457 réponses à ce sujet

[thehistorysage]

No, he's right. The picture from the camera hides the muddiness of the textures therefore making it more visually appealing than in-game at full resolution.

If you can't tell by my wording, I don't really have any technical terms at my disposal to throw out at you.

No worries about the technical terms, they confuse the issue anyway.

A) He said he wasn't talking about textures, right before the quote I snapped from him.
Something that looks muddy "low-def," looks even muddier "high-def."
C) HD CANNOT add detail. Look at the low res shots compared to the HD shot, the difference in detail is obvious.
D) Even IF HD could make a shatty pic look less shatty, looking at the screen directly as opposed to a photo of the screen would always be better visually.
E) "Sure, it looks great on an HD monitor, but..." Is a ridiculous complaint.

Modifié par thehistorysage, 22 janvier 2011 - 04:43 .

[Beerfish]

Jaduggar wrote...

thehistorysage wrote...


This has got to be one of the silliest statements I've ever heard. Please don't try and sell that a picture of a screen actually looks better than viewing the screen in reality. Take a pic of your monitor, compare the pic to actually looking at your monitor and see which view is better. NO, don't do that, because you and everyone else already knows the answer. Get real. This is not quantum physics. I don't care what the lighting and angle are of a screen photo, no monitor adds further detail to muddy textures, or better lighting physics to game screens. It's quite simple. It's graphics turned up on an HD monitor and it looks brilliant. Nobody likes to be proven wrong, but jeeze don't compound it by holding on long after the proof has been shown. The proof is right here:

...No, he's right.
The picture from the camera hides the muddiness of the textures therefore making it more visually appealing than in-game at full resolution.

If you can't tell by my wording, I don't really have any technical terms at my disposal to throw out at you.

I have not once in my life ever seen an undoctored screen shot of a game that looked better than what I see either on tv or on the computer monitor.  Now this may not have anything to do with how good or bad the graphics are for DA2 but it's my experience.

[Noctis2.0]

Saibh wrote...

Shadelon wrote...

@ second screenshot: O.O Holy jack **** that's a lot of Darkspawn. What the hell is this, another Blight?

It's underground--probably the Deep Roads.

In any case, it really does seem like Bethany/Carver are permanent companions.

The textures look bad, this is true, but something tells me this isn't BioWare's graphic engine's fault.

Don't know why there was any doubt personally.

[Loerwyn]

Saibh wrote...

That has to be the first time Dragon Fail 2 has actually looked half-way acceptable to me, but it's still a bit ew.

[nijnij]

You guies really need to take a look at some Diablo III screenshots and reconsider your notion of "today's standards". That game, which looks decent and still vastly inferior to DA2 (and DA:O), has been (and will be ) in development for countless years by the way and they don't know how to make stories like Bioware, yet, Blizzard fans aren't complaining quite as much.

[ReallyRue]

Haha, those ogres are funny-looking.

[Beaner28]

Brockololly wrote...

Ummm yeah, the graphics look straight up awful there.

That's because the graphics are going to be ass in the release version. Let's face it, this close to release and we're still seeing screencaps with absolutely no anti-aliasing (even on the PC version) and ****** poor textures. I made a thread a while back to bring attention to how terrible the graphics looked in Mike Laidlaw's combat video. One of the devs, I think it was Eplon, just made some smarmy post and locked the thread. Apparently, we're not allowed to discuss how ****ty the graphics are.

Modifié par Beaner28, 22 janvier 2011 - 03:43 .

[IndigoWolfe]

*edit; never mind*

Modifié par IndigoWolfe, 22 janvier 2011 - 03:36 .

[Beaner28]

The point of redesigning something is to make it better, right?



FAIL

Modifié par Beaner28, 22 janvier 2011 - 03:42 .

[Phoenixblight]

Beaner28 wrote...

The point of redesigning something is to make it better, right?

*pic snip*

FAIL

Oh because you know what you are talking about and we should listen to you especially with that name of yours which I am actually surprised no one has reported yet.



On a side note I prefer the new models to the old ones it makes the darkspawn look more unique vs the whole copy of Tolkien orcs. 

[Jaduggar]

Beaner28 wrote...

That's because the graphics are going to be ass in the release version. Let's face it, this close to release and we're still seeing screencaps with absolutely no anti-aliasing (even on the PC version) and ****** poor textures. I made a thread a while back to bring attention to how terrible the graphics looked in Mike Laidlaw's combat video. One of the devs, I think it was Eplon, just made some smarmy post and locked the thread. Apparently, we're not allowed to discuss how ****ty the graphics are.

