NeoGAF’s member ‘RoboPlato‘ has shared the first screenshots from the PC version of Fallout 4. RoboPlato used the game’s Ultra settings and as we can see, there are some minor differences between the PC and the console version. For example, the shadows distance is increased on the PC.
As always, we strongly suggest avoiding pre-orders. However, if you can’t wait until our PC Performance Analysis and PC Review get published, you can go ahead and purchase this game from GMG via the following button.
Enjoy the screenshots!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
It looks “alright” for a Bethesda open world game, but the requirementes are bullshit.
Ditch Gamebryo already.
Meh… No one takes fake system requirements seriously, these days.
Sh**e textures. Consoles holding back PC. I’ll wait a year for the modders to fix the visuals and the price to plummet.
Looks OK-ish. Not impressive but not a deal breaker either. I don’t know why people complain about graphics too much. Not everything needs to be graphics king. The real question is, how much the game was dumbed down.
Not anything special but it can be considered acceptable for a vanilla version of a huge open world game. Modders will take the visuals to the next level and beyond.
Hmmm. textures are missing details….
I hope Bethesda will release 4k texture pack @ some time
“textures are missing details”
really? they are good enough, by far the best thing in those shots.
yeap, but thats only my personal opinion, idk maybe ingame will be different with full PBR , those are just static shots, and some textures look, idk simplistic, almost like in TF2
Dat car texture though…
like another poster said many objects in the game look like toys.
but is that a style choice? maybe its just an bigger toy car model
honestly it reminds me more of fallout 1 and 2 than the wahed out rusty fallout 3 objects. It is more colorfull. Not diggint the trees though. Needs vegetation mod.
But will 4k textures work with 4K DSR or only on true 4k monitor?
You will be able to tell the textures are improved at any resolution. 1080p, 1440p, 4k, DSR down to anything less than 4k. They will tax the GPU more and take up more vram. The higher your resolution, the more of the improved texture you will be able to see.
Looks good enough, the draw distance is a huge improvement from fo3 like seen it pic 3.
why did the peasant cross the road? To see the buildings rendering on the other side
Genuinely funny.
It is true though try playing new vegas on a x360 or ps3.
A good laugh.
Knock Knock
Who’s There?
Peasant
Peasant who?
LOADING……
nope i read it on twitter it is everyhwere.
“to watch”
still, great one!
#SteamFtW
ah damn it.
haha…sorry about that!
no its my mistake.
It looks fine. There will be texture packs coming for this game before the year is out. It’s better that Bethesda spent the time on the story and systems than the graphics. As long as we have some relatively high-poly models it’s fine.
Well after playing the witcher 3 nope not good enough
The level of detail shifting in The Witcher 3 is sometimes distracting to me and Fallout 4 seems to achieve a nice graphical detail balance while streaming game assets in and out. Its also likely twice the length of The Witcher 3.
:I
Graphical overkill in the foreground is not always better as watching grass grow right in front of you while moving forward is not ideal.
Seriously need a viewmodel FOV mod, disgusting oversized gun models and hands too close to the screen.
I wonder if you can edit in ini files like before? Maybe there is a in game slider?
In-game slider? Almost no game ever has a slider specifically for character model FOV, all i hope is for console commands or ini settings like you said.
well textures are good enough.
Cant wait to mod the hell out of this game!
Bethesda games have never look very good. They don’t bother. They know there’s an army of modders out there that will make it look nice for free.
I thought Skyrim looks amazing and it still does, even more with mods. This is shaping up to look just as good and probably even better than Skyrim.
They will never look as good as the top games, but damn. They are super fun to play. One of the rare cases where i dont even care how the game looks. Its a really care case too..
I think Bethesda games to be quite boring actually, I tried playing Oblivion and Skyrim, but it was so monotonous that I quickly stopped playing them. The only Bethesda game I ever had fun playing was New Vegas, and it wasn’t even made by Bethesda, they only published it.
I wonder if Obsidian will be allowed to make New Vegas 2 after Fallout 4 is done.
