Dawntrail character graphics update - opinions, requests and discussion megathread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by faiarrow

Femroe Face 2 is still missing an entire eyebrow normal map but still has the baked in shadow for it in our flat diffuse, so no, this has not been corrected.

---

OK, I see what you are talking about, it sounded like you meant the normal map was actually, literally missing. It's there (it's visible in your last picture), but the shadow on the diffuse is entirely too dark and sharp. It does look like to me that the face normal map could be adjusted for it, or the shadow softened so it doesn't look so painted on. Hopefully that does get adjusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

snip

---

What problems were there with the older race models? I remember the live letter where he went over the lengths they went through to preserve the way shading?/shadows? (it's been a while) looked on lalafell pre 7.0, and how the devs talked about preserving the dead-eyes look of Au Ra♀'s face 1 (The small backwards horns face), but both of those were aspects of the races that they tried to keep, not to fix.

That and as far as I know the devs have been pretty good with fixing actual bugs found in the newer graphics (Au Ra♀ hands having an untextured scale, or their body scales looking incredibly jagged and low quality where they met the skin, both fixed sometime between 7.0-7.05). Was that not the case with the old graphics, were issues like those present and left unfixed?

Personally, due to my dissatisfaction with the new graphics, I'm inclined to think the issues were 'issues,' or artistic choices made for one reason or another (Could even be due to technical limitation) that players grew to love over the years, which are now gone. An example that could have been a technical limitation I personally miss is how <7.0 Au Ra limbal rings were just a hard edged solid color ring placed over the edge of the eye that followed the brightness of the eye, being dark when the eye was in darkness, and bright under light, while the new limbal rings are fancy gradients that are dark when light shines directly on them, but glow on their own when in the dark (Appearing to grow thicker in the process because the transparent parts of the gradient become more distinct). Whether limbal rings were the way they were for the last nine years due to technical limitations or something else entirely, I don't really care. Even if they failed developer expectations almost a decade ago, they were also part of the character impressions we were promised would be maintained three months ago, and I wish that had taken precedence.
This post from the JP forums shows what I mean with the limbal rings:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchwarzwaelderTorte

https://i.imgur.com/U0UPdkM.png

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CidHeiral

I've noticed this as well. I recently rewatched Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (excellent movie) and there's a scene that takes place in an elevator with light directly overhead. When I reached this scene I had a good chuckle because I realized it looks exactly like so many pictures people have posted as examples of how bad the graphical update looks.

---

The best way I can think to articulate my gripes with the lighting is that I don't want it to look realistic, I want it to look good. Lighting like that would probably fit right in and look great in a tense scene like the bloody banquet, but in Gridania's markets or inn? :eek:

I don't recall people complaining specifically about shadows in the first benchmark - rather, the lighting in general was broken because it was making characters look translucent. At least, that was my primary issue with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyrtip

What problems were there with the older race models?

---

Specifically with the lalafell, Yoshi-P pointed out some polygons on their faces that, because of the downgrade from 1.0, resulted in a look that was uneven and bumpy.

Quote:

---

Personally, due to my dissatisfaction with the new graphics, I'm inclined to think the issues were 'issues,' or artistic choices made for one reason or another (Could even be due to technical limitation) that players grew to love over the years, which are now gone.

---

Some of this is certainly part of it. I know that people complained about losing visible vertex edges (on an elezen I believe) in one of the older threads. That could be in the realm of technical limitation that some people liked. I don't think the artists should make visible vertex edges intentionally, though.

Quote:

---

An example that could have been a technical limitation I personally miss is how <7.0 Au Ra limbal rings were just a hard edged solid color ring placed over the edge of the eye that followed the brightness of the eye, being dark when the eye was in darkness, and bright under light, while the new limbal rings are fancy gradients that are dark when light shines directly on them, but glow on their own when in the dark (Appearing to grow thicker in the process because the transparent parts of the gradient become more distinct).

---

I can see that. However they're doing limbal rings now is definitely different. They now do quite a lot to change the color of the eyes when they didn't before. I had to adjust the color on my au ra alt's limbal rings to get closer to the original look.

In any event, the devs wished to update the character models, and obviously, a lot of people simply wished they hadn't, while a lot of people are very glad they did. I think, with some things still outstanding that could be adjusted, the devs delivered on their promise about as well as humanly possible, given millions of players will never agree on anything so ephemeral as "impression". Humanly possible, not divinely possible. It's not slip-shod, lazy, lacking in quality, but there are still some things that can be tweaked. How do you think the devs should navigate the path between players who feel they failed to deliver on the promise regarding "impressions" and players who are more than satisfied with the delivery on those same "impressions"?

Maybe they'll do what some other games have done, and let players flip a switch on the models. They can't do that with the lighting, so the results might not be that great, and it would close the devs off from what they hoped to gain from standardizing the models, but maybe they'll do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CidHeiral

Fair enough, but I'm not quite sure what you mean. Characters will always look worse under some conditions. The same thing happened before the graphical update ever existed.

That's a bit of an extreme example, I didn't bookmark the master post of terrible pre-7.0 lighting examples that someone around here keeps posting, but I'm sure you get my point. I'm not seeing a way around that without a radical reinvention of the game's visual style.

