238 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Look at the character models in ME1 and then look at the charater models in ME3. The latter is far more detailed, it isn't even close.

[PSUHammer]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The crushed blacks on the Xbox version make it nearly unplayable.

I think your TV needs calibrated...

[Rotacioskapa]

Han Shot First wrote...

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Look at the character models in ME1 and then look at the charater models in ME3. The latter is far more detailed, it isn't even close.

Only the faces, clothes are terrible in ME3.

[Cuttlebone]

I've been paying more attention to the game recently and I think another thing worth mentioning was the reflection quality. In ME2 the metals and that kind of materials looked gorgeous and very realistic, just go take a look at the collector vessel or Omega. In ME3 it all looks like cheap plastic.

Also the beautiful water present in the past 2 games is gone, replaced by some ugly ass texture.

[spirosz]

The ME3 CC turned my Shepard into garbage.

[spirosz]

Cuttlebone wrote...

I've been paying more attention to the game recently and I think another thing worth mentioning was the reflection quality. In ME2 the metals and that kind of materials looked gorgeous and very realistic, just go take a look at the collector vessel or Omega. In ME3 it all looks like cheap plastic.

Also the beautiful water present in the past 2 games is gone, replaced by some ugly ass texture.

[Grubas]

Well they improved some stuff at the expense of other stuff. The level are very small... compared to ME1. But you are talking about ME2.

I wonder how many resources it took to slightly polish ME2 graphics. Both games use the same hardware, but only one is taking excessive use of sprites...

[Savehtepenguin]

I'd have to agree to some degree. Whilst I never have and never will believe that graphical quality=Visual quality (I personally feel that me3 has the latter in abundance), the actual graphical quality for a game released in 2012 can be incredibly (and noticeably) low. As is pointed out many times, the most jarring of these is the extremely low resolution of what I feel, most people would consider important textures (clothing/armour/weapons primarily...and dont even get me started on the skylines). Couple this with animations that range from mildly inconsistent to outright exorcist, and either questionable object meshes or questionable camera angles that decide to focus on said object, and it's not hard to understand why topics like these spring to life...

...which is why I'd also suggest Texmod and some form of custom shaders as a necessity, rather than a luxury.

[Yate]

I agree with you on the textures... for some reason ME2 had the best textures. Otherwise though I think it looks really nice.

[dreman9999]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Are you blind? The shy texturesarebetterin ME3 then ME1.

[dreman9999]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Look at the character models in ME1 and then look at the charater models in ME3. The latter is far more detailed, it isn't even close.

Only the faces, clothes are terrible in ME3.

Clorhes were always low tex.

[Cuttlebone]

dreman9999 wrote...

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Are you blind? The shy texturesarebetterin ME3 then ME1.

Someone is clearly blind here, and its not Rotacioskapa...

[dreman9999]

Cuttlebone wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

Check the sky texture on the Citadel in ME1 then in ME3. ME1 wins.

Are you blind? The shy texturesarebetterin ME3 then ME1.

Someone is clearly blind here, and its not Rotacioskapa...

No,the shy boxes are not better, resolution wise, in ME1.They are more varied ME1 , only. You can clearly see the pixel in the shy box in ME1.

I looked at both the pc and xbox version of ME1...The resolution of the shy boxes in ME1 is lower.
 One can only argue the ME1's sky box in Asthetice consistancy then me2 and 3...But that's it.

Eventhen eviromental design wise,ME3 is still better.

[Fredvdp]

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm curious if those who hate ME3's graphics also hate the graphics in ME1 and ME2.

Because ME3 is clearly superior to both.

I'm just curious if this is a case of people being so bitter about the ending of ME3 that anything and everything in the game must be described as 'bad,' or people who legitimately did just not like the graphics in the entire series.

I dislike the graphics of all three games, but it seems Mass Effect 3's visuals evolved ins some areas and remained bad in others, making the graphics more inconsistent, which annoys me. But yes, the other two have worse graphics. Especially ME1 with its texture pop-in.

But at least with ME1 and 2 you could cover up imperfections by turning on the film grain filter, something you can't do in ME3.

