387 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

Inarborat wrote...

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. 

Yeah, those engines they used before are outstanding examples of stability.  Dragon Age: Origins had just as many bugs as any Obsidian game I've played.  Creating their own engine, with rpgs in mind, will give them many, many benefits as they'll know the tech inside and out.

I'm looking forward to DS3 more than Skyrim or TW2 but from what I've seen the engine doesn't look that good graphically. Obsidian have the same issue as Bioware in this regard, their gameplay is more resource intensive than for ME or TW2 or Skyrim and thus the graphics will never be as good.

Modifié par Morroian, 20 février 2011 - 10:00 .

[falconlord5]

Anathemic wrote...

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.

Bolded part requires the will to produce, IE the want to make a game as good as they can. You can have the best dev team in the world, but if they don't have enthusiasm in making it, it will turn out crappy.

Skill, more than enthusiasm. You can have the most enthusiastic team in the world, but without skill, it's gonna come out as ****.

[Anathemic]

Do you really want to argue TW2 vs DA2 graphics, this is already done, why resurrect it?

[Anathemic]

falconlord5 wrote...

Skill, more than enthusiasm. You can have the most enthusiastic team in the world, but without skill, it's gonna come out as ****.

The Witcher

Modifié par Anathemic, 20 février 2011 - 10:03 .

[falconlord5]

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Skill, more than enthusiasm. You can have the most enthusiastic team in the world, but without skill, it's gonna come out as ****.

The Witcher

Had a lot of ****ing skill behind it. Still does.


That they loved that universe is just icing on the cake.

[ladydesire]

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...


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.

Bolded part requires the will to produce, IE the want to make a game as good as they can. You can have the best dev team in the world, but if they don't have enthusiasm in making it, it will turn out crappy.

Why does wanting to make a game as good as they can have to include visuals that require the person buying to game to upgrade their computer, or buy a new one, just to meet the system requirements for the game? There are a lot of people that don't buy new computers every year, or upgrade that often; should Bioware make a game that someone will have to wait two or three years to enjoy to its fullest?

[Anathemic]

falconlord5 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Skill, more than enthusiasm. You can have the most enthusiastic team in the world, but without skill, it's gonna come out as ****.

The Witcher

Had a lot of ****ing skill behind it. Still does.


That they loved that universe is just icing on the cake.

Still there was more enthusiasm than skill, you can't deny this, I'd say at the time the Witcher was in production the devs probably weren't as skilled as BioWare devs or Blizzard devs at the time.

[Ryzaki]

Speaking of which what are the system requirements for the Witcher? Because frankly DA2's requirements look a little high for its visuals.

[Morroian]

Inarborat wrote...

Morroian wrote...

TW2 screenshot looks barely better than DA2.

Now you're just being silly.

The character models are very detailed but the background is completely out of focus unlike in the other 2 shots. Bear in mind I am saying TW2 looks better than DA2. 

Modifié par Morroian, 20 février 2011 - 10:08 .

[Icinix]

I hope they use the same engine from Crysis 2.



Hey. It scales well and runs on Xbox and PS3 but includes sooper dooper amazing enhancements if you've got the technology for it...

[falconlord5]

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Skill, more than enthusiasm. You can have the most enthusiastic team in the world, but without skill, it's gonna come out as ****.

The Witcher

Had a lot of ****ing skill behind it. Still does.


That they loved that universe is just icing on the cake.

Still there was more enthusiasm than skill, you can't deny this, I'd say at the time the Witcher was in production the devs probably weren't as skilled as BioWare devs or Blizzard devs at the time.

Not from what saw. Not as experienced, maybe. But the skill levels are certainly comparable.

Equal, even. 'Cept maybe in combat, but that's always a tad tricky (i.e. nobody ever gets it right).

[Anathemic]

ladydesire wrote...

Why does wanting to make a game as good as they can have to include visuals that require the person buying to game to upgrade their computer, or buy a new one, just to meet the system requirements for the game? There are a lot of people that don't buy new computers every year, or upgrade that often; should Bioware make a game that someone will have to wait two or three years to enjoy to its fullest?

No, but again we are entering next-gen. Many other dev companies are doing this, Blizzard, CD Projekt, Crytek, Bethesda, ArenaNet, etc. are all upgrading.

So yes BioWare should make a game that will take 2-3 years long. Maybe its my liking with Blizzard, but on initial release and good time after, I've never been dissapointed with Blizzard games evne if they take more than 10 years to make.

[Anathemic]

Morroian wrote...

The character models are very detailed but the background is completely out of focus unlike in the other 2 shots. Bear in mind I am saying TW2 looks better than DA2. 

Background completely out of focus huh?

[Noviere]

Anathemic wrote...

The Witcher

Modifié par Noviere, 20 février 2011 - 10:14 .

[Morroian]

Anathemic wrote...

Background completely out of focus huh?

Well maybe you should have used that screenshoot instead of the other one. Yes that obviously looks better.

Modifié par Morroian, 20 février 2011 - 10:15 .

[slimgrin]

Morroian wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

All 3 look about the same level to me

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.

WTF are you smoking?

[Anathemic]

Morroian wrote...
]Well maybe you should have used that screenshoot instead of the other one. Yes that obviously looks better.

Well maybe you should do your research:

[ladydesire]

Anathemic wrote...

ladydesire wrote...

Why does wanting to make a game as good as they can have to include visuals that require the person buying to game to upgrade their computer, or buy a new one, just to meet the system requirements for the game? There are a lot of people that don't buy new computers every year, or upgrade that often; should Bioware make a game that someone will have to wait two or three years to enjoy to its fullest?

No, but again we are entering next-gen. Many other dev companies are doing this, Blizzard, CD Projekt, Crytek, Bethesda, ArenaNet, etc. are all upgrading.

So yes BioWare should make a game that will take 2-3 years long. Maybe its my liking with Blizzard, but on initial release and good time after, I've never been dissapointed with Blizzard games evne if they take more than 10 years to make.

Maybe we don't have the same concept of "next-gen", then; I believe Eclipse\\Lycium have been referred to as such in the Wikipedia article that someone posted a link to earlier in this thread. 

[Morroian]

Anathemic wrote...

Morroian wrote...
]Well maybe you should have used that screenshoot instead of the other one. Yes that obviously looks better.

Well maybe you should do your research:

Why? This is a DA2 forum not TW, I'm not following the development of TW2 because I didn't like the first game. You want to make a point about TW2 then actually use something that proves that point not something that is manifestly unsuitable.

Modifié par Morroian, 20 février 2011 - 10:19 .

[mcneil_1]

Ryzaki wrote...

Speaking of which what are the system requirements for the Witcher? Because frankly DA2's requirements look a little high for its visuals.

Last I heard the minimum were (as posted on their forum November last year):
Win XP / Vista / Win 7, Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz or similar AMD, memory: 1GB for XP / 2GB for Vista, Nvidia GF 8800 512 VR or similar AMD/ATI, HDD: 8GB for the game + 8GB for bonus content

[The Elder King]

Do you REALLY have to post all this screenshots? You go on rage quite easily (and you were right, so I don't see any reason to go on nerdrage and spamming all this screenshots)

[Catsith]

Are the Witcher 2 forums dead or something? Holy christ.



^And now we have one guy doing image dumps. Seriously, what the hell?

[_000Darkstar]

ITT:



People pretending to be developers and that they know anything about game design.