387 réponses à ce sujet

[Piecake]

Anathemic wrote...

Catsith wrote...

XBenotto18 wrote...

If DAIII was anounced but they said that they were going to make a new engine, how delayed would the game before release?

I highly doubt they would be able to make an entirely new next-gen engine and a 40+ hour RPG in anything less than 3 years. They would most probably go with Unreal or something else, as I don't think EA is going to let them sit back and work on a new engine for years... they want to crank out sequels and make a profit very quick.

Time for BioWare to join Activion/Blizzard/Bungie party?

Blizzard cranks out sequels? 

[Anathemic]

Piecake wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Catsith wrote...

XBenotto18 wrote...

If DAIII was anounced but they said that they were going to make a new engine, how delayed would the game before release?

I highly doubt they would be able to make an entirely new next-gen engine and a 40+ hour RPG in anything less than 3 years. They would most probably go with Unreal or something else, as I don't think EA is going to let them sit back and work on a new engine for years... they want to crank out sequels and make a profit very quick.

Time for BioWare to join Activion/Blizzard/Bungie party?

Blizzard cranks out sequels? 

Dunno where you going for this, the post was meant as a suggestion for BioWare to leave EA and join Activision but...

Yes Blizzard does do sequels.

[Zlarm]

Revan312 wrote...

But the engine doesn't dictate anything with gameplay.. There are TW2 and Crysis 2 shots that show a bunch of characters on screen.  If anyone wanted to use Cryengine 3 or the RED engine with a party based tactical RPG they could, wouldn't be much harder..

Of course engine influences gameplay or rather gameplay is limited by what the engine can put out.  If not then theoretically any game could have battles agianst infinite number of opponents all with deferring AIs.    And I was referring to more than just characters, I was referring to fully controllable party members which can all cast spells i.e. perform resource intensive actions at the same time.   I would imagine the cryengine and Red engine would have a hard time if suddenly they had to account for the player having full control over 4 different people simultaneously battling numerous enemies. 

[XBenotto18]

Piecake wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Catsith wrote...

XBenotto18 wrote...

If DAIII was anounced but they said that they were going to make a new engine, how delayed would the game before release?

I highly doubt they would be able to make an entirely new next-gen engine and a 40+ hour RPG in anything less than 3 years. They would most probably go with Unreal or something else, as I don't think EA is going to let them sit back and work on a new engine for years... they want to crank out sequels and make a profit very quick.

Time for BioWare to join Activion/Blizzard/Bungie party?

Blizzard cranks out sequels? 

No, but Activision does

[Piecake]

Anathemic wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Catsith wrote...

XBenotto18 wrote...

If DAIII was anounced but they said that they were going to make a new engine, how delayed would the game before release?

I highly doubt they would be able to make an entirely new next-gen engine and a 40+ hour RPG in anything less than 3 years. They would most probably go with Unreal or something else, as I don't think EA is going to let them sit back and work on a new engine for years... they want to crank out sequels and make a profit very quick.

Time for BioWare to join Activion/Blizzard/Bungie party?

Blizzard cranks out sequels? 

Dunno where you going for this, the post was meant as a suggestion for BioWare to leave EA and join Activision but...

Yes Blizzard does do sequels.

A misunderstanding i guess.  I thought you were referring to his crank out sequels line.  Anyway, big difference between doing sequels and cranking out sequels

[Zlarm]

Anathemic wrote...

Well it's preference thing I guess. Personally I didn't conenct to any of the party members or my PC as much as I did to connecting with Geralt and the sub characters affecting his story.

It has nothing to do with connecting with characters...It has everything to do with being able to control (numerous) characters. 

[Anathemic]

Zlarm wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Well it's preference thing I guess. Personally I didn't conenct to any of the party members or my PC as much as I did to connecting with Geralt and the sub characters affecting his story.

It has nothing to do with connecting with characters...It has everything to do with being able to control (numerous) characters. 

Again a preference. Whilst others prefer to control numerous characters, I prefer to control one.

[bloodreaperfx]

While i understand the need of some people to go all "ooooh shiny!" when playing a game i am willing to bet that mainstream graphics will not ruin the sales. Anathemic, you seem to confuse photorealism with good art style. Take WoW for example. They use a 6 years old engine and no one complains. Why? Because the art style makes up for it.



Now, saying that they cant possibly keep up with the competition without a brand new engine is pure BS. You seem to missunderstand what the RPG market is competing for, or perhaps you have some marketing and publishing skills we are not aware of.



I dont actually care if you call others fanboys when out of arguments but consider this: nitpicking on the same screenshot while quoting it over and over, and calling others image dumpers is not very witty. I take all bioware games as interactive books. You might be expecting some prince of persia game with beefed up visuals....whatever...the fact remains: mainstream graphics wont hurt sales, like with origins, and nitpickets are, thankfuly, in minority.

[Anathemic]

bloodreaperfx wrote...

While i understand the need of some people to go all "ooooh shiny!" when playing a game i am willing to bet that mainstream graphics will not ruin the sales. Anathemic, you seem to confuse photorealism with good art style. Take WoW for example. They use a 6 years old engine and no one complains. Why? Because the art style makes up for it.

Now, saying that they cant possibly keep up with the competition without a brand new engine is pure BS. You seem to missunderstand what the RPG market is competing for, or perhaps you have some marketing and publishing skills we are not aware of.

I dont actually care if you call others fanboys when out of arguments but consider this: nitpicking on the same screenshot while quoting it over and over, and calling others image dumpers is not very witty. I take all bioware games as interactive books. You might be expecting some prince of persia game with beefed up visuals....whatever...the fact remains: mainstream graphics wont hurt sales, like with origins, and nitpickets are, thankfuly, in minority.

Did you read the thread?

I don't give a crap about graphics, I actually prefer the content over the game as first priority BUT. There's no denying graphics are the backbone of game evolution (else we would still be on Nintnedo 64's).

I was arguing for BioWare to get a new engine to continue to compete in the competion, as gaming is going to evolve into the next-gen pretty soon.

[XBenotto18]

Aren't  video games currently in the seventh generation? I don't see next gene being around anytime soon

Edit: what are they going to add in the next gene? all games 3D. no

Modifié par XBenotto18, 21 février 2011 - 08:11 .

[bloodreaperfx]

And i was telling you that there is no need for a new engine but rather improved artstyle, so, did you read my post? Have you played The Witcher ? Did you find it a visually appealing game? If so, know that it was built with a dinosaur of a engine called Aurora. They just modified it.



They could very well take an existing engine or further enhance the current one and still be ok. Also, bear in mind that besides graphics a game's engine does other things as well. A cryengine 3 would be a poor choice, for example, no matter how good it looks.

[Anathemic]

bloodreaperfx wrote...

And i was telling you that there is no need for a new engine but rather improved artstyle, so, did you read my post? Have you played The Witcher ? Did you find it a visually appealing game? If so, know that it was built with a dinosaur of a engine called Aurora. They just modified it.

They could very well take an existing engine or further enhance the current one and still be ok. Also, bear in mind that besides graphics a game's engine does other things as well. A cryengine 3 would be a poor choice, for example, no matter how good it looks.

Yes I've played the Witcher, and found it visually appealing, I'd say on par to succeeding DA:O's graphics (but this is just my opinion). And I know it was build with the Aurora engine.

Problem is, the Witcher succeeded with the Aurora engine to the immense amount of dedication and work put into it, and frankly I don't see BioWare doing this with one franchise let alone DA, so heavily modified engine is out of the question.

I know an engine does more than graphics, which is why I keep saying for BioWare to build its own engine instead of buying it off another.

[Zlarm]

Anathemic wrote...

Again a preference. Whilst others prefer to control numerous characters, I prefer to control one.

Of course it's a preference whether one prefers to control multiple characters or one.  Thats not really my point.  I'm explaining why the graphics in DA games tend to be worse then their competition.  When you include numerous controllable characters something else has to go; whether thats AI, number of objects oncreen, number of enemies, graphics or a combination of any of these. 

From what I remember one of the reasons BioWare created the DA engine was because they wanted something that could handle numerous fully controllable characters (not many engines are geared for this).  I'm sure if for DA3 if they wanted only one controllable character they could design an engine with fantastic graphics (if that was their focus).   That would not be a direction I support however since to me DA is a throw back to the tactics of the BG days which was all about controlling numerous characters.   Maybe that would be a direction you would prefer, however you seem to be getting it (and everything else you seem to desire) in TW2 so I don't see why DA suddenly has to become like TW2. 

[Anathemic]

Zlarm wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Again a preference. Whilst others prefer to control numerous characters, I prefer to control one.

Of course it's a preference whether one prefers to control multiple characters or one.  Thats not really my point.  I'm explaining why the graphics in DA games tend to be worse then their competition.  When you include numerous controllable characters something else has to go; whether thats AI, number of objects oncreen, number of enemies, graphics or a combination of any of these. 

From what I remember one of the reasons BioWare created the DA engine was because they wanted something that could handle numerous fully controllable characters (not many engines are geared for this).  I'm sure if for DA3 if they wanted only one controllable character they could design an engine with fantastic graphics (if that was their focus).   That would not be a direction I support however since to me DA is a throw back to the tactics of the BG days which was all about controlling numerous characters.   Maybe that would be a direction you would prefer, however you seem to be getting it (and everything else you seem to desire) in TW2 so I don't see why DA suddenly has to become like TW2. 

If that's the primary reason why the DA engine was created as it is, why not jsut to Mass Effect's engine and use the Unreal engine then? Mass Effects seems fine in doing with that regard.

[daywalker03]

Anathemic wrote...


What's the purpose of this thread? Oh right graphics. In a thread dealing with graphics I could care less about the actual content because we are discussing graphics. If you made a gameplay/content thread I'll argue in that concerning gameplay/content but not in a graphics thread.

Isn't it ultimately up to Bioware to decide whether they want to create a game with eye-catching graphics? I would hope your answer is "yes".

Personally, I don't think photo-realistic graphics are needed in an RPG like this, and Bioware should concentrate on fine-tuning the entire engine to compete with other party-based RPGs instead of First-Person Shooters and Sandbox games.

[Zlarm]

Anathemic wrote...

If that's the primary reason why the DA engine was created as it is, why not jsut to Mass Effect's engine and use the Unreal engine then? Mass Effects seems fine in doing with that regard.

Mass Effect companions are limited to 2 and are not fully controllable.  Furthermore Mass Effect plays like a TPS not a top down tactical RPG. 

[Anathemic]

daywalker03 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...


What's the purpose of this thread? Oh right graphics. In a thread dealing with graphics I could care less about the actual content because we are discussing graphics. If you made a gameplay/content thread I'll argue in that concerning gameplay/content but not in a graphics thread.

Isn't it ultimately up to Bioware to decide whether they want to create a game with eye-catching graphics? I would hope your answer is "yes".

Personally, I don't think photo-realistic graphics are needed in an RPG like this, and Bioware should concentrate on fine-tuning the entire engine to compete with other party-based RPGs instead of First-Person Shooters and Sandbox games.

Photo-realism isn't the issue, it's getting to the next-gen is the issue. Take Diablo 3, it will probably make it to next-gen or atleast be the stepping stone for Blizzard in entering the next gen, and its in-game graphics aren't photorealistic at all.

[Anathemic]

Zlarm wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

If that's the primary reason why the DA engine was created as it is, why not jsut to Mass Effect's engine and use the Unreal engine then? Mass Effects seems fine in doing with that regard.

Mass Effect companions are limited to 2 and are not fully controllable.  Furthermore Mass Effect plays like a TPS not a top down tactical RPG. 

I see...

