122 réponses à ce sujet

[The Metalion]

The more I play, the more I am noticing the bland backgrounds in the game. Especially the bleak outside scenes with nothing in the background.

This was never pitched as a visual masterpiece, but the graphics probably should be better.

Gameplay is important to me, but so is the visual quality. A game that looks nice is just that much better.

[The Metalion]

Gel214th wrote...

I actually thought the characters' faces conveyed a lot more emotion than previous Dragon Age 2 titles.

I agree, the faces are much better than they were.

[The Metalion]

xxVeritas wrote...

I am playing such an ugly game.

Just.. just look at it.

Looks good.  Do you have any texture packs installed?  Still, the background on the left is totally bland.

[Korusus]

Ixalmaris wrote...

By now the picture should be rather famous.

The high powered graphics of DA2...

I have a few thoughts about this image:

1) This is 80% of the background NPCs in the game. 

2) The 20% of the background NPCs that don't look like this are the ones that interact with your group, usually by either talking or moving around.  Or they're dwarves/elves.  You can predict whether an NPC will say something outloud based on its high resolution textures.  That's sad.

3) It may not look like it, but I do believe that is hair on that NPC.  Hair that looks like a helmet.  And isn't it telling that almost all the unnamed human enemies in the game wear helmets or hoods that completely cover their faces?  Even mages?  And that almost all of the background NPCs that look like this unfortunate female(?) also wear hoods/helmets or are bald?

This image more than any other just demonstrates the wide range in quality of textures present in the game.  For extra highlarious points, stand your Hawke next to one of these pointless NPCs whose only job is to make Kirkwall look even more pathetic than it does anyway and take a screenshot.  It's like a real person standing next to a mannequin.

[Darkhour]

Pics are from older build: yes.

Newer build is not much better: yes.

DA:O was better looking: Yes

[Maverick827]

The Metalion wrote...

Still, the background on the left is totally bland.

...it's a hill.

[DarthBakura]

I think the graphics are great. They're up there with those of Mass Effect. That said, it's not really top priority.

The graphics in Dragon Age: Origins weren't anything to write home about to start with. Awkward body proportions/features and the occasional "obvious" snag in design; e.g., the right arm of the Chantry robes some of the characters wore.

[Morducai]

Baelyn wrote...

Nice photoshop.

Mind posting links to where these came from? Cause my DA2 looks nothing like half of those pictures.

Yeah...Yours look way worse! ZING! Sorry mate couldn't resist the pun. However, I would like to see you post some pics from your computer....without any mods or console hacks.

[dfstone]

Um, the game is set in a prison/slave mine. And yall wonder why the art is "bland"?

The OP is wrong and needs to upgrade the Commodore 64 they are using to play the game.

Modifié par dfstone, 29 mars 2011 - 05:05 .

[Lux]

True. I don't like the look either. Looks bland to me...

[Vicious]

Blame Bioware for the 7 years it took for them to create the engine and release DA:O.

They spent a lot of money on that engine. Which looked great at the time, but has since become horribly outdated.

So they changed the 'art style' a la TOR, or perhaps World of Warcraft - an intentionally drab style which could become more unique, and something they could use in their defense when people badmouth the graphics. [which they really couldn't defend in DA:O's case, as it was generic fantasy-ish all the way]

Problem is, they reused a lot of the same stuff. So the art styles [as pointed out by many] clash. And it makes the whole thing look worse.


Not to say they didn't make some progress.

They did a lot better on faces, i'll give them that. The Champion armor [and some other sets in the game] show off the 'new style' and they work.

Problem is, everything NEW is mixed with the OLDER stuff, and as I said, it conflicts. And makes the whole thing ugly.

[Irx]

The graphics suck because it a console port, current gen consoles are outdated by 5 years in comparison to even average pc hardware - what do you expect? Sure, they enabled some terribly optimized next-gen effects like tesselation etc, hi-res textures, but they can't imrove the fundamentally broken graphics with exremely low-poly models and zero detail locations. Not to mention the generally weak art design.

[Irx]

Korusus wrote...

This image more than any other just demonstrates the wide range in quality of textures present in the game.  For extra highlarious points, stand your Hawke next to one of these pointless NPCs whose only job is to make Kirkwall look even more pathetic than it does anyway and take a screenshot.  It's like a real person standing next to a mannequin.

