Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Graphical Excellence!!!!Follow

#1 Jul 21 2010 at 4:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
A quick read through of these boards reveals one thing about this game to me and that is that FFXIV will be cutting edge in its requirements to such a degree that unless you bought a decent gaming computer in the last 12 months - you are probably going to have to at least upgrade, and possibly buy a new computer to play it.

I dont have a problem with this, technology evolves, games evolve and in order to stay on the cutting edge of quality - you have to pay the price.

My problem though is that I hope S-E realise that when you whack such high system requirements on a game, the gaming community is entitled to expect something ground breaking.

Consider Aion. My dual core E8400 (3mhz) maching with an HD 4870 512mb graphics card destroyed this game on the highest graphical settings - And it looked AMAZING!!!!!

If FFXIV really going to look better than Aion, if so I am very, very impressed and it is worth upgrading for!

If FFXIV is not going to be a generation ahead of Aion in graphical terms then why are the requirements so much higher? Perhaps there is some technical issue that I dont understand but if NCsoft were able to make Aion look so beautiful without the massive upgrades, why have S-E been unable to do so. It just smells of potential bad coding (which is hard to imagine given the pedigree).

Does anyone have any thoughts, maybe this game is a massive step forward graphically, or maybe someone can explain the tech in laymans terms?
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#2 Jul 21 2010 at 4:27 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,438 posts
Aion had some issues with its graphical quality.. it was definitely not the be-all end-all of graphics. Seriously, ever look at the environments? The trees? The ground? The CryEngine can only work just so many miracles at once

FFXIV appears to have far superior environmental graphics than Aion did, and it's doing that while rendering multiple player character models which also look very nice and very well-animated.

Honestly, even if FFXIV was only on-par with Aion on character models (I'll admit those were really pretty) it's already blown Aion away on environments and textures, AND we haven't really seen what the game will look like when you push its graphical limits with truly exceptional hardware.

Are the recommended specs high? Yeah.. Are the minimum requirements high? Not really.

People are getting hung up on the recommended spec as some sort of baseline for playing the game, when really that's not the intention or the purpose of a recommended spec. There are numerous videos all over youtube of the alpha being played quite well on machines far inferior to the recommended spec.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#3 Jul 21 2010 at 4:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
I hope that you are right.

I am reluctant to judge on the beta alone but when I look at youtube videos posted it makes me nervous - I dont think it looks any better than Aion.

Like I said though, never judge a game by the beta (or by videos posted on youtube).

The character models in Aion were exceptional as you say, but the environment graphics were also streets ahead of any other MMO I have seen (FFXI, WoW, LoTR, Conan).

I score almost 4000 on the official benchmark on my 18 month old machine (Q9505 with a 512mb Radeon HD4870). This should be OK to play on med settings - i just hope the game looks good on med settings!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#4 Jul 21 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Good
***
3,438 posts
Well the videos I've seen are all from the alpha, and my understanding is that the beta looks a lot better (much more polished), by that same token I'd expect retail to look more polished still.

Youtube isn't a great source of information a lot of the time (in this case it's all I've got unfortunately) but even if you know nothing else about the graphics settings, you can see how jerky the game is, how unresponsive (how many times does the guy have to hit his actionbar to make things happen), or generally how glitchy. I haven't seen a whole lot of any of those, even in videos of people reportedly using below average machines.

Could they be lying and in-fact be playing on dual HD 5970s? Yeah I guess so... Is there any benefit to doing so? Not really.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#5 Jul 21 2010 at 4:45 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
743 posts
YouTube compresses the video, so it loses quality, even if you're watching in 720p. I'm sure SE has some cool stuff planned for us at higher levels.
____________________________
I think you've been smoking the Moko...
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/350413/
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/1628942/
http://www.nerdist.com/
Angus of Cerberus (retired)
#6 Jul 21 2010 at 4:55 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
339 posts
I'm hoping there is much more to be seen.

We've seen some alpha vids and even some beta vids. But in the final release, who knows what other sights we will see.

There are many areas we haven't seen yet. And maybe some effects like the changing weather as was shown back along. With the lightning and rain etc.

