Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Graphics downgradeFollow

#1 Dec 06 2012 at 2:31 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
33 posts
Is it just me or does 2.0 look much worse than 1.0 ? The textures, shadows and vegetation looks horrible
Even the animations are worse. :(
(for example walking doesnt look that smooth anymore)
#2 Dec 06 2012 at 3:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
It's you, except for the animations. They removed some of the animations in favor of getting some other things done before launch. I think the game looks awesome.
____________________________
"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
#3 Dec 06 2012 at 4:17 AM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
**
676 posts
Aren't they still optimizing the game? Can we really expect alpha to look as good as it will be at launch time?
____________________________
#4 Dec 06 2012 at 4:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
I'm trying so very hard to avoid using the phrase "It's just the alpha, wait until release" since that got us burned during 1.0's development but I'm almost certain that there will be improvements between Alpha -> Beta -> Release. I just don't want to get caught with my pants down if that ends up not being the case Smiley: smile

I expect once the Beta starts we will have a better idea of what the progression will be like, Alpha really isn't as much about looks as it is infrastructure.
____________________________
"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
#5 Dec 06 2012 at 4:55 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Could also be that footage you've seen has settings turned down due to their rig. Or it may just be that they had to scale some things down after overhauling the graphics. But everything I've seen has looked amazing, not that I've seen a lot.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#6 Dec 06 2012 at 5:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,416 posts
Quote:
As you already know, our primary objective for the Alpha Test is to conduct stress tests on the servers. For this reason, as yet there aren’t a lot of things for players to do in the game. Alpha versions of a game typically feature unrefined graphics, with many UI elements still provisional. There aren’t any scenarios or quests to undertake, and the focus is on engaging in battles in large groups.


I'm pretty sure they dumbed down the graphics a bit for the alpha.
____________________________

#7 Dec 06 2012 at 5:37 AM Rating: Good
*
230 posts
If you look at the alpha and beta footage of 1.0. There were some nice improvements on there too.

Perhaps will see the same.
#8 Dec 06 2012 at 6:24 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,163 posts
The graphics are still nice but the fact that its an Alpah should say something. I know they set the bar kinda high for themselves but I'm sure they will smooth everything out and make it look less grainy before the release. If not, its still a good looking game so don't be to upset.
#9 Dec 06 2012 at 8:39 AM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
The character detail has been toned down and the terrain detail has been lowered just a bit. However, in motion, it still looks really, really good and the interface, animations, and mechanics are 100x's better than 1.0 without a doubt (from everything I've seen).

Toning down the graphics was a necessity in order to have a more flexible/scalable game as to not alienate as many people as 1.0 did. ****, if ARR can run on my laptop with an integrated Intel graphics card (assuming it will from the information that I've gathered), it will run on almost any laptop/pc that's out there today. The graphics "downgrade", as you put it, is a good thing and personally I'm just thankful that ARR did not end up looking "cartoonly" like WoW or SWTOR.

Edited, Dec 6th 2012 9:43am by McDomination
#10 Dec 06 2012 at 8:50 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
You think SWTOR looked cartoony? I don't like that visual style either, but I don't see that at all in SWTOR. Maybe a bit of uncanny valley.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#11 Dec 06 2012 at 9:23 AM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
Kachi wrote:
You think SWTOR looked cartoony? I don't like that visual style either, but I don't see that at all in SWTOR. Maybe a bit of uncanny valley.


I definitely think SWTOR looks cartoony. I know I'm not alone in that opinion, but I'm also not saying that it's a bad thing. It's just not my preferred style. I understand that the reason for their low detailed character models and terrain is to be able to run the game/engine on as many PCs as possible. If SWTOR looked like The Witcher 2 and required the same system resources to run, they wouldn't have as many subs as they do because, obviously, not as many people would be able to run the game.
#12 Dec 06 2012 at 9:31 AM Rating: Good
****
4,957 posts
inb4 "ps3 limitations"
#13 Dec 06 2012 at 9:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Lighting is much better, the start/stop run and walk animation had frames removed and no tilting when running, which is disappointing but nothing I would complain about.

