39 replies to this topic

[Naduk]

Sturmwut, on 29 October 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:

ok mate that there is Sydney Australia
I am from Australia and I can tell you that Sydney rarely looks like that
who ever took that photo waited for the perfect time to take that
your picture makes it look like a tropical paradise ... something its most certainly not
your picture is so perfect its most likely "worked" in photoshop

this is what Sydney normally looks like on a "clear" day
some days are better than others, but these are average




so location impacts graphics more than you are giving it credit for
a planet made of ICE is going to spend majority of its time in blizzards and will have very low visibility at the best of times

[Cool Hwhip]

F lan Ker, on 29 October 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

S!

Performance vs playability. Want photorealism? Ok, live with abysmal FPS. Want playable game? Graphics look good where they need to(most of the time) and FPS is much better. Can't have it all. Sure an ARMA 3 style map would be great, but for online game would it be a feasible choice?

Yes it would be a feasible choice. At the moment I play ArmA 3 online on a medium spec pc and unless its a mission with tons of badly written scripts, hundreds of AI, and 64 players I get a good 50-60 fps with a view range of around 3000m.
MWO has 24 people playing with no ai and no scripts (which are the two things which slow down FPS in ArmA).

I love MWO, really love it (and to see people compaining so much on the forums really bothers me because i worry it will scare away potential new players), have no issues with the engine or anything, but when ever I play ArmA I think to myself "now this would make an awesome engine for MWO"

[Cest7]

OP.
I also get headaches when playing certain games.
I attribute this to Low/Locked FOV (Field of View) settings. This causes a virtual lack of peripheral vision causing disorientation.

Here is my fix:

Look for the "MechWarrior Online\USER\Profiles\%Name%\attributes.xml" file and change

<Attr name="OptionCfg.sys_spec" value="0"/>

to

<Attr name="OptionCfg.sys_spec" value="-1"/>

This enables changing FOV through the User.cfg file by adding

cl_fov = 85

The base setting is 70 which, IMO, sucks.

70FOV

85 FOV


Hope this helps.

[Marchant Consadine]

Cest7, on 30 October 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

OP.
I also get headaches when playing certain games.
I attribute this to Low/Locked FOV (Field of View) settings. This causes a virtual lack of peripheral vision causing disorientation.

Here is my fix:

Look for the "MechWarrior Online\USER\Profiles\%Name%\attributes.xml" file and change

<Attr name="OptionCfg.sys_spec" value="0"/>

to

<Attr name="OptionCfg.sys_spec" value="-1"/>

This enables changing FOV through the User.cfg file by adding

cl_fov = 85

The base setting is 70 which, IMO, sucks.

70FOV

85 FOV


Hope this helps.

I bet that looks nice in a Shadow Hawk, where the cockpit already takes half the screen in normal FOV. Perhaps if I had a 80 inch UHD monitor...

[Sturmwut]

@Naduk
Although it is foggy, I can see on your images 2000m+ far... and there is no wall of GREY

Cool Hwhip, on 29 October 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

I love MWO, really love it (and to see people compaining so much on the forums really bothers me because i worry it will scare away potential new players), have no issues with the engine or anything, but when ever I play ArmA I think to myself "now this would make an awesome engine for MWO"

I love Mechwarrior... but not this digital evidence of incapacity
And i woud not compaining about the game, when the devs made a better job...
Many people paid to see this game rising and not for FOG!

F lan Ker, on 29 October 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I understand your pain with the graphics, but nothing we can do about it.
See you in the fields of War!

It's sink or swim... i decide to sink, although I have recently enabled premium
I'll probably back in 6 months, to give the game a second chance...

Edited by Sturmwut, 30 October 2013 - 08:01 AM.

[ArmageddonKnight]

MWO's use of CryEngine 3 is woefull tbh, its still on DX9 meaning some great features are not in use. And even when DX11 comes in, PGI have stated they wont be implimenting additional DX11 features.

MWO imo, doesnt look anywhere near as good as it should.

I so much prefer the original Mechwarrior 5 trailer graphics that used a different engine, but crucialy was filmed using ingame graphics and effects but was scritped.


Unfortunatly that verison of MW was dropped and instead we get this(MWO).

CryEngine 3 CAN look beautfill AND have big/large environments at the same time, just look at StarCitizen.

Edited by ArmageddonKnight, 30 October 2013 - 09:20 AM.

[Durant Carlyle]

Durant Carlyle, on 29 October 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

You can see pretty clearly on some maps -- Alpine Peaks, River City, Terra Therma, and Frozen City Night come to mind. On other maps, you have atmospheric effects shortening the visual range.

Tourmaline Desert and Canyon Network also have pretty good visual distance. There's actually only a few that don't. And some of those only have a couple of places where it's obscured.

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 30 October 2013 - 11:14 AM.

[RamataKhan]

Cool Hwhip, on 29 October 2013 - 02:08 AM, said:

I have always wished that the game was made using the ArmA 3 engine- view ranges of 10km, and maps that are 100s of square km- with towns, cities, mountains and all...



To avoid the obvious sniping that will be happening you would really have to use the landscape for cover. You could also use forests as concealment to get nice and close. I know it would never happen, but one can dream...

Yeah, and hardly anyone would play because you need a high end PC to run Arma 3 even on low settings. No thanks.

[Sturmwut]

RamataKhan, on 30 October 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Yeah, and hardly anyone would play because you need a high end PC to run Arma 3 even on low settings. No thanks.

