70 réponses à ce sujet

[Liquidcz]

ArathWoeeye wrote...

Graphics to help immersion, but only to some extent. Unless it's backed up by realistic characters and a good storyline, graphics can only go so far.

That's why games like Fallout 3 are only good for free-roaming.

This. Certainly the game cannot afford to look like Tomb Raider 1, but DAO graphics is much more than good enough to not to pull you out of immersion. Though I hope for more model variety, especially among body armor. And the possibility to turn off displaying helmets during non-conversation gameplay -.-

[Franpa]

They don't need to develop a new engine now, that means less computer geeks and more money for story writers, voice actors and graphical artists.

[Matheau]

The game should look better, have more visual options, bigger levels, more animations. It should also have less system requirements and less load times. Console versions should also look just as good as a PC, despite the fact console specifications were set 4-5 years ago and PC's can be continuously upgraded. Hmmmm.....something tells me this might be a bit problematic.



Considering Dragon Age: Origins shares more game elements in common with a style of game that was predominately made 10 years ago with 2D, fairly pixelated graphics. I don't really think immersion value is that heavily dependent on graphics. Planescape: Torment still drew me into the game much more than DA:O did. There is a lot more to fleshing out a game world than making it look prettier.

[Tweekle]

Matheau wrote...
 There is a lot more to fleshing out a game world than making it look prettier.

Its a shame most game developers still don't get this - they just see all the shiny DirectX xx options/features and can't stop until theres a thousand of each effect in thier game.

In some ways it was better 10 years ago BECAUSE game devs back then were still very restricted in terms of graphic effects so they HAD to come up with other ways of making a world seem alive.

[BroBear Berbil]

It'll be nice to see what they do with the engine in a few years and how they make DA2 all shiny like they did with ME2 using the same engine as ME.



I'm not bothered by low res textures and I have a feeling they will continue to use them for performance reasons. You can still do a lot of great things with low res textures and lots of good lighting. ME2 has a lot of low res textures and Aion would be another example of a game that looks great despite the textures as well. I generally don't stare at walls enough to notice or care.



I wonder at the people who say things like "how about making the gameplay better instead" as if it's some kind of either/or scenario. They can do both - sequels tend to make the attempt at doing both. Graphics are an important part of any game.

[ArathWoeeye]

Tweekle wrote...

Matheau wrote...
 There is a lot more to fleshing out a game world than making it look prettier.

Its a shame most game developers still don't get this - they just see all the shiny DirectX xx options/features and can't stop until theres a thousand of each effect in thier game.

In some ways it was better 10 years ago BECAUSE game devs back then were still very restricted in terms of graphic effects so they HAD to come up with other ways of making a world seem alive.

This. Most pixels doesn't mean the best graphics. It may mean the highest tech quality, but it doesn't mean your artistic direction is in place.

To be honest, I don't really see the problem with Dragon Age. It's realistic enough to be immersive and the colors and models just fit the atmosphere.

New animations? New models? Sure. But higher technology? I don't see the point, except for some tweaks. Dragon Age wouldn't really have improved if it had Crysis quality graphics.

[Wyndham711]

Improving the graphics is nice and all, but I just wish that with this sequel they decide to add depth instead of removing it. And If they decide to make the PC and console versions more equal, then I hope it happens through making the console versions more complex, and not by simplifying the PC-version.

[Misto29]

I'm currently playing the console versions and I really don't have a problem with the graphics. And besides they give you several different options for gameplay and story options. And you have to admit compared to ten years ago. The PC or console version now are really good. But on the other side of that coin the game does vary slighty in how it's played on both systems. Something I've never been really big on. And yes I understand the console is more limited in what can be done with it, then the PC is. But still it would be nice to have all of the same features offered on it. But that's my only quirk with the game.

[i4gotmyid]

or you can stop waiting and improve your graphics today.

http://www.dragonage...file.php?id=686

It's a new mod which come 2 day ago.

Modifié par i4gotmyid, 02 février 2010 - 05:36 .