The most annoying part is, those npcs still look the same on maxed graphics with hi res texture pack.

I can understand that consoles can't handle anything better and it was a compromise to bring slightly better primary characters models and more trash enemies to battles, but they didn't even bother to put normal models for the pc version!

[Monica83]

DomiiMai wrote...

Dragon Age look better than that crappy looking game you have up.

Lock please!

ohhhh look a fanboy!!!!!


Anyways i gree with the post owner.. Dragon age 2 have nice details on texture but all ambient are flat and empty with a lack of details.. And some design choice don't fit's at all with the game

[xxVeritas]

The Metalion wrote...

Looks good.  Do you have any texture packs installed?  Still, the background on the left is totally bland.

I downloaded the high-res texture pack from BioWare, but I think that only shows on Very High settings? Not sure. I'm on High without AA on.

Oh, and.. it's just a hill on the left. It's blocking all that's there.

[17thknight]

Them production values:

[abaris]

17thknight wrote...

Them production values:

That genuine? The guy on the left looks like a vanilla Morrowind character.

[Taura-Tierno]

I agree the NPC's are really ugly.

On the whole, the graphics are better than in DA:O. I especially like the lighting in the game. It's not mind-blowing or anything, but it is good. These are just on "High" settings, too, so I would assume they could be even better.





I think the fire is pretty good, too. A whole lot better than DA:O.


Some of the environtments are really great, too. I especially liked the Gallows:



And you can get good shots of the party.



All I'm saying is, that not everything about the graphics suck. It certainly has its flaws, but some parts are really good.

[v_ware]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I agree the NPC's are really ugly.

On the whole, the graphics are better than in DA:O. I especially like the lighting in the game. It's not mind-blowing or anything, but it is good. These are just on "High" settings, too, so I would assume they could be even better.





I think the fire is pretty good, too. A whole lot better than DA:O.


Some of the environtments are really great, too. I especially liked the Gallows:



And you can get good shots of the party.



All I'm saying is, that not everything about the graphics suck. It certainly has its flaws, but some parts are really good.

I agree, every game has it's minor graphical glitches.

[CaimDark]

I can't speak for the console version, but the PC version with the texture pack and very high settings looks quite good. It's not quite up to modern standards, but it's far from ugly. Many environments, Kirkwall in particular, look bland and kind of boring, but that's more of an art and design issue rather than a graphics issue. And of course, even if some people disapprove of the art style, it looks MUCH better than DAO. The fact that I absolutely loved Origins despite the fact that I sometimes cringed at the its sheer ugliness is truly testament to its greatness.

[Riv2.0]

 Why are the people who disagree "Fanboys" and "Twilight wannabe brigade?" I think the game looks pretty good! It's not got the best graphics but that's not so important, is it? Some of the best games have graphics that don't come close to matching the best graphics in games today.

Modifié par Riv2.0, 29 mars 2011 - 12:38 .

[TheCapulet]

My biggest issue with the graphics in this game is the vegetation.

I mean, come on?

Were these model assets reused from Neverwinter Nights or something?

Obsidian used SpeedTree in NWN2, CDproject used it in The Witcher. So we know it works in this engine. And I'm sure as hell that EA has a license for SpeedTree laying around some where. So holy crap; please use it bio.

[Gaius Octavian]

Baelyn wrote...

Nice photoshop.

Mind posting links to where these came from? Cause my DA2 looks nothing like half of those pictures.

Fanboy blinders much?

[v_ware]

TheCapulet wrote...

My biggest issue with the graphics in this game is the vegetation.

I mean, come on?

Were these model assets reused from Neverwinter Nights or something?

Obsidian used SpeedTree in NWN2, CDproject used it in The Witcher. So we know it works in this engine. And I'm sure as hell that EA has a license for SpeedTree laying around some where. So holy crap; please use it bio.

Speedtree was used in DA:O. I found it ugly.

[TheCapulet]

v_ware wrote...
Speedtree was used in DA:O. I found it ugly.

Speed tree is only a middleware that removes the excuse to use incredibly low poly tree models.  It doesn't hand the developers anything for free.  They still have to make quality model work for the speedtree functions to generate.