I believe the changing enviroment and the fact that the characters movements are more realistic (I've read that they have done motion capture for character movements), will result in a much more realistic and believable atmosphere. Maybe. ;)
#7 Jul 21 2010 at 4:59 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
As far as I'm concerned, and have always been concerned, story and gameplay are infinitely more important than graphics.

You young whippersnappers and your three dees and your polygons and your tessellations make me puke.

















Dear God, that took forever to do by hand....

Edited, Jul 21st 2010 7:01pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#8 Jul 21 2010 at 5:04 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts
LOL,

As a 34 year old, father of 2 who has been a gamer since I was 6 years old (on my ZX Spectrum 48k rubber beer mat), I know what you mean.

That said, since the gameplay these days is so poor compared to the good old days, you need to get something out of your games and graphics is one thing we are getting good at.

That said, I dont really care whether the graphics are exceptional or not - but if they are not, why require such a powerful rig.

I just want the graphics to be commensurate with the power of the computer required to run the game!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#9 Jul 21 2010 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, and have always been concerned, story and gameplay are infinitely more important than graphics.

You young whippersnappers and your three dees and your polygons and your tessellations make me puke.

Edited, Jul 21st 2010 7:01pm by Mikhalia


doo doo doo de doo DOO! hehe graphics are great! but yeah gameplay is much more important.. for example.. other then mario, the final fantay 2 and 3 games for snes. awsome game not so awsome graphics. Link and zelda games.. on nes.. ahh thoes bring back memories... **** i feel old lol
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#10 Jul 21 2010 at 5:10 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,120 posts
Yeah, nintendo's the perfect example for that. N64 & Gamecube were immediately viewed as inferior due to graphics. But I'll take Ocarina of Time & Metroid Prime over some lame crap that looks good any day. Awesome to have both of course, but those games that sacrifice substance to look pretty really annoy me.
#11 Jul 21 2010 at 5:11 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
HallieXIV wrote:
LOL,

As a 34 year old, father of 2 who has been a gamer since I was 6 years old (on my ZX Spectrum 48k rubber beer mat), I know what you mean.

That said, since the gameplay these days is so poor compared to the good old days, you need to get something out of your games and graphics is one thing we are getting good at.

That said, I dont really care whether the graphics are exceptional or not - but if they are not, why require such a powerful rig.

I just want the graphics to be commensurate with the power of the computer required to run the game!


Totally in agreement here.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#12 Jul 21 2010 at 5:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,754 posts
you dont need a computer built within the past 12 months, I built mine august 2008 for about 1200quid and I can let you know right now that I can definitely play the game in HD
____________________________
The Accursed Being Sent By Heaven; Jenova: The Calamity From The Skies

WoW - EU - Al'Akir - Goblin Warlock
Taoquitok

FFXI - Bismarck
Jenovaomega
#13 Jul 21 2010 at 5:52 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,536 posts
Quote:
I am reluctant to judge on the beta alone but when I look at youtube videos posted it makes me nervous - I dont think it looks any better than Aion.


There's a solution to this - try watching the videos in HQ....if it still only looks "as good as Aion" consider finding a good optometry clinic. No disrespect intended but this game looks much better than Aion and if you can't see that your vision might be dipping a little.



Edited, Jul 21st 2010 8:02pm by SolidMack
____________________________
MUTED
#14 Jul 21 2010 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
I just wish they had gone with DirectX 10-11 instead of 9.0c which will be obsolete within 2 years.

scotchio wrote:


I believe the changing enviroment and the fact that the characters movements are more realistic (I've read that they have done motion capture for character movements), will result in a much more realistic and believable atmosphere. Maybe. ;)


Mocap is to 3D animation what rotoscoping is to 2D animation. i.e. a crutch that is used when they don't have the resources to do hand keyframed animation.

Edited, Jul 21st 2010 8:56pm by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#15 Jul 21 2010 at 5:59 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts
Perhaps I am watching the wrong vids on youtube but I have tried up to 720 resolution and due to the compression used by youtube, all I get is grainy images.

We seem to disagree on the quality of AIon and thats fine - I think it looks pretty good (as long as you are not playing Asmo since the graphics are much worse their side of the world).

As I have highlighted before. My issue is not with youtube clips as you cant rely on them. My issue is not with the beta, you cant rely on it.

