So does the full game look better than the demo?

[Wunderbar_007]

hello

First of all, I'm not here to rant about anything or blame anyone, I'm just curious. Anyway, so are the graphics really improved over the demo? Could we get some comparison screens please? Oh speaking of screens and curious, I always wondered what the sandstorm in the sandstorm level looked like, help me out anyone?

Thank You! CAN'T WAIT FOR THIS GAME!!!!!!

[MysTikal]

It's exactly the same.

[GG-Xtreme]

It's exactly the same.

Unfortunately. It's pretty disappointing graphically compared to what you'd expect from Unreal Engine 3.

[Reise]

It's exactly the same.

Nah, it's not. There's a noticeable difference in the mapping quality. (that's bumpmaps, normal maps, and diffuse maps for you laymen)

[rythem]

Unfortunately. It's pretty disappointing graphically compared to what you'd expect from Unreal Engine 3.

pretty disappointing? Are you kidding me dude? Wow do you guys really have anything better to do than sit down and jump on the bandwagon? UT3 and GOW are 2 of the most beautifully constructed games to date. I seriously can't believe some of your random comments. Did you even play the game or run though the maps? Seriously, it's people like you that give all the hard work epic did a bad name. Yeah, constructive criticism is one thing, but to be disappointed? I'm blown away.

Find me a better looking game than UT3 or GOW atm.

@ epic. Amazing job guys. Each map flows pretty flawlessly. The one single thing that I'm most impressed by is how you managed to make every map feel very different than the previous. Once you play the map, you can remember it very easily since they are so vastly different. From tentacles twisting and interwoven into the map, to snow, lush green environments, goo ridden maps, metallic futuristic levels, to maps that feel like they are alive... very good job guys.

[btcomm]

Well, it actually looks a tiny bit better.

There are some screen shots that compare the textures between the demo and the actual game and it does look a little better on ut3 full, I think that it MIGHT be possible it could possibly look a lot better, like there is an option in the ini that says use highpoly characters or something that is set to false, however it seems even if you set it to true it may not do anything, possibly a feature that is not working yet?

I hope that there is either a patch that will fix it or someone will be able to figure out how to make it look like the preview screen shots they released over a year ago, enabling anti aliasing will sure help with that, I'm not sure if it's possible to get it to look like this.

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen002.jpg

I consider that the benchmark that ut should live up to

[GG-Xtreme]

pretty disappointing? Are you kidding me dude? Wow do you guys really have anything better to do than sit down and jump on the bandwagon? UT3 and GOW are 2 of the most beautifully constructed games to date. I seriously can't believe some of your random comments. Did you even play the game or run though the maps? Seriously, it's people like you that give all the hard work epic did a bad name. Yeah, constructive criticism is one thing, but to be disappointed? I'm blown away.

Find me a better looking game than UT3 or GOW atm.

Ever heard of this game called Crysis? And I'm not talking about the engine, it's absolutely incredible. I just see a lack of artistic detail in a lot the maps and some laziness in modeling and texture quality in some places. Almost like if the maps were designed for UT99 or UT2004. GoW looks amazing, you can see the artistic detail and the effort everywhere.

[Bret Hart]

I hope that there is either a patch that will fix it or someone will be able to figure out how to make it look like the preview screen shots they released over a year ago, enabling anti aliasing will sure help with that, I'm not sure if it's possible to get it to look like this.

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen002.jpg

You'll need a mega video card for that

[GG-Xtreme]

You'll need a mega video card for that

No, you just need Unreal Ed. You can make photo-realistic renders with a 3d modeling program with much crappier hardware than games require.

[Wunderbar_007]

mmm...I see...Well, that's too bad, good thing the game still looks VERY good! Saw some new videos posted around and I really can't complain, especially since it runs so smooth (right?). Oh and please let's not bring Crysis into this. Another game, another story.

