141 replies to this topic

[Corvus Antaka]

the user.cfg...my sig...can you use a computer?

[MechFrog1]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 15 September 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

the user.cfg...my sig...can you use a computer?

Condescending tone? check
Pimping your site? check
Post spamming? check

[KovarD]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 15 September 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

the user.cfg...my sig...can you use a computer?

I want see ingame tesselated graphics with Before and After pics. Not user.cfg engine scripts.

Edited by KovarD, 15 September 2013 - 11:47 PM.

[StainlessSR]

warp103, on 11 September 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

6 of 10. Tt does not matter what is bold or not. 6 of 10 tells the story loud and clear. This is the tip of the iceberg that sunk the Titanic. lol

here is the page so you know it is not a made up number.
http://www.gameranki...play/index.html

If you look at the reviews you will see that anything that is a twitch shooter and does not depend on team play does better. Rise of the triad got 9/10???

[Johnny Z]

Waiting to see what IGN says myself. This review wasnt to off though. And these are beta reviews, so it will be interesting to see how it all goes down.

To me this game coming out of beta is just another step towards seeing the game i want to see, not the end of development, just the end of the test period for stability and such.

[CaveMan]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 15 September 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

Tesselation actually already works if you set it up correctly

MWO runs only in d3d 9 right now. Tessellation is not part of the direct3d 9 feature set, ergo there is no tessellation in MWO right now.

Even if CryEngine has some kind of hacked tessellation feature that works in dx9, it would still be a moot point because tessellated models require a special texture pass to actually enhance mesh details. At best, you'd just round off the edges of the models, which wouldn't make things look much better and would slow your machine down without DX11 acceleration.

But please, prove me wrong with a screencap.

[Corvus Antaka]

CaveMan, on 16 September 2013 - 12:32 AM, said:

MWO runs only in d3d 9 right now. Tessellation is not part of the direct3d 9 feature set, ergo there is no tessellation in MWO right now.

Even if CryEngine has some kind of hacked tessellation feature that works in dx9, it would still be a moot point because tessellated models require a special texture pass to actually enhance mesh details. At best, you'd just round off the edges of the models, which wouldn't make things look much better and would slow your machine down without DX11 acceleration.

But please, prove me wrong with a screencap.

you can still force it and improve graphics with it. I don't need to supply screenshots, it's doable with your video card settings and the custom setups.

mint frog, on 15 September 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

Condescending tone? check
Pimping your site? check
Post spamming? check

another moronic troll? check.

[Appogee]

Thanks for sharing the review.

Much as I want MWO to succeed, I feel the reviewers' comments are valid and your summarised highlights are, too.

Who knows, perhaps external reviews will be the wake-up call for PGI to understand that they're the ones on the island, not their loyal player base.

I can dream.

[Ghogiel]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 16 September 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

you can still force it and improve graphics with it. I don't need to supply screenshots, it's doable with your video card settings and the custom setups.

Hardware tessellation is NOT set up in any of the mtl files in the game, therefore it cannot even be enabled even if there was a DX11 build of the game.

The only tessellation that happens in MWO right now is on water displacement and terrain. And what the terrain is doing is not what people are referring as displacement mapped textures, but only the terrain height map optimization algorithm, like you see in like every game since like 2003.

You must be confusing POM or something with hardware tessellation.

[Ghost Rider LSOV]

Johnny Z, on 16 September 2013 - 12:31 AM, said:

Waiting to see what IGN says myself.

I think a 5 or 6. If it gets 7 or more, I'd be surprised.

And I'm almost certain that PC Gamer will have an 80%+ or 85%+ review, because they kept updating their news with each trailer/patch and had it in their "best shooters" list, even though it's in beta.

I don't want the game to fail, but I'm really afraid of the reviews.

We need new people, but we need them with the features that were promised, not new dumb-down features.

[StoneMason]

Obviously PC PowerPlay has different contributors and editors but they've always been pretty reliable in their review matrix. I think the score is a correct measure of the games widespread appeal and learning curve (I think even a moderate change in the points they've mentioned would push it to 8/10).

The maps are my core problem with the game, I don't think they convey scale, or the sense of a real place, or make for interesting maneuver and gameplay. I get that PGI is making a brawling game, but that's just not how Mech's work, they are part of a combined arms team. Except for the highly inhospitable or alien examples (Tourmaline, Terra) the maps should be designed and scaled for Infantry and Tank combat. Once the battlefield has this kind of internal consistency you can start building up, down and around to allow the mobility of Mech's to come to the fore. Imagine how much more fun and realistic Forest Colony or River City would be if you just pinched them and dragged them out to four times the size. Suddenly all those steep cliffs and tiny suburbs would sprawl like a real developed environment. Suddenly a Lance of Patton MBT's would be able move around parts of the map with ease, yet are still easily flanked by Mech's. Suddenly you can drive to work in the morning without relying on a huge bridge to cover just a few hundred metres.

What we have now should essentially just be asset farms for the real maps that will make the game.

