EvaUnit02 on 26/4/2009 at 08:27
Was I the only one who was too focused on the gameplay mechanics being discussed in that Walkthough trailer to notice the graphical quality?
Fade on 26/4/2009 at 08:45
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
God damn I love Obsidian. Do any other RPG devs actually understand how to make a morally ambiguous alignment system anymore?
CD Projekt?
Sulphur on 26/4/2009 at 09:27
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Was I the only one who was too focused on the gameplay mechanics being discussed in that Walkthough trailer to notice the graphical quality?
Nawp! What really intrigues me is the gameplay and whether the game allows you to alter the narrative as you make choices. That 'Handler' system could potentially blow the game wide open and make subsequent replays very, very interesting.
As for the graphics, the game looks a little rough, but... so what? It's not as good looking as, say, Gears of War, but it's not outright 'I'd rather rape my eyes with a fork than look at this shit!' fugly either.
Obsidian's a relatively small team, and the selling point of their games has, so far, never been their graphical quality.
Zygoptera on 26/4/2009 at 11:04
I couldn't care less (within reason) about the graphics either. My only real concern is that it not end up like Mass Effect- not looking great and running like treacle.
It's not like Thief 1/2 or SS2 were brilliant graphics wise either, after all.
Jason Moyer on 26/4/2009 at 11:20
I thought Mass Effect was pretty awesome looking. Probably the best-looking of the UE3 games released so far.
EvaUnit02 on 26/4/2009 at 11:21
Quote Posted by Zygoptera
My only real concern is that it not end up like Mass Effect- not looking great
Wot? I've only played the 360 version, but that looked pretty damn good.
I recall the post-processing effects, HDR usage, DoF, etc being really effective. A lot of the vistas were very beautiful - that was probably one of the only upsides of piloting the Mako, you were given a lot of time to admire the scenery.
I also was taken aback by how fucking great the character and facial animation was during the talky bits. In regard to animation, Mass Effect was the anti-Fallout 3. ME felt like the next step up from Half-Life 2 and Vampire: Bloodlines, whereas FO3 felt like a massive step backward. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I've played second generation PS2 games with far better animation work than FO3.
Pidesco on 26/4/2009 at 13:34
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Wot? I've only played the 360 version, but that looked pretty damn good.
I recall the post-processing effects, HDR usage, DoF, etc being really effective. A lot of the vistas were very beautiful - that was probably one of the only upsides of piloting the Mako, you were given a lot of time to admire the scenery.
I also was taken aback by how fucking great the character and facial animation was during the talky bits. In regard to animation, Mass Effect was the anti-Fallout 3. ME felt like the next step up from Half-Life 2 and Vampire: Bloodlines, whereas FO3 felt like a massive step backward. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I've played second generation PS2 games with far better animation work than FO3.
The one thing I don't get about facial animations in ME is why everyone gushes about them. Going into the game I expected something great due to all the praise, and instead I found it very underwhelming. Sure it wasn't as bad as Fallout 3 or Oblivion, but it was nothing special. The characters still felt way too wooden to me.
Zygoptera on 26/4/2009 at 23:41
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Wot? I've only played the 360 version, but that looked pretty damn good.
I've played both versions, 360 one first. Frankly, Bioshock's graphics are better in every way imaginable (that's a ymmv, of course) except character models and most importantly, for what you get MEPC's performance is
terrible. I played through Bioshock on high graphics settings (and both STALKER's at 1440x with everything but full dynamic lighting) and Bioshock performs better when fighting enemies than ME does when standing still, staring at a wall, and with settings set to minimum.
So yeah, I don't really care much about the graphics in any absolute sense, but something which doesn't combine not looking great with running slow would be nice for AP.
Eldron on 27/4/2009 at 07:30
Quote Posted by Zygoptera
I've played both versions, 360 one first. Frankly, Bioshock's graphics are better in every way imaginable (that's a ymmv, of course) except character models and most importantly, for what you get MEPC's performance is
terrible. I played through Bioshock on high graphics settings (and both STALKER's at 1440x with everything but full dynamic lighting) and Bioshock performs better when fighting enemies than ME does when standing still, staring at a wall, and with settings set to minimum.
So yeah, I don't really care much about the graphics in any absolute sense, but something which doesn't combine not looking great with running slow would be nice for AP.
artistical art versus polycounts, its funny that this is a discussion about obsidian, and then art aswell,
I'm going to post some images from a post I made some time ago, related to nwn2, which has to do with obsidian, which has to do with high hardware requirements and bad art.. hold on.