By the way, in some very recent interview, I believe it was Mark Rein (not sure though) who said that extra DX10 features will be added later in a patch. Plus, we now know they will fix/change UI in a later patch as well, so things can only get better My only concern is that reviews for this game might be lower than expected and it will bring people that actually care about reviews down, so smaller community I really REALLY want this game to be BIG!

Anyway, so no sandstorm screens?

[GG-Xtreme]

Oh and please let's not bring Crysis into this. Another game, another story.

Just answering someone's question. UT owns all.

[Wunderbar_007]

Just answering someone's question. UT owns all.

It's all good man I just don't want this thread closed just yet. Oh and, I agree

[Bebo]

I was playing the Demo with graphics low just cause I didn't really care. I'll turn em' up for the full version though. To me graphics don't matter as much as the game play. Yes I know graphics affect game play I am sure you understand what I mean however.

[btcomm]

No, you just need Unreal Ed. You can make photo-realistic renders with a 3d modeling program with much crappier hardware than games require.

Are you saying with unreal ed you can make a still frame like that somehow? What 3d program would you use to render it?

Not a lot of games as far as I've seen make fake screen shots that cannot be achieved in game.

Like I've said before, I understand they may add action and tweak the screen shot to look the best possible but if that level of smoothness and detail is not possible in game even if you have to get 1 fps to get it then I consider that false advertising, those screen shots were supposed to be from in game from over a year ago, now we get the game I'm still disapointed.

Perhaps you can get to that quality it's just unplayable, I believe Mark reign said before the release that not any computer could play this game max, at the time of that statement the 8800 ultra and quad core intel cpus were around so perhaps it can look like that but not with any hardware in use now?

I hope so, I hope that when the hardware comes out there will be another level of maximizing this game, seeing as as it stands the hardware does exist to maximize the game settings they way they have it now.

[Cenotaph]

I was kinda dissapointed with Crysis, concerning the visual aspect. it looks awful on older hardware. Not that UT3 looks great on older hardware, but the heavy use of foliage in crysis makes it look ridiculous and it even hurts gameplay.

My first impression looking at the UT3 full version was that the characters at least were much more detailed. maybe its just me, but it would be interesting to see the comparison.

[isp_of_doom]

Perhaps you can get to that quality it's just unplayable, I believe Mark reign said before the release that not any computer could play this game max, at the time of that statement the 8800 ultra and quad core intel cpus were around so perhaps it can look like that but not with any hardware in use now?

That's what I keep thinking, I really hope there's something around the corner, like the highpolycharacter ini edit mentioned on page 1. I'm still waiting to get a quad core and G92 graphics card... so I'm in no hurry for it. I wouldn't say no to a max graphics, high res, low compression vid of UT3 though... So far I've seen one with a ridiculous amount of compression on it completely voiding the point of taking a max quality vid.

[GG-Xtreme]

Are you saying with unreal ed you can make a still frame like that somehow? What 3d program would you use to render it?

Not a lot of games as far as I've seen make fake screen shots that cannot be achieved in game.

Like I've said before, I understand they may add action and tweak the screen shot to look the best possible but if that level of smoothness and detail is not possible in game even if you have to get 1 fps to get it then I consider that false advertising, those screen shots were supposed to be from in game from over a year ago, now we get the game I'm still disapointed.

Perhaps you can get to that quality it's just unplayable, I believe Mark reign said before the release that not any computer could play this game max, at the time of that statement the 8800 ultra and quad core intel cpus were around so perhaps it can look like that but not with any hardware in use now?

I hope so, I hope that when the hardware comes out there will be another level of maximizing this game, seeing as as it stands the hardware does exist to maximize the game settings they way they have it now.

They aren't exactly fake, they are just setup and posed with Unreal Ed. You can also export the entire map with all of its meshes and brushes to an obj file, then retexture it and render it high-quality in any modeling program, but I doubt they did that

[exil3]

Perhaps you can get to that quality it's just unplayable, I believe Mark reign said before the release that not any computer could play this game max, at the time of that statement the 8800 ultra and quad core intel cpus were around so perhaps it can look like that but not with any hardware in use now?