Allowed, lol. I doubt they will ever work with Bethesda again, after that story with royalties. New Vegas sold better than Fallout 3, but Obsidian didn’t get a single penny from it, and became close to bankruptcy. Screw Bethesda.
Oh they can be really boring for sure. Its a mood game for me (Skyrim). I have never played Oblivion for more than 10 m, so i cant really say anything there. I had to finish Skyrim over the course of 3 years. I still liked it, but damn.. does it get boring sometimes. 🙂
Once you see the whole world, it starts getting a bit boring for sure.
Morrowind looked good in the day.
No it didn’t. Gothic came in 2000 was first published in 1999 and it had more details. Morrowind had a large world but without any depth, no npc schedules, nothing. And from a graphical point of view it looked very bland.
Still it stands as the best game that came out of bethesda.
Gothic 0/
no Oblivion back in 2006 was the Crysis before Crysis was released.
This is not even consoles holding PC back, this is Bethesda being greedy and not wanting to invest more time and money into the visuals. I sh*t you not, they have being doing this kind of stuff from the very first Elder Scrolls back in the 90’s, and have been getting away with it since.
They don’t give a sh*t anymore because they know they have rabid fans who will eat this up without a second.
the thing is the game is probably good, and that matters far more than graphics quality…
The thing is that they’re not actually really good, at least not as good as people claim them to be, they are so overwhelmed with the game’s scale and staggering ammount of content, that they blow the game’s quality out of proportion. It’s nice to be able do anything you want since the game let’s you go wherever you feel like going, but the gameplay of their games are just bad, they’re too clunky and slow, it doesn’t even feel like you’re hitting things when you attack. The current stories are so simple that you wonder if you’re really playing an RPG, the choices you make and dialogue options for the most part are useless, and the writing is awful, which is a problem because aside from 3, the only Bethesda developed Fallout, every other main entry had great writing.
Bethesda makes their games putting the least possible amount of effort into all of it’s aspects, just barely scraping the current standard for quality in gaming, and they still get praised like godlike developers with godlike games, when there are devs who try to make everything as good as possible getting overshadowed.
well TES and Fallout are good series despite you may not like them, they surely are better games than 80% of the stuff on the market, now the graphics isn’t their forte, sure, but the rest of the game is what matters more, and they often release titles with good or at least decent gameplay/sountrack/plot. Surely if they were to improve their graphics and stability side, they would jump up a level in overall quality, but i say it’s good enough
So you’ll just ignore everything I said and brand it as “But the graphics are bad”? Okay, cool, I don’t think I’ll keep discussing anymore when you didn’t even acknowledge what I say.
Man, you’re talking about it by your point of view, you should learn to talk about it objectively, just say i don’t like bethesda games + they’re ugly and bugged, then, don’t just claim that what you think about a game is the absolute truth
+1 respect
Wanna know some objective FACTS about Bethesda developed games?
They have bad gameplay, they’re slow and clunky, hit detection is crap, melee in most their games suck dicks, and magic and spells are some of the most basic stuff ever, like status buffs , or fireballs/lighting strikes. In Fallout it should be easier since it’s a straight up FPS with RPG mechanics strapped on, but they still managed to make it slow and clunky.
The stories in their games are objectively bad, almost no interesting characters or good plot points, their main quest storyline sucks, and their writing is even worse, making some of the stupidest lines and dialogue options I have ever seen. It makes it worse for Fallout because the other main entries in the series had amazing writing, and were know for that amazing writing. They knew just how much humor and seriousness they needed in order to make it work, but Bethesda doesn’t have the same capacity, because the first thing they did when they made Fallout 3 was rape the lore and make a shit ton of non logical choices that contradict what was already established in the Fallout universe.
They brag about the size of the world of their game, but most of them world is empty, you’ll spend more time walking around in a barren wasteland in both series than actually finding shit to do, and the places that actually have stuff to do aren’t even well constructed. Most towns look the same, most houses look the same, most people look the same, there was no effort into giving these people some sort of distinguishable feature from town to town. Even a game like MGSV, which isn’t even an RPG, have unique bases and different people unique to that particular area.
