457 réponses à ce sujet

[elirian_19]

Blacklash93 wrote...

elirian_19 wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

I have nothing against the art style at all. And I never said there's some sort of required polygon or pixel count. Don't put words in my mouth.

I just want the game to look good. Up to par with current Bioware standards. Up to par with ME2. There are times when this looks even worse than Origins so Bioware clearly isn't delivering.

The textures simply look terrible half the time. It's as simple as that.

And that's completely fine, but something looking good is a matter of opinion. The saying, "You can't please all of the people all of the time" suddenly comes to mind.

Tell me these look good.

*snip*

Then there's stuff like this which actually looks good.

*snip

Some bits look pretty inconsistent, if you ask me.

They look fine... in my opinion. And, you're using the Dev Diary as your argument where someone actually created a post to comment on how great the game was looking visually.

Were they stating a fact? No. It's an opinion*. That's what it boils down to.

*And in no way am I implying that your opinion means less than anyone elses.

Modifié par elirian_19, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:29 .

[Blacklash93]

Meltemph wrote...

So dramatic... If you think that the max quality of the pc version is represented in the little bits that are shown to us... Well, all I can say is we will see how accurate that description is come launch.

And if you don't wan't me to "put words in your mouth" be more descriptive with your implications. The way you worded it, seemed to me, to imply that they should have a specific poly count to be considered what we should be getting.

Perhaps you're the only one seeing drama, here.

I only said they should look better. I never said once there was some required count of anything to do that. However Bioware would go about making it look better would be fine by me, as long as those textures start seeing improvement.

[Jaduggar]

Blacklash93 wrote...
Tell me these look good.

Some bits look pretty inconsistent, if you ask me.

Mayhaps I'm blind, but all those screenshots look pretty consistent with one another.

...And I just noticed that fingers look like fingers in DA2.

Modifié par Jaduggar, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:29 .

[Blacklash93]

Meltemph wrote...

Pretty inconsistent, if you ask me.

So because the screenshots are inconsistent, you believe that is how the game is going to be, graphics wise? Erm, well, I guess we will see come launch, I guess.

What else does anyone have to go by? Am I just supposed to assume things will change and look better by release with only about month left of development?

[elirian_19]

C9316 wrote...

Isn't it great that we all can get along!

"You know, one good thing about new screenshots is how it brings people together." 

[Blacklash93]

Jaduggar wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...
Tell me these look good.

Some bits look pretty inconsistent, if you ask me.

Mayhaps I'm blind, but all those screenshots look pretty consistent with one another.

...And I just noticed that fingers look like fingers in DA2.

Look how muddy the wall is next to Hawke and Carver. Look at how tacky the lightng looks on Hawke's robe amd how low-res it is at the bottom. See how low-res the Arishok's model is.

And look at the third screen with great lighting and good, well-rendered textures all around especially on the wall behind Hawke.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:36 .

[Meltemph]

What else does anyone have to go by? Am I just supposed to assume things will change and look better by release with only about month left of development?

Wait, so because we have nothing else to go by, you think the screenshots we have, given the inconsistency, can tell you much of anything? My whole point is I don't get hwo some of you are coming to the conclusion that this is how the game is going to look, in terms of consistency. Not even the Unreal Engine is that inconsistent.

The only thing I got from the screenshot assorment is that the settings were different on a lot of those screenshots and that we are not seeing all the settings. Just like in DAO, the screenshots left expectations that game was going to look bad/messy based on the screenshots that were available at the time and it ended up looking quite nice(maxed out), at least I thought it did.

Modifié par Meltemph, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:34 .

[nijnij]

Okay, a humility lesson. For those of you who were born this year and take graphics for granted, here's 20 years worth of games praised for their graphics :

1991


1992


1993


1994


1995


1996


1997


1998


1999


2000


2001


2002


2003


2004


2005


2006


2007


2008


2009


2010

Modifié par nijnij, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:49 .

[Blacklash93]

2011

[Blacklash93]

Meltemph wrote...

What else does anyone have to go by? Am I just supposed to assume things will change and look better by release with only about month left of development?

Wait, so because we have nothing else to go by, you think the screenshots we have, given the inconsistency, can tell you much of anything? My whole point is I don't get hwo some of you are coming to the conclusion that this is how the game is going to look, in terms of consistency. Not even the Unreal Engine is that inconsistent.

The only thing I got from the screenshot assorment is that the settings were different on a lot of those screenshots and that we are not seeing all the settings. Just like in DAO, the screenshots left expectations that game was going to look bad/messy based on the screenshots that were available at the time and it ended up looking quite nice(maxed out), at least I thought it did.

Why would Bioware show the PC version on anything but the best settings?

[Jaduggar]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Look how muddy the wall is next to Hawke and Carver. Look at how tacky the lightng looks on Hawke's robe amd how low-res it is at the bottom. See how low-res the Arishok's model is.

And look at the third screen with great lighting and good textures all around especially on the wall behind Hawke.

The texture of the building looks exactly the same quality as the texture on the cave wall.
And how does the lighting look tacky? How *can* lighting look tacky? Is it, rather, you have something against the design of the clothing?

The Arishok is both in motion and being shoved up against the camera. If you would like, I could jump into Origins and show you how every texture looks muddy up-close.

And you do realize that he's wearing the same thing in the second and third images, yes? Obviously, they aren't different resolutions or models.

[ankuu]

I started playing (actual) games somewhere at Morrowind Good times...my PC was so stupid that it made the water in Fable pee yellow, and the floor was white.

Assassin's Creed actually had/has good graphics (especially the second one). But you should have put a more static imagine of DA2 for 2011.

