1245 réponses à ce sujet

[Haplose]

Jestina wrote...

I must comment on the remark about graphics appearing ten years old. I'm not much on graphics myself but here we go. I'm looking at three games I have right now...Skyrim, Shogun 2, and the Amalur demo. To me they all three look pretty good, about almost close in quality. I would say Shogun 2 looks the best, followed by Amalur and then Skyrim. Skyrim looks kind of...not smooth i guess you could say, that's why I put it at the bottom. All three running at the highest quality so yes the remark about the graphics looking dated is very far fetched and sounds biased. What are we comparing the graphics of Amalur to exactly?

Umm, sorry? You just compared KoA's graphics with Skyrim's? And actually believe that the former has superior graphics? I guess something must be wrong with my eyes then. Because for me they are certainly not on the same level and therefore even difficult to compare. In my eyes the amount of detail in the world and texture quality in Skyrim absolutely blows Amalour away. There is absolutely no contest. The same could be said about The Witcher's 2 graphics.
There's more to graphics then resolution modes and Anti-aliasing, you know.

But I guess something must be wrong with my eyes.

[LPPrince]

That's one thing I never do- rent.

I commit to all games I want. Even if they suck in the end, and I've made that mistake several times.

[LPPrince]

Haplose wrote...

Jestina wrote...

I must comment on the remark about graphics appearing ten years old. I'm not much on graphics myself but here we go. I'm looking at three games I have right now...Skyrim, Shogun 2, and the Amalur demo. To me they all three look pretty good, about almost close in quality. I would say Shogun 2 looks the best, followed by Amalur and then Skyrim. Skyrim looks kind of...not smooth i guess you could say, that's why I put it at the bottom. All three running at the highest quality so yes the remark about the graphics looking dated is very far fetched and sounds biased. What are we comparing the graphics of Amalur to exactly?

Umm, sorry? You just compared KoA's graphics with Skyrim's? And actually believe that the former has superior graphics? I guess something must be wrong with my eyes then. Because for me they are certainly not on the same level and therefore even difficult to compare. In my eyes the amount of detail in the world and texture quality in Skyrim absolutely blows Amalour away. There is absolutely no contest. The same could be said about The Witcher's 2 graphics.
There's more to graphics then resolution modes and Anti-aliasing, you know.

But I guess something must be wrong with my eyes.

Are y'all specifically discussing "graphics" or "art style" cause there's a difference.

[Haplose]

Jestina wrote...

android654 wrote...
I also forgot, thier lockpicking system is just bad. Its designed like the system from Fallout 3, but unlike fallout three, one *tick* in the wrong direction and your pick is broken.

Works that way in Skyrim too. Very touchy. And that was kind of the problem with Fallout locks, they were way easy and I rarely broke any picks. That's probably why it is so touchy in Amalur.

There are 5 lock levels in Skyrim: Novice, Apprentice, Adept, Expert and Master. I reckon that you didn't play Skyrim that much. Perhaps you shouldn't try locks above Apprentice when your lockpicking skill level is still basic and you believe the locks to be too "touchy". Novice and Apprentice locks certainly are not touchy... the others stop to be as well - as your skill progresses.

[Haplose]

LPPrince wrote...

Are y'all specifically discussing "graphics" or "art style" cause there's a difference.

To a degree both. And yes, a big difference. But in my comment I was focusing on detail level.
And textures.

[Jestina]

Skyrims graphics only look good to you cause you are obviously biased towards that particular game...so don't even know why you are in this thread.

[Haplose]

Jestina wrote...

Skyrims graphics only look good to you cause you are obviously biased towards that particular game...so don't even know why you are in this thread.

Neat.

I guess the poster who commented before on a fanboy-type of vibe going on was right after all.

[Jestina]

Haplose wrote...
I guess the poster who commented before on a fanboy-type of vibe going on was right after all.

If you wish to refer to yourself as that. I was just going to title you the Skyrim ambassador. Is that thread quiet or something?

[Chromie]

Haplose wrote...

Jestina wrote...

Skyrims graphics only look good to you cause you are obviously biased towards that particular game...so don't even know why you are in this thread.

Neat.

I guess the poster who commented before on a fanboy-type of vibe going on was right after all.

I don't think Skyrim looks good at all. Graphic wise. I enjoy the game yes but it's ugly.

[Haplose]

I guess it's partially a question of settings and optimisation. For example my impressions about the graphics improved a lot after I installed the TESVAL optimisation mod. And I got better framerates to boot!

But that Is off-topic now

Modifié par Haplose, 25 janvier 2012 - 08:10 .

[Jestina]

That's the thing about ES games. You have to mod them up a lot of the time. I've just got the vanilla game, no mods. I couldn't really get into it and the combat system is too awkward for me. There would probably be a riot in the ES community though if they updated the mechanics.

