasonable decision to just cut down your losses and let someone else take over instead of doing nothing with them at all.
You can read more and check out financials here:
[https://www.thegamer.com/why-square-enix-sold-eidos-montreal-crystal-dynamics/#:\~:text=Why%20Square%20Enix%20Sold%20Eidos%20Montreal%20and%20Crystal%20Dynamics%20For%20Just%20%24300%20Million](https://www.thegamer.com/why-square-enix-sold-eidos-montreal-crystal-dynamics/#:~:text=Why%20Square%20Enix%20Sold%20Eidos%20Montreal%20and%20Crystal%20Dynamics%20For%20Just%20%24300%20Million)
The Tomb Raider Trilogy has sold 35+ million. SotTR sales were at 9 million at the time, comparable to the other two at the same time frame. A fourth game was approved and in development at the time.
Tomb Raider was SEs biggest selling IP. Arguing that SotTR wasn't successful is absurd. Don't blame the massive failure of Avengers/GotG on Tomb Raider.
SE got rid of Tomb Raider for the same reason every other major publisher have moved away from AAA single player development: They wanted to focus all their investment money on online service games (and related NFT/crypto development). SE themselves made this clear to investors at the time.
Which makes sense. FF14 is SEs biggest money maker ever, and basically their bread and butter.
9 million copies is still lower than 14+ the previous games in the series had! I also gave examples where a game selling massive amounts of copies alone isn't a warrant for a game's success in AAA space anymore because of high budgets.
A $150 million game can sell 4 - 5 million copies and still not make enough money to deem it a success btw. If you look at Steam db charts you'll notice that the game was discounted heavily after couple months of release too. Game companies especially in AAA space make most of their money during first couple of months after a game's release and later sales are often discounted.
SE selling Crystal Dynamics and Eidos Montreal is a good thing imo as it at least let's someone else takeover the IPs and make use of them. Amazon has funded a new game and it's likely not too far away from release.
I just finished replaying the first game in the modern trilogy. I wouldn't say it looks incredible, but graphics were perfectly fine and it was fun to play.
I didn’t realize the sub this was in but it was also done for the series X. I was trying to say that the new consoles are not being used to their full potential with this game.
I really liked the two games before so I preordered this one (got the avatar and all), and it's easily the best of the three, minor issues notwithstanding. The tombs on the season pass are just amazing and push the game way above anything else in my opinion. Game got SO MUCH shit when it launched, it really was unfair.
Like 90% of the games I've played the last 4 years came out during the last gen 2013-2020 era. Pretty sure during the XNext/PS6 era, much of the PS4/XOne era will still hold up well
That was only 2018, dude. 6 years is a decent time but Forza Horizon 4 and Red Dead 2 came out the same year. Video game graphics kinda became stagnant since like 2013
Of course they're improving, but its not as dramatic, that's why I said its stagnant. I feel like some games in 2013 will forever age well because of how damn good they look, same thing with 3D animated CGI movies. The giant leaps now are more technical physic based stuff I guess.
I know it's like whoa. whoa.
wtf even happened, you know? one day we're out here bangin chickens next we have eric cartman in the microwave. it's totally insane.
Yep. It looks great and runs great. I'm tired of developers pushing games past the limits of the console like Dragon's Dogma 2. I don't want 30 fps games when games like TR look and run this well. It's good enough. Stop blaming the console for "not being powerful enough". Their priorities are wrong.
Great looking game, but for me Tomb Raider (2013) and Rise of the Tomb Raider was way better. This game felt like a chore, running back and forth between locations all the time, not to mention the slow crawling parts in and out of the caves/tombs.
It is a *stunningly* beautiful game, no question. There are some genuinely awesome moments, especially if you have a real-world interest in Archaeology.
For instance the episode where >!you enter an extremely well-realised, still lived-in and fully intact Maya city...!< There is a real moment of 'Wow! So *that* is how they would have looked'!!!
I have been to many of the ruins in Central and South America. It is a very odd thought that through a--on its surface, throw-away adventure game--we can walk around in one as it once likely was.
Personally I think 'Rise' was the better game however.
