146 replies to this topic

[keith]

its kinda sad the game looks ALOT back in CBT times better when we had 8v8. its seems alot had to be given up to make 12v12 happen. maybe we should get rid of 12v12 for a more stable game and a better looking 1.

[Rebas Kradd]

Zultor, on 06 October 2014 - 08:05 AM, said:

We all would like the graphics to be 10x better and have MWO cure cancer, etc. There are a lot of very thoughtful posts in this thread but what surprised me is the almost complete lack of anyone saying "this is so far down the priority list I hope Russ and the folks at PGI don't waste 1 sec on stuff like this". Seriously, stuff like IK is your biggest problem with the game right now?

There are a ton of things that are needed either fixed or added which would drastically improve the game experience and none of them are graphics related. The graphics in this game are very good compared to other online combat games and remember it is a 3+ year old game. Trying to compare it to Armored Warefare is just being unfair. That game isn't even released yet!

PGI is a small company with very finite resources. Deciding where those resources get spent is one of the most important factors in a game (or software for that matter) being successful. I hope the powers at be realize that the issues raised in this thread are irrelevant to the success of the game. We already have had enough wasted development time yielding unwanted or poorly implemented features lets not waste more dev cycles especially ones that can only be used by such a small percentage of the player base.

Agreed. I wouldn't say fidelity is irrelevant, exactly, but I'd much rather see UI2.5, more gamemodes, a real new player experience, hardpoint ordering, more CW depth, and a real command console before they work on the fidelity.

[UrsusMorologus]

performance improvements are probably more important, at least if framerates get into 60+ territory then people will start turning stuff back on... right now people got everything turned off and framerate still trash

[KraftySOT]

Yeah I dont think anyone is expecting AAA, but when youre seeing an obvious backslide in graphics quality that kind of sucks.

And my point about 24 vs 64 players, is that the two basic bottlenecks are packet size and rate, and vertices in the models. Your modern AAA shooter has a higher packet size, rate, and similar vertex counts. You can really go balls to the wall with textures, you just run the risk of excluding low ram players...but for high and ultra...the skies the limit. While you cant probably shove more models into a scene and keep around your low end players....you can certainly have "more things" going on, ie a larger packet size and a higher rate...that just costs money however. And is it really justified?

The game looks good. Just not as good as it did.

Honestly the "damage state" models would be preferred to the 'bullet hole' texture. And you dont have to bother tracking where that is and displaying it for people, since most of the time you cant see it anyways, and youre checking the target info for damage and just aiming at the CT anyways.

Rarely you shoot at the guy missing the arm, knowing he's goobered, over the guy with both his arms. But I dont think visual feed back on the mechs themselves, provides much benefit.

If we can ditch that for better quality else where...thats probably a good idea.

I think everyone would like to see some foliage, and some procedural grass/rocks/terrain detail, even if its just client side and shows in a range around you (like say, Skyrim or the like) beautifying our maps as opposed to some badbullet hold textures.

The lack of a jungle map in MWO is glaring.

And you wont be seeing any grassy fields, forests, beaches, light woods, rolling hills, farms, swamps or villages...

Which is a huge bummer.

If were pushing the edge now, id surely make some concessions to get some grass and woods sprites in the game.

If they could actually absorb some damage and be dynamic thatd be even better.

Edited by KraftySOT, 06 October 2014 - 10:22 AM.

[Kaptain]

Oh how I miss beta

[Big Tin Man]

For all those complaining about FPS: take a look at your HD. I'm running a i7 930 (that's right, first gen i7 from 6 years ago) with a SSD, 12 gb ram, and a GTX 750. The SSD was the last thing that I upgraded, and the part that took me from 20-30 FPS on mid settings to 60+ in heavy battle on very high.

That said, old MWO was beautiful MWO.

[Almond Brown]

When someone using a 6 year old laptop runs MWO, and paid cash money, they want to set it to High and still want High frame rates. From playing lately, it seems there are "a lot of old laptops playing MWO" and they are doing so over rather poor internet connections.

Can't blame PGI for trying to accommodate as many as possible, especially for a niche game...

Edited by Almond Brown, 06 October 2014 - 11:17 AM.