4 ms·
This is the most recent one I've seen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_7XOMO7nJE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_7XOMO7nJE IMO, GTA IV 1.0.4.0 actually lo
by asmr 5y ago
This is the most recent one I've seen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_7XOMO7nJE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_7XOMO7nJE
IMO, GTA IV 1.0.4.0 actually looks better when done properly.
https://external-preview.redd.it/MjjuKj_N4Rn6jyXjZc5ikVk_N3mH6A2Lp9OKRfwb4pQ.jpg?auto=webp&s=96d92e5fc00ea8ae56e73dca43b3adae217aef1e https://external-preview.redd.it/MjjuKj_N4Rn6jyXjZc5ikVk_N3m...
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y agoIt is very easy to see if is not even close to reality: such a wet road would produce a lot of splashes and every car would be followed by a water vapor trail. So yes, textures and some lighting effects are impressive, but not even close to real thing. It would be easier to do a sunny weather.
- eminence32 5y agoI'm amused by that youtube link because one of the very first things you see is some vegetation clipping through some mailboxes. For me, these types of modeling issues are the biggest things that are standing in the way of "photorealism". Another common thing you'll see in a whole bunch of video games is grass or plants that are all "waving" in the wind, but they're just playing the exact same animation, just slightly offset. It looks great when its in your peripheral vision, but as soon as you look directly at it, it becomes noticeably artificial.