Elite Jedi Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Regarding the PC verison, things look to unfinished. The models look like cardboard cut outs, the gun models suck. What the hell! Looks dissapointing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-wa jodar Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Then don`t buy it ! Judging a game by screenshots is pretty silly, IMO ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scavenger Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 that means every pc gamer wont be able to buy it, i found it that in some cases ppl respond over-reacted and make it seem more dramatic than it is..did you actually PLAYED the pc version or seen screenshots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doomie Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 I think they look fine. Well, they playeer models at least. But i'm not there to examine my gun all the the time, i'm here to shoot people that do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mex Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Every LA game is rushed. You all should know that by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegis Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 well some aren't. It's sad though they couldn't deliver on par graphics. they decided from the start to make it like that so i dont think its rushed. Rushed is when you see «OH FEK ONLY X MONTHS OVER, we'll skip Z and Y» (windows longhorne) and wont meet what they promised at first (galaxies). The officer etc were taken out for balance issues, not cause they only had 8 months left. i wouldn't mind at all waiting an extra ±3,4 months for on par graphics with for example battlefield vietnam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-wa jodar Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 I don`t care what anyone says, I think SW:BF is gonna be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SITH_ShadowCat Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Err... Since when did the graphics suck? Some guy posted high res screens from his PC gaming experince and things looked pretty crisp. Throw in AA into it and you've got something that looks smoot. Not to mention the spectacular animations for the vehicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mex Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Originally posted by Alegis well some aren't. It's sad though they couldn't deliver on par graphics. I for one, am glad that this game has bad graphics. I hate playing games that make you upgrade to around 2.5 gig processor and a state-of-the-art 256mb graphics card. It'll be nice to play a game that stays above 60 fps for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Ehh?? I think the graphics are pretty good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDKnite188 Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Graphics, being bad? Uh . . . . 1. The screenshots showed a great deal of detail in environments, vehicles, and effects. 2. The maps are huge. It is better for the graphics level to be lower; we shouldn't have to kill our processors to play (i.e. Doom 3). 3. IGN, which degraded the title, actually spoke well of the graphics. That must stand for something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawaJoey Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 I was expecting this thread to be about the content, but I find that it's about the graphics. HUH? Um, the graphics DO look bad in most of the screenshots. You know, the screenshots that are from beta and pre-beta versions of the game and have been distorted in shrinking them to a smaller resolution. Those don't look that good. But did you see that 20 min video though? It was filmed with a camcorder and was footage of the game on another screen, and the graphics still looked pretty spiffy to me. Regardless, the graphics wont reach bad. From what I've seen, I am sure it will look better than, say, Jedi Academy, and Jedi Academy didn't even have bad graphics. It didn't nearly the best we can get in this day and age, but the game still looked fine. Assuming you're perceptive enough to see that JA's graphics weren't bad and completely acceptable, and assuming that Battlefron'ts graphics will be better, we really don't have anything to worry about here. All I'm worried about is how much stuff got cut from the game. Several vehicles, probably some maps, guns, units, you name it, some have most likely have been dropped. It seems like they really wanted to stick with their release date that coincides with the DVDs. Also, as a Battlefield type game, there's a good chance of expansions, so they probably weren't too concerned missing a few things, since they can just reel in more money for it later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 I feel the game was rushed to meet the september 21, 2004 deadline. In my opinion, alot of things could of being added content wise to make the game harder. The AI help in single player stinks! I have to do all the work in the game. I missed alot of units from the movies that should of been there like wampas, kryat dragons, bespin security guards, naboo security guards, kaminoians, dwarf spider droids, flash speeder, naboo star fighter, tie interceptor, a-wing, playable slave I and millenium Falcon, and other native citizens & wildlife. I would of liked Courscant has a planet instead of Rhen Var. I can think of a couple of planets I would like to add has maps like Alderran, Dagobah, Mon Calamari, Dantoonie, Ord Mantell, Sullust, Kessel, Corellia, Rodia, etc. Instead of putting in an Tank for the empire it should of being an AT-PT Walker and the Republic Tank for the Republic should of been the AT-XT Walker. Makes more sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountainforest Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 This thread goes the same way as a lot of others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scavenger Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 in a negative way? yes... but is the pc version really THAT bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Just wait guys, every version will get patched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-wa jodar Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Originally posted by joesdomain I feel the game was rushed to meet the september 21, 2004 deadline. In my opinion, alot of things could of being added content wise to make the game harder. The AI help in single player stinks! I have to do all the work in the game. I missed alot of units from the movies that should of been there like wampas, kryat dragons, bespin security guards, naboo security guards, kaminoians, dwarf spider droids, flash speeder, naboo star fighter, tie interceptor, a-wing, playable slave I and millenium Falcon, and other native citizens & wildlife. I would of liked Courscant has a planet instead of Rhen Var. I can think of a couple of planets I would like to add has maps like Alderran, Dagobah, Mon Calamari, Dantoonie, Ord Mantell, Sullust, Kessel, Corellia, Rodia, etc. Instead of putting in an Tank for the empire it should of being an AT-PT Walker and the Republic Tank for the Republic should of been the AT-XT Walker. Makes more sense! I find you lack of faith disturbing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.