315 réponses à ce sujet

[Onyx Jaguar]

Or not, and go with a new proprietary engine



tired of games looking similar to another since they all are "almost" and never quite right

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Brockololly wrote...

I think if the landscapes in DA just had a greater draw distance, even if it was just some prerendered landscape, that would go a long way to making the world seem more alive. Too often in Origins it felt like you were just playing in a boxed in level.

I more miss the days when every area of the game world isn't confined to a single 24x24 space. I actually really miss areas being large enough to actually feel like you're going from one end of a forest to the other. Seems the more graphic fidelity improves the smaller the overall gameworld feels in scope.

[tmp7704]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I more miss the days when every area of the game world isn't confined to a single 24x24 space. I actually really miss areas being large enough to actually feel like you're going from one end of a forest to the other. Seems the more graphic fidelity improves the smaller the overall gameworld feels in scope.

Well, the game engine allows for areas to be pretty large -- up to 4km x 4km is possible, even more if one was willing to push it, i think. The chokepoint may be number of shadow maps generated for props placed in such big area, this is large amount of textures the game needs to have loaded and utilized when drawing the content.

[StingingVelvet]

tmp7704 wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

I'm defining low-res as in the textures are 64x64 instead of 256x256, or whatever.  Look at the ground in the Witcher 2 shot, then look at the ground in the DA2 shot.  One is a much lower resolution texture than the other.

Textures in DAO are in range of 512-2048, i don't expect them to be smaller in DA2. These are quite typical resolutions and not really low-res.

Regarding the Witcher shot, pay attention to the character portrayed on it, that gives good idea how much farther out and higher the camera is in it, than it's placed in the comparison shot of DA2 you used. I'm sure you are well aware that makes considerable difference in appearance of textures and how pixellated they may seem. Consider what DAO looks like at similar angle and distance:

For the record if the game looks as good as Origins I will be happy.  The early screenshots did not look as good as Origins, which is why I am concerned.

[ErichHartmann]

Drasill wrote...
 Hopefully for the next DA they pick of CD Projekt's TSOOD Engine.

No thanks.  Lets wait and see how well their engine runs first. 

[Schneidend]

Hah. The Witcher. That's cute.



If graphics mattered, I'd never play Super Mario Bros. Or Baldur's Gate.

[StingingVelvet]

Schneidend wrote...

If graphics mattered, I'd never play Super Mario Bros. Or Baldur's Gate.

Saying graphics don't matter is really silly... we would all be playing text adventures if that were true, as there would be no point to spend the money on anything else.  Stick figures and floors would be fine for you?

And Baldur's Gate looked beautiful when it came out, and still does in that 2D isometric way.

[AtreiyaN7]

I doubt that anyone's saying the graphics don't matter at all, but it's not something that is as fundamentally important as good gameplay. We all want nice graphics, but it seems really unnecessary to obsess over having next-gen graphics or super-super high-resolution textures in DA2.

[B3taMaxxx]

StingingVelvet wrote...


WHAT?

 I know right? What? Those are some pretty shinny graphics IMO.
 
I've grown to really love the look they've pieced together here.

Modifié par B3taMaxxx, 03 octobre 2010 - 06:22 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

StingingVelvet wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

If graphics mattered, I'd never play Super Mario Bros. Or Baldur's Gate.

Saying graphics don't matter is really silly... we would all be playing text adventures if that were true, as there would be no point to spend the money on anything else.  Stick figures and floors would be fine for you?

And Baldur's Gate looked beautiful when it came out, and still does in that 2D isometric way.

N+ is awesome

[Lumikki]

It's true that gameplay is even more important, but I don't play some games, because they just look too bad for todays standard. In today, I want also very good graphics, not just good gameplay, meaning every aspect has to be good. There is no point to say some aspect can be less good as long something else is well done. That's like saying, okey, I ques it's good enough and then settle to some mediocrate product.

Modifié par Lumikki, 03 octobre 2010 - 06:26 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Lumikki wrote...

It's true that gameplay is even more important, but I don't play some games, because they just look too bad for todays standard. In today, I want also very good graphics, not just good gameplay, meaning every aspect has to be good. There is no point to say some aspect can be less good as long something else is well done. That's like saying, okey, I ques it's good enough and then settle to some mediocrate product.

I mentioned Singularity earlier, which was a fun FPS (sci-fi themed) that lacked really detailed textures. It looked okay, but it certainly wasn't Crysis. Fortunately, that didn't make the game less fun. The non high-res textures were even commented on in reviews, but ithe game generally got decent scores despite that (at least in the reviews that I looked up). I didn't particularly care about the texture issue, because I found the gameplay to be pretty good and enjoyed some unique things like the disintegrating ship level.

In this case, I valued gameplay over concerns about the prettiness of the graphics. Some people might find the graphics the most important thing - if so, then hey, that's your choice. Some people might value the gameplay more (like myself). *shrug* To each their own.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 03 octobre 2010 - 06:47 .

[gammle]

i think it looks relly good...the more i read and look on pics from dragonage 2 the more i want it.

