Dawntrail character graphics update - opinions, requests and discussion megathread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tahli

I don't know if a lot of people just didn't read to the end, but they stated:
"Even regarding items that are spec, although it may be difficult at this time, in the future we will look into adding more character creation options, among other things."

They'll look into adding more CC options. This is GREAT news! Those added options may very well be the bridge connecting people who like the old designs and people who like newer, changed features.

---

Oh, I’ve read. To me it’s the same kind of “we will look into it” as viera and hrothgar players have been waiting for since 2019. So it may as well not be there at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice9

The downplaying is very apparent here as well. Yes, lighting does play a big part in the appearances- but it does not change the fact that some faces and their parts are just objectively completely different.

---

Exactly this. Take a look at any of the unique NPC faces that were not updated, like Lyse, pre-ShB Thancred, etc. Despite the new lighting engine, they look 100% the same. You cannot convince me that it would be difficult to upscale the player head models while preserving their look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poooman

also also at risk of sounding a little dumb wtf does "spec" mean in the context used in the announcement..? i dont think ive ever heard it used in this way LOL, cant tell if theyre saying those are intentional or what.

---

As in a "spec sheet", something would be spec if it meets all the criteria on the spec sheet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dysvalence

Of the things we can realistically expect the devs to do in this situation, this is imo one of the better ones, and they list most the stuff I personally care about. For every person saying that this is insultingly inadequate, there's another calling it a waste of dev time.

What bothers me though, is that there's no way it wouldn't require multiple rounds of iteration with plenty of two way communication, and they should have realized that they'll need to lean on community feedback far more frequently even if it means having their WIPs shredded in public- it's going to happen anyway when an update goes live. But through ignorance or arrogance they were completely caught off guard at the first benchmark, and are now trying to keep up with the hole they dug themselves into by operating on geologic timescales. There's a grievous organizational error somewhere.

---

Agreed. There have been so many missteps with Dawntrail (this update, the MSQ, job adjustments, etc.) that feel like they could've been avoided or mitigated if there were a stronger line of communication between the devs and the community. Not only do we not have that, but recent communications have felt utterly dishonest. The downplaying of some of these issues to things like "improved normal maps" rings the same way as Yoshi P taking the mountains of criticism toward Wuk Lamat and coming back with "oh we just needed to make her more confident!", as if that was anyone's feedback.

End of the day, this could be neverending. Not everyone is going to be happy. The tweaks they make in 7.1 will just cause a new wave of complaints from folks who are happy now. And it will never be enough for those unhappy now. Eventually, they are going to have to just say - this is it. Take it over leave it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dysvalence

What bothers me though, is that there's no way it wouldn't require multiple rounds of iteration with plenty of two way communication, and they should have realized that they'll need to lean on community feedback far more frequently even if it means having their WIPs shredded in public- it's going to happen anyway when an update goes live. But through ignorance or arrogance they were completely caught off guard at the first benchmark, and are now trying to keep up with the hole they dug themselves into by operating on geologic timescales. There's a grievous organizational error somewhere.

---

i think this is whats bugged me more than the actual changes tbh. the first bench was a disaster for multiple reasons, but they didnt even think about... updating the lighting within the cc? where people will likely be spending more time in than usual because theyve been told their characters may change a little. its like... a lot of this could have been avoided if they put out a cc-specific bench at some point earlier in development, or even just showed more previews than what they did? just to gauge public opinion from those who care. but then theyd actually have to not only be open to accepting feedback, but doing something to change it that wont take another 10 years. there will be people upset either way you go for the final, but a LOT of it could have been mitigated with more open communication during the development, and not waiting until its been pushed to everyone. i dont know..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liamont

You know what would have solved this problem entirely? Not changing the player characters at all. The models were not ugly or outdated, I'm pretty sure most people would have been fine if they had just made higher resolution textures for armour and clothing so we don't have the situations like G'raha with pixel textures when zoomed in.

---

yes they were and it became more and more noticeable to me and the people i play with every time we came back to the game from newer games. maybe most people you knew would have been fine if they hadn't updated anything, but for every one with that opinion is someone else who disagrees and has wanted updates to the graphics and models. this is an issue where the devs did a poor job on accurately recreating the faces, combined with bugs as we see from the post, none of that equates to "they should never have updated the models or graphics".

I definitely don't envy the team for deciding to put themselves in the position of trying to carefully balance character models based on feedback.

It's silly, but I've been so happy with the "eyebags" on F au ra face 3 that seeing it as a potential part of their list of issues to fix made me a bit sad. :') I love that the face looks a bit tired and more mature, personally. It suits my guy very well. But I understand that's not a popular opinion, and everyone's got their own. Which is, you know, the problem.

I just sort of hope they're committed to some of these further changes to character faces/polygons being really subtle, unless we're talking about the genuine graphical glitches and oversights... that should be paid attention to first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DynnDiablos

End of the day, this could be neverending. Not everyone is going to be happy. The tweaks they make in 7.1 will just cause a new wave of complaints from folks who are happy now. And it will never be enough for those unhappy now. Eventually, they are going to have to just say - this is it. Take it over leave it.

---

Yeah, they will have to stop at some point, and I very much hope once they finish this last round they say, this is it, we're not spending another six months going back and forth on this. Because it has to end. I'm glad they were willing to state that they're done fiddling with the eye highlights.

In any event, it sounds like they plan to address the most commented on issues, and are taking into account that many players like what we have. Godspeed to the devs fixing things without making even more people angry. I'm not too worried about myself in that regard, since nothing they mentioned is something that affects my character's face (except possibly the normals at the corner of his mouth which beg-n-plead SE leaves those alone). I hope people who are currently unsatisfied get a result that is close enough for them, and if not, closure so they can decide what to do if they are still unhappy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noumen0nn

Like I'm sorry, in what universe can something like this be attributed to "higher polygon count" or "more accurate normal mapping". Is it too much to ask that the devs be honest with us instead of trying to constantly save face and never admit to mistakes or wrongdoing?

https://i.imgur.com/ZpCY7ew.gif

---

God, honestly. I really was hoping for a little less PR in this announcement because it is so blatant a lot of these changes were by choice or by the polygon unification. I was thinking, maybe this time, they'd give us an honest explanation about why things turned out the way they did. Or maybe told us they had a more dedicated team / time slot to adjust things, instead of rushing out adjustments on select faces like they had to before launch. Instead I saw this and, admittedly thought, "oh they're full of shit," and went to bed.

I just hope they do better than they did between benchmark 1.0 - 7.0 launch and actually look over all the faces instead of just a few of the most popular ones.

I'm trying to not be overly bitter, though. Ultimately these changes should be "subtle" but hopefully combine enough to have a closer impression to the 1.x-6.x versions of the characters. They have to be as careful and as inoffensive with their wording as possible so players who currently don't see a difference don't think something worse is happening. Still, there are so many issues, especially with the overall mouth shapes for many faces, that I continue to worry about them actually adjusting them in time...

https://i.imgur.com/8uIOeB8.png
This is so specific but I think it was actually this part that filled me with some dread. I haven't seen this issue pointed out much on the NA forums, but the JP forums have a lot of screenshots where some eye type options' lashes straight up look like falsies falling off now. I think it's a little absurd they mentioned the possibility of straight up not being able to fix this for some options...? It's a small thing, but really bizarre to me, since the original models just didn't have this issue. And while I'm not personally affected by this problem, it doesn't instill confidence.