Edit: like this

Modifié par ankuu, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:44 .

[Meltemph]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

What else does anyone have to go by? Am I just supposed to assume things will change and look better by release with only about month left of development?

Wait, so because we have nothing else to go by, you think the screenshots we have, given the inconsistency, can tell you much of anything? My whole point is I don't get hwo some of you are coming to the conclusion that this is how the game is going to look, in terms of consistency. Not even the Unreal Engine is that inconsistent.

The only thing I got from the screenshot assorment is that the settings were different on a lot of those screenshots and that we are not seeing all the settings. Just like in DAO, the screenshots left expectations that game was going to look bad/messy based on the screenshots that were available at the time and it ended up looking quite nice(maxed out), at least I thought it did.

Why would Bioware show the PC version on anything but the best settings?

Have they ever?  I mean, when it is directly from them, yes you see the best settings(or closer to it), otherwise it works just like it always does, leaving you to wonder what max settings look like on the full game and then when it finally comes out people are satisfied enough, typically.  Do I claim to understand it?  No, which is exactly why I'm not making a prediction 1 way or the other.  What I am pretty confident about, however, is that that game will be consistent when playing it, one way or the other.

[C-Gamer90]

The whole graphic debate is pointless. Regardless of anyones opinion on the matter trying to convince the other side to see it your way wont do any good. How good graphics are is subjective, not everyone is going to see them the same way. People are going to stick to their opinion no matter what. The argument wont produce results for either side. Pointless.

[Blacklash93]

Jaduggar wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

Look how muddy the wall is next to Hawke and Carver. Look at how tacky the lightng looks on Hawke's robe amd how low-res it is at the bottom. See how low-res the Arishok's model is.

And look at the third screen with great lighting and good textures all around especially on the wall behind Hawke.

The texture of the building looks exactly the same quality as the texture on the cave wall.
And how does the lighting look tacky? How *can* lighting look tacky? Is it, rather, you have something against the design of the clothing?

The Arishok is both in motion and being shoved up against the camera. If you would like, I could jump into Origins and show you how every texture looks muddy up-close.

And you do realize that he's wearing the same thing in the second and third images, yes? Obviously, they aren't different resolutions or models.

The wall in the first shot looks very muddy and low-res. Perhaps the one in the third shot does, too (although it definitely looks sharper), but the lighting disguises it well. Same goes for the Hawke's outfit in the 2nd and 3rd pics.

And when I say the lighting looks "tacky" on the robe, I mean it has this silly dull shine to it.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:58 .

[Jaduggar]

Ah, so you only believe that it's the lighting that looks inconsistent, then?
Fair enough.

Modifié par Jaduggar, 22 janvier 2011 - 08:55 .

[Blacklash93]

Definitley part of it. It's hard to be sure.

[Dubya75]

I'm kind of surprised the dudes at Bioware has not made any comments on this thread (apart from telling people off about name calling).

What are they up to? Do they really want half their fan base to cancel their pre-orders because all we see are these worryingly bad game graphics?

Would they really produce a game sequel with worse graphics that it's predecessor?

I've never seen a game sequel with worse graphics that its predecessor and surely Dragon Age 2 will be no exception...but it would be nice if Bioware could put our minds at ease. The fact they're not doing just that makes me worry slightly.

Since I'm really looking forward to this game I will be hugely disappointed if the graphics don't at the very least match that of Origins...

Bioware dudes, PLEASE SAY SOMETHING!

[Jaduggar]

When a company must rely on constantly reassuring its community of their project's quality, it tends to equate to miserable ends.

[C-Gamer90]

Bioware has probably realized that people are going to complain no matter what they do to their game or what they say to their fans so they just let it be.
Edit: spelling error

Modifié par Dark_Dahlia, 22 janvier 2011 - 09:22 .

[crimzontearz]

I wonder why people keep posting screens from a double resized trailer taken with a screencap program.......

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

The shots look ok to me. I do realize that someone on another computer took these shots and their settings on their graphics card aren't going to match mine on my computer. Why do people get so bent out of shape over this?  Whoever took these pics probably turned their textures down to run the game, I have to do the same thing or run the risk of burning my graphics card up.

What I like is that we can actually see some color and for me they are vibrant. All anyone has to do is adjust their game video settings and make sure their graphics card is set to make the game look as good as possible that their system will allow.

I don't see anything in these shots that would make me cancel my order.

I love the fact that we are seeing large groups of darkspawn to fight. This is what I wanted especially with the combat system being revamped with more speed.

I'm also beginning to wonder on the emissaries if they are keepers that haven't been fully changed into darkspawn yet? They do look similar to the architect and he was human I think. JMHO.

Modifié par ElvaliaRavenHart, 22 janvier 2011 - 10:33 .

[Gorthaur X]

The BDSM imagery with the Darkspawn is a bit much, and I say this as someone who grew up with Claremont-era X-Men. They look like kinkster orcs who got lost on their way to Mordor Pride.

[mr_luga]

Know what I think? More footage that isnt mashed together to make a herp derp trailer.



Let's see some gameplay proper please.

[crimzontearz]

tmp7704 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Fancy that, the ones that are praised for being really good are the official screens and the native res console screens from the specialized sites

I'm under impression all screenshots published so far are "official" or otherwise approved beforehand, that's why we get to see the same few images all over the intrawebs and in various articles. Sometimes one of the sites messes up the gamma or whatever and we get purple Hawke or overlit pictures, but that's rare.

not by necessity. Look at Halo for instance, every site has it's on screens at a certain point but Bungie pretty much says to only pay to those they release personally for quality purposes