There's clearly something wrong with your argument.
We know Dragon Age 2 will have anti-aliasing.

What does that then say about those screenshots?

[Lintanis]

ReallyRue wrote...

Haha, those ogres are funny-looking.

Feel sorry for the broodmothers that have to knock them out, thats a big load 

[mr_luga]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Beaner28 wrote...

The point of redesigning something is to make it better, right?

*pic snip*

FAIL

Oh because you know what you are talking about and we should listen to you especially with that name of yours which I am actually surprised no one has reported yet.



On a side note I prefer the new models to the old ones it makes the darkspawn look more unique vs the whole copy of Tolkien orcs. 

The problem I got with the redesign is that they look like undead now, not darkspawn :-/

[Beerfish]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...



That has to be the first time Dragon Fail 2 has actually looked half-way acceptable to me, but it's still a bit ew.

Well it's a given that will not look acceptable and will be a terrible game for you no matter what, that is a given considering that you have already made up your mind about it.

[Loerwyn]

Beerfish wrote...
Well it's a given that will not look acceptable and will be a terrible game for you no matter what, that is a given considering that you have already made up your mind about it.

I made up my mind before it was even officially announced.

[tmp7704]

DarthCaine wrote...

So, they didn't bother making Genlocks?

Looks this way so far, and it makes things pretty odd given how genlocks = dwarves and dwarves are kind of primary darkspawn source, given they fight (and die) constantly even between the blights. You'd expect them to be most common darkspawn, not absent one.

Huge emissaries look menacing alright, but feel pretty weird again given the darkspawn source... wonder which race gets such growth spur during the conversion.

As far as technicalities go, apparently only the heroes are important enough to cast shadows. Or the darkspawn gets second job as vampires... maybe it's because the game is played on low settings but why would anyone do that (especially for the review screenshot) is quite beyond me.

[HoonDing]

Rixxencaxx wrote...

http://www.gamestar.....cfm?pk=2196737

http://www.gamestar.....cfm?pk=2196736

2004 called. It wants its graphics back.

But at least I'll be able to run the game.

Modifié par virumor, 22 janvier 2011 - 05:00 .

[jackkel dragon]

2004 wants DAO back.

[Guitar-Hero]

I'm hearing alot of whining.. look play the game or don't play the game, i'm sure it will sell really well even if a few misguided people dont buy it, ultimately it comes down to if you think the game is worth bying, if you do well great, if you don't you can allways go back to playing DAO or BG

[Loerwyn]

Steffen wrote...

I'm hearing alot of whining.. look play the game or don't play the game, i'm sure it will sell really well even if a few misguided people dont buy it, ultimately it comes down to if you think the game is worth bying, if you do well great, if you don't you can allways go back to playing DAO or BG

You're supposed to tell us to play decent games.

[ankuu]

Guys guys! The graphic part is not the only important thing in a game. Would you buy a game with AMAZING graphics but a really bad story? I wouldn't.



And i am sure that people with a good pc will have at least good graphics. Those who don't, well they get matching graphics. This way all of us can play, whenever it's on a high-end pc, a low-end one or a console.

[DebatableBubble]

You guys have REALLY high standards.

[nightcobra]

ankuu wrote...

Guys guys! The graphic part is not the only important thing in a game. Would you buy a game with AMAZING graphics but a really bad story? I wouldn't.

And i am sure that people with a good pc will have at least good graphics. Those who don't, well they get matching graphics. This way all of us can play, whenever it's on a high-end pc, a low-end one or a console.

like ff13?

gorgeous to look at, but a chore to play through.

[Seagloom]

Steffen wrote...

I'm hearing alot of whining.. look play the game or don't play the game, i'm sure it will sell really well even if a few misguided people dont buy it, ultimately it comes down to if you think the game is worth bying, if you do well great, if you don't you can allways go back to playing DAO or BG

How well something sells is not a measure of quality. Plenty of technically mediocre, if not outright terrible games have sold decently for as long as this hobby has existed. Calling others' opinion misguided is misguided in itself. People are free to form opinions you may disagree with. One's tastes are subjective.

Moving on... my opinion of these screens is indifference. The first two are not too hot. It is immaterial however, since graphics are low on the totem pole of what I look for in a story driven game. Compared to my other potential issues with DA2, this registers as a blip on the radar. It is certainly nothing to make me reconsider my preorder. What does make me curious is why the recommended requirements are noticeably higher for this game when the graphics in these screenshots suggest otherwise.