FFXIV 1.0 graphics

Everyone wants them to bring back the graphics from the original game. That game was from 2010 so even if they did bring them back they would still be four years outdated.

sighs Graphics were good but the engine was horrible. So I doubt they want to go back to an Engine that require only High end video cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

Everyone wants them to bring back the graphics from the original game. That game was from 2010 so even if they did bring them back they would still be four years outdated.

---

I dont see it as four years outdated graphics. If something from four years ago looks better than something released 6-9 months ago, I would say that the 6-9 months graphics were rushed and downgraded from the graphics 4 years ago. FFXI came out before WoW, but FFXI graphics are much better than WoW. WoW graphics where not up to par with the times.

I just want those high res textures.

Yes, the textures were nice. Too bad the engine was nigh unworkable, and the requirements pretty much excluded the majority of PC players. Personally, I have zero problem with the graphics. The team has done a great job of making the areas look interesting, which is really all I care about.

And please, stop acting as though you speak for everyone. You don't. Best to just speak for yourself.

NB4 PS3 limitations


The high-res textures would be nice, but I am content with the graphics the way they are. The lighting effects on ARR are so fantastic that I don't mind the trade-off.

I'd also rather see them working on more important features/bugs/whatever.

I'm just saying I expect the graphics to be better now and am willing to buy any videocard required regardless of price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

Everyone wants them to bring back the graphics from the original game. That game was from 2010 so even if they did bring them back they would still be four years outdated.

---

Because they don't want to cut two thirds of the sub-base off from the ability to play without a 600 dollar investment? Also, PS3.

PS graphics are fine. Best of a lot of MMO's I've played recently. Some are just downright ugly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylve

Because they don't want to cut two thirds of the sub-base off from the ability to play without a 600 dollar investment? Also, PS3.

PS graphics are fine. Best of a lot of MMO's I've played recently. Some are just downright ugly.

---

This is the PC. have you never heard of scalable graphics? Loads of games now offer 'optional' high res texture packs, if you have a low end PC you can still run the game at the bare minimum.

I would like to have the higher fidelity back. More polygons, more texture detail, material that looks like actual material, skin that looks luke skin.
I don't know if much of that is feasible with the new models and shaders though. Especially with the intelligent gear deformation system gone.

In ARR, the lighting looks good when it's direct and bright enough and the world design has a lot of great visual direction, but models and textures are less detailed, the bloom on many glowing objects looks remarkably poor, and there's some disconnect with the brightness of some colors vs the natural design of the things designed for 1.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kule

This is the PC. have you never heard of scalable graphics? Loads of games now offer 'optional' high res texture packs, if you have a low end PC you can still run the game at the bare minimum.

---

you mean like this?

http://oi51.tinypic.com/iypo4k.jpg

If your current graphics card can run the entire game at max settings at 60+FPS there is a problem.
I have a GTX780Ti and the game runs and looks the same as it does on a GTX660.
The old graphics models were a lot better than the current graphics and the physics were orders of magnitude better.
The biggest problem i had in 1.0 with graphical lag was my hard drive load time. once i switched over to a PCIe 4x SSD, the lag went away.

Wanting to be able to play the gae at max settings should not be an achievement obtained by lowering the max settings of the game, it should always be slightly in the distance, so that you CAN upgrade to get better, not so that everyone has equally low quality.

"and the trees are all kept equal, by hatchet, axe and saw"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felis

you mean like this?

http://oi51.tinypic.com/iypo4k.jpg

---

yes, like that. I have seen that, normally on cards that are below the minimum specifications. In fact, i do believe that the current game would not run on a system that required you to play at that low level of detail in 1.0

Rather than cut down all of the graphics so that the window spanning hardware is the same size, i would have liked to have seen the graphics we currently have as the low end and allowed those of us who are willing to spend $1200 on an upgrade to have super high end graphics. Yes, the lighting effects are much nicer, but we cant even have nice shadows anymore. have you seen what the highest resolution tree shadows look like?

Did ppl forget this is not only a MMO, but also a rebuilt one?

1.0 failed due to an engine that wasn't original designed or intended for a MMO or its server architecture and had heavy limitations. Those pretty graphics also restricted the hell out of accessibility a step further.

Even if Tanaka was still around, the game would have still hit that point and they would have had to go with a different engine as it was that limited for a MMO's life cycle.

