Thread: can someone explain the whole 1.0 graphics > 2.0?

They also sacrificed the graphics to allow for more resources being used for stuff that actually matters. Even making new gear in 1.0 was a major pita for the devteam, now, not so much.

This has been argued since 2.0 was announced. There's people who much prefer 1.0s shine and others who prefer 2.0s variety with the world. The artistic style changed along the way, making it even harder to argue which is better. It's quite clear the character models in 2.0 have taken a hit in terms of quality, but overall it still looks pretty good.

What drives me nuts is that the Hildebrand cs' show what the team is capable of with the current engine. Yet, they do completely nothing with it in the main story line. I love the Hildebrand stuff as much as the next guy/gal, but they seem to spend way more time on it vs the main plot. Hopefully Heavensward brings a bit more attention to the main story line and quests. Like I say, I don't want to see Hildebrand suffer, I want everything to be on par.

It's easy to put a lot of work into your cutscenes when you have what, four quests per class? 2.0 has more than 10 times as many quests, asking as much care to be put into each of them is a bit much.

Also the main things I remember about 1.0's graphics were blinding glare from the sun and horrific vertical stuttering while climbing stairs.

1.0 might of technically been graphically better, it lacked a lot of aspects that 2.0 in comparison pulled off better. I think people focus way too hard on character models themselves and not look at everything around them. 1.0's terrain, even if not copy/pasted, were extremely dull and forgettable, especially since everything looked the same. 2.0 has a lot of nice, small quality of life features they put into the game that make it stand out much more. Also, 1.0 used the Crystal Tools engine that was used in the FFXIII series and SE learned the hard way, that it's engine was not meant for MMO's.

Originally Posted by Talraen

It's easy to put a lot of work into your cutscenes when you have what, four quests per class? 2.0 has more than 10 times as many quests, asking as much care to be put into each of them is a bit much.

Also the main things I remember about 1.0's graphics were blinding glare from the sun and horrific vertical stuttering while climbing stairs.

Funny thing, when 1.xx first came out, the only quests were the main scenario and class quests. Everything else was done with guildleves.

I am loving the 1.0 graphics, the texture on the cloths.. damn.

i´d never pllayed 1.0 but my biggest complain with the 2.0 world is the lack of connection betwen zones, everything is fragmented in more little zones, from the world map to the raids, i think this breacks all the illusion of exploring.

There were, unfortunately, a lot of trade offs that had to be made in moving to 2.0. One of the things promised with 1.0 was PS3 support and it's pretty amazing that Yoshi-P stuck to that promise. However, to make it happen on that machine (and reduce the ridiculous PC system requirements) a lot of changes had to be made. Zone lines, Reduced poly counts, flatter textures, and canned animations are all signs of this. While some things about 1.0 were damn beautiful, 2.0 is by far a better, more playable game. While environments in 1.0 may have been huge, they were also empty, useless, and not very diverse. There was precious little to do in game, and the fixes thrown at it were band-aids at best.

In the end, I would much rather a good game than a pretty one.