117 réponses à ce sujet

[adam_grif]

So, I think Bioware has to find balance between smooth gameplay and good quality graphics.

If it runs slow, turn the graphics down.



There's no excuse for not including high res textures since all developers already make high resolution textures in the development process for character mdoels and the such. They downscale them for the final product because their hardware target can't handle rendering them (i.e. XBOX 360 / PS3). But it's minimal effort to keep it in the game.



Why the PC version doesn't include it already is because the PC version is a second class citizen.

[Lumikki]

adam_grif wrote...

So, I think Bioware has to find balance between smooth gameplay and good quality graphics.

If it runs slow, turn the graphics down.

There's no excuse for not including high res textures since all developers already make high resolution textures in the development process for character mdoels and the such. They downscale them for the final product because their hardware target can't handle rendering them (i.e. XBOX 360 / PS3). But it's minimal effort to keep it in the game.

Why the PC version doesn't include it already is because the PC version is a second class citizen.

Sorry, but I don't like you attitude, praise your own gear and blaming others. Why you think I would need to lower graphics down at all?

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 février 2011 - 03:32 .

[MaaZeus]

Lumikki wrote...

adam_grif wrote...

So, I think Bioware has to find balance between smooth gameplay and good quality graphics.

If it runs slow, turn the graphics down.

There's no excuse for not including high res textures since all developers already make high resolution textures in the development process for character mdoels and the such. They downscale them for the final product because their hardware target can't handle rendering them (i.e. XBOX 360 / PS3). But it's minimal effort to keep it in the game.

Why the PC version doesn't include it already is because the PC version is a second class citizen.

Sorry, but I don't like you attitude, praise your own gear and blaming
others. Why you think I would need to lower graphics down at all?

C'mon, he said nothing what you are suggesting. He didnt mock anyones computer. For ages PC games have quality settings for a reason, even ME2 has one. Very High for high-end computers and lower ones for more casual ones. Its just ME2 Very High is not exactly a Very High of nowaday standards, not even yesterday actually.
He is correct, if they make very high quality textures at developement process, which are then downsized for the limitations of consoles or just for different quality settings on PC, why leave them out all together? At some point or another, someones PC is powerful enough to handle them and run the game in all its glory.

This doesnt mean the lesser settings should look ugly. Crysis for example looks stunning even on medium settings. Very High and Extreme are just extra eyecandy for the sake of eyecandy alone, not a requirement to fully enjoy the game. We just like to push the limits, to find an excuse to upgrade our computers or some other reason...

Modifié par MaaZeus, 02 février 2011 - 03:42 .

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

Upping texture resolution would only mean a minimal decrease in performance.

Most PC gamers have at least a 512 MB Video buffer, with many having over 1 GB.

Compared to the consoles 256 MB buffer. And texture resolution is mostly about the size of your video buffer.

The game is going for that cinematic quality, but there's nothing that shatters that illusion more than a blurry, pixelated texture, and sub HD, super compressed video cut scenes.

Modifié par Kinthalis ThornBlade, 02 février 2011 - 03:43 .

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

MaaZeus wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

adam_grif wrote...

So, I think Bioware has to find balance between smooth gameplay and good quality graphics.

If it runs slow, turn the graphics down.

There's no excuse for not including high res textures since all developers already make high resolution textures in the development process for character mdoels and the such. They downscale them for the final product because their hardware target can't handle rendering them (i.e. XBOX 360 / PS3). But it's minimal effort to keep it in the game.

Why the PC version doesn't include it already is because the PC version is a second class citizen.

Sorry, but I don't like you attitude, praise your own gear and blaming
others. Why you think I would need to lower graphics down at all?

C'mon, he said nothing what you are suggesting. He didnt mock anyones computer. For ages PC games have quality settings for a reason, even ME2 has one. Very High for high-end computers and lower ones for more casual ones. Its just ME2 Very High is not exactly a Very High of nowaday standards, not even yesterday actually.
He is correct, if they make very high quality textures at developement process, which are then downsized for the limitations of consoles or just for different quality settings on PC, why leave them out all together? At some point or another, someones PC is powerful enough to handle them and run the game in all its glory.

This doesnt mean the lesser settings should look ugly. Crysis for example looks stunning even on medium settings. Very High and Extreme are just extra eyecandy for the sake of eyecandy alone, not a requirement to fully enjoy the game. We just like to push the limits, to find an excuse to upgrade our computers or some other reason...

