Jump to content

The Truth About Graphics


27 replies to this topic

#21 JadePanther

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 967 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:38 PM

Ok crysis 3.. not F2P u pay to play.. that gives them a good bit of cash. Plus they own the engine and license it out for even more cash.

The guys who built crysis 3 are the guys that built the crytek engine.. It's easy to make things look the best when ur using ur own stuff.

MWO is a first person robot shoot em up.. not a first person, people shoot people up. The engine wasent quite designed for this and they are having to hack thier way around alot to get it working.

But if u need something to really understand it.. lets look at cars for a second.

Chevy makes the corvette.. and they make the LS series engine that goes in a corvette..
now u can take a corvette engine and drop it in a pinto. Now it might be able to haul *** like a corvette cause its got the same motor. but it aint gonna handle like a corvette and it aint gonna look like a corvette..

Whyy.. because u aint Chevy.. ur some dopey mechanic whos done a motor swap.. U arent gonna get a corvette by using a corvette motor..

Thus U arent gonna get Crysis 3 using the Crytek engine IF U ARE NOT CRYTEK... It's just not gonna be the same..
Sooooooo Quit expecting this to be Crysis 3.. Because ITS not even close. It just happens to be the same engine.

#22 Roughneck45

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Handsome Devil
  • The Handsome Devil
  • 4,452 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:40 PM

View PostConsta Pation, on 20 February 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:


The magic build theory....how sweet.
Only difference between now and release will be the addition of DX11...maybe. that will change some affects but the graphics will pretty much be the same.

Just like how its been the same since closed beta.

Oh wait, its not. It looks better now. Maybe it will look better later too.

No magic theory, just facts.

Edited by Roughneck45, 20 February 2013 - 01:41 PM.


#23 Havok1978

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fury
  • Fury
  • 371 posts
  • LocationTexaz!!

Posted 21 February 2013 - 01:52 PM

mechs are models, maps are textures, although, mechs models use textures? that clear as mud for ya? LoL

I do some graphic work with gimp,blender and etc.
dx9 or dx11 is actually moot, what we have here is a lack of HD textures and fans patience.
the graphics engine, works. no need to mess with it. the physics engine, needs a bit of tweeking but Havok physics are a bit... "tweeky" at times tho brilliant.
the "eye candy" of how "sharp" an image looks is high defintion textures. the effects you want are post process effects.
both these things take a backseat for two reasons.
#1 online performance.
#2 they have game mechanics to work on and content delivery to deal with before graphics.
yes, an "HD patch" is rather simple to implement, if you have the artists to work on it. also HD graphics are gonna double your current install size.
they are trying to get thier chocolate bar formula to the flavor they want before wrapping it in gold foil, its all good dude.

to understand game development a bit better try googleing, "graphics engine" , "physics engine", "pre and post process effects" , "ENB injector or wrapper"

then perhaps try downloading: GIMP, Blender and an SDK kit and give it a brief try.

I'm not badgering or trolling you, I'm being honest, you might find a new hobby, <i did> and at the very least you will defintely have a better understanding of whats going on behind the scenes in beta's

updating graphics is simple at a later date, im sure the artists over at PGI are building mechs and the like right now and testing maps etc.

#24 Tennex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 6,619 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 01:53 PM

MWO is F2P so its gotta be able to run on a good amount of systems. so they get the most revenue

even though this game is so poorly optimized it runs worse than planetside 2. which looks way better. and fits god knows how many players on screen at a time. with godly rendering distance.

Edited by Tennex, 21 February 2013 - 01:54 PM.


#25 Havok1978

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fury
  • Fury
  • 371 posts
  • LocationTexaz!!

Posted 21 February 2013 - 02:07 PM

http://youtu.be/0_JXjavIqaw

Edited by Havok1978, 21 February 2013 - 02:09 PM.


#26 Phalanx100bc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 242 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 02:26 PM

I'll take a well rounded, deeply immersed tactical/Strategic(?) simulator in a metaverse over must have top of the line graphics anyday.

Edited by Phalanx100bc, 21 February 2013 - 02:26 PM.


#27 Havok1978

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fury
  • Fury
  • 371 posts
  • LocationTexaz!!

Posted 21 February 2013 - 02:48 PM

View PostPhalanx100bc, on 21 February 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

I'll take a well rounded, deeply immersed tactical/Strategic(?) simulator in a metaverse over must have top of the line graphics anyday.


LoL no doubt right? i think most of us were playing MW4 or MW:LL until now haha

#28 Adridos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 10,635 posts
  • LocationHiding in a cake, left in green city called New A... something.

Posted 21 February 2013 - 02:59 PM

It's an online F2P game and has to be playable by everyone on a fair level.

Heck, even now there are a few things which gives advantage to either group (hi-end guys have to deal with more trees in the way, while low-end guys can't see enemy mechs past some point, which is heavily apparent on Alpine, for example). The graphics of the game already took a few hits due to optimalisation (we've had better resolution textures for mechs in CB, for instance).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users