My question is whether the graphics in the game are going to deserve the hardware that people will inevitably buy to run this game. If that is the case - this opthalmically challenged gamer will be happy!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#16 Jul 21 2010 at 6:00 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,536 posts
Well I'd imagine motion capture is much more accurate, and logical to carry out that manually animating isn't it? I don't know I haven't done 3D but I would assume it is.
____________________________
MUTED
#17 Jul 21 2010 at 6:04 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,536 posts
Quote:
If that is the case - this opthalmically challenged gamer will be happy!


Loll...yea sorry i'm sure you're not blind and I know Aion looks good but to me it looked good from a character standpoint, its environments were pretty sub par whereas FFXIV's look much more superb, as do they character models and animations. But I guess we can't tell 100% from vids we've seen but I've only heard good stuff about graphics from the game, so hopefully we'll all be satisfied and it'll justify my $800 desktop purchase coming this September.
____________________________
MUTED
#18 Jul 21 2010 at 6:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
@solidmack,

Yes, motion capture should, in theory be superior. Doesnt mean it necessarily is as it would depend on a lot of variables.

And there is more to graphics and gaming than the animation on the player character (motion captured or otherwise).

Maybe as you suggest it is my nostalgia or my fast declining eye sight in my old age, but I am going to reserve judgment on this until i get to play the game.

Lets see if its looks are worth the money people spend on the upgrades. I hope so.
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#19 Jul 21 2010 at 6:54 PM Rating: Decent
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
SolidMack wrote:
Well I'd imagine motion capture is much more accurate, and logical to carry out that manually animating isn't it? I don't know I haven't done 3D but I would assume it is.


And rotoscoping produces more accurate 2D animation than hand drawn animation but that doesn't make it better.


Accurate =/= Good

Edited, Jul 21st 2010 9:55pm by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#20 Jul 21 2010 at 7:36 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
Avatar
**
325 posts
Well the simple fact that they are having trouble porting it to the PS3 shows that this game could be considered 'Next Gen'. Just my 2cents
____________________________
FFXIV
Name: Z'veagan Brolz
Server: Ultros
Linkshell/FC: Lootwhorindramafest
#21 Jul 21 2010 at 7:57 PM Rating: Good
***
2,614 posts
If there are still doubts about this game's graphics:

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/8939/up56021.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/6628/up56092.jpg

Over-compressed Youtube videos don't do it justice.
#22 Jul 21 2010 at 8:09 PM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
SolidMack wrote:
Quote:
I am reluctant to judge on the beta alone but when I look at youtube videos posted it makes me nervous - I dont think it looks any better than Aion.


There's a solution to this - try watching the videos in HQ....if it still only looks "as good as Aion" consider finding a good optometry clinic. No disrespect intended but this game looks much better than Aion and if you can't see that your vision might be dipping a little.


The environments in FFXIV are better than any I've seen, but the character models, while good, do not blow away games such as Age of Conan, Aion, All Points Bulletin, etc. So the question is, how much of the graphical load is due to character models and how much due to the environments?

Quote:

If there are still doubts about this game's graphics:
http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/8939/up56021.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/6628/up56092.jpg
Over-compressed Youtube videos don't do it justice.


The second one isn't very impressive, IMO. The first one shows off the impressive environments, but the character is floating six inches off the ground.



Edited, Jul 21st 2010 10:12pm by KarlHungis
#23 Jul 21 2010 at 8:16 PM Rating: Decent
*
205 posts
i wonder what graphical setting was the SS taken with, and would the retail improve the graphical quailty further from the beta's SS.

btw are those picture breaking the NDA?
____________________________
I'm Xabac/Sleepymagi from FFXI Odin Server, if u hate/love me send me a /tell.
#24 Jul 21 2010 at 8:21 PM Rating: Default
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Borkachev wrote:
If there are still doubts about this game's graphics:

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/8939/up56021.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/6628/up56092.jpg

Over-compressed Youtube videos don't do it justice.


Never been a fan of DOF blur effects in video games. That's an artifact of a movie camera, it doesn't exist in real life.

Quote:
but the character models, while good, do not blow away games such as Age of Conan, Aion, All Points Bulletin, etc.