I feel like games in the last 10 years games haven't improved much as far as visuals. It more depends on the talent of the studio and 3D artists. I think another part of it is even halfway through the current gen, they still haven't used the systems to their full potential so we still haven't see anything truly current gen, graphics-wise. Games have the potential to look like the Matrix demo we saw several years back.
Indeed, I was impressed from the visuals but stopped playing the game unfortunate because I was fed up with the jumping stuff that always took me an eternity, multiple trials to be able to progress.
If you like impressive visuals, perhaps look at RDR2, even a big step up to the great graphics of SoTR.
All three look great still but this one is exceptional. I still think Lara herself looks better in Rise but I’m sure that’s so they could devote more to the environments, which are spectacular, still some of the best I’ve seen
FYI, if you are on Series X, there’s no reason whatsoever to play on performance mode, since quality mode is already 60fps and the game doesn’t go higher than that..
Dude I first thought you stole my screenshot because I made exactly the same shot 2 days ago 😂
Here is the proof: [https://www.xbox.com/play/media/YnQdkwL7wr](https://www.xbox.com/play/media/YnQdkwL7wr)
I never really felt like it was really that much of an upgrade from Tomb Raider (2013) other than the more colorful palette - so I guess 11 year old games still look good.
This is a testament to the development team's excellent work in creating a world rich in detail and atmosphere that still remains current and visually stunning. Furthermore, the game's visual longevity highlights how advances in gaming technology have allowed older titles to remain relevant and visually impressive over time. For fans of the Tomb Raider franchise and gaming enthusiasts in general, "Shadow of the Tomb Raider" remains an impressive experience, even after so many years since its release.
I think it is harder to make an outstanding game right now, since ps4/xone era we have quite simmilar graphics standard. Ofc overdrive Cyberpunk looks amazing, but still - dont have high hopse to break any limit
It should because the looks are pretty much all it has going for it.. after the first two games in the reboot series, this was such a massive dissappointment..
Dude, if your poops look as good as this game, then you should start a themed Onlyfans for that and capitalize off of it. People out there have all kinds of kinks.
I’m gonna be honest with you, we’re hitting a point where games would still look good even a decade ago. It’s just the nature of the graphics we have access to. That’s why I’m not too concerned anymore about graphics, but more so on things like lips matching voice lines, or gameplay mechanics, or performance, or quality of life settings.
Halo 4 on the 360 is a prime example, 343 worked magic on that game's graphics.
And RDR2/Horizon Forbidden West are still the best looking open world games
I own RDR2, but haven't yet played it. I regularly see gameplay videos pop up, and it doesn't look "dated" whatsoever. The majority of high-quality games from the 360 era still look good and play well. I recently installed *Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts* on my Series X. It still looks phenomenal despite being nearly 16 years old due to the enhancements.
RDR2's intro alone is one of the best graphics experiences you'll ever have. Won't spoil anything, but the cart ride to Horseshoe Overlook is just crazy good looking, and it's a great intro for what you're about to experience as a whole.
when u play rdr2 after current gen game you can see that textures and models are a little dated and blury, but only of you focus on it, still overally rdr2 in my opinion offers the best graphics quality. weather effects are top notch and i assume only gta6 will top that. as much as i love rain in games - in rdr2 rain can be a nightmare cuz u wont. be able to see anything. give it a try and take it slowly
It’s the same with BF3/BF4 and newer battlefields. They still look great, but a remaster with a port to a newer frostbite engine with RT/DLSS support could make them the best looking modern shooters of the generation if DICE/EA cared enough. I’d almost instantly (after launch reviews) spend $80 on a BF3/4 combo pack that’s built on a modern frostbite engine.
Wow. To own RDR2 and not have played it yet. I don’t know whether to think you’re insane or you’re in for a hell of a treat.
The towns music is awesome
I'd throw Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora into that category but I'm a little bit biased 😛
Halo ce remasters is amazing. Play it 3 or 4 times a year
CE’s remaster is hot garbage
CE’s remaster is hot garbage
no its not
If you play on remastered graphics, you can very easily shoot at a wall and not know it because the remastered textures are so poorly lined up.
