387 réponses à ce sujet

[Revan312]

Morroian wrote...
So why isn't ME more tactical then in having more control over your squadmates? I think one of the devs talked about party based tactical games being more resource intensive and thus couldn't be as graphically as good as FPS or TPS games.

That's an excuse.. plain and simple.. If you have the right talent you can optimize an engine to be wonderful, or it can be a mess.. Take Two Worlds II, it looked great and yet it ran on very modest hardware, then take GTA IV, which ran fine on consoles but was absolute trash on the PC.. I chug much harder running GTAIV with a quad core and a GTX 470 then my friends XBox does..

Graphical optimization is a huuuge part of how it will run.  Bioware may just not have the technical talent to get an engine to run as well as it can.  DA:O runs almost as rough on my PC with everything turned to max as Crysis Warhead does, and the difference in looks is crazy.  Plus Crysis uses advanced physics which takes even more juice.

Really, if you had the right team, you could make a Cryengine 2  tactical party based RPG that ran extremely well, and was very scalable, as long as they knew what they were doing.

Modifié par Revan312, 21 février 2011 - 02:28 .

[lovecraftiangod]

a few things

1 people are comparing da2 to games that are mostly pc only except crysis2 which will be what 6-8 hours max

2 people need to chill on the hate

3 if da2 bugs you so much you have to complain like this don't buy it

4 when it comes out if it sucks then scream at the top of your lungs

5 yes witcher2 looks better but dragon age 2 is fine

[Anathemic]

lovecraftiangod wrote...

a few things
1 people are comparing da2 to games that are mostly pc only except crysis2 which will be what 6-8 hours max
2 people need to chill on the hate
3 if da2 bugs you so much you have to complain like this don't buy it
4 when it comes out if it sucks then scream at the top of your lungs
5 yes witcher2 looks better but dragon age 2 is fine

DA2 is not fine in terms of graphical appeal, it's barely hanging on.

[Nohvarr]

By whose standards? And why does DA:2 need to look like the Witcher 2 when the game series is specifically trying to forge a visul identity for itself?

[lovecraftiangod]

Anathemic wrote...




DA2 is not fine in terms of graphical appeal, it's barely hanging on.

 
it is in my opinion.

[Riosred]

Has DA3 been confirmed??? Did I miss that?

[Anathemic]

Nohvarr wrote...

By whose standards? And why does DA:2 need to look like the Witcher 2 when the game series is specifically trying to forge a visul identity for itself?

It doesn't but when next gen comes and every game is starting to have Crysis 2, Witcher 2, and Skyrim graphics, BioWare needs to step it up

[Nohvarr]

They did, just not in the direction of Witcher 2. Most people on this forum seem to agree that the game is graphical superior to DA:O even if they don't like the visual art style.

I just don't see why Bioware needs to make their game look like the Witcher 2 or Skyrim. That style works for those games. Skyrim is a FPS/RPG/Adventure and is more heavily invested in a specific type of immersion. The Witcher is based off an established Dark Fantasy series with a visual look already determined by the Author and the fans imaginations. and must fit thise expected look or face massive fan backlash.

DA2 is not trying to attain the type of immersion seen in Skyrim, and it is not under the visual constraints of The Witchers series. There's nothing that says they have to spend extra resources tarting up the engine.

Let's take a look at another game, one that is wildly popular, but not the biggest graphical powerhouse. I of course mean World of Warcraft. WOW has managed to murder it's competiton (and the lives of some of it's customers) despite the fact that it's not a graphical powerhouse. The artstyle does a great job of selling the various locations of the world, and ensuring that the game carries it's own identity. The same principle works for DA 2. I just finished watching the new version of The Witch of The Wilds, and it's clear that I will NEVER again mistake her for anyone else, or anything other than what she is. The same holds true for this game. The artstyle gives the game a distinctive look while allowing the team to paint the 'visual' world in broader strokes.

I say let people make fun of it, and laugh at it in comparison to TW2. All they're really doing is marketing the game to other people for free. Beacuse at the end of the day people will remember the game, and despite it not looking 'next gen' by the definition of some, they're still likely to give it a chance.

"The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."

- Oscar Wilde

Modifié par Nohvarr, 21 février 2011 - 05:11 .

[Anathemic]

Nohvarr wrote...

They did, just not in the direction of Witcher 2. Most people on this forum seem to agree that the game is graphical superior to DA:O even if they don't like the visual art style.

I just don't see why Bioware needs to make their game look like the Witcher 2 or Skyrim. That style works for those games. Skyrim is a FPS/RPG/Adventure and is more heavily invested in a specific type of immersion. The Witcher is based off an established Dark Fantasy series with a visual look already determined by the Author and the fans imaginations. and must fit thise expected look or face massive fan backlash.

