Elite Jedi Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I know you may have discussed this before, but the state of the graphics is shocking. Compared to Vietnam, looks like a kid came along and drew it all out. I really hope the grahics improve. Far Cry anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Viet Nam's screenies only looked slightly better. I don't really care a lot about the graphics, I prefer a game that runs smoothly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jokemaster Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad I don't really care a lot about the graphics, I prefer a game that runs smoothly. So do I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastcoast2895 Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 i'll wait until closer to the release date to judge the graphics. also the graphics so far look playable enough to me. and besides for a graphic star wars treat i'll wait for republic commando. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gukkjo Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 unless you've already played the game, you can't really judge what the graphics will be like. Maybe the screenshots are messed up. I wouldn't worry too much about graphics right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormHammer Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Well, on my ageing rig, Far Cry MP is pretty much unplayable. On low settings, I can usually get a decent 30 fps in outside areas in SP - and sometimes more than that. In other words, SP is quite playable. When it comes to MP, though, it grinds to a halt - anything from 15fps to 2fps, which is basically a slide show. I know it's not lag, because I had the best ping (30-60) on a couple of servers, but I still had this problem. So the engine must be pretty demanding for MP matches. The other game that kills my framerate is Unreal Tournament 2004 - which noticeably performs worse than UT2K3. Yes, I know I need to upgrade my PC (CPU and RAM mostly), but most of the other games I have run quite well in MP. I have a great blast with Enemy Territory, even on servers with 60 people playing, and I get a decent framerate with that game even with all the options turned to highest settings. The graphics in ET are quite acceptable to me. The gameplay is so fast you don't really have time to think about whether certain textures could have been better. So as far as I'm concerned, if lower quality graphics means the gameplay is smoother, and older PC friendly, I'm all for it. What's the point in having a totally up-to-date engine that eats resources, when a lot fewer people will be able to play the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Dark Jedi Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 The graphics look bad because the game is still in its early development Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sounds Risky Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Then they shouldn't have put up any shots, because the game looks nasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegis Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I don't think the graphics will suddenly mutate into something like 'nam, but I like the way it is now. Looking at the rebel models in the rebel facion on lucasarts' swbf site and I just like it. It said somewhere in the dev. diary for models that they turned it az bit down for smooth gameplay, and that is whats most important for me..of course you cant see smooth gameplay on screenshots and only graphics so thats why so many mind already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whoopknacker Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Keep in mind that they likely used the highest setting for the graphics in the films. The trick is making a game that looks great and will be accessible to a variety of computers. This is why Counter Strike still leads the pack when it comes to online games. They have low requirements, and that allows someone with a Pentium II and a dial up to play. This is also why settings are in the game. I had lag for Vietnam, I turned down my settings and did not have the problem as bad. WAKE UP IT WASNT THAT LONG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Warrior Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I don't really care a lot about the graphics, I prefer a game that runs smoothly. me neither i dont care about the graphics just that the game runs smoothly. the graphics are fine how they are to me. could be better but are fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Graphics look better in the videos than in the screenshots for some reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poggle Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Graphics are important but if the game doesnt run smoothly then its really not worth it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMuffin Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I agree with Jabba... though I don't want really crappy graphs. For LA's games, I'm always more worried about the engine... but they said they actually crated a new one this time, so it might be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Originally posted by Darth54 I agree with Jabba... though I don't want really crappy graphs. For LA's games, I'm always more worried about the engine... but they said they actually crated a new one this time, so it might be good. It's not like Lucas Arts made it, it's a profesional company that done good games like Battlezone2 (I like it) and Star Wars: Clone Wars I have full faith in them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegis Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Originally posted by tFighterPilot Graphics look better in the videos than in the screenshots for some reason because on a single screenshot you focus more on the different parts of the player models, which lack good graphics, but in a movie it's just like ingame; you pay more attention to the environment and it looks 'ok' then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KPM Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 i reallly like the swbf grapics, call me crazy but i just love the water! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 The water effect has become a standard in modern games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountainforest Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 This game is already called "the best star wars game ever". I don't think lucasarts would like "the best starwars game ever" to have horrible graphics. I'm not to worried about it yet, they've got another year (ok, maybe a little less) so time enough to emprove some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I thought the best star wars game ever is supposed to be KoTOR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultar__Terragor Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 The reviews at Gamespot and recently at IGN are quite positives about the engine graphic and especially towards the ps2 version. For now, my worries are more concentrated on the balance element of the game and all the other unique features they want to add because it could work great or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I was under the impression that the PS2 version had graphical issues... I really should learn english... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SITH_ShadowCat Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I don't care if the graphics back up five years, what I want to see is a decent net code, and smooth animations. I think giving those few extra frames at the cost of less detailed models may actually help the game seem more graphically advanced. If anyone's played Prince of Persia (the new one), then you know that there textures aren't anything new, yet reviews have told of the great graphics. This is do to how good the animation was that made the character move. This game seems to have the best walker animation I've seen so far hands down. Just go watch one of the movies and you'll agree that the way those walkers walk is quite satisfying to watch for what ever reason that is, be it frame rate or ingenious animation. Plus, the blaster and explosions effects seem to rate high on my visual scale. Sorry if that was hard to read, I'm in abit of a rush to get my thoughts through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 The explosions looks kinda bad. Of course we're not thinking about going 5 years back in terms of graphics just for the sake of gameplay. We want something that can run smoothly for most people at medium setting. Smooth gameplay>graphics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Again, I trust pandemic to balance the framerate and graphics in the best way possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.