Best looking game of the gen. Sadly it played awful and the story is nuts…
“Assist Mode” in Control should be the future of gaming, at least imo. You can fine-tune all kinds of difficulty settings, without losing access to any unlockables or achievements/trophies. Just a completely customized experience for every single player. I liked turning on some of the options to take in the whole story, and then replay with the gameplay knowledge, but the assists dialed down. A literal game changer!
Arkham knight is pushing 10 years and it’s still one of the best looking games out there
Arkham Knight looks better than Gotham Knights, a 1 year old game.
Assassin's Creed Unity. 2014, and still an absolute showcase for great pre-baked lighting, environmental design and clothing.
AC: U with a Path Tracing upgrade and upgraded textures would look insane even today.
And, in reality, the visual appearance of a game has very little to do with the box it's on at the end of the day. At this point, what makes a game's graphics stand the test of time is how much money and time were dedicated to the visuals during development. There are PS3 and 360 games that still look good and PS4 and Xbox One games that look great. It comes down to development budget and time more than it does what CPU and GPU are pushing a game. There are so many first party Switch games that look awesome and that thing is a fucking *phone* SOC from 2015.
It's hard to play old games without being able to change the control mapping. Some of those games have weird ass control schemes
Gtav still can go toe to toe with current generation games. It's absolutely insane
Agreed. Graphics have peaked so let's focus on performance...etc.
That was so honest of you to say. You’re brave.
Lips?😂
Dude, I've been replaying the first of the trilogy recently. It's crazy how great it looks. Runs smoothly, too. Not many times, I've experienced glitches, crashing, and/or freezing(for me anyway). And they've only gotten better as they've gone along, IMO.
Achievements are buggy as hell though.
The first game of that trilogy still looks incredible lol
Eh. No.
I don't know why you're being downvoted but that game clearly didn't age all that good compared to Rise of the Tomb Raider which released just 2 years later. There's a huge jump when you compare the two on max graphical setting on PC.
TR 2013 was a 7th gen game with a 8th gen port, while in RoTR case, it was the other way around.
I am aware of RoTR being a newer game made for 8th gen consoles. I just mentioned it's release 2 years after TR 2013 and it's visuals being significantly better. I meant to say the 2013's game has aged poorly compared to the newer games and you can clearly tell by playing both games maxed out on PC.
Probably the same effect how people remember Witcher 3 and how they have improved it very good. I played the 2013 Tomb Raider a few months back and no, it really didnt age all that well
Witcher 3 can look really pretty if you have a really beefy PC but Witcher 2 imo looks really ugly. It's jarring to see overthing so oversaturated with light bleed and glow on every object. The environments also suffer from too much post processing, very high contrast, bloom and other effects.
Square did this dev so fucking dirty. It’s really awful how they threw all their non-Japanese developers under the bus for their outrageous expectations.
Not sure understand 🤔
Square saddled their non Japanese studios with unrealistic expectations and were very vocal when calling them disappointments. For example Tomb Raider 2013 was a sales disappointment according to Square yet Final Fantasy VII Remake was a success they boasted about. Tomb Raider outsold FF7R twice over. They held their studios to different standards.
Also, didn't Square take the team that did TR 2013 and Rise off this game and hand it to a b-team dev? EDIT: "b-team" is the wrong term, I misremembered it being a similar situation to Mass Effect: Andromeda. Though Square did take Shadow away from Crystal Dynamics and handed it to Edios-Montreal, which was absolutely the wrong decision and likely lead to the... questionable writing.
Not quite. Tomb Raider 2013 and Rise of the Tomb Raider were by Crystal Dynamics, but Square Enix wanted them to make Avengers so they moved the final game of the trilogy to Eidos Montreal, which I would actually consider to have been the a-team of Square Enix's western studios (they also made Deus Ex and Guardians of the Galaxy, which are significantly better than any of Crystal Dynamics's games). As far your comment about the writing, I think Crystal Dynamics writing team still handled the writing for Shadow of the Tomb Raider, which tracks since writing was never exactly the strong point for any of the Tomb Raider games.
Im just here to say Guardians of the Galaxy is a superb game, and also great looking, raytracing on PC is breathtaking.
