83 réponses à ce sujet

[Sunnie]

As RagingCyclone noted, there is also the lighting, which is brighter in DA2 in most places. One thing that should have had more attention in DA2 is environment maps for equipment, that coupled with the bright lighting make the textures look less detailed when they actually are not. I've done more texturing and texture mods than I can count or even remember, I can assure you that the DA2 face/body textures are more detailed that in Origins. The armor and equipment are also on par with Origins.

[Savber100]

Good lord Bioware... Fix those textures >.<

[weedyfun]

Eski.Moe wrote...

Good God, that Isabella edit is hideous.

WORD.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Sunnie22 wrote...

As RagingCyclone noted, there is also the lighting, which is brighter in DA2 in most places. One thing that should have had more attention in DA2 is environment maps for equipment, that coupled with the bright lighting make the textures look less detailed when they actually are not. I've done more texturing and texture mods than I can count or even remember, I can assure you that the DA2 face/body textures are more detailed that in Origins. The armor and equipment are also on par with Origins.

The only thing that DA2 did better were the sky boxes. DA:O's engine was superior in everything else and some skies (such as the Warden's Keep sky) were pretty much awesome. DA2 faces are more detailed than those in Origins? I don't think so. Origins has faces that look more realistic:







If someone who had never seen any of these games - or heard their names - saw these two images, they would think that the first image was either a newer game or simply had a more powerful engine.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 23 septembre 2011 - 07:13 .

[Sunnie]

Elton John is dead wrote...
DA:O's engine was superior in everything else and some skies (such as the Warden's Keep sky) were pretty much awesome. DA2 faces are more detailed than those in Origins? I don't think so. Origins has faces that look more realistic:

Um, The Origins engine is the DA2 engine, with modifications to support the new "press a button an summin' awesome happens!" ninjatastic combat, and the changes in the quest/dialog system to emulate the ME dialog wheel. the only thing they really changed in the graphics is the change to how tint maps are handled.
Like I've explained previously, the textures and models are more detailed, I've looked at the meshes and the textures, they are in fact, higher detail. But the lighting, the pallet, the normal/environment maps can make them look less detailed. You can argue all you want, but you will still be wrong.

[mesmerizedish]

Elton John is dead wrote...

If someone who had never seen any of these games - or heard their names - saw these two images, they would think that the first image was either a newer game or simply had a more powerful engine.

You're comparing an interestingly lit scene to a low-res screenshot of a flatly-lit scene. Really?

[Stoomkal]

KenLyns wrote...

^ Disagree. Nitpick as much as you want, but the face creators in Mass Effect and Dragon Age are among the best in the business. I would be interested to learn what other popular game has a better face creator?

...

Wow... I would go with anything!

I *love* Dragon Age - but I will never be accusing them of being technically proficient games, not even "standard" for the years they were released in...

As for face generators... even Demon's Souls had a more advanced face generatore, with more options.

... and that game had literally half a page of dialgoue in its whole running time... it did not *need* any individuality for the characters.

But I could make a dark skinned barbarian or a an albino mage...

Hawke is just Hawke... he is just so damn Hawke.

EDIT:

WOW... are you arguing that DA2 has better graphics - but they look *worse* due to "other" reasons??

It is like saying it is not raining outside - water is falling from the sky because of precipitation...

Modifié par Stoomkal, 24 septembre 2011 - 04:34 .

[mesmerizedish]

Stoomkal wrote...

WOW... are you arguing that DA2 has better graphics - but they look *worse* due to "other" reasons??

It is like saying it is not raining outside - water is falling from the sky because of precipitation...

No one is arguing that. I'm the mind that DAII's visuals do not look worse. But Sunnie is saying that there are reasons that the greater detail may be less noticeable. This is more like saying it's not raining outside because it's not raining outside. You're getting wet because someone is squirting you with a garden hose.

[TheBlackBaron]

Stoomkal wrote...

WOW... are you arguing that DA2 has better graphics - but they look *worse* due to "other" reasons??

It is like saying it is not raining outside - water is falling from the sky because of precipitation...

It depends on how you define "graphics", really. If you're just looking at polygon count and texture detail, then yeah, DAII technically is better. If you include other aspects of design then DAII is definitely worse, as any eye test with screenshots can demonstrate. 

[Hel]

What was the topic at hand again? Ah right, Shepard's face in DA2 and not the game's graphics.

[mesmerizedish]

Helekanalaith wrote...

What was the topic at hand again? Ah right, Shepard's face in DA2 and not the game's graphics.

