164 réponses à ce sujet

[Captain_Obvious_au]

For those defending the graphics, you REALLY think that this is okay for a 'blockbuster' 2012 game?
www.youtube.com/watch

[FluffyScarf]

GirlPower reminds me of Ash. Very confrontational...

And that video looks great for a 2002 game.

Modifié par FluffyScarf, 15 février 2012 - 09:23 .

[RazielPC]

The demo is perfect the way it is, I hope it is the final build, just to annoy you.

[B.Shep]

The graphics are fine, better than ME2

[magnuskn]

Graphics looked totally fine. A bit stiff facial animations, though.

[Feanor_II]

Didn' have problems with graphics..... First thing I did was compare them with ME1 & 2 and I found them better (I'm playing currently ME1 and the difference is bovious)

The Witcher 2....... That was a great game! (Hey Biowarte, learn from this Polish guys for DA franchise), it has much better graphics, yes, but what I expected from ME3 was to continue improving the level from previous games and I think they did.

[Jurigag]

The graphics is very old, like 2006-2007, for example gothic3, crysis, bioshock have much better graphic than me3, batman from 2009 on UE3 too have better graphic......

i think the textures can be much better.....

[Almostfaceman]

Nomanor wrote...

Anyone else noticed the terrible animations and crap graphics?

in this day and age, this is unacceptable

Not really.

[GnusmasTHX]

Luc0s wrote...

Unbannable wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

I know more about the Unreal 3 engine than you do, I work with it at school on a daily basis as a game-design student.

Well if thats the case, I'd love to hear you explain why Rocksteady, a studio with not even half the experience of Bioware, can make Batman Arkham City with high rez textures, amazing animations, realistic looking hair and hair physics (Talia Al Ghul), PhysX, DX11, 3D Vision etc while Mass Effect 3 has none of those features.

I cant answer that. To answer that, I need to know how both games are scripted, how they use the RAM and VRAM, what variables both games contain and what extra plugins both development teams used. Also, I haven't played Arkham City so I'm really not in the place to answer your questions.

In other words he doesn't know anything. Unreal Engine 3 is a great engine that can pump out great looking games.

It's BioWare's version of it that is warped, has been since ME1. I'm not saying ME3 looks bad, but it certainly doesn't/isn't of the level, in many aspects, as some other tuned UE3 games.

Modifié par GnusmasTHX, 15 février 2012 - 09:43 .

[LOST SPARTANJLC]

 D*** if you do , d*** if you don't.I believe they said a while back that the demo is from an older build , meaning the final game can't be exactly the same.What good does it do to tell people its an older build , if they completely ignore what you've said.
A one to two gig demo(missing effects/low-res textures and other incomplete problems) somehow equals a 12-18 gig final game with final animations/textures and other content not found in the demo.Really ? , some of you need head evaluations.<_<

Modifié par LOST SPARTANJLC, 15 février 2012 - 10:07 .

[WaffleCrab]

Looks fine to me, considering how old the damn engine is. I never really found anything bad to say in the graphics department other than how crappy the sheps, uniform looks compared to hes armor, But the only real problem isnt even in there, its the conTROLs they are god awfull.

[Techlology]

I hope this isn't indicative of the final product because by god the textures make my eyes cry buckets of blood.

[Balek-Vriege]

Zu Long wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

FRANCESCO84Inn wrote...

the real preblem its the console, in this time the pc its more powerfull.

Yeah blame it on the console.  

The real problem is not the console, the real problem is the developer using an outdated engine. If you only knew how much a newer engine could do for both platforms, console AND pc.

For example, look at this: 



That my friend, is a screenshot from the XBOX 360 version of The Witcher 2. The game is developed in a very new engine specifically developed for that game; the RED engine. 

Amazing what you can do with a modern and well-tailored engine, isn't it?



But honestly, for an Unreal 3 engine game, Mass Effect 3 looks amazing.