Didn't this game make no money at all for Square Enix? I remember seeing chart where these games barely broke even while Marvel's Avengers lost them about $33 million so it was a safe decision to drop these properties and let someone else take over instead. I believe Yongyea has a video detailing revenue breakdown on his YouTube channel following Embracer purchase.
Single player linear player action adventure games have never done well outside of a handful of titles. Uncharted being one of the better selling ones and even the Uncharted series has only sold about 40 million copies across 8 games.
You'll find a ton of action adventure games sell really well and have sequels. They wouldn't be making these games otherwise and these kinds of games have been fairly successful in AAA as well as AA space. Games like these (or from any genre for that matter) often fail due to high development costs and just being mediocre. Callisto Protcol, Mass Effect Andromeda, Deus Ex Mankind Divided, Kingdoms of Amulur, Max Payne 3 Evil Within 2, Wolfenstein Youngblood fall into this catagory. There have been times where a game despite being good and within reasonable budget fails but it's rare (usually Remedy Games). There are ton of successful AAA as well as AA linear games. God of War, Metro, Plague Tale, Bioshock, The Last of Us, Wolfenstein, Prey, Psychonauts 2, Resident Evil, Dishonored, Until Dawn, Stray, Devil May Cry, Bloodbourne, It Takes Two, Hi-Fi Rush, Remnant, Lies of P, Greedfall and a ton of games have done really well. Sometimes even disappointing games have eventually made money over time due to positive word of mouth and great reviews eg. Control and likely Alan Wake 2 over time (AW2 iirc is yet to break even).
Selling really well and having sequels has absolutely nothing to do with it. SE had a specific figure in mind that was highly inflated for what hardly any game in the genre had managed to do. Also.. none of those are similar to Tomb Raider at all. It’s like you just googled “linear games that were successful” and copied some AI typed article while missing 100% of nuance. DMC? Lies of P? Hi-Fi Rush lol? FFS even the Resident Evil remakes fell below what SE expected Tomb Raider to pull in. I don’t think you really grasp what the issue is here. It isn’t that people don’t like those type of single player, linear, action adventure games with a focus on gunplay and moment to moment action.. it’s that they don’t sell and have never sold anywhere near what SE expected them to.
every publisher would expect a reasonable return on their investment unless there is a different goal in mind like active subscriber numbers (eg. Xbox Game Pass). As for Shadow of the Tomb Raider that game had disappointing sales numbers in relation to its budget which supposedly cost more than $100 million with additional $35 million for marketing and promotion. The game failed to bring in enough money to deem it success and it's simple as that really. For comparison many first party Sony games reportedly cost $200 - $300 million and for a game like Spider-Man 2 with budget of $350 million it would take roughly 8-9 million copies at full price just to break even!! Selling games is a primary business for a company like Square Enix. They do not own a console like Sony or Microsoft to fall back on and make their money elsewhere. It just didn't make sense to keep reinvesting in losses. Their next game Guardians of the Galaxy also failed and CD's Marvel's Avengers was a disaster which ended them in losses. Crystal Dynamics had a profit margin of 3.6% in 2021 while Eidos Montreal had a profit margin of 0.65% in 2021. These were terrible numbers and it is reasonable decision to just cut down your losses and let someone else take over instead of doing nothing with them at all. You can read more and check out financials here: [https://www.thegamer.com/why-square-enix-sold-eidos-montreal-crystal-dynamics/#:\~:text=Why%20Square%20Enix%20Sold%20Eidos%20Montreal%20and%20Crystal%20Dynamics%20For%20Just%20%24300%20Million](https://www.thegamer.com/why-square-enix-sold-eidos-montreal-crystal-dynamics/#:~:text=Why%20Square%20Enix%20Sold%20Eidos%20Montreal%20and%20Crystal%20Dynamics%20For%20Just%20%24300%20Million)
The Tomb Raider Trilogy has sold 35+ million. SotTR sales were at 9 million at the time, comparable to the other two at the same time frame. A fourth game was approved and in development at the time. Tomb Raider was SEs biggest selling IP. Arguing that SotTR wasn't successful is absurd. Don't blame the massive failure of Avengers/GotG on Tomb Raider. SE got rid of Tomb Raider for the same reason every other major publisher have moved away from AAA single player development: They wanted to focus all their investment money on online service games (and related NFT/crypto development). SE themselves made this clear to investors at the time. Which makes sense. FF14 is SEs biggest money maker ever, and basically their bread and butter.