This thread is now about boobs. Specifically: how much goddamn better they are in DAII than in Origins.

[Torax]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Helekanalaith wrote...

What was the topic at hand again? Ah right, Shepard's face in DA2 and not the game's graphics.

This thread is now about boobs. Specifically: how much goddamn better they are in DAII than in Origins.

Merrill alone should be a testament to that

[Chromie]

PresidentCowboy wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Yeah, and somehow the graphics look worse than Origins'.<_<

Except they don't

For the performance difference yes they do. How is it I can run Witcher 2, Deus Ex and Origins on max but DA2 seems to slow down. Origins also had the benefit of what 6+ years of dev time it looks much more detailed and while not the best game graphically it's not ugly. DA2 is lifeless and the environments looks so sterile its so easy to notice the bad textures...yes even with the "highres texture" patch.

KenLyns wrote...

^ Disagree. Nitpick as much as you want,
but the face creators in Mass Effect and Dragon Age are among the best
in the business. I would be interested to learn what other popular game
has a better face creator?

Eve Online wins

Skyrim is looking great this time around unlike Oblivion which still has a better Character creator.

APB

Two Worlds II

Torax wrote...

Merrill alone should be a testament to that

Well there are people who hate the new elves and those who don't...so I don't think so.

Modifié par Ringo12, 24 septembre 2011 - 10:39 .

[Wulfram]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

You're comparing an interestingly lit scene to a low-res screenshot of a flatly-lit scene. Really?

Well, can you find an interestingly lit DA2 screenshot to compare?

Here are some random shots of DA1 and DA2 male NPCs.  I'm not handpicking, I'm just grabbing them off the wiki

[tmp7704]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

This thread is now about boobs. Specifically: how much goddamn better  bigger they are in DAII than in Origins.

There, fixed

(ok, i lie. they're ridiculously big in DAO, too)

[alex90c]

Wulfram wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

You're comparing an interestingly lit scene to a low-res screenshot of a flatly-lit scene. Really?

Well, can you find an interestingly lit DA2 screenshot to compare?

Here are some random shots of DA1 and DA2 male NPCs.  I'm not handpicking, I'm just grabbing them off the wiki

Those DA2 pictures actually look awful.

AND THOSE DAMN EARS

Modifié par alex90c, 24 septembre 2011 - 02:33 .

[DarkDragon777]

Wulfram wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

You're comparing an interestingly lit scene to a low-res screenshot of a flatly-lit scene. Really?

Well, can you find an interestingly lit DA2 screenshot to compare?

Here are some random shots of DA1 and DA2 male NPCs.  I'm not handpicking, I'm just grabbing them off the wiki

Exactly......Origins faces have much more detail. I guess some people think lifeless faces and fake mustaches that look like the same exact texture are good.


Visual appeal or an unoticable amount of textures does not prove graphical superiority. Noticeable detail does.

[Hel]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Exactly......Origins faces have much more detail. I guess some people think lifeless faces and fake mustaches that look like the same exact texture are good.


Visual appeal or an unoticable amount of textures does not prove graphical superiority. Noticeable detail does.

Erm, the facial hair in DA2 is overal the same as it was in DA. As for the amount of details put in the DA2 textures; that last image of Danarius looks better than those four DA characters combined.

Also, what noticeable details do those four DA characters show? I see nothing worth mentioning, aside from the fact that they all share the same nose.

[DarkDragon777]

Helekanalaith wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Exactly......Origins faces have much more detail. I guess some people think lifeless faces and fake mustaches that look like the same exact texture are good.


Visual appeal or an unoticable amount of textures does not prove graphical superiority. Noticeable detail does.

Erm, the facial hair in DA2 is overal the same as it was in DA. As for the amount of details put in the DA2 textures; that last image of Danarius looks better than those four DA characters combined.

Also, what noticeable details do those four DA characters show? I see nothing worth mentioning, aside from the fact that they all share the same nose.

No, it really isn't. At least the hair in Origins didn't look like the exact same texture based on the same shape that was glued on someone's head. All I can say about Origins is better lighting and various different details that make an object look real, not  a lifeless shell that has horribly fake hair glued onto it. Again, the minute things really don't matter overall.


And yes, Danarius' face looks good in that picture, but that doesn't make up for everyone else.

[Zanallen]

Can we stop quoting the picture wall, please?

[Hel]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Helekanalaith wrote...

Erm, the facial hair in DA2 is overal the same as it was in DA. As for the amount of details put in the DA2 textures; that last image of Danarius looks better than those four DA characters combined.