Most side quests their games are just some stupid fetch quests, there’s not an interesting story and back story to them, it’s just ‘go there do that/pick this, and come here to me’ New Vegas was amazing at this because the Side Quests had real substance to them, they had something interesting happening and you wanted to know what it was, even the fetch quests in that game were better because there was something bigger than fetching an item happening.
They also brag about how much freedom you have in your games, which I’ll admit, is a pretty cool thing, being able to go whenever you want to go, even if you’re underleveled, no restrictions. So yeah, here’s a plus for them. The music is also pretty damn nice.
Still, you wanted objective? Here’s objective. I didn’t state any opinions my friend, I said the cold hard truth, Bethesda games are not as great as people claim their are. I’m not gonna say they are utter shit, because they aren’t, even if it may seem like I’m saying so, but their games are definitely not amazing.
They have a lot of potential, but Bethesda don’t fucking do anything. They made the same game for over 10 years with different paint jobs, and next to no improvements, and they get fucking praised like gods,
which is funny because even Ubisoft and Treyarch are putting more effort into trying to innovate their annual franchises. If Bethesda put just a little effort and money into making them better, just a tiny little, something spectacular could come out, but they won’t, they prefer to stay in their safe zone, because they know their fans will eat that shit up regardless of quality, and the modders are forced to fix their shit because they are unwilling to do so.
go read what i wrote at the “all perks revealed” article It is dumbed down to He11 and back.
Ultra? They’re taking the piss.
Why they use FXAA in every new fuc…. game ?
I don’t like it its too cartoonish, fo3 was at least realistic and scary… I cant take fo4 seriously lol but well see..
Fallout 3 looked so desolate, like the whole place was a desert. You could feel the nukes wiping out everything. Fallout 4 looks abit more like Stalker… it really reminds me of that. It aint bad, but i dont know how much it actually fits, considering the name of the game.. and the older games.
Plus everything was a shade of green
I sure hope the gameplay is fantastic.
….because it’s nothing special to look at.
With the amount of DLC bethesda makes, it’s best to wait for Ultimate/Goty Editions.
Looks meh graphics. urgh..
Bethesda is the only company whose problems get excused with “It’s a [insert company name here] game.” Pretty sure you don’t see people excusing EA’s DLC practices with the same mindset. Just wish people would hold them to a higher standard.
At least the shadows are rendered pretty far and it’s got AO. PS4’s version is too bright for my eyes XD (almost non-existent shadows)
TBH I don’t get the furore over the graphics. It looks pretty normal to me, and totally on par with what I’d expect from an open-world game of this kind/scale. Not that making the graphics pretty is going to suddenly make me interested in this sub-genre.
I love how all of these guys in here complain as if they’re not going to play the game because its not as good looking as the Witcher or something. You turds aren’t fooling anyone. We all know you’re going to play the game.
well take a look at what i wrote at the “all perks revealed” article. Wherever we will play the game is irrelevant since we dont have alot of choics, right now pretty much every game is an open world shooter ,but this game is no longer fallout but a average looking dumbed down open world shooter with a skill tree.
/hug
It has mistakes but i will have to get it approved again if i edit it.
The question is when they’ll play:
– You complain and yet, will still buy it full price? Yeah, you’re both a sucker and a hypocrite.
– You wait till it’s 50% off or more and immediately play with graphics mods? You are a smart man.
This has nothing to do with consoles. They’re just using an updated version of the Creation Engine, which was used to power Skyrim. Obviously that’s why it looks more like an upressed last-gen game.
I believe that if consoles were more powerful and had more impressive looking games Bethesda would be forced to improve visuals. The console climate allows them to get away with not trying.
They also ported Skyrim to X1 (the lowest common denominator of hardware which is a fact) in order to study how to get Fallout 4 working for it and saved them having to build F4 from the ground up which means that yes they had to develop the game for the lowest common denominator and yes effectively as well as the engine itself, consoles held the game back just as much. This gen started off weaker than the last with sacrifices having to actually be made before or during release, both consoles are showing issues with keeping a complete stable 1080p/60fps. Last gen Sony’s PS3 had an incredibly strong CPU, it;s still stronger than what they are using now even. The fact is consoles of this gen are using off the shelf PC parts to make their consoles rather than completely built from the ground up custom created systems that could actually bring some power to the table, because they skimped out on that they have effectively hit the ceiling of what they can accomplish a lot sooner than last gen.