ARR brought balance, accessibility, and playability. At it's current state graphically it is equal and in many ways surpasses its peers. On top of that a DX11 client in the future and hopefully a hi-rez texture option.

Even if you go all out graphically what is the point, every 2 years you would be blowing millions in money and resources to graphically upgrade to maintain non-MMO current graphic standards. When that money could go towards content.

Everyone does? Not me!

I prefer what we have now. I liked 1.0's graphics, but ARR's appeals to me better. Just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pseudopsia

I just want those high res textures.

---

Could they release a texture pack in the future? Other games have done this but not sure if it's doable in an MMO.

Just wait the DX11. Might have some candy like Tesselation and stuff like that ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

Everyone wants them to bring back the graphics from the original game. That game was from 2010 so even if they did bring them back they would still be four years outdated.

---

We can bring back the old bump/normal maps, (to an extent, the specular maps) as well as the shaders and various other effects that were used in 1.23.


What /can't/ be brought back is the way lighting/shadows were rendered in the old engine. The method they were using was capable of casting a seemingly perfect shadow but underperformed in generating an even result overall due to the excessive volume of computation time required to use this method, but on the plus side provided a perfect light source for all the bump/normal/specular maps that were used.

The downside of this old way of rendering the scene proved VERY expensive and required a pretty beefy system to even run it at the "halfway" mark let alone the full-hog.


What is normal mapping?
Almost every game you play probably uses this method, where a higher detail model is created then a colour coded 'map' of the detail is made and applied to a lower-detailed object (shown below), which gives the illusion that the lower detailed object has more detail based on the light sources in the scene.

http://www.foro3d.com/attachments/10...ng-image08.png

Now, where the comparison between 1.0 > ARR here is the actual resolution of the textures used for bump maps and diffuse (AKA flat image) textures, is considerably lower where finite details are lost which when it comes to bump maps REALLY shows.

ARR
http://i.imgur.com/AGUnaga.jpg

1.0
http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__...land_stand.jpg

An example of 1.0 > ARR comparison is something like muscle where there was definition before, only the outline/shadow remains, you can see clearly below the shape is retained but the nice finite details of the neck, pectoral muscles and arms are completely.

1.0 gained most of its ""beauty"" through textures like these as well as its attention to detail for cut scenes and animations.

DO NOT mistake 1.0s lighting/shadows as "something to be missed", it really isn't, the actual detail you enjoyed wasn't found in this lightning/rendering system for the most part, another effect you don't see in ARR is 'Bloom'.
Bloom is an effect that saturates and adds a 'hazy' light effect to the scene which if balanced incorrectly can look too bright and tacky, where-as in 1.0 you'd have noticed they blended bloom into the game so that it had the intended effect without it overkilling everything else.

http://www.radioactive-software.com/...Comparison.jpg


Square Enix reasoning behind this 'change of heart';

Lower resolution textures use considerably less memory, the current lightning model their using (Deffered Rendering) uses a lot less computation time (and memory) also, broadening the games audience.
1.0's problem was, half of the people couldn't even run the game which affected their enjoyment (even more so than the convoluted systems to play 1.0 on release) so it's a no brainer that Square Enix dummed down the requirements.

Now, for the lightning/shadow rendering (Deffered Rendering) in ARR, this is very scalable which is why its become so popular to use in games as of recent, where the resolution of the shadows being casted from objects in the scene can be adjusted as the developer sees fit, the only problem with adjusting this is increasing this further and futher will obviously sky-rocket the computation time required to draw the scene which is why we have a limit of 2048 currently.

http://i.imgur.com/gofa85K.png

Animations

Animations in 1.0 were fantastic, no doubt about it mainly due to the fact that they used 'inertia', there was a gradual /beginning > animation > end/ to every animation; walking, running, attacking or casting you'd always begin and end the animation flawlessly, as a result of this an animation-lock was added in (if you remember).

Animation Lock for those who don't know, locked you into whatever position you were in whilst you were casting/attacking making it almost impossible to dodge any AOEs or attacks once you began casting, leaving you with only a few seconds to either cancel the cast and them move, or finish and moved. This required at times precise timing and either proved a fun challenge or just; "Oh my god, animation lock erupted me again...sorry guys!".

