238 réponses à ce sujet

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I thought ME3's graphics were the best in the series, though there was some kind of weird, annoying color filter going on.

ME1 and ME2, my main Shep had brown hair.  ME3, his hair turned black because of the weird lighting in the game.  Maybe that's what happened to Udina's hair.

[RuthlessGravity]

Neverwinter_Knight77 wrote...

I thought ME3's graphics were the best in the series, though there was some kind of weird, annoying color filter going on.

ME1 and ME2, my main Shep had brown hair.  ME3, his hair turned black because of the weird lighting in the game.  Maybe that's what happened to Udina's hair.

My Shep's skin color was a light brown. But the lightning in-game made him pale as a ghost! 

[N7-RedFox]

I must say, when i see some of the textures in ME3 i do think to myself 'are we back in the Goldeneye age of 1997?'

Especially during the escape from earth scenes where Anderson has zombie hands and skin. Was also peeved off when i couldn't import my ME1+ME2 Shepard's hairstyle (the spikey marine cut). It really did feel like a downgrade graphically.

[Logos77]

 Since we're sharing our opinions here...

I think E.T. on the Atari 2600 not only had bad graphics, if I fell down one more hole, I was gonna go kill a developer or playtester.

[PSUHammer]

Logos77 wrote...

 Since we're sharing our opinions here...

I think E.T. on the Atari 2600 not only had bad graphics, if I fell down one more hole, I was gonna go kill a developer or playtester.

That was, seriously, the worst game ever made.  I actually enjoyed Raiders of the Lost Ark better.

[Th3 Bunman]

I played all three games on a tv that was over 20 years old.Just got a 47 inch flatscreen tv and everything looks great...well compared to what i had anyway.

[Ash J. Williams]

For a game built in the Unreal Engine and it has to be able to run on the consoles I think ME3 is one of the best examples yet of the Unreal Engine. Textures of which you mention are something developers have to sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

The improvements from ME1 to ME2 were pretty incredible & ME3 only improved upon ME2. You want great graphics with no minor graphics niggles you have to play a PC only game like Metro 2033.

Modifié par Ash J. Williams, 24 janvier 2013 - 07:36 .

[Ambivalent]

Blame consoles especially x-box 360. PS3 at least supports 1080p and has a nice bluray reader which could mean more textures, more detail, more of everything but x-box still runs 720p as far as i know and has DVD driver which means less detail in every branch.

Still even the console that i just praised is 6 years old. We had, i think dual cores at that time.

So if the game isn't PC exclusive(And last one was either Witcher 2 or Red Orchestra 2) it doesn't and it can't look very well. Until when next generation starts of course.

But just like Bethesda does every other developer studio and also Bioware should support extensive modding so we could use our PC's resources.

TLDR: a) We PC gamers need heavy modding support cause i haven't got i7 to play in console detail
Next generation of consoles should come out. Not that i'm gonna buy them but after then i can see some detailed graphics after a long long time.

[AlexMBrennan]

Textures of which you mention are something developers have to sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

Omg! If only someone would invent the TB HDD already... Oh wait... Or blueray for that matter...

[Fredvdp]

Ash J. Williams wrote...

For a game built in the Unreal Engine and it has to be able to run on the consoles I think ME3 is one of the best examples yet of the Unreal Engine. Textures of which you mention are something developers have to sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

DVD size is not an issue, thanks to the internet. BioWare has released a 1GB texture patch for Dragon Age II immediately after its release.

Nabyroth wrote...

Blame consoles especially x-box 360. PS3
at least supports 1080p and has a nice bluray reader which could mean
more textures, more detail, more of everything but x-box still runs 720p
as far as i know and has DVD driver which means less detail in every
branch.

Both PS3 and Xbox 360 support 1080p output, but both consoles output most games at 720p. While a BluRay disc has the space to contain more content and therefore higher resolution textures, the current-gen consoles simply aren't powerful enough to render them at decent framerates. Even with the current graphics, Mass Effect 3 only runs at 30 fps at 720p on an Xbox 360. On PS3 it runs even slower at the same resolution. Higher resolution textures would hurt either version of the game.

I don't blame the consoles for the low quality on PC. BioWare/EA decided to release a PC version and decided not to use the platform's full potential.

Modifié par Fredvdp, 24 janvier 2013 - 09:28 .

[DarkSeraphym]

Fredvdp wrote...

Both PS3 and Xbox 360 support 1080p output, but both consoles output most games at 720p. While a BluRay disc has the space to contain more content and therefore higher resolution textures, the current-gen consoles simply aren't powerful enough to render them at decent framerates. Even with the current graphics, Mass Effect 3 only runs at 30 fps at 720p on an Xbox 360. On PS3 it runs even slower at the same resolution. Higher resolution textures would hurt either version of the game.