This gen there is no “secret untapped power” that devs touted and managed to squeeze out of last gen.
What is this crap?
I gotta admit that these screenshots do not look good. However, Fallout was never a graphics showcase. It was always about the world, the lore, the role-playing. The graphics should be good enough to immerse me for the hundreds of hours I plan to be in the game.
Yeah graphics aren’t as good as Crysis, but I’ll easily get 300+ hours from this game and will enjoy every minute.
Well at least it doesn’t look as blurry as the previous games. The textures I mean, is nothing impressive but it does look more “pleasant” to the eyes than the other games.
No green tint all over it like in FallOut 3, or yellowish like in New Vegas. (let’s be honest it made sense in both but it doesn’t help with the looks of each game)
Hope to see some nice quests and the gun-play to be way better than in the previous games.
looks exceedingly last gen
thats because it was made last gen. it takes them 4-5 years to make skyrim fallout games. consoles are only 2 years old so this is last gen graphics.
How did they manage to have cartoonish graphics with bad textures lol.
I’m still going to grab the game, albeit two months down the line but I am filled with disappointment for this game due to how it looks and plays in some areas, animations looking stiff and lip sync out of place. The fact that there isn’t much difference between this and the PS4 version fills me with doubt since for the longest time PC versions have always had the one up over consoles, especially in the visuals department. This feels like some form of parity was made, that and we also find out that Bethesda technically ported Skyrim to XB1 as a study and case for Fallout 4 so they didn’t have to make Fallout 4 completely from the ground up.
Fun times ahead!
Fugly.
2007 Called. Its time to catch up.
http://www.abload.de/img/00010cmgf.jpg
thats fallout for you.who ever said fallout 3 looked good.
i read the first 2 lines, and i had enough already, this is just ur point of view, you don’t like bethesda games? fine, stop talking about them then, because what u’re saying is bullshit, if you complain about the gameplay being too slow, even if true, you just don’t like it, so it means you don’t like that style.
I didn’t say the gameplay was just slow, it’s clunkly, it’s stiff. and the hit detection is bad, it has one of the worst melee combats of any action RPG. You just ignored everything I said, AGAIN, this time to brand these flaws as ‘opinions’, without counter arguing anything at all.
are you for real? Whatever you said about it, it’s just your point of view, and again, even if that is true, and you don’t like it, so it means that you don’t like the game being that way, but since they pretty much always make games that way, it means it’s their style, and you don’t like that, me, personally i’d only complain about the meh graphics (in all their games). bugs, and overall stability, i see no problem in anything else aside from that
Oh, I get it, you’re saying that even though I made real criticism about the problems their games have, it’s all biased because I don’t like Bethesda, so it doens’t count.
Okay, I think we’re done here kid.
i’m done, you have problems…
The images no longer exist. I missed it. 🙁
Zoink! http://abload.de/img/falloutcrysis9lub6.jpg
That makes no sense, it takes years to make most games, yet there are plenty of games with current gen graphics that have been released in the past 2 years. It doesn’t matter when they started it, they could have it look current gen if they really wanted.
most games it longer to make elder scrolls games. all items in game in the world are hand place. skyrim took 4 years to make
https://www.quora.com/How-long-did-it-take-to-develop-Skyrim
each scrolls game takes about 4 years to make. they put a lot in to it.
still makes no sense. all AAA games take over 2 years to make, yet there were current-gen graphics available in games as soon as ps4 launched. That cant happen according to you, because ‘they were made last gen’. it doesn’t matter when development started. They could configure the skyrim engine to look current-gen if they wanted to, and that was started in 2007.
i like the world that bethesda created. Its just that it feels empty. thats why Witcher 3 is more superior compared to skyrim, fallout 3 or DAI.
and im not sure im going to like this wasteland setting.