Visuals, again...

[MoldyCheese]

Last real post I saw on this was from early last year, and after watching some of the new trailers... I felt that it needed to be brought up again; now that it's gone gold.

 

Now I'm not normally one to knock a game for its looks over its gameplay. But, what the hell is with the graphics engine here? This game looks like it's 5 years old already. Did Obsidian come up with this thing themselves? I realize that this is an RPG and all, but after Dragon Age and ME2...This just looks...yikes.

 

Graphics dont necessarily take away from the gameplay; but they do take away from the immersion(imo). It's a little too late to do anything about it now, but I hope that in their future games that they throw down a little cash for a decent graphics engine. Be it from a 3rd party, or its own in house project. You just know that they're gonna get hammered in the reviews for this aspect, which will undoubtedly hurt their sales.

 

Still looking forward to the game, as I'm a bit of an Obsidian fanboy at this point. But, I just needed to say it.

[Starwars]

It's the Unreal Engine, just not the newest version (that Mass Effect 2 used afaik).

 

I think the game looks comparable (a bit better) to Dragon Age. Both games were in development for a really long time, so neither game is up to par with the current visual heavyweights.

[MoldyCheese]

It's the Unreal Engine, just not the newest version (that Mass Effect 2 used afaik).

 

I think the game looks comparable (a bit better) to Dragon Age. Both games were in development for a really long time, so neither game is up to par with the current visual heavyweights.

 

It looks like the Unreal 2 engine... And Dragon Age (compared to the recent trailers that i've seen) looks FAR better. Where I've really been noticing it, is in the lighting and shadows(Or lack thereof). Particularily, with the character models. Also, the textures that have been displayed look very low res.

Edited May 10, 2010 by MoldyCheese

[smokey]

what are you talking about? Dragon Age doesn't have the best graphics but they're 10 times better than what I've seen of AP, however it's not really a problem for me, and the only immersion breaker is going to be the stupid yellow colors popping up every time you punch/kick someone, that's going to drive me nuts

[Starwars]

Eh, I'm not a particularly visual person when it comes to games (meaning I usually don't see the technical aspects of it) but I really don't know how anyone could think the Dragon Age looks better than AP. But yep, I have a hard time telling which games look "good" technically and vice versa.

 

At any rate, it's certainly something that will work against AP in terms of sales. But I don't really care personally. Knights of the Chalice was one of my favorite games last year and I think playing that would cause a lot of todays gamers to pluck their own eyes out and eat them.

Edited May 10, 2010 by Starwars

[MoldyCheese]

After doing a bit of research; I found out that it uses the Unreal 3 engine. Disappointing, considering what that engine is capable of.

 

Again, I'm just basing my views off of the trailers. Some aspects look fine, others like crap. Of course, I'm critisizing the crap, not the fine :D

[WorstUsernameEver]

To be honest I'm just getting used to low-res textures : there were plenty in Mass Effect (don't know for Mass Effect 2), plenty for Dragon Age (pretty much everything except people's skins, eyes and a couple of other things), Fallout 3 (do I really need to mention it?).

As for the shadowing I believe it actually looks good, some locations look pretty atmospheric going by the screenshots.

[Raithe]

Of course, most of the trailers and teasers have shown Moscow (outside, covered in snow) or Saudi Arabia (weapons depot, lots of barren, desert style rock)... Lots of white background or that brownish-orange.... That's always going to throw perceptions out somewhat..

 

And personally, I've never really been bugged by the graphics in AP.. I'm just wanting to sit down and play the damn game after all this time

Edited May 10, 2010 by Raithe

[Pidesco]

Alpha Protocol

 

Dragon Age

 

Unreal Engine 2 (UT 2004)

 

Now there's no need to make baseless statements filled with pointless hyperbole.

 

In case you're wondering I didn't cherry pick these images. In fact, that AP screen was one of the first to be released.

[Oblarg]

Alpha Protocol

 

Dragon Age

 

Unreal Engine 2 (UT 2004)

 

Now there's no need to make baseless statements filled with pointless hyperbole.

 

In case you're wondering I didn't cherry pick these images. In fact, that AP screen was one of the first to be released.

 

The dragon age screen is on low settings, though. Not that it matters, I played DA:O on max settings and I still think AP looks better than it did.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Alpha Protocol

 

Dragon Age

 

Unreal Engine 2 (UT 2004)

 

Now there's no need to make baseless statements filled with pointless hyperbole.

 

In case you're wondering I didn't cherry pick these images. In fact, that AP screen was one of the first to be released.

 

The dragon age screen is on low settings, though. Not that it matters, I played DA:O on max settings and I still think AP looks better than it did.

 

It actually doesn't seem to be on low setting to me, but it's a pre-release screenshot since the interface was tweaked a little bit before release. It's a good indicator on Dragon Age graphics quality in combat though since it hasn't really changed much.

[macrocarl]

I played DA:O on XBox 360 and I thought it looked pretty damn good. I think AP looks slick too. I don't get what people are measuring 'better' graphics off of. Seriously, what's considered the most awesome graphics going these days? I'd like to see a pic so I can understand what all the knee jerking is about.

 

Also, I played ME2 which had slicker looking graphics I guess but story-wise it's pretty light in the heels. So maybe we just need to wait & play the game since story is 90% of the immersion IMHO.

