Update on DirectX 11 client?

[zakalw3]

The game certainly doesn't look terrible, by any standard. The world also seems much more vibrant than in 1.0.

[xXHalloweenTrixXx]

The game certainly doesn't look terrible, by any standard. The world also seems much more vibrant than in 1.0.

1.0 player models do in fact look more defined and detailed. But 2.0 destroys 1.0 in environment graphics, animations and skill graphics.

[yukikaze_yanagi]

As it currently stands, A Realm Reborn indisputably looks much worse than 1.0. 1.0 looked gorgeous, one of the best looking games by far when it came out in 2010. A Realm Reborn looks terrible by today's MMORPG standards.

Can we please receive an update on the DirectX 11 client? What is the development team doing to make the game look better? Will it perform any better than the current client? What is the release window for the DirectX 11 client (I see some articles saying as long as June 2014, another one says "early 2014"?

I really would love to know about this.. Don't keep your customers in the dark.

i have still to see a mmorpg with this graphic around. Comparing only texture resolution mean nothing, and it's the same reason why 1.0 look better while in reality it's BROWN

[Shioban]

As it currently stands, A Realm Reborn indisputably looks much worse than 1.0.

February-March 2014 is the rough release window.

And it is VERY disputable. 1.0 did have some nice areas, and some really nice graphical features, but features can't compare to design.
The textures and anti-aliasing and over-sampling options made the game look much better than ARR.

Please note that anti-aliasing makes a HUGE difference in games aswell as texture resolution. ARR can't use hardware anti-aliasing like 1.0 used inside a DirectX 9 client simply because you can't hardware anti-alias Deffered Rendering in DX9, with the DirectX 11 client there will be hardware anti-aliasing options and most likely a nice pack of high resolution textures which will bring back some of the feel you had in 1.0.

However we won't get the nice animaitons we had in 1.0, but for the sake of the combat system that as a necessary sacrifice.

In comparison (I can't show many) for the most part, 2.0's environments are interesting and carefully designed EVEN with the limitation of the PS3 zoneing it into blocks we have large sprawling areas packed with detail that we simply didn't get in 1.0.

[Jynx]

However we won't get the nice animaitons we had in 1.0, but for the sake of the combat system that as a necessary sacrifice.

Lies and slander.

They could have always allowed us to interupt animations instead of just cutting them hole hog like they did with alot of other systems.

[Shioban]

Lies and slander.

They could have always allowed us to interupt animations instead of just cutting them hole hog like they did with alot of other systems.

Actually it's not lies i'll have you find. (And slander is an attack on a person, not applicable to this context)

Simply 'Interrupting' the old animations would be pointless for a number of reasons, mainly that it would look horrid.

The major difference between 1.0 and 2.0 is the speed of battle, in 1.0 abilities had a longer cool-down and abilities took longer to cast, we even had an animation lock for that to ensure the realistic look of the animations, so we weren't sliding across the floor whilst casting a spell or firing an arrow. So essentially these older animation would never have worked in 2.0 without simply speeding the frames up which would have looked horrendous.

The animations in 1.0 were considerably slower and suited that battle system, you may have noticed almost all the animations were adjusted or re-done for 2.0 based on this fact that the speed didn't suit them anymore, hence why almost everything was re-done.

The animations in 2.0 aren't by any means awful, but the casting animations from 1.0 were removed not just in favour of the battle system but also for thematic reasons.

Black Mage for example has a different animation set for casting Fire versus Blizzard, which looks much nicer than the old 'tap my forehead and cast' that 1.0 had.

[Tupsi]

Black Mage for example has a different animation set for casting Fire versus Blizzard, which looks much nicer than the old 'tap my forehead and cast' that 1.0 had.

And yet no variation for races and genders. I still think the point is they managed it for a 2000 PS2 MMORPG but seemingly can't for a 2013 MMORPG. The animation in 1.0 had more weight to them where this one has even more clipping than 1.0 did, normally you don't want a game of any kind to have insane clipping.

[Shioban]

And yet no variation for races and genders. I still think the point is they managed it for a 2000 PS2 MMORPG but seemingly can't for a 2013 MMORPG. The animation in 1.0 had more weight to them where this one has even more clipping than 1.0 did, normally you don't want a game of any kind to have insane clipping.

The reasoning for that is simple, think about how many animations there are, now think how many races/genders there are, not think how many animations it would require to match one for every-single-race/gender combination.

The fact we get race/gender emotes, walks and runs, asking for battle animations too is a little bit too much.

1.0 had inertia steps which added more weight to the character along with a mesh deformer.
A lot of work went into trying to avoid clipping in 1.0, far far far too much development time was wasted on little details like this.

The inertia steps for movement was removed in favour of combat as your characters actual speed slowed down as a result of the inertia steps for starting and stopping movement, so that we could move quicker.

Image doing Titan with inertia steps where you're slower to start and stop moving.


Anything that was removed, was removed for a reason. I'm not trying to defend it based on a 'YOU'RE ALL WRONG' point of view.
The development team really did remove certain things and ignored certain details simply because it was a waste of development time to adjust things to suit.

[Edellis]

Lies and slander.

They could have always allowed us to interupt animations instead of just cutting them hole hog like they did with alot of other systems.

The animations in 1.0 were physics assisted. They were dynamic and took alot more to maintain. That's the reason they're worse off now than before. It most certainly is not as simple as interrupting them. 2.0 went with 1) Memory consumption and 2) consistency in mind, especially for the PS3 version.

It's not as simple as "We forgot about gender differences". It's more like "that's another multiple of animations to load per zone".


1.0 is graphically better but 2.0 is so much better designed artistically and functionally that I really can't believe people are complaining. 1.0 looks lifeless, washed out and dull compared to almost any screenshot of 2.0, despite its higher horsepower usage.


And i really should bold horsepower usage, because that game sucked ass at resource conservation.

[indira]

/cut

there is no cant when you program there just taking shortcuts & ps3 has limits, there not using rpg maker.
graphics were smooth in 1.0 in 2.0 there gritty. they can use all the animations from 1.0 on the pc but took a shortcut for the PS3.
zones could still be massive if they made it streaming but they went for the tiny little zone that has to sit in memory the whole time.