DA2 is not trying to attain the type of immersion seen in Skyrim, and it is not under the visual constraints of The Witchers series. There's nothing that says they have to spend extra resources tarting up the engine.

Let's take a look at another game, one that is wildly popular, but not the biggest graphical powerhouse. I of course mean World of Warcraft. WOW has managed to murder it's competiton (and the lives of some of it's customers) despite the fact that it's not a graphical powerhouse. The artstyle does a great job of selling the various locations of the world, and ensuring that the game carries it's own identity. The same principle works for DA 2. I just finished watching the new version of The Witch of The Wildds, and it's clear that I will NEVER again mistake her for anyone else, or anything other than what she is. The same holds true for this game. The artstyle gives the game a distinctive look while allowing the team to paint the 'visual' world in broader strokes.

I say let people make fun of it, and laugh at it in comparison to TW2. All they're really doing is marketing the game to other people for free. Beacuse at the end of the day people will remember the game, and despite it not looking 'next gen' by the definition of some, they're still likely to give it a chance.

"The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."

Oscar Wilde

Sure but guess what, heard of Blizzard's newest project 'Titan'? Next-gen MMORPG, note next-gen. Blizzard too is going next-gen. Again BioWare needs to step it up.

[Nohvarr]

Anathemic wrote...


Sure but guess what, heard of Blizzard's newest project 'Titan'? Next-gen MMORPG, note next-gen. Blizzard too is going next-gen. Again BioWare needs to step it up.

'Next-gen' is a marketing word, and since you have no screenshots with which to compare the game, and the fact that the game StarCraft 2 and DIablo 3 won't be winning any 'next-gen' graphics awards, cast some doubt on your assumption.

[drahelvete]

@Anathemic: You're like a broken record. Let it go already! No, DA2 is not the most visually stunning game in the world, but guess what? It's not the end of the world. There's more to a game than just graphics.

Modifié par drahelvete, 21 février 2011 - 05:17 .

[Anathemic]

Nohvarr wrote...

Anathemic wrote...


Sure but guess what, heard of Blizzard's newest project 'Titan'? Next-gen MMORPG, note next-gen. Blizzard too is going next-gen. Again BioWare needs to step it up.

'Next-gen' is a marketing word, and since you have no screenshots with which to compare the game, and the fact that the game StarCraft 2 and DIablo 3 won't be winning any 'next-gen' graphics awards, cast some doubt on your assumption.

StarCraft 2 on ultra setting is beast, it's running the e-sport crowd, and unlike BioWare has a tendency to patch it's games, no worries there.

Diablo 3, still in production, and again cosntant patching will keep it up to date.

And do you doubt Blizzard isn't capable of releasing a next-gen MMORPG? 'next-gen' might be a marketing word, but when Blizzard says it's going to create the next-gen MMORPG, it's going to create he next-gen MMORPG.

[Tenken_h]

Anathemic wrote...


Sure but guess what, heard of Blizzard's newest project 'Titan'? Next-gen MMORPG, note next-gen. Blizzard too is going next-gen. Again BioWare needs to step it up.

So you are comparing a game that is coming out Q4 2013 (according to that leaked Blizzard release schedule a while back) to a game coming out in little over two weeks?

[Anathemic]

drahelvete wrote...

@Anathemic: You're like a broken record. Let it go already! No, DA2 is not the most visually stunning game in the world, but guess what? It's not the end of the world. There's more to a game than just graphics.

Yes I know graphics aren't everything, if you've read through the thread however you will understand that graphics/new engine is  a must if BioWare is going to keep up in the competition in the near future.

[Anathemic]

Tenken_h wrote...

Anathemic wrote...


Sure but guess what, heard of Blizzard's newest project 'Titan'? Next-gen MMORPG, note next-gen. Blizzard too is going next-gen. Again BioWare needs to step it up.

So you are comparing a game that is coming out Q4 2013 (according to that leaked Blizzard release schedule a while back) to a game coming out in little over two weeks?

No, I'm simply stating next-gen will be upon us, and every dev company who wants to compete needs to step it up.

[XBenotto18]

Origins hugely lacked graphics but that didn't stop people from playing it

Modifié par XBenotto18, 21 février 2011 - 05:26 .

[drahelvete]

Anathemic wrote...

drahelvete wrote...

@Anathemic: You're like a broken record. Let it go already! No, DA2 is not the most visually stunning game in the world, but guess what? It's not the end of the world. There's more to a game than just graphics.

Yes I know graphics aren't everything, if you've read through the thread however you will understand that graphics/new engine is  a must if BioWare is going to keep up in the competition in the near future.

Maybe you're right, I don't really care, I'm just wondering why you feel the need to argue that point in almost every thread?

[Anathemic]

drahelvete wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

drahelvete wrote...