That depends entirely on whether you consider photorealism "better" Age of Conan's character models looked kind of bland to me. Photorealistic and highly detailed, but bland nontheless.

Edited, Jul 21st 2010 11:28pm by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#25 Jul 21 2010 at 8:46 PM Rating: Good
***
2,614 posts
Quote:
Never been a fan of DOF blur effects in video games. That's an artifact of a movie camera, it doesn't exist in real life.

FFXIV's implementation is a little odd (with everything in the distance turning blurry for no apparent reason) but DoF is a property of all lenses, including the human eye. Close one eye and focus on something up close, then further away.

Uncharted 2 is an example of a game with excellent and very realistic depth of field. It only turned on when you were focused on an object. I wish this game would do it that way too -- say, when you locked onto a target, things in the foreground and background would blur.
#26 Jul 21 2010 at 8:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
They're going to shoot themselves in the foot (yet again) if a lot of people that want to play, can't play. SE is basically saying "our game is so good that you should spend an extra $200 to upgrade your computer, $50 on the game and $15 or so dollars a month in order to play. Sorry, SE, No game is worth spending that kind of cash on.
____________________________
WoW -- Zaia -- Dragonmaw -- Mage 80 BABY! Alchemy 450
Also... Hunter 62, Rogue 52, Warrior 66, Warlock 43, Death Knight 70, Shaman Who Cares? ;)

FFXI -- Caia -- Retired/Deleted -- Blm 75, Alchemy 97
Pandimonium server - Rank 10 - Bastok

Zaela Rdm -- 35, Alchemy 45 -- Forced into retirement because I didn't have the right kind of credit card. Hope it was worth 18 bucks a month, SE.

#27 Jul 21 2010 at 8:51 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,438 posts
Caia wrote:
They're going to shoot themselves in the foot (yet again) if a lot of people that want to play, can't play. SE is basically saying "our game is so good that you should spend an extra $200 to upgrade your computer, $50 on the game and $15 or so dollars a month in order to play. Sorry, SE, No game is worth spending that kind of cash on.

So don't do it. Wait for the PS3 version.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#28 Jul 21 2010 at 8:57 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
I'm not planning on it. In fact, at this point I'm not planning on playing at all. Too much BS from SE for way too long.
____________________________
WoW -- Zaia -- Dragonmaw -- Mage 80 BABY! Alchemy 450
Also... Hunter 62, Rogue 52, Warrior 66, Warlock 43, Death Knight 70, Shaman Who Cares? ;)

FFXI -- Caia -- Retired/Deleted -- Blm 75, Alchemy 97
Pandimonium server - Rank 10 - Bastok

Zaela Rdm -- 35, Alchemy 45 -- Forced into retirement because I didn't have the right kind of credit card. Hope it was worth 18 bucks a month, SE.

#29 Jul 21 2010 at 9:36 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
398 posts
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, and have always been concerned, story and gameplay are infinitely more important than graphics.

You young whippersnappers and your three dees and your polygons and your tessellations make me puke.


hehe http://sharkrobot.com/t-shirts/you-kids-today

I do agree though, nice grafics are nice but ultimatly worthless if the game isn't good tobegin with. That's why I played UO for so long... **** you AoS!
#30 Jul 21 2010 at 9:38 PM Rating: Good
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Borkachev wrote:
Quote:
Never been a fan of DOF blur effects in video games. That's an artifact of a movie camera, it doesn't exist in real life.

FFXIV's implementation is a little odd (with everything in the distance turning blurry for no apparent reason) but DoF is a property of all lenses, including the human eye. Close one eye and focus on something up close, then further away.


Yes but you don't really notice it because your eyes automatically focus on whatever your looking at. In a game with DOF blur effects the blur doesn't go away when you look at the mountains in the distance so it looks unnatural.
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#31 Jul 21 2010 at 10:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
29 posts
Quote:
I'm not planning on it. In fact, at this point I'm not planning on playing at all. Too much BS from SE for way too long.


My system that I got almost 3 years ago, for a fair price, hits about 3000 on the benchmark which is fine for playing. My point is that people are being a little over dramatic (like you) about having to upgrade to play this game.

You don't need max settings to have a good time.

