wulfsturm wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
You - this equals my physical self, or in terms of the arugment, my character.
mad - this is the insult directed to 'you' which is me, my character since it comes after the noun 'you'
brah - this is also an insult directed to 'you', which is me, for it comes after the first insult 'mad'
Seriously, just stop.
Hahahahaahahahahahahha.
I think he's mad.
Anathemic wrote...
Well I replied with a new in-game image for better accuracy
Exactly. They've added DX11 support, they've optimized texture compression, etc. In my opinion the current engine can last, at least, for another game. It's better if they keep improving their own engine than to throw it to the bin just after two games. Engines aren't something easy and cheap to code, you know?Noviere wrote...
I don't think they need a new engine to improve the quality of the graphics. Updating and optimizing the current one should be fine.
So they must be doing something well, then.
falconlord5 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
Well I replied with a new in-game image for better accuracy
I know, I was replying to that one, too.
And the concept art still looks better.
LTBK wrote...
Exactly. They've added DX11 support, they've optimized texture compression, etc. In my opinion the current engine can last, at least, for another game. It's better if they keep improving their own engine than to throw it to the bin just after two games. Engines aren't something easy and cheap to code, you know?Noviere wrote...
I don't think they need a new engine to improve the quality of the graphics. Updating and optimizing the current one should be fine.
And talking about the Witcher, it reminds me about the graphical improvement that CD Projekt did with the old Aurora engine in their original game. Some people didn't belive that it was the same engine than Neverwinter Nights used. That just shows that, if BioWare wants, they can keep improving the current engine a little more. They're smart enough to build an engine easily extendable when they already knew that they would probably make several DA games.
So, in my opinion, there're some other reasons that explain why they don't push their engine to the limit. Some people have already said that it's better if the game can run in as much hardware as it can, and remeber thay they want to sell as much copies as they can and many many many people don't change their computers just for a single game. Another reason already pointed are consoles and, while they could use different texture sets for PC and consoles, sometimes there's not much that you can do with the assigned money (time = money). I preffer if they throw that money in other areas of the game as long as the graphics aren't terrible, that it's not the case here (they are quite pretty, indeed).
Long story short. While some games excel in graphics, we must take into account that that's not where BioWare's games try to be good at. Resources, profit, and priority in certain areas over some others are things that a developer has to take into account when making a game. But I think that we all can agree that if we are here, and if we love BioWare's games, it's not because of their next gen graphics, right?
bloodreaperfx wrote...
falconlord5 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
Well I replied with a new in-game image for better accuracy
I know, I was replying to that one, too.
And the concept art still looks better.
Check out the pic I posted. Its not concept art per se...the Architect is still rendered with the game engine but without the bloom and lighting.
Aren't "clutter" items like this typically of lower quality than stuff you actually focus on(like character models)?Anathemic wrote...
True, but BioWare did sacrifice some tidbits to improve, as seen on skeleton/bone models:
Anathemic wrote...
LTBK wrote...
Exactly. They've added DX11 support, they've optimized texture compression, etc. In my opinion the current engine can last, at least, for another game. It's better if they keep improving their own engine than to throw it to the bin just after two games. Engines aren't something easy and cheap to code, you know?Noviere wrote...
I don't think they need a new engine to improve the quality of the graphics. Updating and optimizing the current one should be fine.
And talking about the Witcher, it reminds me about the graphical improvement that CD Projekt did with the old Aurora engine in their original game. Some people didn't belive that it was the same engine than Neverwinter Nights used. That just shows that, if BioWare wants, they can keep improving the current engine a little more. They're smart enough to build an engine easily extendable when they already knew that they would probably make several DA games.
So, in my opinion, there're some other reasons that explain why they don't push their engine to the limit. Some people have already said that it's better if the game can run in as much hardware as it can, and remeber thay they want to sell as much copies as they can and many many many people don't change their computers just for a single game. Another reason already pointed are consoles and, while they could use different texture sets for PC and consoles, sometimes there's not much that you can do with the assigned money (time = money). I preffer if they throw that money in other areas of the game as long as the graphics aren't terrible, that it's not the case here (they are quite pretty, indeed).
Long story short. While some games excel in graphics, we must take into account that that's not where BioWare's games try to be good at. Resources, profit, and priority in certain areas over some others are things that a developer has to take into account when making a game. But I think that we all can agree that if we are here, and if we love BioWare's games, it's not because of their next gen graphics, right?
What CD Projekt did with the old Aurora Engine was a breakthrough. But the main reason for that was dedication, because well they loved the Witcher universe.
This is pure dedication we are talking about here, working for 3+ days and sleeping in the building for each employee.
Not bashing BioWare on this, but I doubt they can pull that off with DA3, let alone with other 2 franchises to manage.
slimgrin wrote...
falconlord5 wrote...
Graphics are cute, but they become irrelevant after several hours of gameplay, mere background noise.
Despite the frequent justifications of DA2's average visuals on this site, I'd like to point out there is nothing highbrow about poor graphics. Bioware will simply have to upgrade to a new engine if they want DA3 to be taken seriously. The same criticism was leveled at Bethesda for sticking with gamebryo for so damn long and rightly so.
Bioware is a AAA studio owned by a huge and wealthy American company. Their games should deliver on all fronts.
Guest_Inarborat_*
Phoenixblight wrote...
What obsidian is creating their own engine? *shutters* You can see what they did with other people engines, I can't imagine what they can do with their own.
Merci357 wrote...
slimgrin wrote...
falconlord5 wrote...
Graphics are cute, but they become irrelevant after several hours of gameplay, mere background noise.
Despite the frequent justifications of DA2's average visuals on this site, I'd like to point out there is nothing highbrow about poor graphics. Bioware will simply have to upgrade to a new engine if they want DA3 to be taken seriously. The same criticism was leveled at Bethesda for sticking with gamebryo for so damn long and rightly so.
Bioware is a AAA studio owned by a huge and wealthy American company. Their games should deliver on all fronts.
Did Blizzard ever release a game with anything else then average visuals? Granted, they use a very stylised approach that hides their dated engines somewhat - but that obviously never had any impact on their sales. And I'd say, you may or may not like them, but you'd better take them quite serious.
Don't get me wrong, I'm with you, I'd love to see better graphics in BioWare games - since they are very cinematic games by design. What does suit them better then stunning visuals? I played (and enjoyed) Jade Empire despite it's look, the same might be true with DA2 - but I'll reserve final judgement until I've seen it on my system with all DX11 options enabled.
Anathemic wrote...
Merci357 wrote...
slimgrin wrote...
falconlord5 wrote...
Graphics are cute, but they become irrelevant after several hours of gameplay, mere background noise.
Despite the frequent justifications of DA2's average visuals on this site, I'd like to point out there is nothing highbrow about poor graphics. Bioware will simply have to upgrade to a new engine if they want DA3 to be taken seriously. The same criticism was leveled at Bethesda for sticking with gamebryo for so damn long and rightly so.
Bioware is a AAA studio owned by a huge and wealthy American company. Their games should deliver on all fronts.
Did Blizzard ever release a game with anything else then average visuals? Granted, they use a very stylised approach that hides their dated engines somewhat - but that obviously never had any impact on their sales. And I'd say, you may or may not like them, but you'd better take them quite serious.
Don't get me wrong, I'm with you, I'd love to see better graphics in BioWare games - since they are very cinematic games by design. What does suit them better then stunning visuals? I played (and enjoyed) Jade Empire despite it's look, the same might be true with DA2 - but I'll reserve final judgement until I've seen it on my system with all DX11 options enabled.
StarCraft 2 on ultra settings are beast
Noviere wrote...
Aren't "clutter" items like this typically of lower quality than stuff you actually focus on(like character models)?Anathemic wrote...
True, but BioWare did sacrifice some tidbits to improve, as seen on skeleton/bone models:
Anathemic wrote...
Noviere wrote...
Aren't "clutter" items like this typically of lower quality than stuff you actually focus on(like character models)?Anathemic wrote...
True, but BioWare did sacrifice some tidbits to improve, as seen on skeleton/bone models:
Yes, but that's jsut pathetic
I'd say those books and even that low-text potion looks better than those bones
falconlord5 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
Merci357 wrote...
slimgrin wrote...
falconlord5 wrote...
Graphics are cute, but they become irrelevant after several hours of gameplay, mere background noise.
Despite the frequent justifications of DA2's average visuals on this site, I'd like to point out there is nothing highbrow about poor graphics. Bioware will simply have to upgrade to a new engine if they want DA3 to be taken seriously. The same criticism was leveled at Bethesda for sticking with gamebryo for so damn long and rightly so.
Bioware is a AAA studio owned by a huge and wealthy American company. Their games should deliver on all fronts.
Did Blizzard ever release a game with anything else then average visuals? Granted, they use a very stylised approach that hides their dated engines somewhat - but that obviously never had any impact on their sales. And I'd say, you may or may not like them, but you'd better take them quite serious.
Don't get me wrong, I'm with you, I'd love to see better graphics in BioWare games - since they are very cinematic games by design. What does suit them better then stunning visuals? I played (and enjoyed) Jade Empire despite it's look, the same might be true with DA2 - but I'll reserve final judgement until I've seen it on my system with all DX11 options enabled.
StarCraft 2 on ultra settings are beast
STC2 is also the first game that Blizzard released that actually looks good (still have zero interest in playing it, but that's just me).
Anathemic wrote...
What CD Projekt did with the old Aurora Engine was a breakthrough. But the main reason for that was dedication, because well they loved the Witcher universe.
This is pure dedication we are talking about here, working for 3+ days and sleeping in the building for each employee.
Not bashing BioWare on this, but I doubt they can pull that off with DA3, let alone with other 2 franchises to manage.
stormhit13 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
What CD Projekt did with the old Aurora Engine was a breakthrough. But the main reason for that was dedication, because well they loved the Witcher universe.
This is pure dedication we are talking about here, working for 3+ days and sleeping in the building for each employee.
Not bashing BioWare on this, but I doubt they can pull that off with DA3, let alone with other 2 franchises to manage.
Yes, Dragon Age could be so much better if Bioware just wanted it more.
You have a promising future in sportscasting.
Anathemic wrote...
stormhit13 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
What CD Projekt did with the old Aurora Engine was a breakthrough. But the main reason for that was dedication, because well they loved the Witcher universe.
This is pure dedication we are talking about here, working for 3+ days and sleeping in the building for each employee.
Not bashing BioWare on this, but I doubt they can pull that off with DA3, let alone with other 2 franchises to manage.
Yes, Dragon Age could be so much better if Bioware just wanted it more.
You have a promising future in sportscasting.
Isn't that what makes good quality games? When the devs clearly want it to make it the best game they can?
Seriously, what's with the sarcasm in this thread?
Wow I suggest you look again, the Crysis 2 sreenshot is clearly above the other 2 with Skyrim clearly second and TW2 a long way behind. TW2 screenshot looks barely better than DA2.Anathemic wrote...
All 3 look about the same level to me
Anathemic wrote...
I didn't think it was subjective
I'd say i prefer that druid-cat model from WoW over the kitty model
falconlord5 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
stormhit13 wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
What CD Projekt did with the old Aurora Engine was a breakthrough. But the main reason for that was dedication, because well they loved the Witcher universe.
This is pure dedication we are talking about here, working for 3+ days and sleeping in the building for each employee.
Not bashing BioWare on this, but I doubt they can pull that off with DA3, let alone with other 2 franchises to manage.
Yes, Dragon Age could be so much better if Bioware just wanted it more.
You have a promising future in sportscasting.
Isn't that what makes good quality games? When the devs clearly want it to make it the best game they can?
Seriously, what's with the sarcasm in this thread?
No. There's money, time, planning, access to resources, writing, and of course, quality of employees (and whole bunch I'm missing).
Every dev wants to make a good game. Not all of them have the resources to do so.
Morroian wrote...
Wow I suggest you look again, the Crysis 2 sreenshot is clearly above the other 2 with Skyrim clearly second and TW2 a long way behind. TW2 screenshot looks barely better than DA2.Anathemic wrote...
All 3 look about the same level to me
Retour en haut