Also, keep in mind the shadows were softer in the first benchmark and were made more harsh due to player feedback. Personally I preferred the softer shadows so I'm at least partially with you there.



You bring up a good point that I realize I was unclear about in my previous post. I was referring more to the way the shadows were being cast across the face than the actual darkness of the shadows. I haven't seen any standard daytime screenshots that are that dark, but I'd be happy to take a look if you have any examples.

---

I think using extreme examples is a great way of getting the point across! You're absolutely right about weird lighting like that always being in the game. But like I've said before that lighting was generally only in areas like The Gold Saucer that have "artificial" overhead lighting, and didn't really come up very often.

https://i.imgur.com/elZIuny.png
https://i.imgur.com/mGUsUzv.png

Here are a few examples from The Mist that would have had a very neutral effect on faces in the previous lighting that now cast harsh shadows. Some of my issues with it are due to model and normal map issues, but the lighting definitely plays a part in the problem. I understand that the more accurate lighting will make certain things look different, but the very swollen look that the current implementation gives to some faces is to me undesirable. So when it comes down to it the thing I take issue with isn't those weird instances of lighting exist, (as you said it's always been a thing in XIV) but rather that they have become much more common than they were before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I don't recall people complaining specifically about shadows in the first benchmark - rather, the lighting in general was broken because it was making characters look translucent. At least, that was my primary issue with it.

---

This is what I recall as well. Unless I'm misremembering, the complaints about the first benchmark were more about changes to the models themselves and the weirdly waxy looking skin that almost seemed to glow, rather than the shadows. It's why I'm still confused about the radical changes that they made to them going into the second benchmark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I don't recall people complaining specifically about shadows in the first benchmark - rather, the lighting in general was broken because it was making characters look translucent. At least, that was my primary issue with it.

---

Oh I absolutely recall people complaining about the soft shadows. There wasn't much people weren't complaining about. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaziek

I understand that the more accurate lighting will make certain things look different, but the very swollen look that the current implementation gives to some faces is to me undesirable. So when it comes down to it the thing I take issue with isn't those weird instances of lighting exist, (as you said it's always been a thing in XIV) but rather that they have become much more common than they were before.

---

I see, thank you for the thoughful explanation. To me the under eye area looks a little odd but other than that the shadows are falling as I would expect them to given the lighting and that head shape, but I understand this is all a matter of perception and personal preference. I have a better idea of where you're coming from now though.

So if you could wave a magic wand and change the lighting somehow, how would you like it changed? Assuming a complete rollback to the previous lighting is off the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CidHeiral

I see, thank you for the thoughful explanation. To me the under eye area looks a little odd but other than that the shadows are falling as I would expect them to given the lighting and that head shape, but I understand this is all a matter of perception and personal preference. I have a better idea of where you're coming from now though.

So if you could wave a magic wand and change the lighting somehow, how would you like it changed? Assuming a complete rollback to the previous lighting is off the table.

---

I wouldn't ask for a complete rollback even if I could, as that wouldn't be fair to the people who enjoy the improved graphics even if I somewhat disagree with the style shift.

I actually like the new graphics for some characters! For instance my male elezen turned out quite nicely, and while there are certain things that are a bit different I think he ended up being recreated very faithfully. Male elezen faces had the most issues in the old lighting system in my opinion, so it was really nice to see those problems fixed. Viera also look great in the new lighting and have none of the weird shading issues when viewing them in the same areas (La Noscea daytime while facing the sun in the character creator is a great example).

So I guess to make a long story short I don't expect things to look 100% the same or perfect at all times, but in my opinion some faces could use a little more love to make them more faithful as well as work better in the new lighting system. It's almost definitely more of model level issue, but I think the lighting may need some tweaking as well in order to get the best results for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noumen0nn

I see your overall point, but I wanted to point out that this specific instance actually isn't an issue with the new lighting interacting with the model itself. Rather, the eyebag shadows are "drawn" onto the normal map of the face. If you remove the eyebag lines from the normal map, that region of the face would go back to looking smooth without needing to alter the geometry.

---

I'm not really disagreeing with you however when I'm referring to eiditing the model itself, I do personally include normal map as part of that progress and not just the mesh. Just to clarify.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

In any event, the devs wished to update the character models, and obviously, a lot of people simply wished they hadn't, while a lot of people are very glad they did. I think, with some things still outstanding that could be adjusted, the devs delivered on their promise about as well as humanly possible, given millions of players will never agree on anything so ephemeral as "impression". Humanly possible, not divinely possible. It's not slip-shod, lazy, lacking in quality, but there are still some things that can be tweaked. How do you think the devs should navigate the path between players who feel they failed to deliver on the promise regarding "impressions" and players who are more than satisfied with the delivery on those same "impressions"?

---

You are being extremely unserious. This isn't some kind of esoteric art. People are literally lining pixels up and showing how they're totally, OBJECTIVELY different for no reason. If you think it isn't humanly possible to do as good as a job on upgrading characters as they did on downgrading them 10 years ago I think you shouldn't bother speaking on what humans are capable of because you clearly don't know. I know you really love how your character turned out but come on lol.