[Rotacioskapa]

Citadel sky, ME1 clearly wins, the ME3 one looks terrible and almost all ME3 sky textures:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/nwsh6.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/lmuqS.jpg

Citadel water:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/CL4Wi.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/sjgGS.jpg

Citadel Tree, ME3 one is a joke.
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/eqSlW.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/xOBtB.jpg

[dreman9999]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Citadel sky, ME1 clearly wins, the ME3 one looks terrible and almost all ME3 sky textures:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/nwsh6.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/lmuqS.jpg

Citadel water:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/CL4Wi.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/sjgGS.jpg

Citadel Tree, ME3 one is a joke.
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/eqSlW.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/xOBtB.jpg

I'll give you the citadel sky for ME3. But the tree in ME1 justhas more leaves. Me1 tree and ME3 tree were donein the same way with ME3 just has it with less leaves and limps. Also, ME3 water is better.

[Savehtepenguin]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Citadel sky, ME1 clearly wins, the ME3 one looks terrible and almost all ME3 sky textures:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/nwsh6.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/lmuqS.jpg

Citadel water:
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/CL4Wi.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/sjgGS.jpg

Citadel Tree, ME3 one is a joke.
ME1 http://i.imgur.com/eqSlW.jpg
ME3 http://i.imgur.com/xOBtB.jpg

Pretty much sums it up, even if the water textures dont really bother me so much in me3. The skyboxes on the other hand, lack any sense of depth. It's a shame, because the actual art style and level design in me3 is on the whole pretty great...until you look up and realise you're stuck on The Truman Show.

*Edit - To the above, it's not about having more leaves...it's how the texture actually appears to interact with the world i.e. the contrast in what is shadowed and what is lit. There are quite a few examples in me3, of environmental textures that just seem to have absolutely no connection to anything around them.

Modifié par Savehtepenguin, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:05 .

[dreman9999]

Savehtepenguin wrote...



Pretty much sums it up, even if the water textures dont really bother me so much in me3. The skyboxes on the other hand, lack any sense of depth. It's a shame, because the actual art style and level design in me3 is on the whole pretty great...until you look up and realise you're stuck on The Truman Show.

*Edit - To the above, it's not about having more leaves...it's how the texture actually appears to interact with the world i.e. the contrast in what is shadowed and what is lit. There are quite a few examples in me3, of environmental textures that just seem to have absolutely no connection to anything around them.

1. The citadel was always the ruman show from ME1. It is a space station. The idea was to make it look more opens.

2. I understand that but branch and leave ammount is a factor to that any way. More leaves and branches equals more shadows. Less Leaves and branches equals less shadows. ME3 tree is anemic next to ME1 tree. It some how going to have the same ammount of shadows as a thicker leaves and branched tree?

Modifié par dreman9999, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:18 .

[Savehtepenguin]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The citadel was always the ruman show from ME1. It is a space station. The idea was to make it look more opens.

I could buy that if a) the poor sky textures were not present everywhere, and I actually believed it was the council's intention to make the fake skylines of the citadel look like they were the result of heavy budget cuts.

2. I understand that but branch and leave cut is a factor to that any way. More leaves and branches equals more shadows. Less Leaves and branches equals less shadows. ME3 tree is anemic next to ME1 tree. It some how going to have the same ammount of shadows as a thicker leaves and branched tree? 

I'm not talking about the same amount of shadows or lighting in particular, just the same attention to detail...attention to detail which, even if the tree in question did have, would be completely lost due to the extremely low resolution of the textures.

[Fiery Phoenix]

WellBig D wrote...

The Graphics are okay but for some reason the first level looks particularly awful.

Certain levels do seem to look worse than others and vice versa. As an example, like you say, the first level looked mediocre at best, while the level immediately after (Mars) looked particularly impressive. Funny how that works, but it seems to be the case in ME3.

Overall, though, I would say ME3 is BioWare's best looking game to date. There are some embarrassing textures here and there, but as a whole I think it looks better than any game BioWare has made yet.

[Rotacioskapa]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Overall, though, I would say ME3 is BioWare's best looking game to date. There are some embarrassing textures here and there, but as a whole I think it looks better than any game BioWare has made yet.

ME2 looks way better than ME3. Even ME1 mostly.

Modifié par Rotacioskapa, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:46 .