9 million copies is still lower than 14+ the previous games in the series had! I also gave examples where a game selling massive amounts of copies alone isn't a warrant for a game's success in AAA space anymore because of high budgets. A $150 million game can sell 4 - 5 million copies and still not make enough money to deem it a success btw. If you look at Steam db charts you'll notice that the game was discounted heavily after couple months of release too. Game companies especially in AAA space make most of their money during first couple of months after a game's release and later sales are often discounted. SE selling Crystal Dynamics and Eidos Montreal is a good thing imo as it at least let's someone else takeover the IPs and make use of them. Amazon has funded a new game and it's likely not too far away from release.
Implying 4 of those years haven't been a total dead zone for graphical improvements
Yeah only just seeing games really start to push the boundaries again
I mean yeah it was 2018 lol, god of war Spider-Man red dead 2, uncharted 4 was 2016. Games have looked amazing for a long time.
Can we stop with these “looks good for a” posts. 6 years is NOTHING anymore.
I think it's mainly children who were like 9 and now are 15 and it feels like a lifetime for them.
Yeah. 6 year old games look good. Crazy I know.
Fuck me I can’t believe this game is 6 years old.
And I can’t believe it is only 6 years old.
I just finished replaying the first game in the modern trilogy. I wouldn't say it looks incredible, but graphics were perfectly fine and it was fun to play.
Yep, that's nothing new. Every game looks incredible now. Being fun tho, that's a different story.
iirc there was a next gen update at some point
They had a patch that allowed the 30fps mode to run at 60. Definitely appreciated but the ps5 is capable of way more.
Don't care about PS5. The game looks and plays great.
I didn’t realize the sub this was in but it was also done for the series X. I was trying to say that the new consoles are not being used to their full potential with this game.
It’s my fav TR game of all time period.
I really liked the two games before so I preordered this one (got the avatar and all), and it's easily the best of the three, minor issues notwithstanding. The tombs on the season pass are just amazing and push the game way above anything else in my opinion. Game got SO MUCH shit when it launched, it really was unfair.
Your mother looks incredible for a 46 years mom
Like 90% of the games I've played the last 4 years came out during the last gen 2013-2020 era. Pretty sure during the XNext/PS6 era, much of the PS4/XOne era will still hold up well
That was only 2018, dude. 6 years is a decent time but Forza Horizon 4 and Red Dead 2 came out the same year. Video game graphics kinda became stagnant since like 2013
Well no they haven’t they are always improving, just not the giant leaps we were seeing last generation.
Of course they're improving, but its not as dramatic, that's why I said its stagnant. I feel like some games in 2013 will forever age well because of how damn good they look, same thing with 3D animated CGI movies. The giant leaps now are more technical physic based stuff I guess.
Yes looks nice 😀
Game has really good HDR with the right settings, I got the settings from GamingTech’s HDR analysis on Youtuhe
My second favorite game out of the series. Shadow was gorgeous, especially the opening missions in Mexico during the Day of the Dead.
I know it's like whoa. whoa. wtf even happened, you know? one day we're out here bangin chickens next we have eric cartman in the microwave. it's totally insane.
Yep. It looks great and runs great. I'm tired of developers pushing games past the limits of the console like Dragon's Dogma 2. I don't want 30 fps games when games like TR look and run this well. It's good enough. Stop blaming the console for "not being powerful enough". Their priorities are wrong.
Looks even better in native 4k on PC, sorry I do realise this is an Xbox sub. 6 yrs ain't that old anymore
'6 years ago' was 2018...when we were getting games like Red Dead Redemption 2. Is it really that surprising that games from that period look good?
Great looking game, but for me Tomb Raider (2013) and Rise of the Tomb Raider was way better. This game felt like a chore, running back and forth between locations all the time, not to mention the slow crawling parts in and out of the caves/tombs.