The thing is, you MAY notice a downgrade if you were previously playing at MAX settings. I don't know many people who were though, as many people (myself included) had to reduce shadows or remove AA to get great FPS. I could play on Max but it wasn't optimal.

Now, you'll be able to play on max and many people will get better graphics.
____________________________


#14 Dec 06 2012 at 10:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
428 posts
They are still working on the shaders, so I would expect the graphics to improve. Also, they have said that their next milestone after release will be DX11 compatibility; Once that is in, the PC versions graphics should improve even more.

They are still working on implementing some of the animations for running jumping, but the old battle animations have been removed to make combat much snappier and reduce loads on the server.
#15 Dec 06 2012 at 10:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Also keep in mind that any YouTube video is going to heavily compress the movie, which results in a grainier appearance. It's like the difference between an old Realtime movie ripped from a DVD and the DVD itself. No matter how good the source was, the final result was going to be pretty crappy looking because the compression technology sucked.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#16 Dec 06 2012 at 12:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
i noticed some clear signs of "alpha-tized" graphics and even(i hope) placeholder UI elements. regardless it looks great, and definitely an improvement. most importantly, it looks much more "final fantasy", and i cant see how anyone could argue that.

hence, it is good.
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#17 Dec 06 2012 at 3:46 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
818 posts
McDomination wrote:
Kachi wrote:
You think SWTOR looked cartoony? I don't like that visual style either, but I don't see that at all in SWTOR. Maybe a bit of uncanny valley.


I definitely think SWTOR looks cartoony. I know I'm not alone in that opinion, but I'm also not saying that it's a bad thing. It's just not my preferred style. I understand that the reason for their low detailed character models and terrain is to be able to run the game/engine on as many PCs as possible. If SWTOR looked like The Witcher 2 and required the same system resources to run, they wouldn't have as many subs as they do because, obviously, not as many people would be able to run the game.


You're not alone. It looks very cartoony or, as they say in the biz, "stylized".
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#18 Dec 06 2012 at 3:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,416 posts
I just want to say, that the addition of DirectX 11 compatibility will probably do wonders. I was checking out "The secret world" which already is DirectX 11 compatible, and the graphics are pretty amazing. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, but if you want to see what DirectX 11 can do, it's worth checking out for that reason.

Edit: Typo's, and Yay 1000th post!

Edited, Dec 6th 2012 4:56pm by Teneleven
____________________________

#19 Dec 06 2012 at 4:55 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,825 posts
It doesn't look as good (imo only a slight drop in texture quality/quantity), but (also IMO) still better than most MMO's... what I do notice more than the graphical change is that there is finally a feeling of atmosphere... something I thought XI had loads of and XIV was seriously lacking except a few key zones.
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#20 Dec 06 2012 at 5:38 PM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
*
131 posts
For some reason the new graphics reminds me about FF9 :P buuut I loved FF9 so its all goooood here ! :D
#21 Dec 06 2012 at 5:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Teneleven wrote:
I just want to say, that the addition of DirectX 11 compatibility will probably do wonders. I was checking out "The secret world" which already is DirectX 11 compatible, and the graphics are pretty amazing. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, but if you want to see what DirectX 11 can do, it's worth checking out for that reason.

Edit: Typo's, and Yay 1000th post!

Edited, Dec 6th 2012 4:56pm by Teneleven


Congratuations on 1000 posts! As they say in the OOT forum, this is now a PFORU thread. Posting for Obligatory Rate Ups. Also known in the XI forums as a "yellow" thread.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#23 Dec 06 2012 at 6:20 PM Rating: Good
**
863 posts
I would say that even if the texture quality is slightly reduced everything else (aside maybe for animations) look A LOT better. I prefer this vivid lively cosy world over what 1.0 was.
#24 Dec 06 2012 at 6:42 PM Rating: Excellent
2 posts
Everything is actually a lot more FF-ish. That's all I care about. And the cities and landscapes are absolutely breathtaking.
#25 Dec 06 2012 at 7:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Teneleven wrote:
I just want to say, that the addition of DirectX 11 compatibility will probably do wonders. I was checking out "The secret world" which already is DirectX 11 compatible, and the graphics are pretty amazing. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, but if you want to see what DirectX 11 can do, it's worth checking out for that reason.

