Thread: FFXIV 1.0 graphics

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?

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 That game was from 2010 so even if they did bring them back they would still be four years outdated.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.



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


1.0


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.




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.



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.

'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...