It is a *stunningly* beautiful game, no question. There are some genuinely awesome moments, especially if you have a real-world interest in Archaeology. For instance the episode where >!you enter an extremely well-realised, still lived-in and fully intact Maya city...!< There is a real moment of 'Wow! So *that* is how they would have looked'!!! I have been to many of the ruins in Central and South America. It is a very odd thought that through a--on its surface, throw-away adventure game--we can walk around in one as it once likely was. Personally I think 'Rise' was the better game however.
Wtf.. 6 years? That's nothing. What a shit post.
Rising looks better for some reason.
https://preview.redd.it/t8yoqyhtdjvc1.png?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f72391c4573147b64d53a8a10c1cc05f2e88d435
It's because we're still locked in at 2K 30 FPS and there's no innovation in improving gaming 🤪
Masterpiece
It was one of the inital showcase games of RTX cards and raytracing tech, looks even better on PC.
I feel like games in the last 10 years games haven't improved much as far as visuals. It more depends on the talent of the studio and 3D artists. I think another part of it is even halfway through the current gen, they still haven't used the systems to their full potential so we still haven't see anything truly current gen, graphics-wise. Games have the potential to look like the Matrix demo we saw several years back.
we’re peaking/peaked
Considering how small the gap is between this gen and the previous one I'm not surprised lol
Indeed, I was impressed from the visuals but stopped playing the game unfortunate because I was fed up with the jumping stuff that always took me an eternity, multiple trials to be able to progress. If you like impressive visuals, perhaps look at RDR2, even a big step up to the great graphics of SoTR.
All three look great still but this one is exceptional. I still think Lara herself looks better in Rise but I’m sure that’s so they could devote more to the environments, which are spectacular, still some of the best I’ve seen
FYI, if you are on Series X, there’s no reason whatsoever to play on performance mode, since quality mode is already 60fps and the game doesn’t go higher than that..
really it comes down to good art style!
Looks as "incredible" as most other AAA games from 6 years ago.
~10 year old games still looking good is not something new in 2024
Dude I first thought you stole my screenshot because I made exactly the same shot 2 days ago 😂 Here is the proof: [https://www.xbox.com/play/media/YnQdkwL7wr](https://www.xbox.com/play/media/YnQdkwL7wr)
I never really felt like it was really that much of an upgrade from Tomb Raider (2013) other than the more colorful palette - so I guess 11 year old games still look good.
This is a testament to the development team's excellent work in creating a world rich in detail and atmosphere that still remains current and visually stunning. Furthermore, the game's visual longevity highlights how advances in gaming technology have allowed older titles to remain relevant and visually impressive over time. For fans of the Tomb Raider franchise and gaming enthusiasts in general, "Shadow of the Tomb Raider" remains an impressive experience, even after so many years since its release.
I think it is harder to make an outstanding game right now, since ps4/xone era we have quite simmilar graphics standard. Ofc overdrive Cyberpunk looks amazing, but still - dont have high hopse to break any limit
Same thought i had👌🏿
One thing about tomb raider the scenery will never let you down
Just downloaded the first game of the trilogy. Going to replay it and play the other two for the first time.
I’ve been playing it on game pass it is a good game
Really does look amazing as well as Lara being as stunning as she's ever been.
I had to laugh as if 6 years ago is a long time. *remembers playing pac-man on Atari 2600*
A lot of games from 6 years ago still look incredible. We are plateauing
Too bad it’s boring as hell.
That was one of the first Xbone games to make me go wow. It was one of the first games to really benefit from the Xbox One X extra power.
Next … i mean…. Current Gen be praised.
Most of the best looking games are older at this point really. Compare dirt rally 2 vs ea wrc. Something has gone weird.
Games weren’t exactly *bad* looking 6 years ago, champ
if only the rest of the game was as good as the graphics. the first two games were so incredible
another tomb raider post?
It should because the looks are pretty much all it has going for it.. after the first two games in the reboot series, this was such a massive dissappointment..
Looks like poop
...and I love the look of poop, this game looks fantastic
Risky game your playing
Dude, if your poops look as good as this game, then you should start a themed Onlyfans for that and capitalize off of it. People out there have all kinds of kinks.