View Full Version : Realistic Graphics.
mojom@n
08-28-2007, 07:54 PM
I just saw the little video of the ingame footage on the front page and i am gob smacked it is the most realistic looking game i have ever seen.
What do you guys think?.
GunGhost01
08-28-2007, 08:00 PM
Well yeah those are great cinematic graphics. And the game play trailers show that the graphics are insane for a RTS.
mojom@n
08-28-2007, 08:01 PM
Well yeah those are great cinematic graphics. And the game play trailers show that the graphics are insane for a RTS.So they weren't in game graphics. Danm i thought they were. why would they deceive us like that?
GunGhost01
08-28-2007, 08:02 PM
lol.
All new games tend to have cinematic trailers for show first. It is there to interest people and show how well thought out the actual thing is.
mojom@n
08-28-2007, 08:05 PM
lol.
All new games tend to have cinematic trailers for show first. It is there to interest people and show how well thought out the actual thing is.Ok i get it now. I rather see gameplay compared to CGI. They should make it clear that it is CGI. Will have to do some screen shot searching.
Rocky_Universe
08-28-2007, 08:06 PM
Some games film some of their scenes then make it look computer graphics looking.
qutini
08-29-2007, 12:00 AM
I think the game graphic is ok, I mean its a rts, and if u look at one of the films in media u'll see that a big walker loses leg plates en his "ears" (:P) thats really cool though its quite bad that they dont fall of it just disappear like if nothing been there after it been blown...
Jackal24
08-29-2007, 11:37 AM
I am not even reading replies to this post. I'm just going to say no that is not real NO RTS will look like that for a good while. That is still above the quality for an FPS and was obviously a pre render.
Project Dark Fox
08-29-2007, 11:40 AM
I am not even reading replies to this post. I'm just going to say no that is not real NO RTS will look like that for a good while. That is still above the quality for an FPS and was obviously a pre render.
It pays to read, they already said that it was CGI. Likely to just get you to oggle at it for a bit.
We'll see.
Jmoyer
08-29-2007, 12:37 PM
I think it is still going to look great.
Rocky_Universe
08-29-2007, 04:09 PM
I think it is still going to look great.
Agreed, I love the looks of the farm fields. It really shows you the scale of the machines
Edit: If the game had the graphics of the cinematic what computer in the world could run a RTS with that much of a monsterous appetite from the game engine?
Jelly Jiggler
08-29-2007, 04:47 PM
I think it is still going to look great.
Agreed, I love the looks of the farm fields. It really shows you the scale of the machines
Edit: If the game had the graphics of the cinematic what computer in the world could run a RTS with that much of a monsterous appetite from the game engine?umm. 200 ps3s???:P
TehOwn
08-29-2007, 04:56 PM
I like the fact that UaW looks like a game I can run.
I'm cautious with "great" graphics nowdays, since they always look worse on your computer than they do in the shots.
They show you the NICEST shots at the highest detail on super beasts that not that many of us can afford. Then when we get the game, it's like, "oh, so I have to play it on low-medium graphics where it looks worse than the games that came out in 2002?"
But UaW isn't particularly ground-breaking in it's graphics and that's okay, because they're being smart and making it so everyone can participate and those with decent PCs can still have pretty awesome graphics.
Ubergeek
08-29-2007, 04:56 PM
I run 4 different PC systems in my game room, each with a different set-up and graphics card.
There is only so much that the developers can do with the presentation and still allow for cross system usability. Same problem Microsoft runs into when developing new releases of Windows. There is a certain element of needing to program to a lesser system then one might want to.
Some games are awe inspiring on my upper end systems that have huge graphics cards, and yet are just "ok" on the lower end systems.
But, as others have pointed out, there is no way to release a commercial version of a game that looks real, yet. Think Babalyon 5 opening sequence. That used a Video Toaster and about 2 GB of storage space per second. (About 30 seconds long, do the math)
I would love to see games released in different modalities.
Regular - for normal systems
Gold - for systems that have X GB of RAM and X GB of disk
Plat - for systems that cost way too much for normal humans.
Ubergeek.
Rocky_Universe
08-29-2007, 05:16 PM
Get a computer that has the specs of now adays but is the size of the first computer so it has the power of that sized computer. Nothing could stop you then!!
Pirate Kitty
08-30-2007, 12:30 AM
I run 4 different PC systems in my game room, each with a different set-up and graphics card.
There is only so much that the developers can do with the presentation and still allow for cross system usability. Same problem Microsoft runs into when developing new releases of Windows. There is a certain element of needing to program to a lesser system then one might want to.
Some games are awe inspiring on my upper end systems that have huge graphics cards, and yet are just "ok" on the lower end systems.
But, as others have pointed out, there is no way to release a commercial version of a game that looks real, yet. Think Babalyon 5 opening sequence. That used a Video Toaster and about 2 GB of storage space per second. (About 30 seconds long, do the math)
I would love to see games released in different modalities.
Regular - for normal systems
Gold - for systems that have X GB of RAM and X GB of disk
Plat - for systems that cost way too much for normal humans.
Ubergeek.
If they made different modalities, it will have high production cost with limited demand. If you have a computer that'd put people out of work, just to buy it, then I recommend sparing us some coinage. Har har har!
PGHammer
08-30-2007, 08:21 PM
I am not even reading replies to this post. I'm just going to say no that is not real NO RTS will look like that for a good while. That is still above the quality for an FPS and was obviously a pre render.
I have news for you: Supreme Commander actually comes darn close to its CGI pre-renders. What's scarier, Starcraft II shows how close an RTS title can get (the last three SC II videos weren't CGI, but pre-beta code). SupCom unlocked the door; UAW (and later, Starcraft II) is going to literally blow it off the hinges.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.11 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.