Alright straying away from the Mass Effect suggestion, I still don't see a reason why not BioWare won't want to create a new engine, probably built upon it's current engine and then build it up so that it can compete with next-gen.

[XBenotto18]

for their to be a next gene it HAS to be different from the current one (seventh)



Anathemic, do you even know what the seventh generation of video games is.

[Anathemic]

XBenotto18 wrote...

for their to be a next gene it HAS to be different from the current one (seventh)

Anathemic, do you even know what the seventh generation of video games is.

The current one, beginning in late 2005 with introduction of 360. (2004 if you really want to count the DS)

Its been 6 years since the introduction of 7th gen. Before than the 6th gen lasted 6 years. If time is anything, we are about to enter the next gen really soon.

[XBenotto18]

their has to be a breakthrough in technology. Not just updated graphics or what other excuses you have

Edit: Diablo three still fits in the current generation and same for blizzards new MMO in the next 2 years

Modifié par XBenotto18, 21 février 2011 - 08:49 .

[Zlarm]

Anathemic wrote...

I see...

Alright straying away from the Mass Effect suggestion, I still don't see a reason why not BioWare won't want to create a new engine, probably built upon it's current engine and then build it up so that it can compete with next-gen.

1. because creating a new engine is very expensive. 
2 because they can probably tweak the current engine to get better visual results for the 3rd game (if it happens)
3.  because graphics really aren't all that important for RPGs so creating a whole new engine just to improve the graphics seems rather dumb...especially when the current engine isn't that old.   I know it's been said before but some of the most highly regarded RPGs (including BG and Planescape) had rather weak graphics compared to other games released at that time.   Bethesda have gotten away using the same ancient (8 years old?) engine for years with their RPGs and have only very recently decided to switch it up.  And their games were still both critically and commercially successful.   Compare that to the DA engine which is 3 or 4 years old.   And I would argue Bethesda are creating a new engine for a variety of reasons: better graphics, improved AI, get rid of some of those persitent bugs etc....

I'm not totally against a new engine for DA3 if it happens, but I don't really see how it can justify the cost unless BioWare decide to go in an entirely different direction with the game (one which doesn't work well with the current engine). 

[bloodreaperfx]

Nvm the wikipedia history thing. 7th gen is in a nutshell: high def 1080p support, motion and/or gyro controlers, touch and play capabilities for certain consoles and stuff like that. Advancing towards the next gen is not so much dependant on game devs as it is on breakthroughs in hardware tech. 8th or 9th gen games = virtual reality imo

[Anathemic]

Zlarm wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

I see...

Alright straying away from the Mass Effect suggestion, I still don't see a reason why not BioWare won't want to create a new engine, probably built upon it's current engine and then build it up so that it can compete with next-gen.

1. because creating a new engine is very expensive. 
2 because they can probably tweak the current engine to get better visual results for the 3rd game (if it happens)
3.  because graphics really aren't all that important for RPGs so creating a whole new engine just to improve the graphics seems rather dumb...especially when the current engine isn't that old.   I know it's been said before but some of the most highly regarded RPGs (including BG and Planescape) had rather weak graphics compared to other games released at that time.   Bethesda have gotten away using the same ancient (8 years old?) engine for years with their RPGs and have only very recently decided to switch it up.  And their games were still both critically and commercially successful.   Compare that to the DA engine which is 3 or 4 years old.   And I would argue Bethesda are creating a new engine for a variety of reasons: better graphics, improved AI, get rid of some of those persitent bugs etc....

I'm not totally against a new engine for DA3 if it happens, but I don't really see how it can justify the cost unless BioWare decide to go in an entirely different direction with the game (one which doesn't work well with the current engine). 

Bethesda, had to switch the engine, Gamebryo wasn't doing it for them. Engines are costly but they usually make up for it in the end. I understand than engines serve more than just graphics, however I jsut believe BioWare has the resources and/or the actual effort to put in into tweaking the engine to keep DA2 visually appealing with other games in competition.

[XBenotto18]

still dont see how near future games can be considered next gene