[dreman9999]

Savehtepenguin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The citadel was always the ruman show from ME1. It is a space station. The idea was to make it look more opens.

I could buy that if a) the poor sky textures were not present everywhere, and I actually believed it was the council's intention to make the fake skylines of the citadel look like they were the result of heavy budget cuts.

2. I understand that but branch and leave cut is a factor to that any way. More leaves and branches equals more shadows. Less Leaves and branches equals less shadows. ME3 tree is anemic next to ME1 tree. It some how going to have the same ammount of shadows as a thicker leaves and branched tree? 

I'm not talking about the same amount of shadows or lighting in particular, just the same attention to detail...attention to detail which, even if the tree in question did have, would be completely lost due to the extremely low resolution of the textures.

1.The citadel is series of giant roon, like the truman show. That's my point.
2.But that's not attetion to detal. ME1's trees was a buch of 2d leaves stuck on to some 3d branches. ME3 is the same thing.Every shadow in ME1 is a product of shaders in the program. BW never installed the tree shadowsin ME1, they just applied the lighing and the shadows came to place because of the shaders.
You can only bring details of attetion to detail to the shy of the citadel, which isjust the carried over low res shy from ME1.

[Savehtepenguin]

Perhaps we're getting wires crossed here, because I do understand that the citadel is a space station, and, as is tradition with space stations, any area you visit on the space station will be within the confines of.....the space station. That aside, with all the reaper tech that's been discovered, I would've expected more from the citadel than attempting to emulate an open environment with what appears to be a terribly unconvincing paint job. Simply put, you seem to be covering up poor textures by trying to cite lore and logic? It doesn't make sense.

As for shadows, I'm really not talking about anything to do with shaders. I'm talking about any kind of variance in texture detail, that alludes to variances in the environment they're going to be present in. Differences in colouration, shape, or texture of an object in an attempt to make the texture as a whole look realistic. Not just a dark green blob with sharp edges, you know? If you can't see how that's a difference between the two trees, even at a plain glance, then I'm really not sure what to say.

[Cuttlebone]

dreman9999 wrote...

Savehtepenguin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The citadel was always the ruman show from ME1. It is a space station. The idea was to make it look more opens.

I could buy that if a) the poor sky textures were not present everywhere, and I actually believed it was the council's intention to make the fake skylines of the citadel look like they were the result of heavy budget cuts.

2. I understand that but branch and leave cut is a factor to that any way. More leaves and branches equals more shadows. Less Leaves and branches equals less shadows. ME3 tree is anemic next to ME1 tree. It some how going to have the same ammount of shadows as a thicker leaves and branched tree? 

I'm not talking about the same amount of shadows or lighting in particular, just the same attention to detail...attention to detail which, even if the tree in question did have, would be completely lost due to the extremely low resolution of the textures.

1.The citadel is series of giant roon, like the truman show. That's my point.
2.But that's not attetion to detal. ME1's trees was a buch of 2d leaves stuck on to some 3d branches. ME3 is the same thing.Every shadow in ME1 is a product of shaders in the program. BW never installed the tree shadowsin ME1, they just applied the lighing and the shadows came to place because of the shaders.
You can only bring details of attetion to detail to the shy of the citadel, which isjust the carried over low res shy from ME1.

At this point I'd say you're just in denial, but maybe if you keep believing it will become true. Even if, as you say the trees in ME1 are just as good as ME3 (which is obviously not true, as you can clearly see in the images) ME1 is a lot older than ME3, more than 5 years to be precise, after 5 years you'd expect them to improve the look of their games quite a bit, but it looks even worse, almost like a downgrade.

And if you're gonna say they made the citadel sky look fake on purpose then why in the first game it looks so amazingly real? and why every other sky in the game looks just as bad? gee maybe its all a big lie and we're actually playing in some sort of matrix thingy.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Rotacioskapa wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Overall, though, I would say ME3 is BioWare's best looking game to date. There are some embarrassing textures here and there, but as a whole I think it looks better than any game BioWare has made yet.

ME2 looks way better than ME3. Even ME1 mostly.

Well, as I noted, ME3 falls short in certain graphical aspects that ME2 handled better. But if I had to choose, I would pick ME3 as the overall graphically superior game to both ME1 and ME2. I emphasize overall, for the reason remarked earlier.