Except...that honestly doesn't look any better to me than the mass effect screenshots. The peasant NPC faces on the left actually look considerably WORSE than the Alliance NPCs from the beginning of the game.

Not to mention the ground textures are pretty basic, but I think those graphics are great regardless.  The same way I think ME3 graphics are superb.  Must be because I don't ever play shooters etc. using state of the art engines and tech.

The only low resish texture I saw (on PC version) was Shep's armor at the beginning of the Sur'Kesh Mission.  Everything else (Liara, NPCs, Wrex, Anderson etc. landscapes etc) were great.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 15 février 2012 - 10:22 .

[Clearly Balkan]

 I don't know what the hell are you talking about.

I've played demo on X360 & my high-end PC gaming rig. FYI I have two Radeon HD6950 2GB  in CrossFireX. 

Graphics on X360 are over the top for console & I don't have to mention PC graphics. They are amazingly beautiful.

This is just a demo so chill out. You didn't have any detailed options to customize. 

Modifié par Clearly Balkan, 15 février 2012 - 10:22 .

[G3rman]

Listen Mr. and Mrs. PC elitists, the game was only ported to your Higher performing system because of popular demand from the original exclusive Xbox 360. That meant that there was no guarantee you would get a different product, it was a port over with the same graphics.

They chose to continue with keeping the game streamlined for all consoles and only bother releasing it on the PC because you still demand it.

[lechugator]

crap graphics inferior to ME2 in TEXTURES
LOW-res textures spEcially in enemies... watch them before their bodies disappear in front of you in secodns
Absence of ragdoll in corpses etc ........

[Clearly Balkan]

Nomanor wrote...

Catsith wrote...

What is "crap" about the graphics for you? What exactly are you disappointed with? Your post contains no valuable feedback for the developers.

Graphics look BAD. Like something you'd expect in 1998

faces and characters in general look terrible, animated terribe


did you see the RUN animation?

Now you're just talking sh*t and trolling.

U Mad Bro?!

[FluffyScarf]

At least the shadows aren't a blocky, pixelated mess like in a certain other game by another studio starting with 'B'.

[HCGxKaLiBeR]

IMO,the greaphic is worse than ME2...

The city just terribly textured, very lack of details over distance and water looks back as well. Seems BW nerf the graphics for the consoles again.

However, the 2nd mission looks a little bit better. I didnt see any horrible textures. (prob just no more distance views, which it was just bad in the 1st mission)

I hope there will be more graphic options in the release version, or high rez textures later on. Right now, my expectance for this game just cut in half cuz of the demo...

[WaffleCrab]

G3rman wrote...

Listen Mr. and Mrs. PC elitists, the game was only ported to your Higher performing system because of popular demand from the original exclusive Xbox 360. That meant that there was no guarantee you would get a different product, it was a port over with the same graphics.

They chose to continue with keeping the game streamlined for all consoles and only bother releasing it on the PC because you still demand it.

PC version ended up outselling the x360, ME2 DLC's for the PC version generated more revenue than the actual game sales and DLC sales on 360, Nuf said? so its not just the public who want the game for the PC, but it is also a lucrative choice for BW.

[Stallownage]

Alright, gonna make my first post here. Let's do this

Please, for the love of god, disregard anything a developer says about demos being "from an older build". Their job is to persuade you to buy the product, so they say things like that. They don't directly state it will look exactly the same, because that could be interpreted as "lying". But saying that this version and the version you eventually play are somehow "different" is probably technically true, and it gives you hope that any concerns you have will be fixed. Take it from someone who was active on the BF3 forums for a good six or seven months leading up to release, the "oh its an older version" line is meaningless (although I do like BF3's expansion pack, which saved the game for me).

As far as Unreal engine goes, it's pretty damn good. It's not the outdated piece of junk people think it is; it's been around a long time, but its also had a very diligent team updating constantly throughout that time, and its one of the top "off the shelf" triple A solutions available. I've always opted for CryEngine for my personal work due to its unique advantages, but Unreal is no slouch. If you watch the tech demos for the engine, you'll see just how impressive it can look.

Any issues with ME3 graphics are more probably down to budget and time. This is a game with 40,000 lines of dialogue, deep story driven cinematic plot, a very lengthy campaign, big name talented actors to do justice to the characters and story... that takes a lot of money to produce. So the budget for the art team is probably stretched thinner than it would be on say, Battlefield or Crysis, where the story/plot/dialogue element is less important. A more thinly stretched art team on an expansive game like this, means some corners will have to be cut, and with that in mind I'd say the Bioware art team have done a damn fine job. Of course I'd like to see certain things improve, and of course things would look better if the consoles weren't so old. But it was far from bad, most of the corner cutting was done on background elements (like the infamous 2d people). And whichever character artist did James Vega's shirt did an amazing job; I couldn't stop looking at the folds. Sells the material perfectly, just thought I would drop that in there.

Bottom line, as long as my Shep gets to bang seven shades of **** out of Ashley again, I'll be happy. And truthfully, if you're playing Mass Effect for the graphics, you're not doin' it rite.

Modifié par Stallownage, 15 février 2012 - 10:33 .

[ploppy54]

Nomanor wrote...

Anyone else noticed the terrible animations and crap graphics?

in this day and age, this is unacceptable

dont buy the game then.

[WaffleCrab]

Stallownage wrote...

Alright, gonna make my first post here. Let's do this

Please, for the love of god, disregard anything a developer says about demos being "from an older build". Their job is to persuade you to buy the product, so they say things like that. They don't directly state it will look exactly the same, because that could be interpreted as "lying". But saying that this version and the version you eventually play are somehow "different" is probably technically true, and it gives you hope that any concerns you have will be fixed. Take it from someone who was active on the BF3 forums for a good six or seven months leading up to release, the "oh its an older version" line is meaningless (although I do like BF3's expansion pack, which saved the game for me).

As far as Unreal engine goes, it's pretty damn good. It's not the outdated piece of junk people think it is; it's been around a long time, but its also had a very diligent team updating constantly throughout that time, and its one of the top "off the shelf" triple A solutions available. I've always opted for CryEngine for my personal work due to its unique advantages, but Unreal is no slouch. If you watch the tech demos for the engine, you'll see just how impressive it can look.

Any issues with ME3 graphics are more probably down to budget and time. This is a game with 40,000 lines of dialogue, deep story driven cinematic plot, a very lengthy campaign, big name talented actors to do justice to the characters and story... that takes a lot of money to produce. So the budget for the art team is probably stretched thinner than it would be on say, Battlefield or Crysis, where the story/plot/dialogue element is less important. A more thinly stretched art team on an expansive game like this, means some corners will have to be cut, and with that in mind I'd say the Bioware art team have done a damn fine job. Of course I'd like to see certain things improve, and of course things would look better if the consoles weren't so old. But it was far from bad, most of the corner cutting was done on background elements (like the infamous 2d people). And whichever character artist did James Vega's shirt did an amazing job; I couldn't stop looking at the folds. Sells the material perfectly, just thought I would drop that in there.

Bottom line, as long as my Shep gets to bang seven shades of **** out of Ashley again, I'll be happy. And truthfully, if you're playing Mass Effect for the graphics, you're not doin' it rite.

I second you 100% sir. *goes back to playing through ME2 save with kaidan as a survivor from virmire*

[G3rman]

WaffleCrab wrote...
PC version ended up outselling the x360, ME2 DLC's for the PC version generated more revenue than the actual game sales and DLC sales on 360, Nuf said? so its not just the public who want the game for the PC, but it is also a lucrative choice for BW.

Not worth noting unless you provide your sources.  And if it was as lucrative as you say, BioWare would have their own PC team working to provide a better service, clearly they find streamlining better.

At least Microsoft and EA do.