Plus if you're not getting a good benchmark score, then maybe you just flat out need to consider an upgrade or new system. I mean come on now, how bad/old is your system if you can't play at mid to low settings?

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 12:01am by supergp17
#32 Jul 21 2010 at 10:35 PM Rating: Good
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Caia wrote:
They're going to shoot themselves in the foot (yet again) if a lot of people that want to play, can't play. SE is basically saying "our game is so good that you should spend an extra $200 to upgrade your computer, $50 on the game and $15 or so dollars a month in order to play. Sorry, SE, No game is worth spending that kind of cash on.


If they don't future proof the game it will be obsolete in a year or two. Yes the max settings require some hypothetical future computer. This isn't a bad thing because it will extend the life of the game.
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#33 Jul 22 2010 at 12:38 AM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
Borkachev wrote:
If there are still doubts about this game's graphics:

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/8939/up56021.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/6628/up56092.jpg

Over-compressed Youtube videos don't do it justice.


With all due respect, I doubt those screenshots are going to convince anyone who's in doubt about the game's graphics.

In the first shot, as mentioned, the character is standing in mid-air. Furthermore, the character is the only object in the scene that casts any kind of shadow. And every surface of the scenery appears to receive light in exactly the same way. The draw distance is nice, but not particularly impressive in this day and age, compared against games like Just Cause 2 and Assassin's Creed.

In the second shot, there are noticeable alpha-testing artifacts on the foliage. The stratification on the cliff wall in the background reads more like poor tiling than anything else. Then there's the very low resolution texture on the large rock at the right, and worst of all, the low resolution bump map on same rock.

And of course there's the dodgy depth-of-field effect.
#34 Jul 22 2010 at 1:30 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts
Im sorry - it has been said already here that perhaps I have a problem with my eyesight but when i look at these two pictures. I see a poor mans Aion.

I am not having a go at the game before I have even played it and I have not been so excited about a launch since the release of FFXI. My only point is that why does the game take a relatively powerful modern machine to run when graphically it appears less sophisticated than existing titles (such as Aion).

If my computer can run at max settings the very pretty Aion, but cant run an average looking ffxiv then that must be down to bad coding!

I will stand corrected if the day I log in to FFXIV, I realise that it is graphically a big step forward!
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#35 Jul 22 2010 at 1:52 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
751 posts

http://www.ffxivcore.com/topic/7456-find-the-right-retainer-for-you/

Link at post number 9!!!!!!!

I take it all back. It is worth paying whatever it costs to run this as best you can.
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#36 Jul 22 2010 at 12:11 PM Rating: Default
*
88 posts
I didnt play aion that much but i didn't think the gfx were all that special. ffxiv doesnt look that great judging by the benchmark either, certainly nothing groundbreaking -during the bit with the boat for example that sea doesn't look like sea does in most games recently with eveything reflecting off of it.

If the ageing ps3 hardware can run it (after they've sorted the ram issues!) i don't know why the system requirements are so high. It doesn't even use dx10 let alone dx11. It's just a badly optimised engine like gta iv on the pc imo.

also its looking like you cant play in less than 720p resolution. thats a first, every game i've seen including gta iv you can knock right back to 800x600 if you want to, doesn't look pretty but it at least gives you that option.

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 2:28pm by jamiehavok
#37 Jul 22 2010 at 12:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Not sure what we can post here, but I assume this is ok:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-gNeqY7YA&videos=17N_nV14wNA

Whoever is recording this must have a monster rig to take that video and play that smoothly.

Edit: Obviously this isn't me, I'm not in the beta Smiley: frown

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 1:25pm by Wint
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#38 Jul 22 2010 at 1:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
516 posts
Wint wrote:
Not sure what we can post here, but I assume this is ok:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-gNeqY7YA&videos=17N_nV14wNA

Whoever is recording this must have a monster rig to take that video and play that smoothly.


I think that video took Roegadyn out of my list of races I am considering. Now it's down to Lalafell and Miqo'te.
#39 Jul 22 2010 at 1:27 PM Rating: Good
**
394 posts
I'm sure we'll be given more graphics options with the full client, the benchmark is locked at particular settings with only two resolutions to pick from. Crank up the shadow detail, throw in some high quality anti-aliasing, and FFXIV will be the best-looking game this generation when it comes out.

