Home
tech
The graphics in 'FIFA 17' are the closest thing we've seen to a real game on TV

The graphics in 'FIFA 17' are the closest thing we've seen to a real game on TV

The colors in "FIFA 17" are less vibrant than they were in "FIFA 16," which looks more realistic.

The overly vibrant green grass in "FIFA 16" made it look more like fake turf than real grass, and its texture looks more like actual grass in "FIFA 17."

The lightning in general is more photo-realistic and dynamic, and there's more focus blurring, too, which makes it look more cinematic than a video game cut-scene.

Notice how much darker the dark spots in "FIFA 17" are compared to "FIFA 16," which gives the new game more depth. The "FIFA 17" screenshot shows more shading in the stands and the pitch itself, which makes for more dramatic ambience. There is some shading in "FIFA 16," but it's hardly noticeable – it looks like the whole scene is lit up.

But one of the biggest graphical improvements in "FIFA 17" is the way players look. EA finally gave "FIFA" the same visual treatment it gives to its other games, like its "NBA 2K" series, where realistic player complexions and sweat is clearly visible.

And players look much closer to the real thing. Just take this example of Bayern's Thomas Müller in "FIFA 17" compared to last year's game.

And certain players who looked nothing like their real selves in "FIFA 16" finally got a makeover. Manchester United's Anthony Martial was a particularly noticeable example.

The overall look of players during cut-scenes is dramatically improved due to the Frostbite graphics engine, which EA is using in "FIFA" for the first time this year.

Cut-scenes actually look cinematic now, rather than close-ups of "FIFA's" regular gameplay.

Colors during gameplay are also less saturated, giving "FIFA 17" a more mature look compared to the over-saturated "video game" look.

Source: DigitalFoundry/YouTube

And the lighting makes "FIFA 17" look more like a game what watch on TV than a video game.

Source: DigitalFoundry/YouTube

Player movements during cut-scenes, like goal celebrations, are also smoother and more realistic in "FIFA 17," whereas they're a little stiff in "FIFA 16."

Source: HollowGamer/YouTube

Here's a similar goal celebration from "FIFA 16" to compare. It seemed good at the time, before "FIFA 17" came out.

Source: WhoGivez/YouTube

And you now have your club's actual manager on the sidelines compared to the random characters in suits, which has a surprisingly positive effect when it comes to realism.

Source: DigitalFoundry/YouTube

And they respond to your performance, too. Jose Mourinho clearly isn't happen with what's going on.

Player movements were pretty good in "FIFA 16," and they're marginally improved in "FIFA 17." However, players have more proportionate body parts in "FIFA17."

Source: DigitalFoundry/YouTube

Muller's arms in "FIFA 17," for example, are slimmer and somewhat shorter, which looks much more proportionate than in "FIFA 16." His skin tone is also more human compared to his morbidly pale skin in "FIFA 16."

View Other Slidelists

The graphics in 'FIFA 17' are the closest thing we've seen to a real game on TV

The colors in "FIFA 17" are less vibrant than they were in "FIFA 16," which looks more realistic.

The overly vibrant green grass in "FIFA 16" made it look more like fake turf than real grass, and its texture looks more like actual grass in "FIFA 17."

The lightning in general is more photo-realistic and dynamic, and there's more focus blurring, too, which makes it look more cinematic than a video game cut-scene.

But one of the biggest graphical improvements in "FIFA 17" is the way players look. EA finally gave "FIFA" the same visual treatment it gives to its other games, like its "NBA 2K" series, where realistic player complexions and sweat is clearly visible.

And players look much closer to the real thing. Just take this example of Bayern's Thomas Müller in "FIFA 17" compared to last year's game.

And certain players who looked nothing like their real selves in "FIFA 16" finally got a makeover. Manchester United's Anthony Martial was a particularly noticeable example.

The overall look of players during cut-scenes is dramatically improved due to the Frostbite graphics engine, which EA is using in "FIFA" for the first time this year.

Colors during gameplay are also less saturated, giving "FIFA 17" a more mature look compared to the over-saturated "video game" look.

And the lighting makes "FIFA 17" look more like a game what watch on TV than a video game.

Player movements during cut-scenes, like goal celebrations, are also smoother and more realistic in "FIFA 17," whereas they're a little stiff in "FIFA 16."

Here's a similar goal celebration from "FIFA 16" to compare. It seemed good at the time, before "FIFA 17" came out.

And you now have your club's actual manager on the sidelines compared to the random characters in suits, which has a surprisingly positive effect when it comes to realism.

Player movements were pretty good in "FIFA 16," and they're marginally improved in "FIFA 17." However, players have more proportionate body parts in "FIFA17."

Popular Right Now

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides