Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think that guy's face looks great. The rest of the game might need some work ;(

 

As for improvement, it's hard to say. I honestly have trouble imagining a huge revamp before release, but I'm a little bit cynical. Probably just sharper textures and finessing of a polygon here and there.

 

By my own personal standards, the current level of graphics is totally adequate. By the standards of people who expect Gears of War or MGS4 visuals from every new title, it could be rough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that guy's face looks great. The rest of the game might need some work :)

 

As for improvement, it's hard to say. I honestly have trouble imagining a huge revamp before release, but I'm a little bit cynical. Probably just sharper textures and finessing of a polygon here and there.

 

By my own personal standards, the current level of graphics is totally adequate. By the standards of people who expect Gears of War or MGS4 visuals from every new title, it could be rough.

im not talking about a overhaul i just mean they get even better i dont think its bad looking at all i think it looks really good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an overhaul would be necessary to make it look comparable to Killzone 2, Uncharted, Gears, MGS4, CoD 5, Splinter Cell: Double Agent . . . etc., which is what some people expect out of what they perceive to be a "shooter."

 

Is it a fair expectation from a RPG that dabbles in shooting? Hell no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the problem. The first picture isn't bad, the second picture looks great.

 

Personally, I don't care about graphics as long as they look clean (meaning everything is clearly defined, not all blended together and dull, for lack of a better explanation) For example, Max Payne and Far Cry 2. Both games look great, the first being really old, the second just looks great on low settings. Crysis however, looks horrible on low settings, in my opinion, simply because everything looks exactly like everything else (at least to me) to the point where it affected gameplay for me. Then again, one of Crysis' main goal was graphics, unlike the other games I mentioned. But anyway, at the current state it's in, the graphics of AP are great. Not top notch or anything, but why does it need to be?

Edited by Venom713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest here, AP's graphics are very hit and miss. Some things looks really good, while others look just plain bad. I'm not talking here about how many polygons objects and characters have, or textures resolution. It's just that the game's use of color is not that great, as environments usually have one color dominant and little else to break the visual... what's the word I'm looking for here? Uniformity. See Saudi Arabia screenshots for examples of what I'm saying here. Not to mention that colors often times seem desaturated, they're not vibrant at all.

 

It's surprising, as Obsidian proved to be more sensible to color-related stuff than many other developers, as evidenced by the lovely work they did with Mask of the Betrayer and Storm of Zehir. At least that's how it seems to me. Both these expansions have beautifully vibrant colors, and managed to be interesting even when using one color dominant (like Thaymount in MotB, its brown-ish look was broken down by the superb blue lights and created a surreal combo that was simply eye-cathing). They're going for more of a photorealistic look with AP, I understand that, but it looks boring color-wise.

 

It's hard to change this sort of stuff at this point in development, but maybe they can play with the post-processing filters a bit before shipping the game. Ultimately, I'm getting this game no matter how it looks, but I'm sure some people will complain about graphics, and it might pull sale numbers down a bit.

Edited by fastpunk

"We do not quit playing because we grow old, we grow old because we quit playing." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But anyway, at the current state it's in, the graphics of AP are great. Not top notch or anything, but why does it need to be?

 

It would certainly help, since gamers in general and critics particularly tend to be superficial. I mean, when was the last time the critics mostly agreed that a game was pretty yet utterly devoid of other positive qualities? Crysis was a tech demo on steroids and it got a metacritic of 91, for crying out loud.

 

Mass Effect got away with having good character/weapon models and blocky environments though, so maybe AP can follow in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the textures should be sharper. In both of the pictures, it looks as if the arms dealer guy is standing in front of a furry carpet will a brick-motif. Hopefully there will be an option allowing sharper textures in the game.

 

For me, good animations and a steady, smooth framerate are just as important, however. The animations we've been shown so far look pretty good - way, way better than the ones in Fallout 3 for example. Unfortunately, framerate issues tend to appear in many multi-platform games nowadays, but I'm hoping that Obsidian will have the time and resources to work on engine optimization.

 

I also think it's important that the game will run well on average-spec PCs.

 

Graphics alone don't make or break a game as long as the game has something unique going for it. Just look at Saints Row 2 - horrible graphics, but still a game with good sales and good reviews (if you don't count the horrific PC-version).

Edited by ericjones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think an overhaul would be necessary to make it look comparable to Killzone 2, Uncharted, Gears, MGS4, CoD 5, Splinter Cell: Double Agent . . . etc., which is what some people expect out of what they perceive to be a "shooter."

 

Is it a fair expectation from a RPG that dabbles in shooting? Hell no.

 

its not finished don't forget this game is going to look great better than mass effect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But anyway, at the current state it's in, the graphics of AP are great. Not top notch or anything, but why does it need to be?

 

It would certainly help, since gamers in general and critics particularly tend to be superficial. I mean, when was the last time the critics mostly agreed that a game was pretty yet utterly devoid of other positive qualities? Crysis was a tech demo on steroids and it got a metacritic of 91, for crying out loud.

 

Mass Effect got away with having good character/weapon models and blocky environments though, so maybe AP can follow in that regard.

 

Well, Crysis had some fun gameplay as well as future graphics from outer space. But I guess you're right, it would help sales... I'm just pointing out that a great game doesn't need great graphics, and that people shouldn't be discouraged from this game because of the visuals, especially since Obsidian is going out on a limb and trying something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, good gameplay is prerequisite for a good game. Graphics is only a bonus.

 

Agree 100%. Good game /= popular game though. Basically, I just want AP to be popular enough to become a franchise and release a sequel. Beyond that, meh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, good gameplay is prerequisite for a good game. Graphics is only a bonus.

 

couldn't put it better myself mate :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not really looking into top-notch graphics when I buy an RPG.

 

Nor do I. But let's face it, the way forward for RPGs is to add FPS elements to the traditional RPG character development and storyline. Bethesda is touching on something with great visuals, however their game design (esp. TES skill/level system is a joke, too non-linear for it's size, FO3 was an improvement tho) has been absolutely horrid. They are also much too light on the RP aspects. Sure I would sacrifice visuals to get a better storyline and gameplay, but at this day and age I don't see a reason we should have to, at least not to any significant degree. Of course I don't expect Crysis level graphics, but Mass Effect should set a standard for what we should expect in future releases.

 

Alpha Protocol is using the Unreal 3 engine which is used by games like Bioshock, Mirror's Edge and the upcoming DC Universe Online. It is said to be looking like Mass Effect meets James Bond. I'm interested to find out how much of that is hype and what holds true, but one thing is sure; the engine itself allows for stellar graphics.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not really looking into top-notch graphics when I buy an RPG.

Me neither, I personally couldn't care less about the graphics but I realize how important this aspect is in making one game a smash, thus I actually hope AP will present good visuals.


M4-78 Enhancement Project :: www.m4-78ep.deadlystream.com

banneranimatedlucasforu.gif

Discuss the M4-78EP, Sleheyron Restoration Project, KotOR: Revenge of Revan and more! Join Deadly Stream Forums today!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...