Remember, XI didn't have the best of graphics on the benchmark, and it benefitted greatly from later tweaks (registry tweaks, but hopefully XIV will just give us those options in a convenient menu rather than having to go through the registry). Over time, I'm sure XIV will look even better.
#40 Jul 22 2010 at 1:46 PM Rating: Decent
**
577 posts
Ccomparing a game made by Square-Enix to a game made by pretty much any other game company in terms of OMGawesome graphics? No contest. Trust me, with the right setup, playing FFXIV looks better than any video you'll see on youtube.
____________________________
"So farewell hope, and with hope farewell fear,
Farewell remorse; all good to me is lost.
Evil, be thou my good."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost

Download Eorzea Clock for your android phone! Available FREE on the Android Market now!
#41 Jul 22 2010 at 5:10 PM Rating: Excellent
*
242 posts
I have it on good authority (*wink*) that there will be a significant array of graphical options to choose from, and using those options, the game will still look quite pretty (though not 30+ fps by a long shot) on a 5 year old, mid-priced computer with a graphics card that was middle of the line three years ago.

You needn't worry about graphical excellence, it is most assuredly there.
____________________________


#42 Jul 22 2010 at 5:12 PM Rating: Good
*
88 posts
khorbin wrote:
Ccomparing a game made by Square-Enix to a game made by pretty much any other game company in terms of OMGawesome graphics? No contest. Trust me, with the right setup, playing FFXIV looks better than any video you'll see on youtube.


I dont think you can say ffxiv and square enix games are the best looking games out there.

I played ffxiii recently which looked like a jaggedy mess. (they really shouldnt put supports 1080p on the back of xbox games when they blatently aren't running in 1080p)

Crysis came out 3 years ago and games like metro 2033 and dirt 2 on pc are only just starting to come close to it.

It may be apples to oranges comparing shooter gfx to rpgs, but lets look at age of conan which also looks better imo and pc exclusive the witcher. yeah ffxiv looks like a nice game but graphically groubreaking like everything else recently it deffinitly isn't.

hopefully crysis 2 might push things on abit.



Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 7:38pm by jamiehavok
#43 Jul 22 2010 at 5:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,536 posts
Quote:
And rotoscoping produces more accurate 2D animation than hand drawn animation but that doesn't make it better.


Accurate =/= Good


I'm no expert but I don't understand this logic - if anything I would assume when it comes to animation, the more accurate it is the better, how do you assume otherwise? maybe your wording is off but that's what I'm getting from your post. I think FFXI wasn't motion captured correct? I'm gonna go see if the animations were as good as they are in FFXIV or the other way around...although the differences are probably so subtle to even notice.
____________________________
MUTED
#44 Jul 22 2010 at 5:39 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Lobivopis wrote:
Never been a fan of DOF blur effects in video games. That's an artifact of a movie camera, it doesn't exist in real life.
Depth of field doesn't exist in real life?
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#45 Jul 22 2010 at 5:48 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
784 posts
Wint wrote:
Not sure what we can post here, but I assume this is ok:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-gNeqY7YA&videos=17N_nV14wNA

Whoever is recording this must have a monster rig to take that video and play that smoothly.

Edit: Obviously this isn't me, I'm not in the beta Smiley: frown

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 1:25pm by Wint


Thank you for the link. It looks amazing.

I'll be showing this to my wife when I get home (she has finally decided to play, but I think this video might help cement that decision a bit more)
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#46 Jul 22 2010 at 5:58 PM Rating: Good
***
2,207 posts
Quote:
Depth of field doesn't exist in real life?


I assume he means that DoF is only a byproduct of perception, not inherent to the environment. Games that force it as an environmental effect, therefore, are rather unrealistic and I can see where he is coming from.
____________________________
Seterra (Server Odin) (retired)
Main: RDM 75 (5/5 AF2), WHM 75
Subs: BLM 40, NIN 37, SMN 37, DRK 37, THF 37,
WAR 37, BRD 40, BLU 41
Other: MNK 17, RNG 5
ZM13, CoP 8-2
#47 Jul 22 2010 at 6:03 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Derekloffin wrote:
Quote:
Depth of field doesn't exist in real life?