And the reality of the matter is: We're NOT asking to push any limits here. We're talking about bringing the game's texture quality on PAR with most other modern games on the PC.

[Lumikki]

I'm not agaist adding very higher textures, how ever, if you think Bioware is leaving them out because Xbox or PS3. I think you may got it wrong. I'm sure the reasons are somewhere else, like example how much space there is in DVD's or something else what I can't even think of. People allways see just what fits they own needs, but many times there is other reasons what we don't even know.

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

Lumikki wrote...

I'm not agaist adding very higher textures, how ever, if you think Bioware is leaving them out because Xbox or PS3. I think you may got it wrong. I'm sure the reasons are somewhere else, like example how much space there is in DVD's or something else what I can't even think of. People allways see just what fits they own needs, but many times there is other reasons what we don't even know.

Higher resolution textures are not be possible on the consoles given their small video buffer size. Add to that the fact that they are only rendering at 720p and most PC gamers game at a higher resolution than that, and yes, I think that the PS3 and xbox 360 are at least part of the reason why.

Modifié par Kinthalis ThornBlade, 02 février 2011 - 03:56 .

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

Edit: Double post.

Modifié par Kinthalis ThornBlade, 02 février 2011 - 03:56 .

[Bogsnot1]

The problem with adding hi-res textures for the PC version, is the lack of understanding most console owners have of their own hardware. They forget that the console is non upgradable in the way that PC's are, and if they see a prettier picture on the PC version, you can bet the uneducated ones will cry and whine about why they are being treated like second class citizens, when it was their own decision to buy such limiting hardware in the first place. They will not accept the explanation that its a limitation of the console, as it would then put the blame solely on their own shoulders for buying into the low scale tech.

In order to save themselves the headaches, devs tend to try and make the experience equal across the board.

Damned if they do, damned if they dont.



This is not a dig at uneducated console owners, but uneducated owners in general. You are all welcome to browse through the PC tech support forum and see how many we have had to deal with in there who have sub-par systems, and then complain because it wont run ME/ME2.

Samples:

http://social.biowar...6/index/5865064

http://social.biowar...6/index/5845943

[Dominus]

That's a reminder of why particular games like World of warcraft have held an undeniably solid spot in the PC genre from a technical perspective - Blizzard has an incredibly scalable engine to allow anyone from a 7+ year old computer to an i7 to have the same essential experience, but with one more heightened and tailored to the other. But like you said:



Damned if they do, damned if they dont.

[Vena_86]

Lumikki wrote...

Hard to say, when the graphics is good enough. Of course we all wanna see photo realistic graphics someday.

Mass Effect is how ever very visual cinematic game, so graphics has it's meaning. Even if players don't allways play for graphics, it is still one more thing what creates impressions of real "live" world. I don't usually care if the graphics textures are not top in line, because as long it does the job I'm usually fine. Only big issue what I have had was in Kotor 2, those scenes graphics qualities was really bad.

So, I think Bioware has to find balance between smooth gameplay and good quality graphics.

It is about resolution and forcing lower res textures on PC gamers for console limitations. The most important thing is the art design ofcourse. But the art design with its hexagon patterns etc. profits from sharp, clean textures, the higher the resolution the better.

[HTTP 404]

Mongerty wrote...

Hmmmm, I didn't really notice anything game-breaking in terms of texture resolution on the PC.....

Then again, I was a console player first, which may as well be a second class citizen from the sounds of it.

I used to be a first class citizen in the 90s (PC user).  Now due to budget restraints I am a second class citizen.  Us ignorant console users have terrible graphics on our caveman console devices hooked up to our archaic hd devices showcasing sub par graphics. 

[nutshell43]

HTTP 404 wrote...
I used to be a first class citizen in the 90s (PC user).  Now due to budget restraints I am a second class citizen.  Us ignorant console users have terrible graphics on our caveman console devices hooked up to our archaic hd devices showcasing sub par graphics. 

And because you can't afford the $100 for a decent graphics card you are happy how Bioware forces the rest of us to endure the same glaring disconnect between high-resolution faces and low-res bodies.
classy

[Big stupid jellyfish]

Couldn't agree more. I wish there was an option to run a game with hi-rez textures for those whose computers can handle it.

The current textures are sometimes painful to look at. Especially if you're playing as FemShep - her textures are smaller than MaleShep's.

Modifié par Big stupid jellyfish, 02 février 2011 - 04:58 .