Edited May 10, 2010 by macrocarl

[Alpha]

bah the OP sounds like a Bioware fanboy ...DAO graphics aren't awesome .

[Tigranes]

This game looks like it's 5 years old already.

 

I'm actually interested about this, can you tell me what things make you think it looks old/crap? I ask because I look at it and think "oh it doesn't look the best out there, but it looks alright". But then, honestly, 2006 graphics (Oblivion) were pretty good IMO, so I probably have low standards...

 

In any case there *are* a lot of people out there who think "hey old graphics" so I'm curious.

[Thorton_AP]

I think the game looks fine personally.

[smokey]

You guys can say what you want but the graphics on this game are far less than impressive, and the OP does have a point when all the reviews come out saying the graphics suck it will hurt the sales of this game, like I said I don't care about the graphics all that much, but a lot of people do (my best friend refused to play MAG because of it's half-assed graphics)

 

I agree with macrocarl it won't affect the immersion, but DA's graphics are far better than what I've seen on previews and such, granted DA was filled with clipping issues, now I haven't seen any of that in any of the previews so I guess you could make the argument that AP graphics are better in that area, but then again I didn't see any clipping in DA previews either

[Oblarg]

You guys can say what you want but the graphics on this game are far less than impressive, and the OP does have a point when all the reviews come out saying the graphics suck it will hurt the sales of this game, like I said I don't care about the graphics all that much, but a lot of people do (my best friend refused to play MAG because of it's half-assed graphics)

 

I agree with macrocarl it won't affect the immersion, but DA's graphics are far better than what I've seen on previews and such, granted DA was filled with clipping issues, now I haven't seen any of that in any of the previews so I guess you could make the argument that AP graphics are better in that area, but then again I didn't see any clipping in DA previews either

 

DA's graphics were not at all better than what we have seen of AP. I played through the entire game on max settings, and it looked pretty similar (especially in terms of character faces).

[Baeus]

The graphics in Dragon Age really depended what system you played it on. The 360 version was pretty terrible by comparison to the PS3 and (moderate settings) PC version.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Well it looks better than Dragon Age and Fallout 3, that's for sure.

 

EDIT: Also, can we stop fooling ourselves? AP is not even close to AAA titles in terms of graphics. The game does not look great, but I don't think anyone here cares about that: this is mostly a roleplaying game and RPG players tend to not care about looks as much.

Edited May 10, 2010 by WILL THE ALMIGHTY

[Tigranes]

Where's the fooling? Nobody is saying AP looks like Crysis 2, it's a total strawman.

[HoonDing]

The game will most probably be compared to Splinter Cell: Conviction a lot, including graphics. I think AP looks about as good as Splinter Cell: Double Agent, which is a 2006 game.

 

Big deal.

[ginji]

The game will most probably be compared to Splinter Cell: Conviction a lot, including graphics. I think AP looks about as good as Splinter Cell: Double Agent, which is a 2006 game.

 

Big deal.

 

Well, I've only played demo of the last 2 Splinter Cell games (even if I absolutely loved the series until Chaos Theory), but for what I've seen I think that Double Agent actually looks better than Conviction...

Edited May 10, 2010 by ginji

[mothra]

i played dragon age on maximum settings and I think this looks much better. not to speak of the bland and unimaginative design and story in DA:O. sure, it can't compare with shooters that put all money on the front, the visuals, but what I have seen sofar should hold up as "combat arenas" and setpieces. the context will make it awesome - hopefully.

Edited May 10, 2010 by mothra

[PastramiX]

Frankly, I just hope that AP runs at a decent framerate on my rig, regardless of the settings. I could really care less about the graphical quality, as long as I can actually move my mouse deftly without succumbing to gratuitous use of bloom and pixel shaders. While other UE3 games such as UT3 and Mirror's Edge have ran at ~30 FPS at maximum quality, Mass Effect lurches along at the equivalent settings on my rig, unfortunately.

[MoldyCheese]

Okay, I've looked at the trailers again, and I can see what you guys are saying. It seems to be mainly the trailers fault. The main issue that I was having was with the "Gone Gold" trailer over at gamebanshee. Supposedly, it's at 720p. If I fullscreen this thing on my 32" monitor, it's absolutely horrid. Ultimate case of the jaggies. Textures look blocky and everything looks very flat(like theres virtually no shaders or something).

 

I check the videogamer.com one and it's a little clearer. Still, everything looks really flat, particularily the ground, wall and object textures(characters look better though). Also, if you look at a character model that has some solid colors on it(like the russian chick with the tank top), you should see what I'm talking about. However, the character faces look FAR better then the gamebanshee vid, so I can see your DA comparisons making some sense.

 

It's tough to see a lot of this because its a combination of very short clips, so you see very little fluid character movement and even less panning of the camera to see the environment from different angles. The smaller the image that your viewing, the better it looks. When I fullscreen these video's they dont look very good. And, I dont expect you all to be watching these trailers on a 30+" screen.

 

I'm just saying that the footage that I've seen looks blocky at the resolutions that we're given(supposedly HD). Particularily, the gamebanshee one. And, if thats the case when the game is being reviewed; then Obsidian may end up losing some money.

 

Needless to say, i'm still picking up the game. These were just some concerns I had after seeing these trailers.