As a result reworking the animations for 2.0 resulted in quicker movement where inertia simply wasn't possible anymore, so we now have a choppier (and sloppier) look to the animation. But compared to most MMOs the animations we DO have now are fantastic, just not as great as before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onidemon

Could they release a texture pack in the future? Other games have done this but not sure if it's doable in an MMO.

---

Anything is possible, but as it stands I don't see SE doing this.

I recall in beta Yoshi mentioned that they won't include high resolution textures till Directx 11 client.

Later there is an interview where he says he won't include high resolution textures with Directx 11 client, rather will focus on lighting instead.

2013/09/24 http://gamerescape.com/2013/09/24/ga...oshida-part-2/

Quote:

---

GW: How’s the texture resolution?
Yoshida: We have no plans to change the resolution. I explained this before, but current games are not built on resolutions any more. For photo realistic effect the quality of normal map, for sculpt model it will depend on the amount of time spent, and for the quality seeing how realistic you can get the engravings to show by shining realistic light. These are the kind of things we need to tackle down. There are things which uses really low texture resolutions, but I think, you won’t be able to tell that it was even used. Game structure like the “previous FFXIV” are the only one that required resolution to fight, therefore I don’t think around resolutions.

---

'Graphics' is FAR too ubiquitous a term. People need to be much more specific.

Are you talking about the Graphics Engine?

• 1.0 had a clunky and demanding graphics engine - I don't think anyone wants that back.
• ARR's graphic engine is fantastic, and DX11 will make it even better.

Are you talking about the Visual Design of Gear and items?

• 1.0 was much more realistic in it's design. I miss the sense of 'authenticity' that the gear and animations had.
• ARR is very flashy and has far too many glowing weapons, carnival costume gear, and circus mounts.

Are you talking about the Environmental design?

• 1.0 was copy-pasted and dull, but it was a vast world.
• ARR is vibrant, living and full of amazing things to see, even if it is rather tightly packed

Perhaps you mean Texture detail?

• 1.0 had much higher texture resolutions overall, a clear winner in the close-up shots and cutscenes.
• ARR has lower texture resolutions, but it also has MORE textures overall which make the wide angle camera views look amazing.

And then, there are other graphic effects that are camera and light based:

• 1.0 had crazy bloom effects, but also nifty Depth of Field and Stereoscopic 3D.
• ARR has global shadows, volumetric light rays, and a great balance of indoor/outdoor lighting. I really wish it also had 1.0's Depth of Field and Stereoscopic 3D. -- FFXIV was so fun to play in 3D...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

'Graphics' is FAR to ubiquitous a term.

---

Yes, it is!

I admit that I don't have the knowledge or background to specify what I preferred from 1.0. Unfortunately, my husband doesn't either. Perhaps if I give you my impressions you can tell me what aspects of the graphics I'm missing? (sincere question here, I know that sometimes over the internet it can seem like I'm mocking you or being sarcastic, but I'm not!)

I feel like the world is smaller and plastic, instead of vast and weighted.
Whether I'm zoomed out, or in first person, it feels like I'm in the bottom of a concave bowl, but 1.0 felt more convex, where the scenery around me spread out and seemed farther away.
Also, you know when you watch cartoons, how you can tell the difference between the background and things that actually move? Because there's a different quality to the color or something? I see that in ARR. In 1.0, you could turn off labels, zoom out all the way, and not see a difference between the world and the mobs/people, including your character. In ARR, even with the labels off and zoomed out all the way, the people and mobs stand out, a lot. They look like little colorforms (wow, I'm old >< ) laid out over a drawn background.
Also, the scale or perspective seems off. I can zoom out farther in 2.0, but it just makes the world look even smaller. I don't know if my character is placed in a different spot on my screen, or if it is a difference in scale, but sizes just seem off to me.

So, what aspect(s) of the 'graphics' am I missing? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrystWildkey

So, what aspect(s) of the 'graphics' am I missing? :D

---

From what I see, your feedback is more focused on Design rather than graphics... specifically 'Environmental Design'.

And I agree with many of your points. ^^

In 1.0 I feel like I left the camera behind me and I saw the sky a lot more often, and it was pretty. In ARR I feel like I'm always staring at the ground, maybe the camera is different or I'm just used to watching for AOE markers. Or both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fawkes

In 1.0 I feel like I left the camera behind me and I saw the sky a lot more often, and it was pretty. In ARR I feel like I'm always staring at the ground, maybe the camera is different or I'm just used to watching for AOE markers. Or both.

