423 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

shall we make a comparison?

Dragon age: Origins

Dragon age 2



seriously? you do not see it?

Modifié par crimzontearz, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:18 .

[Blacklash93]

For consoles that's a big step up from Origins.



Looks better than the PC footage from the new dev diary, actually.

[crimzontearz]

Blacklash93 wrote...

For consoles that's a big step up from Origins.

Looks better than the PC footage from the new dev diary, actually.

and THAT is actually console footage...how do you think it's going to look on YOUR pc...how do you think it's gonna look AFTER you install those HD texture mods that will undoubtably come out?

Modifié par crimzontearz, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:22 .

[Blacklash93]

Notice the extremely low-res textures and the wierd lighting.

You should be able to see where my concerns are coming from, here. And these are PC shots.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:34 .

[crimzontearz]

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse



the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.



which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

[Blacklash93]

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

Go through the diary and compare them to the footage they're from. There's little difference.

Those textures and the lighting in the 2nd pic won't magically look better, anyway.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 16 janvier 2011 - 01:52 .

[AlexXIV]

crimzontearz wrote...

shall we make a comparison?

Dragon age: Origins

Dragon age 2



seriously? you do not see it?

Well I see that the words attack /hail of arrows/attack seem to be rough pixelated. And if you take a close look same with the rest. I really can't see anything better in the DA2 screenshot aside from being more colorful.

[Liablecocksman]

crimzontearz wrote...
DA2 PIC

What the hell, I just noticed the diablo-esque minimap in the top right corner!
That is awesome![

[Blastback]

slimgrin wrote...

You can decide for yourselves. 

What is this?

[Liablecocksman]

Blastback wrote...
What is this?

Looks like The Witcher and Torchlight.
EDIT: It could also be Diablo 3.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 16 janvier 2011 - 02:05 .

[DJBare]

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

You really don't want to see it do you?

http://i987.photobuc...pg?t=1294698013
Check the shoulder of the character on the left, those are low res textures, the shoulder on the right hand character shows a very pronounced low poly count.

I'm still looking forward to DA2 with much anticipation, but there is no denying at least this is not much of a step up from DA:O, I can only hope that DX11 tesselation will do something about the low poly count.

[Atakuma]

DJBare wrote...

I can only hope that DX11 tesselation will do something about the low poly count.

It wont, they are only using tesselation on the environments.

[shnizzler93]

I played DA:O on console, and yes, it wasn't very pretty. Heck, it was ugly at (several) times, but I still loved the game nonetheless. If DA2 is in any way an improvement, whether it be graphics, sound, story, mechanics, etc, I will love it. Even if much of it looks the same, I will still love it.



Really, I don't want every game to be a "Crysis" or a "RAGE" or what have you because that would honestly be boring in a sense.

[crimzontearz]

AlexXIV wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

shall we make a comparison?

Dragon age: Origins

Dragon age 2



seriously? you do not see it?

Well I see that the words attack /hail of arrows/attack seem to be rough pixelated. And if you take a close look same with the rest. I really can't see anything better in the DA2 screenshot aside from being more colorful.

you are kidding right?

seriously the ground textures are NOT a step up in your opinion??

[crimzontearz]

Blacklash93 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

Go through the diary and compare them to the footage they're from. There's little difference.

Those textures and the lighting in the 2nd pic won't magically look better, anyway.

I did....all I have to say to you is wait till you have the game in your hands and stop using a dev diary as a quality indicator 

[ladydesire]

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

The folks that want to complain about the apparent low quality of those screen captures aren't going to believe you until they see the evidence on their PC screens. Why not just accept that they aren't listening and save your fingers. 

[crimzontearz]

ladydesire wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

The folks that want to complain about the apparent low quality of those screen captures aren't going to believe you until they see the evidence on their PC screens. Why not just accept that they aren't listening and save your fingers. 

But I'd miss your refreshing comments if I did 

[DJBare]

ladydesire wrote...

The folks that want to complain about the apparent low quality of those screen captures aren't going to believe you until they see the evidence on their PC screens. Why not just accept that they aren't listening and save your fingers. 

The textures are questionable, the low poly count is not, unless of course for some mysterious reason Bioware decided to release a low poly image when they had high poly images on hand.

[crimzontearz]

DJBare wrote...

ladydesire wrote...

The folks that want to complain about the apparent low quality of those screen captures aren't going to believe you until they see the evidence on their PC screens. Why not just accept that they aren't listening and save your fingers. 

The textures are questionable, the low poly count is not, unless of course for some mysterious reason Bioware decided to release a low poly image when they had high poly images on hand.

you do realize that "usually" in sequels you aim to create meshes with the same or LESS poligon counts than a prequel while using the same engine (unless there is a generation/engine jump) right? I mean look at Bungie, I cannot count the numbers of times they said that meshes in Halo 2 had less poligons than halo 1 for instance

[Aynslie]

Games with the incredible top of the line graphics generally have bad or even missing storylines. You want a pretty game go play Final Fantasy, you want a kick ass story will deep developing companions, and choices throughout the story then play Bioware. Personally I'm happy they go for the lower level graphics to give us such quality in story and gameplay.

[Blacklash93]

ladydesire wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

those are screens of a video diary taken with an image capture software after gow knows how many resizing from the original gameplay source and video sourse

the IGN screens are taken straight from the game.

which ones should you be looking at as a representation of the game's quality??

The folks that want to complain about the apparent low quality of those screen captures aren't going to believe you until they see the evidence on their PC screens. Why not just accept that they aren't listening and save your fingers. 

Watch the dev diary the shots are from. You'll see that the low quality of those screen captures is more than apparent.

[Squeeze the Fish]

So far, I can say I'm not that excited about what I've seen graphically, but I'll hold judgment until I get to play the game for myself. After all, there's always the opposite, beautiful graphics, ******-poor story. FFXIII anyone?

[Blacklash93]

Aynslie wrote...

Games with the incredible top of the line graphics generally have bad or even missing storylines. You want a pretty game go play Final Fantasy, you want a kick ass story will deep developing companions, and choices throughout the story then play Bioware. Personally I'm happy they go for the lower level graphics to give us such quality in story and gameplay.

ME2 had everything right. Why can't DA2?

And you realize that lower quality graphics rarely ever means better gameplay and story, right? Different teams work on all of those aspects. You don't "trade" the quality of one aspect of a game for an increase in another with a company such as Bioware.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 16 janvier 2011 - 02:57 .

[Aynslie]

And the reason it is hard to have both, the best graphics AND story and gameplay, probably has to do with the amount of information that can be put on a disc. Lets be honest Bioware games are generally not short, I would hate for loose that for top of the line graphics.

[Onyx Jaguar]

longer story does not mean better or else Xenosaga would be considered the Bible of video games



In fact some of the best video game stories are often the most striking visually, however because of the visuals they take a big hit on gameplay