[Lumikki]

This is exactly what I was talking. Making assumptions that it's because consoles, allways blaming others. Just because something seem logical to you, doesn't mean it's the real reason.

[HTTP 404]

nutshell43 wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...
I used to be a first class citizen in the 90s (PC user).  Now due to budget restraints I am a second class citizen.  Us ignorant console users have terrible graphics on our caveman console devices hooked up to our archaic hd devices showcasing sub par graphics. 

And because you can't afford the $100 for a decent graphics card you are happy how Bioware forces the rest of us to endure the same glaring disconnect between high-resolution faces and low-res bodies.
classy

im sorry but some posters blame consoles for their PCs low res graphics.  Im all for PC users getting the best they can get out of a game.  I dont know why consoles have to brought up in the first place.  besides I said my post in jest 

[JeanLuc761]

HTTP 404 wrote...

im sorry but some posters blame consoles for their PCs low res graphics.  Im all for PC users getting the best they can get out of a game.  I dont know why consoles have to brought up in the first place.  besides I said my post in jest 

Actually, the point he's making is valid.  The huge popularity of consoles has led to a big increase in "console ports," as they're called.  Mass Effect 2 has limited texture resolution specifically because the game was designed for the Xbox 360, which has much less RAM and video memory than a decent PC.  The big problem here isn't necessarily that the texture resolution for consoles is low to begin with, but that Bioware (and a lot of other companies) don't bother to give the PC the high resolution "source" textures.  That leads to PC gamers getting 512x512 or 1024x1024 textures when the PC can handle up to 4096x4096 (maybe even 8192x8192, but I have no real reason to test that).  

So while it's not the console's fault specifically, the PC getting pixelated textures is definitely an EFFECT of the console popularity.

[Dominus]

I used to be a first class citizen in the 90s (PC user). Now due to budget restraints I am a second class citizen

Back in my day, having Super VGA was a privilege and glorious... then every few years the previous super-tech becomes obscure. It is the nature of the beast... and the beast is very hungry for power. And RAM, apparently.

[Icinix]

Agree with OP and Terror K. I have the pleasure of running at 2560x1600, so when a low res texture rears it's head or the pre-rendered 720p movie plays; the quality is glaringly obviously ****...





..well it would be if I could see past the murky blocky images before me.

[Bocks]

I actually found ME2 more pleasing to the eye than ME1 (I play on the PC), regardless of the low res textures (which I had to strain my eyes to see) but that might just be me..

[Wulfram]

The brown female casual outfit has some big problems.

[BWBamboo]

Lumikki wrote...

This is exactly what I was talking. Making assumptions that it's because consoles, allways blaming others. Just because something seem logical to you, doesn't mean it's the real reason.

It's not an assumption. Current generation consoles cannot technically handle texture resolutions that a high-end PC could very well handle. Disc-space is not an issue for PC either, as the game is fully installed to harddisk - even if high-resolution textures meant having to release the game with one more DVD, that would increase production costs by only a few cents.

Nobody is blaming the consoles, but higher resolution textures would have improved the PC port.

[JeanLuc761]

Bocks wrote...

I actually found ME2 more pleasing to the eye than ME1 (I play on the PC), regardless of the low res textures (which I had to strain my eyes to see) but that might just be me..

Mass Effect 2 has vastly improved art design and technical prowess than Mass Effect 1.  The lighting and shaders have seen a phenomenal improvement. 

Don't get me wrong, Mass Effect 2 is a great looking game, nobody could honestly look me straight in the eyes and tell me "Mass Effect is ugly."  However, because Mass Effect is designed to take advantage of extreme character closeups in dialogue scenes, it becomes blatantly obvious how pixelated some textures are.  It breaks immersion very quickly, and it begs the question as to why Bioware kept the textures like that.

[Ahriman]

Bocks wrote...

I actually found ME2 more pleasing to the eye than ME1 (I play on the PC), regardless of the low res textures (which I had to strain my eyes to see) but that might just be me..

ME2 is more pleasing to the eye because it has better face textures, wise decision if you have to work with limited hardware though.

[Fredvdp]

Mass Effect 2 on PC was simply a very bad port and I'm sure the game would have been better if they let Demiurge make the port. It's not just the graphics but the terrible user interface as well. It's one of my all-time favorite games which makes mistakes like these stand out. What's worst about the textures is that they're inconsistent. I think faces generally look really good but why then couldn't they put the same attention for detail in clothing and armor?

Modifié par Fredvdp, 02 février 2011 - 05:18 .