EU Graphical Update Feedback - Hands and Feet

[Rolder50]

I just find it hard to take workload / storage space arguments seriously when every other modern game can have high / low graphics settings with no issues. Usually by having one set of textures/models that is upscaled/downscaled as needed based on your settings.

Edit: I also know of a mod that adds higher resolution fingers/toes for hundreds of items, so I went and checked the file size on that. It is a whopping 26.5 MB, so no it's not a storage space issue.

[TheDustyOne]

Edit: I also know of a mod that adds higher resolution fingers/toes for hundreds of items, so I went and checked the file size on that. It is a whopping 26.5 MB, so no it's not a storage space issue.

Models themselves are usually pretty small, even with hundreds of thousands of polygons, it's textures that you have to be more concerned over. I know one of the body mods goes into about 3GB purely because of the texture sizes.

[MsQi]

Things that have physical presence are the same dimensionally for everyone. That does not stop it from having more or less details on different screens. Things that are considered “ground clutter” have no substance. They may be there or not depending on settings. This is not some gotcha scenario. These have been par for the course as long as there has been 3D gaming.

[TheDustyOne]

They may be there or not depending on settings.

That's what I mean though, their presence can have some impact on gameplay, but they're superfluous enough that someone could legitimately ask to not have them rendered to help with their performance. How do you reconcile that?

Again, I'm not against the addition of these things, the amount of people running the game on potatos at 15fps on the lowest settings are... practically non-existent, I'm just saying that it does affect the minimum specs, and Square can only ever really design around that minimum they've decided on. Some scalability is needed of course, and the more options the better, I'm just saying that to take advantage of all the latest bleeding edge tech requires leaving behind people who haven't upgraded in a while, and there's still concerns around workflow when it comes to asset creation if we decide on having both high and low quality assets.


Anyway, I'll bow out of this debate. It isn't that I believe you guys wrong, you are right in the extra options, I'm in favour of extra options as you guys, my initial response was moreso playing devils advocate in regards to Squares situation in 2013. They wanted a game that was more accessible than 1.0, and in a much tighter schedule, lower quality assets was one of those compromises. We're now in a situation 10 years later where those limitations can be lifted and we can have higher quality assets than the ones from 2010.

[MsQi]

That's what I mean though, their presence can have some impact on gameplay, but they're superfluous enough that someone could legitimately ask to not have them rendered to help with their performance. How do you reconcile that?

uummmmm. You give them the option to not render them, like you currently can. Like you can in tons of other games. I was talking about ground clutter there. That is usually just grass and flowers. I was making the point that it is different from things like barrels that people can jump on, which will be there for everyone, unless it is far in the distance where it wouldn't matter.

Your only argument seems to be that the devs don't want to work on things that everyone else in the industry does.