51 replies to this topic

[Egomane]

And now make it non-static and see how much frames you still get.

This game needs to be playable for many gamers, not just those with beefy systems.

[Ph30nix]

Biggest Salami, on 26 August 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

I don't find it beautiful. I find it terrifying. Too realistic graphics make me feel nauseated and dizzy. I want to know I'm playing a game.

The only thing that would be better than as-is would be if MWO was done in Pixel art. Now, Pixel Art is beautiful, especially nowadays.

the next decade for you is going to really suck dude.....

and i would love it if game looked that pretty while still being playable without 5000+ machine.

and i swear a few of those pics look like you could just hop right in and start blasting

Edited by Ph30nix, 27 August 2014 - 03:56 AM.

[Turist0AT]

if MWLL can do it, so can MWO. Nothing but bad excuses and incompetence.

Edited by Turist0AT, 27 August 2014 - 03:59 AM.

[EvilCow]

Egomane, on 27 August 2014 - 03:51 AM, said:

And now make it non-static and see how much frames you still get.

This game needs to be playable for many gamers, not just those with beefy systems.

LL worked pretty well on my dual core 7 years old PC, it allowed 32 players on huge maps with destroyable environment. I don't really understand all the trouble MWO is having in providing something closer to the state of art in games. We are experiencing a regression in visuals since the beta.

I think it is more a matter of focusing resources on things that provide a short term income (mugs, heroes and other silliness) vs planning for the long run.

Edited by EvilCow, 27 August 2014 - 03:58 AM.

[Sudden]

I don't give a crap about the eye candy I want the game play that MechWarrior 2 and 3 gave us. MechWarrior 4 was an abomination that should never have been made.

[Fut]

MIKE25S, on 26 August 2014 - 06:55 PM, said:

Well they really need to fix the FPS issues first. Then they can worry about making it look like a game from 2007 or later.

Mmhmm. It'd be great if the game looked as awesome as the pics in the OP, but then it'd probably run at 3fps.
Optimize the game first, get it running smoothly, then people might actually be able to use the "high" graphic settings.

[DeRazer]

I dont really understand all the complaints I see about performance. My computer is 4 years old and I run everything on max.

i5 2500K is not that special really - are people still trying to run modern games on 486 DX or something?

Anyway, that aside - I love seeing the mechs from a "human" scale POV. I'd love the chance to spectate in "infantry mode", it really gives you a sense of "Wow these are big, bad machines!".

[Jonny Taco]

Egomane, on 27 August 2014 - 03:51 AM, said:

And now make it non-static and see how much frames you still get.

This game needs to be playable for many gamers, not just those with beefy systems.

Which totally explains why mwo has significantly worse fps than it did 2 years ago...

[Rhaythe]

DeRazer, on 27 August 2014 - 04:15 AM, said:

I dont really understand all the complaints I see about performance.  My computer is 4 years old and I run everything on max.  
i5 2500K is not that special really - are people still trying to run modern games on 486 DX or something?
Anyway, that aside - I love seeing the mechs from a "human" scale POV.  I'd love the chance to spectate in "infantry mode", it really gives you a sense of "Wow these are big, bad machines!".

This game is heavily favored on the i5/i7 platform. AMD users get the short stick here. Bad.

[Alistair Winter]

The good news is: if they decide to upgrade the game engine in a few years time, they can basically just keep all the mechs and other assets they've made already. They'll still look great in 3-5 years, I imagine. Well, except for the Catapult ears or some of the other easy-fix weapon geometries, of course.

[o0Marduk0o]

EvilCow, on 27 August 2014 - 03:57 AM, said:

LL worked pretty well on my dual core 7 years old PC, it allowed 32 players on huge maps with destroyable environment. I don't really understand all the trouble MWO is having in providing something closer to the state of art in games.

Show me a MWLL map with the visual quality of Crysis maps.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Alistair Winter, on 27 August 2014 - 05:08 AM, said:

The good news is: if they decide to upgrade the game engine in a few years time, they can basically just keep all the mechs and other assets they've made already. They'll still look great in 3-5 years, I imagine. Well, except for the Catapult ears or some of the other easy-fix weapon geometries, of course.

I dont think It will be a few years time.

[Rhaythe]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 August 2014 - 05:15 AM, said:

Show me a MWLL map with the visual quality of Crysis maps.

Crysis quality, sure. Crysis 3 quality? No.



Psst - notice the framerate around the six and a half minute mark. That's Crysis for you.

[o0Marduk0o]

Rhaythe, on 27 August 2014 - 05:19 AM, said:

Crysis quality, sure. Crysis 3 quality? No.

No, it's not even close...




...to Crysis 1.

[Rhaythe]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 August 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

No, it's not even close...




...to Crysis 1.

Eh. You must have better memories of Crysis 1 than I do. I played it years after it came out (got Crysis 1 and 2 together on Steam), and remember thinking, "Well, this looked good in its time".

[Turist0AT]

There are far more important things to a good map than just good graphics

[nonnex]

I love good graphics, beautifull landscapes and like good imersion.
But I know after a while (mostly after a few days) I'll switch back to fps optimized settings for a better overview never mind if I have a ultra high performance rig or not.

If MWO would be a single player expirience I wouldn't do this of course.

[EvilCow]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 August 2014 - 05:15 AM, said:

Show me a MWLL map with the visual quality of Crysis maps.

I liked this map for example because I like open areas with not many places to hide:

Better than anything in MWO, huge map and fight can happen anywhere. There are lots more.

[o0Marduk0o]

Rhaythe, on 27 August 2014 - 05:45 AM, said:

Eh. You must have better memories of Crysis 1 than I do. I played it years after it came out (got Crysis 1 and 2 together on Steam), and remember thinking, "Well, this looked good in its time".

The environment of Crysis has much more details than maps in MWLL.

[o0Marduk0o]

EvilCow, on 27 August 2014 - 06:10 AM, said:

I liked this map for example because I like open areas with not many places to hide:

Better than anything in MWO, huge map and fight can happen anywhere. There are lots more.

Looks quite generic to me. Remove respawn and then think again about map size.