I don't blame the consoles for the low quality on PC. BioWare/EA decided to release a PC version and decided not to use the platform's full potential.

Hold on a second there good sir. Are you suggesting that game development/publishing corporations make choices and we should blame them for those choices? Say it isn't so my friend.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 24 janvier 2013 - 10:10 .

[Ash J. Williams]

Fredvdp wrote...

Ash J. Williams wrote...

For a game built in the Unreal Engine and it has to be able to run on the  consoles I think ME3 is one of the best examples yet of the Unreal  Engine. Textures of which you mention are something developers have to  sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch  of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

DVD size is not an issue, thanks to the internet. BioWare has released a 1GB texture  patch for Dragon Age II immediately after its release.

Only thing I have to say about that is Dragon Age II is made by a different devolopement team at Bioware so it was the team's choice to release a texture pack for DAII, what one team does does not mean another development team will do it  too. Second thing is that Dragon Age II is running on a modified version of the engine that DA: Origins is running and well I gotta tell you the  graphics in Dragon Age II while better than Origins are not what I would call great so it makes sense they release a texture pack. Mass Effect 3 on the other hand uses the Unreal Engine 3 and ME3 looks on the whole  very nice minus some low res textures here and there. Also the Mass Effect devolopment team have been cranking new DLC/updates  like a steam train since & before release, highly doubt releasing a texture pack  to improve "some" textures (minus clothes textures most gamers won't even notice the other low res textures) would be worth their time.

Modifié par Ash J. Williams, 24 janvier 2013 - 11:50 .

[N7Infernox]

Garbage? Not quite. ME3 had a very level of detail all across the board.
If you're like me, you might take issue with the fact that ME3 doesn't look as luminescent or 'clean' as ME2 did, and that it (coupled with the art direction, which emphasized a lot of blues and dark hues) quite possibly seems dissonant to the more welcoming atmosphere of ME1/2. Granted, it matches the tone of the game, but it's hard to adjust to. Just my $.02

Modifié par N7Infernox, 25 janvier 2013 - 12:26 .

[KotorEffect3]

I am fine with the graphical quality of the entire trilogy. Hell I think even ME 1 still is pretty decent to look at, though that game is over 5 years old now.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fredvdp wrote...

Ash J. Williams wrote...

For a game built in the Unreal Engine and it has to be able to run on the consoles I think ME3 is one of the best examples yet of the Unreal Engine. Textures of which you mention are something developers have to sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

DVD size is not an issue, thanks to the internet. BioWare has released a 1GB texture patch for Dragon Age II immediately after its release.

Nabyroth wrote...

Blame consoles especially x-box 360. PS3
at least supports 1080p and has a nice bluray reader which could mean
more textures, more detail, more of everything but x-box still runs 720p
as far as i know and has DVD driver which means less detail in every
branch.

Both PS3 and Xbox 360 support 1080p output, but both consoles output most games at 720p. While a BluRay disc has the space to contain more content and therefore higher resolution textures, the current-gen consoles simply aren't powerful enough to render them at decent framerates. Even with the current graphics, Mass Effect 3 only runs at 30 fps at 720p on an Xbox 360. On PS3 it runs even slower at the same resolution. Higher resolution textures would hurt either version of the game.

I don't blame the consoles for the low quality on PC. BioWare/EA decided to release a PC version and decided not to use the platform's full potential.

Good to see someone else who knows what they're talking about for a change. Blu-ray does nothing for games because the textures have to fit into the small amount of memory the consoles have. Infact, blu-ray is only good for one thing: video. That's why the FMV in Japanese games is rendered at 1080p and isn't as compressed as the DVD9 version.

You gotta admire Sony's ability to spin information. They still have some people thinking blu-rasy was added to the PS3 for games.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

It's not really graphics, I guess, but have you noticed how silly the "teeth-baring frown" is in ME3? Please tell me you've seen it. It's very visible on custom male Shep. It was introduced in this game, and imo it looks terrible. Comical, even. I can't take it seriously when I see it. Almost reminds me of Bottomtooth from Family Guy.

[Fredvdp]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Fredvdp wrote...

Both PS3 and Xbox 360 support 1080p output, but both consoles output most games at 720p. While a BluRay disc has the space to contain more content and therefore higher resolution textures, the current-gen consoles simply aren't powerful enough to render them at decent framerates. Even with the current graphics, Mass Effect 3 only runs at 30 fps at 720p on an Xbox 360. On PS3 it runs even slower at the same resolution. Higher resolution textures would hurt either version of the game.

I don't blame the consoles for the low quality on PC. BioWare/EA decided to release a PC version and decided not to use the platform's full potential.

Hold on a second there good sir. Are you suggesting that game development/publishing corporations make choices and we should blame them for those choices? Say it isn't so my friend.