Yeah, makes MWO in 2D so that it runs on any system... stop crying about "System Requierments" and get a new hardware, no one likes it to wait for the "wood" PC's at the loadtime!

Edited by Sturmwut, 30 October 2013 - 01:11 PM.

[ArmageddonKnight]

Indeed, if u cant afford keeping ur PC up to scratch then PC gaming isnt for you. ur agument is moot.

[VIOLENT REACTION]

I see FOG every morning on my way to work especially this time of year..I don't think the sun is shining in Crimson Strait or Forest Colony snow, if anything it's early morning so yes there will be fog..you can't compare beautiful sunny pictures to pictures of a game where a massive robot battle is taking place..you ever see real life battlefields with sunny plains and majestic skyscrapers on an oceanfront ..no neither do I but yes to your question ..I've seen fog every morning for the last 3 weeks straight and yes i work in a city..Memphis,TN. to be exact..Lots of fog in these parts

[Durant Carlyle]

Sturmwut, on 30 October 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

Yeah, makes MWO in 2D so that it runs on any system... stop crying about "System Requierments" and get a new hardware, no one likes it to wait for the "wood" PC's at the loadtime!

ArmageddonKnight, on 30 October 2013 - 02:21 PM, said:

Indeed, if u cant afford keeping ur PC up to scratch then PC gaming isnt for you. ur agument is moot.

Sorry to burst your bubbles, but they wouldn't make any money if they only catered to people who keep their hardware current. Probably 75% or more of the people who play this game have hardware that's at least two generations old.

I do understand your viewpoint to an extent -- I've got a 4770 CPU, GTX 780 GPU, 16GB RAM, a 256GB SSD, and a 27" 2560x1440 monitor, and I'd like to see what this game could look like if it really stressed the hardware ... but it's not going to happen.

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 30 October 2013 - 08:00 PM.

[Cool Hwhip]

RamataKhan, on 30 October 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Yeah, and hardly anyone would play because you need a high end PC to run Arma 3 even on low settings. No thanks.

The great thing about the ArmA engine is how well it scales. You can reduce view ranges and all the shiny effects and play it on a 3 year old PC. I know because before my PC upgrade I did.

[ArmageddonKnight]

Oh dont get me wrong, i can understand having a computer thats 3 or 4 years old so long as it was a strong machine when it was new.

A 2500k or 2700k are a few generations old now but due to the rate performance is increasing (or not increasing in this case) u can easily have a computer from early 2011 and be fine.

Its when i see people still runng Core 2 Duo/Quads and old 8800GT's or even 200 series GPU's..thats when it gets a bit silly when they think a computer with such specs thats from 2007 (~6 years old) should be able to play a game like MWO without issue. or when they have a new computer but its running somthing like a Intel i3 with a IGPU or a Nvidia 630.

Edited by ArmageddonKnight, 31 October 2013 - 07:42 AM.

[VikingN1nja]

I don't mind the log distance but on some maps like forest there are parts i can barley differentiate between a mech and background at 12

[Kain]

Yeah the graphics need some loving,

but the Fog/graphics is pretty intentional, so they can keep the game running smooth, (sure CryEngine 3 could handle it all pretty well, but apparantly the client-server architecture built by PGI, is not playing well with the available CPU/GPU resources)

Also they want to keep the view distances on all systems the same, otherwise players with a high end system will have an advantage.

Edited by Kain, 02 November 2013 - 10:40 AM.

[ArmageddonKnight]

With all respect, advanatges to view distance wouldnt be a problem if they fixed weapons, and general gameplay balance so we couldnt shoot people at such extreme ranges.

Honestly some of the excuses PGI have used for their lack of visual fidelity and engine features, are silly becouse they wouldnt be an excuse if the gameplay was fixed and balanced

Whats worse is that they then do a 180 on that mindset of " we cant do X becouse it would cause Y inblance or unfairness etc etc" and do stupid things like increases the speed at which mechs can move knowing full well that their game cant handle the hit detection involved with such fast moving mechs. Its rediculus.

[Zarlaren]

Caustic Vally has pollution reducing visablity.
Frozen City Day has blizzards reducing visablity.

When you got to other planets and moons your not going to be expected to have perfect Earth horizens that you can see for miles. Some planets and moons is harsh and very inhospitable your lucky you can even see 800m as is.

Pollution is a huge hazard that is why Caustic Vally isn't blossoming into trees and wildlife cause the pollution is like acid it eats stuff up. Look up Acid Rain. To tell you the truth I have no idea why the ponds there don't do acid damage when you stomp around in it.

Edited by Zarla, 10 November 2013 - 02:13 PM.

[Talsha]

ArmageddonKnight, on 30 October 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:

MWO's use of CryEngine 3 is woefull tbh, its still on DX9 meaning some great features are not in use. And even when DX11 comes in, PGI have stated they wont be implimenting additional DX11 features.

MWO imo, doesnt look anywhere near as good as it should.

I so much prefer the original Mechwarrior 5 trailer graphics that used a different engine, but crucialy was filmed using ingame graphics and effects but was scritped.


Unfortunatly that verison of MW was dropped and instead we get this(MWO).

CryEngine 3 CAN look beautfill AND have big/large environments at the same time, just look at StarCitizen.

I have to admit the graphics in the trailer look several times better to my eyes than those in game right now...

[Durant Carlyle]

That trailer isn't for this game. It's for a proposed "MechWarrior 5" single-player campaign like the previous MechWarrior titles. Unfortunately, they couldn't find a publisher willing to fund it. So they scrapped that entirely and came up with F2P MW:O instead.