[nhsk]

Lumikki wrote...

It's true that gameplay is even more important, but I don't play some games, because they just look too bad for todays standard. In today, I want also very good graphics, not just good gameplay, meaning every aspect has to be good. There is no point to say some aspect can be less good as long something else is well done. That's like saying, okey, I ques it's good enough and then settle to some mediocrate product.

Lets say you have 1 million credits to develop a game for. Now lets say the only two factors involved is graphics and gameplay.

You allocate 0.5 million credits to each part and get a good game that doesn't get the highest reviews, but not the lowest either.

Next game you have another 1 million. You allocate 0.7 million to the graphics because that was scored the lowest last time, but end up creating a ****ty game with 0.3 million in gameplay.

Next time you have learned your lesson and have 1.3 million for the game. You use 0.8 on graphics because people demand better graphics, but still end up with gameplay for 0.5

Now if only it was the other way around...

[Sihipop]

I'm not too worried about the technical quality of the DA2 graphics...

Though I haven't been really impressed with what I've seen either.

In any case, great graphics are a huge plus, not an absolute must.

But the colours in these screenshots are way off IMO. I dislike the new darkspawn design, I think an easy fix would be to make them grey/brown/black, or change their armor to lighter shade.

I hope the whole game won't be filled with these kinda lame, not colourful but not dark enough tones.

[socoldwinter]

they are two different kind of graphics

lost planet is more into realistic graphics

while DA2 is more cell shading like bordelands

so comparing the two is really pointless

[Sidney]

I thought DAO looked fine. Maybe I have low standards on graphics and don't see all the bleeding edge eye candy but it worked.



The DA2 screenies I've seen do look bad to me and I'm not sure if that is "alpha" quality or just the new art style that I'm not digging on.

[StingingVelvet]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I doubt that anyone's saying the graphics don't matter at all, but it's not something that is as fundamentally important as good gameplay. We all want nice graphics, but it seems really unnecessary to obsess over having next-gen graphics or super-super high-resolution textures in DA2.

I don't see why we need to compromise.  I don't see why good gameplay and good story means a lack of attention in graphics.  It didn't work that way in Mass Effect 2, we got all three.  Dozens of people in this thread are desperate to frame this thread as a war between gameplay and graphics and it is not about that, it never was about that.  It's very frustrating.

[StingingVelvet]

socoldwinter wrote...

they are two different kind of graphics
lost planet is more into realistic graphics
while DA2 is more cell shading like bordelands
so comparing the two is really pointless

I loved the look of Borderlands, DA2 does not look like Borderlands.  It is not cell-shaded for one thing...

[nightcobra]

StingingVelvet wrote...

socoldwinter wrote...

they are two different kind of graphics
lost planet is more into realistic graphics
while DA2 is more cell shading like bordelands
so comparing the two is really pointless

I loved the look of Borderlands, DA2 does not look like Borderlands.  It is not cell-shaded for one thing...

i want good gameplay and good graphics, but i won't make my judgement yet because it's still too early to tell, the screenshots of DA2 in this thread were the of the earliest version where bethany's hair was still purple and hawke's hair and beard didn't match. even the latest demo isn't close to the final build but rather a playable version for people to know how more or less DA2 is going to work. 
a lot can be improved in 6 to 7 months of development.

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 03 octobre 2010 - 02:30 .

[triggerhappy456]

The graphics are not bad, and when not examined closely they look quite good, especially when you consider that the game is not going to be released for 8 months. In a game like this I never really care about the graphics much, unless they are especially awful, and these aren't.

[StingingVelvet]

triggerhappy456 wrote...

In a game like this I never really care about the graphics much

That's odd to me because an immersive RPG is exactly the kind of game where I think graphics matter most.

[Brockololly]

I just think things like textures are more closely scrutinized on the PC in part because you've got higher resolutions than on consoles and you're most likely closer to the monitor if you're gaming on a PC. So you'll notice less detailed textures more readily. I just really hope they avoid the kind of stuff that went on in ME2; for example, Jack's tatoos. The tatoos from her neck up were all nice and detailed, yet below the neck they turn into a pixelated, muddy mess and it was distracting.

[Mike Laidlaw]

StingingVelvet wrote...

triggerhappy456 wrote...

In a game like this I never really care about the graphics much

That's odd to me because an immersive RPG is exactly the kind of game where I think graphics matter most.

It's a balancing act, though. If we overload on texture memory or really crazy shaders, we can't support crowds of people and still maintain our framerate. So, you can lose some immersion only to gain a different kind of immersion.

Overall, though, your question seems to be "Will this look better than Origins." My personal, and obviously biased response, is "hell yes." We'll be releasing some more screens from Kirkwall in the near future that I think will prove the point. Or maybe not. I never really know what's key to the hardcore graphics folks. My thing (insofar as it is a thing at all, I'm not Art Director for a reason), is that I would like it to look consistent. Origins featured a few too many instances of really high-fidelity characters standing next to non-high fidelity objects.