Comparing the graphics via screenshots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

By that, I meant effects quality-wise. The lower image seems photoshopped to me (or CG), while the upper is something you could see in our current version too.

---

what good does good texture if all has the same bland color and lacking the real light effect? besides you dont know how max setting texture will be in ARR like everyone else in this forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

what good does good texture if all has the same bland color and lacking the real light effect? besides you dont know how max setting texture will be in ARR like everyone else in this forum

---

Forums= Jumps the gun. ( not necessarily a bad thing but it can get annoying lol)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

what good does good texture if all has the same bland color and lacking the real light effect?

---

What good does realistic lighting if the textures are just a pixelpulp?

Quote:

---

besides you dont know how max setting texture will be in ARR like everyone else in this forum

---

Go read my first post in this thread again. I never claimed I do. I said to wait till beta before judging it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

By that, I meant effects quality-wise. The lower image seems photoshopped to me (or CG)

---

Very unlikely. The fact tat playing with contrast/saturation/blur like that is very popular between people that like to photoshop game screenshots doesn't mean they can't very easily applied to a game in-engine.

They're so easy to apply that modders use them extensively in several games. They're at the base of most of the popular skyrim lighting upgrades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

What good does realistic lighting if the textures are just a pixelpulp?
Go read my first post in this thread again. I never claimed I do. I said to wait till beta before judging it.

---

I'm sorry, but what do you mean by pixelpup?

Could you point which one you mean on this screenshot?

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/img/sc...UB_0901_04.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

Very unlikely. The fact tat playing with contrast/saturation/blur like that is very popular between people that like to photoshop game screenshots doesn't mean they can't very easily applied to a game in-engine.

---

Might be, however the difference between the effect in the upper and lower pictures is way too high. Background matters, I guess.

But it's not only the effect, the textures are higher quality, maybe cause of it being a close-up image vs. screencap of a trailer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aion

I'm sorry, but what do you mean by pixelpup?

Could you point which one you mean on this screenshot?

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/img/sc...UB_0901_04.jpg

---

Thank you for taking my comment out of context. Obviously, it was a sarcastic way to say you need BOTH if you want the game to look good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

Might be, however the difference between the effect in the upper and lower pictures is way too high. Background matters, I guess.

But it's not only the effect, the textures are higher quality, maybe cause of it being a close-up image vs. screencap of a trailer.

---

Looking at the tunic, I don't see appreciable differences in texture resolution, besides a possible zoom for the whole image.

The effect is different because from what we've seen so far in the gameplay trailer, at gamescom and in screenshots the engine applies situational filters when certain spells are cast and skills are used to increase the dramatic impact, and removes them right after.

By the way, the texture definition in the current engine isn't even determined much by resolution (that is good but not exceptional), but by the extensive use of normal maps, that seems to be still present in ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

Might be, however the difference between the effect in the upper and lower pictures is way too high. Background matters, I guess.

But it's not only the effect, the textures are higher quality, maybe cause of it being a close-up image vs. screencap of a trailer.



Thank you for taking my comment out of context. Obviously, it was a sarcastic way to say you need BOTH if you want the game to look good.

---

So...on that screenshot,does it has good lighting and textures?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aion

So...on that screenshot,does it has good lighting and textures?

---

Yes, for a small image, it does.
You still seem to be missing the point, as I was speaking in general, not saying ARR has shitty textures.

Again (why do I have to quote myself?) :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soukyuu

Whether or not we will still have high texture details like in the eft screenshot... we'll have to wait till beta for that I guess.

---

I'm not going to say "it looks good/bad" until I have played the actual game myself. Now stop nitpicking about my wording, there is a topic to discuss.

Warlock implies the current graphic lacking real lighting effect...and you reply with the opposite statement, and while this thread is about comparing FF XIV 1.0 and ARR....


:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbygunz

SE claim it's a "sister engine", which doesn't really quantify how much of its "core" is similar to the luminous engine. However, similar staff members worked on each, and maybe that's why people think that they're closely related. But they're not. A cursory glance at Agnis Philosophy and ARR is enough to prove that. Theyre obviously completely different. I mean it's obvious that since the system requirements for Agnis Philosophy will be so much higher than ARR that the similarities between the two cannot really be that great. Dynamic lighting is nothing exlusive to Luminous, so ARR's engine probably has more in common with its contemporary MMO games with similar system reqs than with Agnis Philosophy and other games made with the real luminous.

---

No people think they are the same because in the hour long demo and interview that came out last month the words "this engine is the luminous engine slightly modified for mmo's" came out of a developers mouth.

/sigh

Seems a lot of you are expecting Agni's Philosophy quality graphics. It's never going to look perfect. Even pre-rendered CG doesn't look perfect. The uncanny valley is steep.

Not sure if this is "high-rez" enough for you, but take a look at this video I stumbled on recently. It shows off 1.0's graphics pretty well, though the movement shots are a bit rough.

I love how the real graphical comparisons here for ARR, is being compared to it's former self, and not other games (which have settled on a heck of a lot less than what AAR's pulling out, even with the washout lighting.)

Also, weren't we complaining month's ago that Graphics are irrelevant when compared to the gameplay?

You guys must be running out of things to say given that the end is near.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yrusama

/sigh

Seems a lot of you are expecting Agni's Philosophy quality graphics. It's never going to look perfect. Even pre-rendered CG doesn't look perfect. The uncanny valley is steep.

Not sure if this is "high-rez" enough for you, but take a look at this video I stumbled on recently. It shows off 1.0's graphics pretty well, though the movement shots are a bit rough.

---

I def don't expect that quality but it was very good to hear that they at least made this MMO scaleable unlike xi. So maybe we will be fortunate enough to see this on the ps4 a few years from now. Or on the Wii U. I would be happy just seeing this game go to as many different systems as possible over the course of the next few years. I expect nothing more than whats been shown.

Since no one here has access to the game I fail to see how anyone can actually give a comparison. No one knows what settings you can change and how they will impact the game.

I wish people would stop talking about graphics cuz people really don't care that much. As many people play FFXI (if not more) than this game it doesn't look as good and they are perfectly content. It just doesn't matter.