Edit: Typo's, and Yay 1000th post!

Edited, Dec 6th 2012 4:56pm by Teneleven


Dude, you can never post again, or the effect is just ruined Smiley: grin
____________________________
Our team is like a flock of woodpeckers in a petrified forest. We just need to keep working and keep an eye open for opportunity.

FFXI
Toofar - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - WHM BLM SMN
Rafoot - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - THF SAM BRD
#26 Dec 06 2012 at 7:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
***
1,675 posts
IMO it looks fine, 1.0 looked good, but some of the textures looked a little too "rounded" and shiny for lack of a better term.

2.0 looks more like GW2 and that's a really good thing. There are some great views and niches where its just plain beautiful. One of the problems I have though, is that the DoF is a bit off in GW2 and you don't really get that grandeur, like you should.

However, in general, I'd prefer slightly worse overall graphics if it meant more varied locales/and better spell effects/weapon skills.
#27 Dec 07 2012 at 2:38 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
McDomination wrote:
Kachi wrote:
You think SWTOR looked cartoony? I don't like that visual style either, but I don't see that at all in SWTOR. Maybe a bit of uncanny valley.


I definitely think SWTOR looks cartoony. I know I'm not alone in that opinion, but I'm also not saying that it's a bad thing. It's just not my preferred style. I understand that the reason for their low detailed character models and terrain is to be able to run the game/engine on as many PCs as possible. If SWTOR looked like The Witcher 2 and required the same system resources to run, they wouldn't have as many subs as they do because, obviously, not as many people would be able to run the game.


You're not alone. It looks very cartoony or, as they say in the biz, "stylized".


Maybe I need my eyes checked. I mean, they're not absent of a color palette, but I always thought they were basically going for 90% realism, which is pretty consistent with all Bioware games. WoW and GW2 are stylized and cartoony, absolutely. But even FFXI/XIV are stylized.

Or are you guys talking about resolution, maybe? I assumed we were speaking in terms of art direction.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#28 Dec 07 2012 at 3:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
Avatar
**
644 posts
catwho wrote:
[Also known in the XI forums as a "yellow" thread.


Vawn and the fun that was Yellow Then we tried Wolley It got Legendary then unlocked to let the madness continue.

>>---->
____________________________
Pikko wrote:
I can't freaking believe I didn't click this thread earlier. YOU LITTLE TWERPS!!


Wint wrote:
You know, I can click the rate down button more than once Smiley: motz


>>>--Justice-->
#29 Dec 07 2012 at 3:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
Avatar
**
644 posts
Also Nice catch CatSmiley: wink

Yellow Go !
____________________________
Pikko wrote:
I can't freaking believe I didn't click this thread earlier. YOU LITTLE TWERPS!!


Wint wrote:
You know, I can click the rate down button more than once Smiley: motz


>>>--Justice-->
#31 Dec 07 2012 at 6:07 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,148 posts
Said this many times before, but I'll take a game that looks 8 bit and plays smoothly on a moderately jacked rig over the 10 minute wait to render 20 characters of the previous version.

I'm someone who has been very critical of XIV during 1.0 and ARR still has a way to go, but I'll be honest here... at least it appears they're laying a proper foundation to build upon. The spell animations are a bit over-the-top and might be more of a distraction than anything, but I really appreciate the subtle things like being able to draw/sheath your weapon on the go.