I assume he means that DoF is only a byproduct of perception, not inherent to the environment. Games that force it as an environmental effect, therefore, are rather unrealistic and I can see where he is coming from.


Eye sight depending :P
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#48 Jul 22 2010 at 6:03 PM Rating: Good
***
2,207 posts
Quote:
I'm no expert but I don't understand this logic - if anything I would assume when it comes to animation, the more accurate it is the better, how do you assume otherwise? maybe your wording is off but that's what I'm getting from your post. I think FFXI wasn't motion captured correct? I'm gonna go see if the animations were as good as they are in FFXIV or the other way around...although the differences are probably so subtle to even notice.


Well, I'm not sure I agree with the statement, but the point that manual motion verses motion capture always favors motion capture being false is true... god, did I just say that mess...

Put another way, despite motion capture being off real human beings, or whatever, that doesn't make it actually better. My Dad worked a bit in animation and he can tell you that motion capture is a very hit or miss affair, very often miss, and requires a LOT of clean up quite often to look good. It can actually be better to just do it all manually rather than try to shoe horn capture data onto a virtual model.
____________________________
Seterra (Server Odin) (retired)
Main: RDM 75 (5/5 AF2), WHM 75
Subs: BLM 40, NIN 37, SMN 37, DRK 37, THF 37,
WAR 37, BRD 40, BLU 41
Other: MNK 17, RNG 5
ZM13, CoP 8-2
#49 Jul 22 2010 at 6:06 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
784 posts
Aye, I agree. Quite often, in my experience, motion capture can turn out to be really crap if not done exactly right (and even then it often looks like crap). Sometimes, its better to be able to actually tweak things in a way that isn't actually natural, but LOOKS more natural in the game.

I suppose it's a personal preference thing though... YMMV
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#50 Jul 22 2010 at 7:07 PM Rating: Good
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Fetter wrote:
Wint wrote:
Not sure what we can post here, but I assume this is ok:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-gNeqY7YA&videos=17N_nV14wNA

Whoever is recording this must have a monster rig to take that video and play that smoothly.

Edit: Obviously this isn't me, I'm not in the beta Smiley: frown

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 1:25pm by Wint


Thank you for the link. It looks amazing.

I'll be showing this to my wife when I get home (she has finally decided to play, but I think this video might help cement that decision a bit more)


No problem!

Trying to convince my wife to play after she finishes school in May, then she can have my gaming computer and I can build myself a new one Smiley: grin
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#51 Jul 22 2010 at 7:14 PM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
SolidMack wrote:
Quote:
And rotoscoping produces more accurate 2D animation than hand drawn animation but that doesn't make it better.


Accurate =/= Good


I'm no expert but I don't understand this logic - if anything I would assume when it comes to animation, the more accurate it is the better, how do you assume otherwise? maybe your wording is off but that's what I'm getting from your post. .


Because you can get a perfect motion capture of a motion that doesn't fit your needs correctly, so you either need to do a whole bunch of takes until you get it right, or some one has got to go in after the fact and correct it manually. In order to get great Motion Capture you need a director who understands how the captured motion is going to be used within the game, and how to coax that from the "actor." That's a level of sophistication that barely exists in the industry, so instead you end up with animators having to clean up and "invent" so much motion that you might as well have no done the Mo Cap in the first place.

Think of it like recording an actor doing a scene where he's arguing with another person. Most of us have been in arguments before, so you'd think, it can't be hard to just do what you do naturally, and get it on film, but it IS hard. Because you aren't doing it in a natural environment, you aren't doing it in a natural context, and there are special requirements to the entire thing that don't necessarily exist in a real situation (like, in reality, you don't need to look into a camera as if it is some one else's eyes).

Mo Cap is the same thing. Maybe you can dribble a basketball or swing a sword, but if you're not actually swinging it at another person, in anger, is it going to look at all convincing? And even if it looks convincing, can the motion be broken down into small enough parts to be useful within the context of a video game, where that animation needs to flow from dozens of other animations? Just recording some one's movements does not guarantee that the movements seem authentic or that they fit your needs as a game developer.


Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 9:19pm by KarlHungis
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (20)