Let's Talk : GRAPHICS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valaskor

What rustles my jimmies is the Fact that we don't know what it will be like or if we get better textures

---

Actually they specifically talked about the directx version in response to this problem. They directly told us the textures were low because of directx 9 limitations and that the directx 11 engine would fix that allowing for larger textures. Stop letting your jimmies get all rustled because you aren't reading all the known info.

I wish people would stop throwing around ps3 being the cause of everything being bad and not as good as they think it should be. You all forget, 1.0 was coming to ps3 also. They reduced graphics and similar things to improve other things not because of ps3 limitations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IveraIvalice

I wish people would stop throwing around ps3 being the cause of everything being bad and not as good as they think it should be. You all forget, 1.0 was coming to ps3 also. They reduced graphics and similar things to improve other things not because of ps3 limitations.

---

Actually, they've acknowledged on multiple occasions that they dropped the graphics to support the ps3 and to support lower end pc's. They absolutely did do exactly what you say they weren't. As it stood there was a very good reason the existing engine for 1.0 wasn't ported to the ps3, and it wasn't entirely because the game sucked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiggy

Actually, they've acknowledged on multiple occasions that they dropped the graphics to support the ps3 and to support lower end pc's. They absolutely did do exactly what you say they weren't. As it stood there was a very good reason the existing engine for 1.0 wasn't ported to the ps3, and it wasn't entirely because the game sucked.

---

So it's not entirely due to PS3 support, like you said. PS3 isn't some kind of horrible millstone.

Some of us play on more modest computers and appreciate that the game is beautiful and fluid even on lower detail settings.

I thought I remembered a quote from a dev that stated they have no plans to implement higher resolution textures? I can't recall where it was brought up (in another thread about texture resolution/graphics), but I distinctly recall being extremely disappointed by it. The low resolution textures in this game are hideous. I can see the pixelation of the red parts on my WHM AF without even trying. And that horrible low-resolution design on the Darklight cowls...

Name an mmo other than Archage (cryengine 3) that can compete with this game graphically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolviteSekai

Name an mmo other than Archage (cryengine 3) that can compete with this game graphically.

---

Not with character models, but Rift has ARR beat handedly in terms of world design and the graphics used therein. On its highest settings, Telara is mind bogglingly gorgeous, right down to the littlest of details (like how the grass and such sways when you walk/run through it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valaskor

WHY didn't you put up TWO Clients for YOUR Game SE ?

---

Extra costs:
Dev
QA
Tech Support

Extra gains:
Extremely niche non-primary demographic is pleased (same niche market will pay subsciprtion fees regardless of this multiple client availability)

Offering two clients would result in a net loss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiggy

Actually, they've acknowledged on multiple occasions that they dropped the graphics to support the ps3 and to support lower end pc's. They absolutely did do exactly what you say they weren't. As it stood there was a very good reason the existing engine for 1.0 wasn't ported to the ps3, and it wasn't entirely because the game sucked.

---

They did say they lowered some graphics to make it run better on lower end pcs but not for ps3. Again we're forget that it WAS going to come for ps3 and was postponed for the specific reason of not feeling it right to release a game that they admitted was unfinished. And for no other reason. Clearly 1.0 was better graphically and that WAS coming to ps3. And I guess I'm just imagining that my pc version looks 10 times better then the ps3 version?
I mean if they were limiting the pc version for ps3 then why doesn't both versions look the same? Because they don't do that, any decision that's a limitation of the pc version is taking the performance of the game in mind. Fate battles would not be possible if they hadn't made the adjustments that they did. Both versions are limited by how they want the game to run at its core game design (displaying more characters on screen to make fate battle possible, lowering textures to improves movement speed and rendering times along with animation lag) and each system is limited graphically by its own hardware, one doesn't impact the other

Speaking as a jaggy hater: as long as they add real antialiasing in the directx11 client, they could keep everything else the same and I'd congratulate the dev team for a job well done! If they are going to substantially increase the texture resolution, though, I hope they have a 64-bit client.