[nYshak]

Glad to see so many agree that pretty graphics are not that important. I'd like them to go for more variety (models, animations) instead of "better" gfx any day.

[Curlain]

Wyndham711 wrote...

Improving the graphics is nice and all, but I just wish that with this sequel they decide to add depth instead of removing it. And If they decide to make the PC and console versions more equal, then I hope it happens through making the console versions more complex, and not by simplifying the PC-version.

Fully agree with above, I certainly found nothing wrong with the graphics in DA, I found the character models fine, and the environments were quite detailed.  There is much more to enabling immersion then pretty graphics (and like I said, I found no problems with them, certainly seemed better then ME 1 on my computer), storyline, character, a believable and adaptable world etc are all more important imo.  Improving the graphics in a future DA is fine, but I agree, adding depth, story and further dialogue is much more important and should have first priority in terms of resources.

But then I'm someone who still finds Baldur's Gate series, Planescape Torment and Ultima VII series (played through Exult) just as immersing and fun as modern RPGs are (which for me only shows that graphics alone don't make a RPG immersive or believable, they are only part of what makes it so)

[Prethen]

It would be awesome to see this RPG (or sequel) in a much more updated graphics engine where the characters and scenery are a LOT more realistic. It's kind of disheartening to see all the graphic glitches that are in this game like watching characters' hair go through their armor when moving their head, similar armor glitches, etc. I think a lot, if not most, players have adequate graphics cards and systems to handle it...so bring it on! I can't wait until games get basically photo-realistic!

[Leohan]

Well since DA:O2 isn't being done from scratch, maybe it won't take quite as long.. we can only cross our fingers and hope.

[Phex]

Personally I was quite happy with how DAO looked on PC with full settings. Sure, it isn't ME2 standards but pretty enough to look at. I like the general look of the people of Ferelden as well and the faces in particular are pleasantly detailed (after all that's all I'm staring at for most of the game when listening to hours of dialogue).



I'm sure DAO2 is going to be brilliant in every way, but I may be horribly biased... I haven't enjoyed a game this much in years.

[kosarev]

Im wondering what do people want in a console version. ME2 runs at 15-20 fps in some areas on the XBOX version. Consoles will never be as good as a pc, face it. The only way of makin both equal is giving pc gamers a worse quality game than they could.

[Dragon Age1103]

Brenn86 wrote...

http://dailycontribu...on-age-2/11245/

So it's going to look like ME 2 does except in 10 years?

  I think the environments need to be drastically improved & Bioware should be ashamed they released such blurry back grounds that lack all detail! That said i hope DA never gets graphics like ME simply b/c ME isn't half the game D:O is. Less dialogue, way easier, less loot, characters, just rather have worse graphics than lose all that so the game can be shiny.
   Usually it is onyl kids that care about graphics so much. Gamers & RPG fans just care about core gameplay mechanics & content. I do admit that the environmens are very lacking but the art style is beautiful & the character models hold so much detail. I prefer DA:O's character models over any other game. ME's are nice but lack the depth of expressions DA:O has.
  I just really hope Bioware doesn't sacrfice content, characters, story, loot, & dialogue to please a bunch of children who want shiny toys that look pretty.

[ArathWoeeye]

I think the point of graphics in these "modern" times are the initiation. When most people look at a game and see graphics not matching today, they don't even try. These may be "kids" but those "kids" are a major customer group and developers need to consider them too. They are not just trying to please us old timers, you know:)

[Chromie]

The Elite Elite wrote...

Who cares what the graphics look like? Story and gameplay should come first. I don't really care if the graphics look like something that could have been done ten years ago, if the game isn't good the nice graphics aren't going to save it.

I prefer a good story and fun combat but I also like nice visuals.
Mass Effect 1 and 2 graphics were such a big update only helped me appreciate the work Bioware did even more.
Dragon Age 2 can atleast have better highres textures. It can atleast look like a nextgen game...

[Ubasti]

ArathWoeeye wrote...