@Anathemic: You're like a broken record. Let it go already! No, DA2 is not the most visually stunning game in the world, but guess what? It's not the end of the world. There's more to a game than just graphics.

Yes I know graphics aren't everything, if you've read through the thread however you will understand that graphics/new engine is  a must if BioWare is going to keep up in the competition in the near future.

Maybe you're right, I don't really care, I'm just wondering why you feel the need to argue that point in almost every thread?

I can argue gameplay if you want

[Krimson_Wolf]

really DA3. DA2 is not even out yet and were talking about the next freaking game. Thats just stupid all be back after the 8th of march.

[Anathemic]

Krimson_Wolf wrote...

really DA3. DA2 is not even out yet and were talking about the next freaking game. Thats just stupid all be back after the 8th of march.

Actually I'll prolly still be here as Witcher 2 doesn't come out until May, might try the demo.

[drahelvete]

Anathemic wrote...

I can argue gameplay if you want

Go ahead. Not with me, though.

[Anathemic]

drahelvete wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

I can argue gameplay if you want

Go ahead. Not with me, though.

Maybe in another thread, however as this thread is strictly portaining to graphics and graphics engines, I can't else I'll get off-topic.

[Amyntas]

Krimson_Wolf wrote...

really DA3. DA2 is not even out yet and were talking about the next freaking game. Thats just stupid all be back after the 8th of march.

It's probably already too late to influence DA3, to be honest...

I just wanted to agree that DA3 needs a new engine.

[Nohvarr]

Anathemic wrote...

And do you doubt Blizzard isn't capable of releasing a next-gen MMORPG? 'next-gen' might be a marketing word, but when Blizzard says it's going to create the next-gen MMORPG, it's going to create he next-gen MMORPG.

Dosen't matter what Blizzard is capable of, their track record shows a distinct disinterest in creating games on the visual level of Crysis 2, The Witcher 2 and Skyrim. This has worked well for them, for reasons I've already stated. Not just for them, but also for the guys behind Borderlands, which caught a lot of flak initially for moving away from realistic graphics, but still sold very well.

As for your claims about Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, they don't look anything like the three games you compared DA 2. You claim SC2 is a beast on ultralevels but I only have your word for that, as nothing I've seen, and I've played the game, would seem to prove your point.

No, I'm simply stating next-gen will be upon us, and every dev company who wants to compete needs to step it up.

Allow me to present a list of games that lack 'Next-Gen' graphics, but were still succesful, in some cases wildly so.

This isn't a full list, otherwise we'd be here a while.

Starcraft 2
World of Warcraft
Borderlands
Limbo
No more Heroes 1&2
Dragon Age: Origins
Dawn of War 2
Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep
The World Ends With You
A boy and his blob (with extra points being granted for the hug button)
Persona 4
etc.

Now I'm going to stop here for now and sleep. If you post anything that I feel requires a response it will be done so tomorrow.

[Anathemic]

Nohvarr wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

And do you doubt Blizzard isn't capable of releasing a next-gen MMORPG? 'next-gen' might be a marketing word, but when Blizzard says it's going to create the next-gen MMORPG, it's going to create he next-gen MMORPG.

Dosen't matter what Blizzard is capable of, their track record shows a distinct disinterest in creating games on the visual level of Crysis 2, The Witcher 2 and Skyrim. This has worked well for them, for reasons I've already stated. Not just for them, but also for the guys behind Borderlands, which caught a lot of flak initially for moving away from realistic graphics, but still sold very well.

As for your claims about Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, they don't look anything like the three games you compared DA 2. You claim SC2 is a beast on ultralevels but I only have your word for that, as nothing I've seen, and I've played the game, would seem to prove your point.

No, I'm simply stating next-gen will be upon us, and every dev company who wants to compete needs to step it up.

Allow me to present a list of games that lack 'Next-Gen' graphics, but were still succesful, in some cases wildly so.

This isn't a full list, otherwise we'd be here a while.

Starcraft 2
World of Warcraft
Borderlands
Limbo
No more Heroes 1&2
Dragon Age: Origins
Dawn of War 2
Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep
The World Ends With You
A boy and his blob (with extra points being granted for the hug button)
Persona 4
etc.

Now I'm going to stop here for now and sleep. If you post anything that I feel requires a response it will be done so tomorrow.

StarCraft 2 has still 2 more games to go in it's trilogy and graphics will probably be updated over time as we've seen in World of Warcraft



This is jsut 1 of 3, StarCraft 2 is going to reach the next-gen.

World of Warcraft? Again patches, if you compare vanilla WoW to Cataclysm WoW you will see the vast differences in quality. And again, WoW will be replaced by Blizzard's next-gen MMORPG in the future, so I hardly see how this relevant.

For the rest of the games I've no comment for I've never even heard of them except for Kingdom Hearts, but that's not even a real sequel. And as for DA:O, that's been discussed to death already.