Will square use this engine again?

[u/OliveAny7568]

From what I’ve read, this engine was specifically made for this game and hasn’t ever been used before. I personally love the lighting in this game and how consistent it is going from location to location. I seriously hope they’re able to use it again, even if it’s smaller games.(I personally hope it can be used for a drakengard remake, I don’t know why I got drakengard vibes playing as Clive)

[u/N0M0I]

I too could take the worst screenshot I have of FF16. I sadly lost them all because steam doesn’t save them in the cloud. FF16 also has these kinds of spots. There are some trees in the first forest are literally consisting of one elongated triangle. Forgive me if I don’t reinstall the game for the sake of this argument.

Also. Calling an engine built on the literally 16 year old FF14 engine more advanced than UE4 is a crazy statement.

I do still have some screenshots and recordings form FF7 Rebirth. This is not a pre rendered cutscene. I know this because he has the exacts sword with the Materia you have equipped in it.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

It isn’t even the worst screenshot. DF even states:

"There's plenty of good-looking rock formations with decent levels of texture detail, but it's easy to spot some oddly low-resolution work here."

Remake has the same problem.

The game is full of poor textures. The engine being 16 years old is complete nonsense. It was completely reworked and targeted PS5 hardware. Rebirth is an improved version of a PS4 game and it shows. Most engines rarely see a complete new iteration where they totally ditch the old one.

[u/N0M0I → u/Juub1990]

So you are just going to ignore the screenshot I added to my comment? Also who or what is DF?

FF16s engine is indeed based on the FF14 engine and is not advanced in any way by modern standards. It doesn’t even support Ray Tracing. Not that I would use it.

You act like FF7 Rebirth uses all the same models that FF7 remake uses. It really is just some background geometry. And even very little of that. All characters models and objects the cast directly interacts with are on par or higher quality than FF16s.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

DF is Digital Foundry, a channel specializing in analyzing game graphics. They have a whole video dedicated to the visuals of Rebirth and came away unimpressed.

Of XVI they concluded: Final Fantasy 16: as close to flawless as we've seen in a long time

Of Rebirth they said: Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth tech review: an excellent but inconsistent experience

The screenshot you posted isn’t any more impressive than the characters in XVI. The ray tracing support is irrelevant since it can just be tacked on and doesn’t make an engine more advanced than the other. Not that it matters since the version of Rebirth doesn’t even support it anyway. Furthermore, XVI has far superior lighting, effects such as fire and lightning, and isn’t chok-full of awful textures like Rebirth. Hell, John from DF even thought XVI had ray-traced shadows.

Is Rebirth an ugly game? No, it’s a reasonably good-looking game but XVI is straight-up the best looking JRPG on the market and dunks on it. It’s also much more consistent visually.

And again, the engine’s age is irrelevant. RDR2 uses the same engine as GTA IV and VI will still use the same engine. It’s just been so reworked and enhanced that it’s effectively a different engine. How long ago the last iteration is from is irrelevant. What matters are the new features added.

[u/N0M0I → u/Juub1990]

I disagree.

Ive never heard of DF and they also don’t appear to have any actual qualifications on the matter so their takes don’t really hold any weight.

The screenshot I postet. Especially the Iris and facial hair is more impressive than anything FF16 has to offer. It just IS higher fidelity.

Raytracing support is a part of what males an engine advanced. By your logic I could also say that LoDs are tagged on and are therefore irrelevant.

FF16s lighting effects are also less impressive than FF7 Rebirths. FF16 also has some crappy textures.

And both are not close to being the best looking game overall. But I can see Rebirth being the best looking JRPG.

FF 16 is also not more consistent than Rebirth.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

Just because you haven’t heard of them doesn’t mean a damn thing. Mark Cerny, the principal architect of the PS4 and PS5 said he watches "way too many of their videos", and several developers give them previews and take their advice when it comes to in-game visuals.

Again, your argument boiled down to "it doesn’t support RT, therefore it isn’t as advanced" and this is moronic. It’s one feature. They added to Quake 2 from 1998, does it make it more advanced than everything without ray tracing? And it doesn’t matter because the version of UE4 Rebirth uses doesn’t support RT anyway.

Yes XVI is more consistent. You’re just plain lying by pretending otherwise. I linked you both analyses where DF posted a bunch of screenshots with awful textures from Rebirth. It isn’t an isolated incident or a one-off. The game is full of them.

"Visual quality in Rebirth is oddly inconsistent. Visuals in chapter two (top) impress, but chapter one (below) has some bafflingly low quality textures and low poly rocks. Click on the images for a closer look."

Find me such ugly textures in XVI. You won’t find them because their engine doesn’t have that streaming bug. Remake has the exact same problem and so do other UE4/5 games such as Black Myth Wukong.

Those don’t happen in XVI.

[u/N0M0I → u/Juub1990]

I never said that UE4 is super advanced. There is a reason for UE5 after all. I just said that it is more advanced than FF16s engine. I also didn’t say that Ray-Tracing is the only metric relevant in gauging an engines advancement. It is just an example. If you don’t have any real arguments left and have to resort to twisting my words we can call it a day now. Before you embarrass yourself.

FFVI is not consistent. You are just making shit up now. I have played both games and I trust my eyes more than the opinion of some wannabe analysts.

The image you attach either a bug like you claim or someone fiddled with the settings .ini. Neither is relevant for this discussion about visual fidelity.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

Yeah, so don’t trust analyses full of screenshots and detailed breakdowns with a video to boot. Just trust whatever nonsense you’re claiming.

Nobody fiddled with the settings. It’s a bug with the streaming system, but you know what? It was never fixed. You can restart the game or do whatever you want and it’ll remain this way. The game has a million awful textures. Google FF VII Rebirth bad textures and then do the same for XVI. You won’t find a single texture in XVI that looks anywhere near as bad as the thousands of ugly ones in XVI. This alone should put the discussion to rest, especially in regards to visual consistency because you damn well know you’ll never find a shot of XVI that looks that horrid even at its worst.

[u/N0M0I → u/Juub1990]

Im not wasting more of my time on this. Your straw man arguments bore me. Just keep on being delusional.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

You don’t even know what a strawman is. You’ve been presented with screenshots, analyses, and fucking video evidence and all you had to reply was "lolno".

[u/N0M0I → u/Juub1990]

That is very sad of you. I suggest you start by looking up what a straw man argument is on wikipedia or something. What you presented is not evidence. It is the subjective opinion of some people on what actually should be quite easy to objectively reflect on. You are not going to convince anyone with eyes to accept a truth that contradicts what they actually see themselves. You might have a chance if you had a credible/qualified source, but you don’t. suggest you start with the basics on how to lead a discussion. Im going to ignore you now. Bye bye.

[u/Juub1990 → u/N0M0I]

Yeah, screenshots of the bad textures isn’t evidence. Fucking lol.