Disclaimer: Speculation

I'd guess that the official vids they're producing are coming from mid-range PCs. The final product will almost certainly look better on mid-high range rigs. Also, if you look at the screenshots they've shown of the benchmark, they're running it at required(1024 x low) settings and not maxed out.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#32 Dec 07 2012 at 11:58 AM Rating: Decent
12 posts
From what I can tell, is that max settings look really good.
#33 Dec 07 2012 at 5:41 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Said this many times before, but I'll take a game that looks 8 bit and plays smoothly on a moderately jacked rig over the 10 minute wait to render 20 characters of the previous version.

I'm someone who has been very critical of XIV during 1.0 and ARR still has a way to go, but I'll be honest here... at least it appears they're laying a proper foundation to build upon. The spell animations are a bit over-the-top and might be more of a distraction than anything, but I really appreciate the subtle things like being able to draw/sheath your weapon on the go.

Disclaimer: Speculation

I'd guess that the official vids they're producing are coming from mid-range PCs. The final product will almost certainly look better on mid-high range rigs. Also, if you look at the screenshots they've shown of the benchmark, they're running it at required(1024 x low) settings and not maxed out.


Which is why I'd play this game over any MMO on the market if it actually played the way it does in the show. (If you've never seen Community, it's a great show.) The game was just a special episode, but it looked so good that someone decided to go and actually try to make it. I haven't checked in on the progress yet to see how it's been coming along.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#34 Dec 07 2012 at 5:48 PM Rating: Default
Not an expert programmer or anything but just curious, wasn't there some kind of graphical overhaul for ARR?

In a sense where the entire graphic engine was changed?

I thought 1.0 used Crystal Tools and ARR went back to Unreal Engine.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, again I am not an expert game programmer but from what I have heard overall, Crystal Tools is the better one out of the two.

Also, the Unreal Engine is aging and aging fast, not that it's not good or stable but just old tech. I guess it's known and popular for long distance rendering?

Crystal Tools supposedly does a fantastic job at particle affects and high quality texture rendering, much better compared to the Unreal Engine. And is a much newer technology. Unfortunately when it first rolled out, not a lot of programmers wanted to use it, due to the complexity of working with this particular engine. It's really ******* good but it's equally amount of hard work, so a lot of folks opt out for the easier path to work with Unreal Engine.

At least, this is what I heard.

If any of this is remotely true, then quite obviously ARR 2.0 is basically settling for a less powerful engine. So it is fair and logical to say that ARR 2.0's graphics will never be able to truly reach the full capabilities of Crystal Tools.

I don't mean to provoke the white knights of this site but I think it is unfair to say that ARR 2.0 is better looking compared to 1.0. That's like saying your F12 Berlinetta performs just as good, if not better than a Bugatti Veyron. That's just flat out stupid.

Don't get me wrong though, a F12 Berlinetta is ******* awesome but it's no Bugatti, period.

____________________________
CPU: Core i7 960 (OC'ed 4.0ghz)
CPU Cooler: Corsair H70 hybrid liquid cooler
Mobo: Gigabyte G1 Sniper
RAM: Corsair Dominator 1600 DDR3 (12gb, 2gb x 6)
Video: EVGA Nvidia GTX 570 (Single Card)
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Black 7200 rpm, 1TB x2 (In Raid 0)
Case: Corsair 600T Graphite with mesh side panel
PSU: Corsair HX850 professional series
Optical: Asus 24x DVDRW+/- DL drive
KB: Logitech G110
Mouse: Logitech G500
Pad: Logitech Rumble Pad F510
Monitor: Asus 24" 1080p LED-backlit LCD display
#35 Dec 07 2012 at 6:43 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
yes they ditched Crystal Tools, in favor of what engine, i'm not sure. Could be Unreal, but i don't think it is for some reason (ie, no reason)

and no, Crystal Tools is not the better one of the two, and if you play 1.0 for 5 minutes, you'll understand why.


maybe it's better for screenshots.



also, its not just the engine, it's what the artists do with it. When people check out ARR, and say "hey it looks better than 1.0" its because this time around, the artists actually had a cohesive vision to follow. that's all.
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#36 Dec 07 2012 at 8:04 PM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
**
676 posts
The new engine they are using for ARR was created by the same people who made SE's Agni philosophie engine. Think of the ARR engine like the little brother of Agni. They used a lot of the same code so it's basically the same thing.
____________________________
#37 Dec 07 2012 at 8:04 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,148 posts
Kachi wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Said this many times before, but I'll take a game that looks 8 bit and plays smoothly on a moderately jacked rig over the 10 minute wait to render 20 characters of the previous version.