Also, what noticeable details do those four DA characters show? I see nothing worth mentioning, aside from the fact that they all share the same nose.

No, it really isn't. At least the hair in Origins didn't look like the exact same texture based on the same shape that was glued on someone's head. All I can say about Origins is better lighting and various different details that make an object look real, not  a lifeless shell that has horribly fake hair glued onto it. Again, the minute things really don't matter overall.

And yes, Danarius' face looks good in that picture, but that doesn't make up for everyone else.

Hair isn't much better in DA either. The textures used for it are of the same visual quality, ie you see no thin strands but quite a lot of thick streaks that are supposed to present the hair. Other than that the same hair models make their appearance in DA2 too.

The changes made to the lighting engine were for the better too. The problem lies with the settings that they used throughout the areas. The brightness looks to be set too high to appear even remotely realistic. Because if you take the time to observe the differences between lighting in DA and DA2 you'll see that there's more to it than simply brightening up the objects in the world. In DA2 the models receive light according to their position to the light source. One side of a character could be lit, while the other side is cloaked in darkness. That's something that DA didn't have, as far as I can remember at any rate.

These complaints about DA2's supposed graphical inferiority compared to DA are pretty silly. DA2 is the winner regardless of how you look at it. The problem lies with that DA2 just received too little time and effort to make it really shine. When comparing certain elements from DA2 to Legacy this becomes apparent rather quickly. The details put into the visualization of the areas for that DLC are above the DA2 standard.

[tmp7704]

Helekanalaith wrote...

As for the amount of details put in the DA2 textures; that last image of Danarius looks better than those four DA characters combined.

Ehh, no. DA2 render seems completely devoid of specular highlights, which makes skin appear unnaturaly dry, compared to DAO version. It's also sort of exception as far as the amount of details go -- DA2 faces for some reason tend to be rendered overly smooth, lacking the texture other than the largest (if any) wrinkles.

Hair isn't much better in DA either.

Both games use the same textures for hair, but the shader used for DA2 is again rendering them in relatively odd manner. It's most visible when comparing characters sporting the same hairstyles in both games (like Bohdan)

DA2 is the winner regardless of how you look at it.

No, depending how you actually look at it, there's quite a few areas when DA2 falls short in comparison -- some of the shaders, lighting setups,quality of animations (seemingly complete lack of blending, e.g) to name a few.

Modifié par tmp7704, 24 septembre 2011 - 03:41 .

[RagingCyclone]

Perhaps a little visual to help illustrate the lighting talk. Here is a pic of the warden armor ported to Origins. I have highlighted in the pic where the armor shows reflections...no where in DA2 I have I been able to find this:

edit: and tmp knows what he is talking about, this pic is using his mod for illustration.

Modifié par RagingCyclone, 24 septembre 2011 - 03:52 .

[Sunnie]

The bottom line is that they did make improvements in DA2, but lacked the time to actually do anything with them, and in fact fell short of even meeting the bar set by the previous game in the series.
Origins took 6.5 years, DA2 was limited to 18 months. Had the latter got even half the time the previous title got, I'm pretty sure DA2 would be a totally different game, and there wouldn't be all the negative reactions to it (whether justified or not).

[Hel]

tmp7704 wrote...

No, depending how you actually look at it, there's quite a few areas when DA2 falls short in comparison -- some of the shaders, lighting setups,quality of animations (seemingly complete lack of blending, e.g) to name a few.

I think the animations were created to look like that on purpose, to supposedly fit the new combat style and pace. It isn't something that bothers me much, since the rest of them blend nicely together. (Varric twirling a bolt, walking animations, etcetera, ...)

RagingCyclone wrote...

Perhaps a little visual to help illustrate the lighting talk. Here is a pic of the warden armor ported to Origins. I have highlighted in the pic where the armor shows reflections...no where in DA2 I have I been able to find this:

edit: and tmp knows what he is talking about, this pic is using his mod for illustration.

• IMAGE SOURCE •

Hm interesting.

I wonder if this is an issue with the rendering of specular maps, so that objects in the world fail to reflect the light they receive off themselves to other objects. If the armour is a 1:1 port from DA2 to DA, then I can imagine that this might be case. However, that raises the question whether this is this a bug in the engine or something they intentionally left out to create a more stylized visualization for the game...

Either way, I stand corrected on this part of the discussion. 

Modifié par Helekanalaith, 24 septembre 2011 - 07:06 .