I think the point of graphics in these "modern" times are the initiation. When most people look at a game and see graphics not matching today, they don't even try. These may be "kids" but those "kids" are a major customer group and developers need to consider them too. They are not just trying to please us old timers, you know:)

Maybe they should?

Actually, I wish there'd be a company out there, that really would make "mature" (and no, I don't mean the sex here) games instead of games that try to please everyone.

And yes, I know and understand that the new generation is used to more vivid graphical world than us old timers, who still find books more interesting than games (at least I do, mostly). But I also wish as so many in this thread, that the content will not suffer from trying to please those who want everything to look like "real life".

One thing also, can anyone point out any really real looking games, whose environment is in medieval type of age? I don't know of any, probably because I don't play games so much, but all games that people seem to think have good graphics are some kind of space games or at least happen in modern era? I've dabbled enough with computer graphics to know, that it is much much easier to make futuristic objects to look real than for example nature when it is done with a computer, much easier too. Even in the (here mentioned) Witcher, even though its world was beautiful and colorful, wasn't as realistic as some of the futuristic games I've seen.

[filetemon]

All of you saying improved graphics engine shouldn't affect storyline quality and that in rpgs story is more important than graphics, are forgetting how much the improved graphics are essential to perceive DAO as emotional and compelling.

Because everyone here assumes DAO is subpar in the tech department.It is not.Maybe compared to ME2, but not to other rpgs.
Have you played Drakensang and Risen? Their lack of facial expressions and low detailed polygon models for faces and facial animations make you feel like you are talking to cardboard boxes instead of NPCS. The poor quality and quantity of animations makes you not to care at all about their motivations and quests, and you'll never feel even remotelly interested about who they are and why they live.No matter the story quality, if the characters don't feel human, you don't care about them.

Imagine the Landsmeet from DAO with Risen's graphic engine. In DAO was tense, epic and had you at the edge of your seat. Now imagine the whole landsmeet scene with:

50% less of background npcs
unexpressive faces and zero facial gestures
totally lame animations
crappy voice acting.

You wouldn't give a damn of what happened there.

When all rpgs were like Risen (which btw is not a bad game, but it pales in comparison to DAO) you could get in touch with the story because you knew no better)
But after tasting caviar nobody wants to go back.
Bioware relies heavily in hi-tech to accomplish the mission of making the npcs look absolutely alive and human-like.So any improvement in graphics should be embraced and not dismissed.

Modifié par filetemon, 09 février 2010 - 04:11 .

[ArathWoeeye]

50% less of background npcs -> not about graphic quality
unexpressive faces and zero facial gestures -> half about quality, half about how well it's used
totally lame animations -> similarly, not directly about graphic quality, more about how well its used
crappy voice acting. -> again, not about graphic quality

You are right, but the thing is, more is not better. DA has reached a very good point. They have reached an -optimum-.

I don't think it's fair at all to say that bioware relies HEAVILY on hi-tech. Crysis? Yes, that game does it. Dragon Age? Not at all. Dragon Age relies on good writing (story, characters, dialogues) and combines it with technology. Dragon Age without expressions wouldn't be as good, but bad writing with expressions would be even worse.

Ubasti wrote...

ArathWoeeye wrote...

I think the point of graphics in these "modern" times are the initiation. When most people look at a game and see graphics not matching today, they don't even try. These may be "kids" but those "kids" are a major customer group and developers need to consider them too. They are not just trying to please us old timers, you know:)

Maybe they should?
Actually, I wish there'd be a company out there, that really would make "mature" (and no, I don't mean the sex here) games instead of games that try to please everyone.

And how would that company survive? At least half of the "mature" gamers would pirate it, which leaves a very little number of people compared to the market. There is no guarantee that the other half would buy it either. However, to reach the quality of a market game, they still need to use the same resources. I bet there are several developers who dream that, but in today's conditions, it looks quite impossible.

Modifié par ArathWoeeye, 19 février 2010 - 10:27 .