"I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I’m ****ing ******ed but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me “Apache†and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can’t accept me you’re a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding." - Guuse
"uh, I identify as counterstrike and I find this globally offensive" - ???
"uh, I identify as counterstrike and I find this globally offensive" - ???
Defenitly a graphic render. There's a few thing that point in that direction but the most obvious is that it's a based on a GTA location. And GTA is always based in fictionals cities. Well, I think it's GTA. Could someone confirm it?
Thanks to TinyStar for making me this awesome sig
Pheyniex wrote:
there is a huge difference between a render that has to be avaiable within 1/24 of a second, and a render with maximum definition where you have 5h to do it.
I do realize that, but I also believe it would be a bit too invalid a comparison to make. And as such I think the render is done in real time, just possibly with some poor framerates.
Looking closely at it, the only thing that stands out in my opinion is the incredible quality of the textures. There's not much of a requirement for geometrical detail, and where it is (the cab for example) it might even be tessellated.
i'm very skeptical about that image. Gta is a game that loads all at once. it has a rather large environment and it has to be constanlty avaiable, within the player's vicinity.
the upper photo would take time to make, from the experience i have with 3d modelling (but that was a "couple" of years ago, Pentium4)
it may be hard to reach a consensus about these two images, and i really would like to get a bit more information about the upper one, but i think it's an unfair comparison.
the upper photo would take time to make, from the experience i have with 3d modelling (but that was a "couple" of years ago, Pentium4)
it may be hard to reach a consensus about these two images, and i really would like to get a bit more information about the upper one, but i think it's an unfair comparison.
The top is clearly a render. There are many flaws within the rendering that, when looked at, completely take away from the overall image. It's very well rendered to the point that it can fool people into believing that it's a photo from life, however, there are some glaring faults within the image that distract one from the illusion when they're discovered.
For starters, take a look at the newspaper on the street to the right side of the taxi. Once you look at that, more things should become apparent to you.
In all honesty, I still prefer pc gaming vs console gaming with exception to the Wii U.
For starters, take a look at the newspaper on the street to the right side of the taxi. Once you look at that, more things should become apparent to you.
In all honesty, I still prefer pc gaming vs console gaming with exception to the Wii U.
MrCuddowls wrote:
Hahahaha telling me my items are bad HHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAhA
Listen buddy don't judge someone's items if your only level 13
This build is Platinum approved, Thats all you need to know
You need to log in before commenting.
The photo had this title:
You-can-pretend-it-s-an-actual-photo-all-you-want-But-when-PC-users-say-consoles-are-holding-graphics-back-they-mean-it
I thought it was a photo too at first, but when I look closely at it I find small things that just seem a little off.
If it's rendered they are probably using real photos as textures, just so you know.
What do you guys think, real photo or graphically rendered?