[Roland]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 16 September 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

you can still force it and improve graphics with it. I don't need to supply screenshots, it's doable with your video card settings and the custom setups.

Panda, WTF are you talking about? You can't "enable tesselation" via the user.cfg.

[Appogee]

Even as a long time player and supporter, I still find it hard to explain why we are fighting over drill rigs in the middle of docks and runways.

You'd think, for the sake of a few new graphical asset files, PGI might have found some time - in amongst the bobble heads and Christmas lights and 3PV - to fix such a basic element of the game.

[AC]

StoneMason, on 16 September 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

Obviously PC PowerPlay has different contributors and editors but they've always been pretty reliable in their review matrix. I think the score is a correct measure of the games widespread appeal and learning curve (I think even a moderate change in the points they've mentioned would push it to 8/10).

The maps are my core problem with the game, I don't think they convey scale, or the sense of a real place, or make for interesting maneuver and gameplay. I get that PGI is making a brawling game, but that's just not how Mech's work, they are part of a combined arms team. Except for the highly inhospitable or alien examples (Tourmaline, Terra) the maps should be designed and scaled for Infantry and Tank combat. Once the battlefield has this kind of internal consistency you can start building up, down and around to allow the mobility of Mech's to come to the fore. Imagine how much more fun and realistic Forest Colony or River City would be if you just pinched them and dragged them out to four times the size. Suddenly all those steep cliffs and tiny suburbs would sprawl like a real developed environment. Suddenly a Lance of Patton MBT's would be able move around parts of the map with ease, yet are still easily flanked by Mech's. Suddenly you can drive to work in the morning without relying on a huge bridge to cover just a few hundred metres.

What we have now should essentially just be asset farms for the real maps that will make the game.

That is one thing I miss from MW4. Even the user made maps had varied terrain. There were areas where the mechs could fight at range, areas to sneak up to mechs trying to use range, areas of pure point blank brawl, and areas where missiles reigned supreme. I miss that. You could plan a strategy based on what you wanted to run on your mech, not on what map you played on. Of course, MW4 had pure city maps too, but they usually included a central park so that people could play some range too.

MWO maps seems very singular. They are either point blank slug fests where the buildings are so dense you can barely walk between them. (river city) Or they are so wide open that it is hard for mid/short range mechs to get their weapons in range. (alpine) My least favorite so far is Pan's labyrinth where mechs can spend half of the 15 minutes looking for eachother only to have the game end via capping without a shot fired. (Terra Therma)

Why can't we have maps with varied terrain? I would love to see River City stuck in the middle of alpine or Ice City being the upper portion of Forest Colony. Give us some varried terrain..on the same map!

[Sadist Cain]

infinite xaer0, on 11 September 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

the two reviews that are up now seem really critical of the gfx... but the comments are rather petty and subjective, especially without polycount and texture resolution numbers to compare with other similar games... The comments about object scaling are also really subjective, and overblown. I haven't heard anyone who actually plays this game complain that the scaling is a "failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction".

actually the scaling of mechs against each other in particular has been a hot topic for a while now and just take time to look at the buildings, just how lackluster and devoid of any detail they are. When this game was being developed on unreal they had destructible environments and we're still lacking that, it's an obvious cop out.

You brag about polys and texture rez when something looks good, when it looks average you dont try to make it sound better by bragging about ow much effort has gone into making it look average

[Budor]

I think the graphics are ok but the fps are horrible and thus the game often feels sluggish. If they fix netcode/hitreg, fps and add a "game" on top of the 12vs12 random shootouts it might survive another year.

[edit] The movement restrictions made the game feel even more sluggish, unresponsive and frustrating imo.

Edited by Budor, 16 September 2013 - 07:00 AM.

[Chronojam]

Roland, on 16 September 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

Panda, WTF are you talking about? You can't "enable tesselation" via the user.cfg.

Panda's been spouting unfounded nonsense for a while. I think he's a performance artist, a sort of parody of true "white knights." Asking us to visit his site, download this one magic file, discarding facts, etc.

I mean here he is, saying screenshots aren't necessary, right? When third person had its debut, he was claiming third person gave no advantage and was demanding screenshots to prove it did from anybody who complained. When they did, he insisted on video. When they did, he insisted on full-match video. When they provided it, he requested full-match video that resulted in a win.

It's got to be an act.

[Sadist Cain]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 15 September 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

the user.cfg...my sig...can you use a computer?

Very well, well enough that your sig will just link me to your website, I don't wanna rift through your miles of ******** self promotion, if you're going to state that tesselation works then try to gather as many people as possible to browse your wesbite go **** yourself, either post up your screenshots as proof or shut the hell up with groundless sycophantic self gratifying promotion.

[Roland]

Panda obviously has no idea what you are even talking about when you say tesselation.

This is the same guy who said he thought MWO's graphics were cutting edge, state of the art for F2P games, which is clearly, demonstrably false.

[Corvus Antaka]

LOL.

Like trying to lead sheep to water.