Right now i'm mostly just wasting time with Shogun 2 and hoping a good RPG will emerge soon.

[jcainhaze]

Hmmmm. I played Skyrim with maxed out graphics on a mega powerful pc. The graphics are definetly good. The design is nice as well. The style isn't my favorite though.

I played the Amalur demo on my 360. I very much liked the design and style and the graphics were not bad at all. This game I preordered in full on the 360 because I want to play it on a 50" HD screen. Probably because it has alot of personality.

I don't want all my games to look and feel the same. That would be boring.

[Chromie]

Haplose wrote...

I guess it's partially a question of settings and optimisation. For example my impressions about the graphics improved a lot after I installed the TESVAL optimisation mod. And I got better framerates to boot!

But that Is off-topic now

Well if your going to bring mods into this well obviously KoA can't compete. I'm talking about the vanilla game with out mods. Skyrim has lowres textures, terrible shadows, no DX11 features (we were promised some!) and etc. It does look better than Oblivion but that's like saying Mass Effect 2 looks better than Mass Effect 1. It's just updated really. 

The artstyle however is great. I prefer KoA because it looks great to me and I love a lot of color in my games. Witcher 2 is gorgeous not just because the graphics are so great but because CDPR made such vibrant landscapes.

[Haplose]

jcainhaze wrote...

I played the Amalur demo on my 360. I very much liked the design and style and the graphics were not bad at all. This game I preordered in full on the 360 because I want to play it on a 50" HD screen.  

So what's stopping you from using that 50" HD screen with your PC? Cable limitations and room arrangement?

[jcainhaze]

Haplose wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...

I played the Amalur demo on my 360. I very much liked the design and style and the graphics were not bad at all. This game I preordered in full on the 360 because I want to play it on a 50" HD screen.  

So what's stopping you from using that 50" HD screen with your PC? Cable limitations and room arrangement?

AH!  A very good question.  Maybe you can help me solve this problem.  I have infact connected the PC to the 50"er.  I didn't like the picture quality though.  Which made no sense since my PC is a gazillion times more powerful than the xbox.  I used a nice monster HDMI cable and everything.  I tweeked every setting I could think of but it just didn't look right.  Same thing if I play netflix through my xbox it looks great but if I run it through my pc it looks blah.  Any ideas? 

[Haplose]

Hmm... not really.
I understand you're running 1920x1080 resolution, with no overscan/zoom/whatever? Might make sure that the TV isn't resizing/zooming/whatever the picture (could be left over after watching some standard channels).

Other than that, not sure. I'm getting sharp and crisp picutre quality on my 40" TV. Though I don't use it to play much, as I have the computer in another room and since I prefer mouse+keyboard control, sitting by the desk is preferable to couch for me. It's great for photos and videos though.

[jcainhaze]

You know as simple as that sounds I might have actually forgotten that my monitor is 1920x1200. But I'm pretty sure I switched that setting.

I prefer m&k for certain games like BF3 but liked the 360 controller for The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

Modifié par jcainhaze, 25 janvier 2012 - 10:05 .

[Morroian]

Zanallen wrote...

Personally, I am having trouble with the "the story is terrible" comments. I mean, its a demo.

When I criticise the writing I mean the dialogue, the overarching story seems OK for a game.

It also doesn't have the incidental writing that Skyrim shines in, the backstories. 

Modifié par Morroian, 25 janvier 2012 - 12:03 .

[LPPrince]

You know whats epic?

Griffin is representing the BSN on Google Images-



Google Image Search for "Ljosalfar Kingdoms of Amalur" Large images

Google Image Search for "Dokkalfar Kingdoms of Amalur" Large Images

Go Griffin!

[RPGamer13]

Haplose wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Are y'all specifically discussing "graphics" or "art style" cause there's a difference.

To a degree both. And yes, a big difference. But in my comment I was focusing on detail level.
And textures.

Yeah, well, Skyrim has horrible armor textures.  The armor textures in Skyrim are blurry and uninteresting, for the most part.  The Daedric armor actually looks pretty cool, but the blurry textures mar it.  Mass Effect also has blurry and blocky textures, I sure hope they decided to change and improve the textures for ME3.

In Reckoning, the armor textures look so much much much better.

Haplose wrote...

I guess it's partially a question of settings and optimisation. For example my impressions about the graphics improved a lot after I installed the TESVAL optimisation mod. And I got better framerates to boot!

But that Is off-topic now

Yeah, well, that's a mod.  And if Bethesda was better at textures, you wouldn't even need a mod to get the level of detail in the armor in Reckoning.

jcainhaze wrote...

Haplose wrote...

jcainhaze wrote...