And as you can see this was in direct response to someone who blames the consoles. I don't intend to post revolutionary new insights, but someone said the consoels are to blame, so apparently my comment was more relevant than your sarcasm makes it out to be.

Modifié par Fredvdp, 25 janvier 2013 - 01:31 .

[Impulse and Compulse]

I play on console.

ME1 was passable, but stuff just didn't seem super-polished, and those shadows.....my god, those shadows were so minimal.

ME2 was a massive improvement, but it was overall just a lot more shiny things everywhere.

ME3 seems to largely be about the same detail, but the scale of everything is much bigger. I never felt like you had really any in-level renders in ME2 that even came close to a lot of the ones in ME3, like Mars and the Geth homeworld. ME1 had the (kinda bland) highway, and that one scene on the Citadel where it took me 5 playthroughs to even realize stuff was moving up ahead.

[AlexMBrennan]

@Ash J Williams: Stop moving the goalposts; your argument was initially that ME3 graphics was due to technical limitations; when we demonstrated that this is not an issue, you suddenly shift your argument to "Developers didn't care enough to make hi-res patch"

And you don't even realise that this was our position all along...

[Grubas]

Im mostly ok with the graphics, though i would have bought it, if it had the same graphics like ME2 or even 1.

[MegumiAzusa]

*looks at EDIs compression artifacts* hmm yes I have to agree with the topic >.>

[Ash J. Williams]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

@Ash J Williams: Stop moving the goalposts; your argument was initially that ME3 graphics was due to technical limitations; when we demonstrated that this is not an issue, you suddenly shift your argument to "Developers didn't care enough to make hi-res patch"

And you don't even realise that this was our position all along...

I'm not, I'm simply replying to what he said to me (he mentioned DAII pack, I didn't suddenly start talking bout it randomly to shift anything), just carrying on a conversation  and just talking about possible reasons as to why they never released a ME3 texture patch, sorry its a crime to do that. And as I explained its more than they don't care, there are reasons as to why they didn't and I tried to answer that. I'm actually defending Bioware for not releasiing a texture pack FYI. But I'll leave this thread now with this post.

Modifié par Ash J. Williams, 27 janvier 2013 - 11:23 .

[Haargel]

I don't care about the graphics, though in cutscenes it was annoying that the uniforms look so bad.

[Vubica]

MACharlie1 wrote...

I'm guessing the people who are saying ME3 looked great are all Xbox or PS3 users.

Slap that on a PC monitor and you'll see how much like garbage they really are. They bump up the facial textures but leave everything else in 1024 resolution. Maybe even smaller. I know the ground textures are smaller then that. It's tiny. Bioware seriously falls behind when it comes to graphics and such.

It was 2012 - I shouldn't be seeing compression artifacts on Andersons uniform...

Just keep in mind guys: the graphics for all three games are all bloody the same. Same amount of polygons. Same texture resolution. Maybe for ME3, they upgraded some of the NPC wear and added a plasticy filter to the game and gave hair a new texture (which looks like crap on Miranda) but thats it. They carried textures over and everything is pretty much the same. Sure, new textures are now more detailed but thats not a graphic improvement since the polygons are the same and they move the same.

I play it at 1920x1080 , dont mind the visuals , its no Crysis or Skyrim but its a pretty decent looking game, it runs w/o glitches crashes or problems and is well optimised for a variety of systems... win IMHO

[Cuttlebone]

Ash J. Williams wrote...

Fredvdp wrote...

Ash J. Williams wrote...

For a game built in the Unreal Engine and it has to be able to run on the  consoles I think ME3 is one of the best examples yet of the Unreal  Engine. Textures of which you mention are something developers have to  sacrifice and I mean ALWAYS have to sacrifice to jam it all on a bunch  of DVDs to avoid ending up being a 25GB install.

DVD size is not an issue, thanks to the internet. BioWare has released a 1GB texture  patch for Dragon Age II immediately after its release.

Only thing I have to say about that is Dragon Age II is made by a different devolopement team at Bioware so it was the team's choice to release a texture pack for DAII, what one team does does not mean another development team will do it  too. Second thing is that Dragon Age II is running on a modified version of the engine that DA: Origins is running and well I gotta tell you the  graphics in Dragon Age II while better than Origins are not what I would call great so it makes sense they release a texture pack. Mass Effect 3 on the other hand uses the Unreal Engine 3 and ME3 looks on the whole  very nice minus some low res textures here and there. Also the Mass Effect devolopment team have been cranking new DLC/updates  like a steam train since & before release, highly doubt releasing a texture pack  to improve "some" textures (minus clothes textures most gamers won't even notice the other low res textures) would be worth their time.

Here and there?! HERE AND THERE?!!! now those are some guts you have there to say something like that, have we even been playing the same game? please remind me of a single texture in the whole game that doesn't look subpar (face on main characters don't count)