I'm someone who has been very critical of XIV during 1.0 and ARR still has a way to go, but I'll be honest here... at least it appears they're laying a proper foundation to build upon. The spell animations are a bit over-the-top and might be more of a distraction than anything, but I really appreciate the subtle things like being able to draw/sheath your weapon on the go.

Disclaimer: Speculation

I'd guess that the official vids they're producing are coming from mid-range PCs. The final product will almost certainly look better on mid-high range rigs. Also, if you look at the screenshots they've shown of the benchmark, they're running it at required(1024 x low) settings and not maxed out.


Which is why I'd play this game over any MMO on the market if it actually played the way it does in the show. (If you've never seen Community, it's a great show.) The game was just a special episode, but it looked so good that someone decided to go and actually try to make it. I haven't checked in on the progress yet to see how it's been coming along.

Donde esta la biblioteca?
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#38 Dec 07 2012 at 9:25 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
I think it's also using a different Direct X. The lighting effects we've seen in the videos don't look the same as they did in 1.0 (they look a LOT better) and I think 1.0 was using an older DX which was one reason it struggled - couldn't take advantage of modern hardware's DX accelerators.

Can't say for certain til SE says, though. Smiley: lol
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#39 Dec 07 2012 at 10:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,416 posts
The truth is, IMHO, that Crystal Tools was a great idea on paper. It's the same engine used in FF XIII, and Dragon Quest X. It seems to work great for single player games on modern consoles. For some reason, it didn't work out so well for an MMO. I can't explain why this is, but the graphics for FF XIII were pretty good, and i can see why they were excited to use it for XIV.

Edit: 1,001

IKickYoDog wrote:
Dude, you can never post again, or the effect is just ruined


Dammit!

Edited, Dec 7th 2012 11:53pm by Teneleven
____________________________

#40 Dec 08 2012 at 10:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
25 posts
They said the animations are not finalized. That includes the blending animations. Blending animations mean the animations used when a character is switching between each animations. Like Run to standing.
#41 Dec 08 2012 at 11:21 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
hmmm, i actually remember reading somewhere that the final animations will not have all the blending that 1.0 did. pro: tighter controls. con: doesn't look as cool.

the great mo-cap sudden directional turn and stumble stop animations will be missed. would be nice if they found a happy medium, but WoW doesn't have it so ARR won't!


____________________________
monk
dragoon

#42 Dec 08 2012 at 12:03 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
I hated the stumble stop. I always felt like I was about to face plant.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#43 Dec 09 2012 at 1:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
catwho wrote:
Teneleven wrote:
I just want to say, that the addition of DirectX 11 compatibility will probably do wonders. I was checking out "The secret world" which already is DirectX 11 compatible, and the graphics are pretty amazing. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, but if you want to see what DirectX 11 can do, it's worth checking out for that reason.

Edit: Typo's, and Yay 1000th post!

Edited, Dec 6th 2012 4:56pm by Teneleven


Congratuations on 1000 posts! As they say in the OOT forum, this is now a PFORU thread. Posting for Obligatory Rate Ups. Also known in the XI forums as a "yellow" thread.


Wow... I forgot about the Yellow thread... That was so long ago!
____________________________


#44 Dec 11 2012 at 11:00 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
33 posts
I watched a few FFXIV 1.0 videos and you guys were right

I remembered the game much better looking than it actually is.

FFXIV 2.0 looks much more detailed and the lighting is better too.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 16 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (16)