I played the Amalur demo on my 360. I very much liked the design and style and the graphics were not bad at all. This game I preordered in full on the 360 because I want to play it on a 50" HD screen.  

So what's stopping you from using that 50" HD screen with your PC? Cable limitations and room arrangement?

AH!  A very good question.  Maybe you can help me solve this problem.  I have infact connected the PC to the 50"er.  I didn't like the picture quality though.  Which made no sense since my PC is a gazillion times more powerful than the xbox.  I used a nice monster HDMI cable and everything.  I tweeked every setting I could think of but it just didn't look right.  Same thing if I play netflix through my xbox it looks great but if I run it through my pc it looks blah.  Any ideas? 

It could be your HDMI cable.  I read that monster cables are over priced and not really good at all.  The company that makes them isn't even on the official list of HDMI standard adopters. 

http://www.hdmi.org/...founders.aspx#M


 I was using an HDMI cable for my PS3 and Xbox 360 to my laptop that I was given by a friend when I bought his Xbox 360 off of him a few years ago and realised that the colors looked faded and on both consoles, in DAII X360 and White Knight Chronicles, there was a rainbow effect present on the character skin textures.

Well, the original cable I found out was made before Belkin became an official adopter of the HDMI standard. So, I bought a new MediaBridge cable and in the XBox 360, I no longer get that rainbow effect in Dragon Age II.  And it's a little bit lessened in White Knight Chronicles, but it's still there and colors still don't look right.

I think it has something to do with the PS3 and it's only White Knight Chronicles that has it.  I don't know, I tried messing with the options, but nothing has worked for that game.  Oh, and I had to get a new cable from the manufacturer because I was shipped a faulty one from amazon.  And even this new cable, if it's not in the HDMI slot a certain way, it doesn't work.  So, I wouldn't really recommend the cable.

But anyway, you could try a different HDMI cable.  Or like what Haplosee said, on your TV, look for an option for resizing and try turning it off.  I know my mom's TV has such an option, but I forget what it was called.  Also, try changing to 1080p or higher on the TV.

[android654]

LPPrince wrote...

Haplose wrote...

Jestina wrote...

I must comment on the remark about graphics appearing ten years old. I'm not much on graphics myself but here we go. I'm looking at three games I have right now...Skyrim, Shogun 2, and the Amalur demo. To me they all three look pretty good, about almost close in quality. I would say Shogun 2 looks the best, followed by Amalur and then Skyrim. Skyrim looks kind of...not smooth i guess you could say, that's why I put it at the bottom. All three running at the highest quality so yes the remark about the graphics looking dated is very far fetched and sounds biased. What are we comparing the graphics of Amalur to exactly?

Umm, sorry? You just compared KoA's graphics with Skyrim's? And actually believe that the former has superior graphics? I guess something must be wrong with my eyes then. Because for me they are certainly not on the same level and therefore even difficult to compare. In my eyes the amount of detail in the world and texture quality in Skyrim absolutely blows Amalour away. There is absolutely no contest. The same could be said about The Witcher's 2 graphics.
There's more to graphics then resolution modes and Anti-aliasing, you know.

But I guess something must be wrong with my eyes.

Are y'all specifically discussing "graphics" or "art style" cause there's a difference.

I was arguing against its Art direction, I think it looks bad. The graphics aren't anything to write home about, the world looked stale.

[MrDizazta]

Does anyone else get a Zelda vibe from this game?

[Nameless one7]

MrDizaztar wrote...

Does anyone else get a Zelda vibe from this game?

Not really.

[T764]

The demo is really quite buggy so i can only judge from one full demo session but i liked the art style and how colourful the game world was. The combat did very little for me, it starts off far too simple but judging from the video's it gets better as you get stronger.
The two main problems for me are the world and the feel of the game. Even with the heavy mythological influences the world isn't different enough for me to want to explore it and i just didn't enjoy wandering about.

Also it reminds me far too much of Fable, i'm fairly certain that the longsword animations are identical to those in Fable but the whole demo has this Fableish vibe.

I doubt that i'll get it at launch but in a month or three, maybe.

[android654]

T764 wrote...

The demo is really quite buggy so i can only judge from one full demo session but i liked the art style and how colourful the game world was. The combat did very little for me, it starts off far too simple but judging from the video's it gets better as you get stronger.
The two main problems for me are the world and the feel of the game. Even with the heavy mythological influences the world isn't different enough for me to want to explore it and i just didn't enjoy wandering about.

Also it reminds me far too much of Fable, i'm fairly certain that the longsword animations are identical to those in Fable but the whole demo has this Fableish vibe.

I doubt that i'll get it at launch but in a month or three, maybe.

I knew  culdn't be the only one to make the Fable connection from the demo, and that is not a good thing.  All they needed was handholding for there to be a copyright lawsuit.