---

AOE markers. I do the same thing all the time, so used to spending a few hours in a fight trying to watch for markers on the floor and enemy positions that I forget I don't need to do it when i'm walking around the town/field.

As for camera weight, try adjusting 3rd Person Camera Angle. (As shown below) Sometimes setting it higher or lower can change your perspective view.
http://i.imgur.com/WWz4z21.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sygmaelle

Just wait the DX11. Might have some candy like Tesselation and stuff like that ;)

---

I think with DX 11 support coming out for this game, I think we will be seeing a lot more detail and textures (well, for those with computers that can handle it). So definitely agreed, Syg.

Also, though I miss the level of detail and textures (there is still a good amount of detail, remember), I prefer the art direction of ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shioban

neat tip

---

Thank you! I will try this later :D

I was one who couldn't get 1.0 to run even though I had a very high end machine. It caused me to quit the game(aside from the gameplay issues). But now I'm back with 2.0 and am enjoying it very much. One thing I can say is I'm sort of happy they made the character design more cartoony and less realistic. I think there is a balance you have to match before you get so realistic that the fantasy elements start to look fake. i.e. to me the realism of 1.0 was so great that instead of seeing character in a fantasy world, it looked more like people dressed up in a cos-play. It was immersion breaking I guess you could say.

i prefer to bring back the animations

Even FFXI supported custom RES textures but ARR No... is really disappointing. They MUST add in DX11.

Low RES textures = 512 x 512
Medium = 1024 x 1024
High = 2048 x 2048
Maximun = 4096 x 4096

Yes adding this option to pc, will cause the ps3/ps4 version looks terrible outdated but why the PC users HAVE deal with the consoles limitations?

The best example for the people see this. Go to Middle la noscea and close up the Vegetation there, that looks HORRIBLE not even reach 512 x 512 res texture.

I just want those sweet animations and the original font back

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LioJen

I just want those sweet animations and the original font back

---

I miss the option to choose our own font.

It'd be cool if they did what Bethesda did with Skyrim, and let the PC players mod their own graphics in. I can't see it happening, but it'd be interesting.

As a 1.0 player though, wild chocobos couldn't drag me back to the PC version.

I'd largely like to see the return of 1.0's animations. The amount of detail they put in was incredible. Texture improvement with Dx11 would be nice, but I'll survive if they decide not to update them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felis

you mean like this?

http://oi51.tinypic.com/iypo4k.jpg

---

What are your specs back then?

Besides, I think you tweaked your configuration wrong. Even on my laptop which has Core2Duo 1.6 mhz with Nvidia G210M, I still could manage getting good graphic.

This is example taken from my laptop:
http://i.imgur.com/9FJGRf8.jpg

And here's me saying goodbye to 1.0 forever on Dec 31, 2012 23:57
http://i.imgur.com/LXs0JHe.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

I'm just saying I expect the graphics to be better now and am willing to buy any videocard required regardless of price.

---

Well that's good for you but other people exist on this planet and they must be considered too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobbinT

This is example taken from my laptop:
And here's me saying goodbye to 1.0 forever on Dec 31, 2012 23:57
http://i.imgur.com/LXs0JHe.jpg

---

FWIW that's over half of the maximum number of characters that engine could show on-screen at a time.

My major gripe atm is the minecraft shadows. Hopefully dx11 will bring an improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArkhamNative

FWIW that's over half of the maximum number of characters that engine could show on-screen at a time.

---

Versus how many can it show now? During Odin or just strolling through Rev toll people pop out of thin air 10ft in front of me on a crowded (every) day...

For that, I have to admit that ARR could show more ppl. Back in the days when you running in Uldah, for couple of steps had some players rendered and some vanished. Even had to make shout region in Uldah separated in region that we now know as Steps of Nald & Thal areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckles

Versus how many can it show now? During Odin or just strolling through Rev toll people pop out of thin air 10ft in front of me on a crowded (every) day...

---

ARR
In a single grid, a maximum of 100 characters will be displayed. Since NPCs and monsters have display priority, the monsters themselves do not actually disappear, but once more than 100 players enter a grid, certain characters are no longer displayed. The system was set up to hide objects from other grids, so even if hundreds of characters gather, stress is not placed on your PC.

I'm not gonna even get into 1.0 as it was like less than 50 displayed and not by grid but total. All you had to do was walk into a retainer ward back then to see it.