Even with the current video cards dual or not dual there is no way they can achive what those pics provided by epic "ingame". Those were done with 3D Studio Max and Maya software at very high poly counts. Epic has yet posted an ingame shot for us, that should tell you something.

this is the only screen that looks ingame, but still its old and probably before they decided to port it to consols and i still dont see a HUD

http://www.games-fusion.net/screens/..._00000Shot.jpg but if it looks this good with everything its got then

Just a thought. Crytek did this with there new engine that crysis runs on. They designed it so later on down the line When new hardware and technology come out crysis and any other game using the crytek engine
are capable of looking even better.

[m4tze]

I just thought about something I been reading alot.
I think the videos that some of us seen on gametrailers.com for example, were done with a 64-Bit OS. Its supposed to have better textures?

Dont know any other explaination. I tried out myself alot.
Digital Vibrance, LODBias, cant get the game look that sharp....

[Brutal]

I'm sure their making a patch for the full ut3 graphics so u can use the advance settings

[Wunderbar_007]

I'm sure their making a patch for the full ut3 graphics so u can use the advance settings

Sure would be nice, bought this bloody machine for a reason

[eckz]

Those were done with 3D Studio Max and Maya software at very high poly counts.

Source? Or you just making that up?

[Ultron]

Source? Or you just making that up?

He's right, IIRC. I don't have a link but I'm sure if you Googled it you'd find it. I know they included Maya Basic in UT2k4 and perhaps they might do that in this version.

[VACkillers]

I seriously didn't even think about using a 64bit OS though... that with DirectX10.1 could be what makes all the difference when DX10.1 gets released january next year. I think a patch will basicly tell us, and who knows, a patch might get released day of official launch for the 19th. I guess we'll see.

[btcomm]

He's right, IIRC. I don't have a link but I'm sure if you Googled it you'd find it. I know they included Maya Basic in UT2k4 and perhaps they might do that in this version.

That is disapointing.

All I can hope is that with new hardware the game can look like maybe something similar to what was posted by epic.

That is horrible, I can't believe they posted these fake screen shots, that is what they are fake.

[exil3]

That is disapointing.

All I can hope is that with new hardware the game can look like maybe something similar to what was posted by epic.

That is horrible, I can't believe they posted these fake screen shots, that is what they are fake.

People keep saying DX10 will make big difference, look at Bioshock, it uses the same engine there really wasnt much of a difference between the
DX9&DX10 versions.
Only game ive seen thus far that truly shows it off is Crysis

[KriLL3.8™]

Imo Lost Planet makes a great showing of DX10, though that's all it does, nice tech demo, horrible game.

[exil3]

Imo Lost Planet makes a great showing of DX10, though that's all it does, nice tech demo, horrible game.

True, forgot about that one. Geat game, great game lol

[Bret Hart]

Why pretty up the screenshots and have the game look not nearly as good?

[Reise]

I seriously can't believe you guys are freaking out over their official screenshots being "fake." Everyone does this, it's advertising.

And to say it doesn't even come close is ridiculous, the game looks fantastic. Pull your heads back from the screen for a little while and stop picking at a tiny smidge of pixelation. I doubt you even notice half the details that DID get shown in the game since you're too busy having fun jumping around and mowing people down.

[Ultron]

That is disapointing.

All I can hope is that with new hardware the game can look like maybe something similar to what was posted by epic.

That is horrible, I can't believe they posted these fake screen shots, that is what they are fake.

Just an FYI those screenshots were put together a year ago using the Unreal Engine. And if you've seen the game as it is, with enough tweaking, it looks pretty darn close. Let's not get carried away here.

[KriLL3.8™]

Not to mention the fact for the game to look exactly like that you'd need actual million poly characters, 8800ultra in quad SLI + fastest quad core you can find wouldn't run that faster than 1-2 frames per min.

[faultymoose]

Show me where in those screenshots, fake or otherwise, they're using 'million poly characters'. That's all game-rez geometry. It's just the shading samples are so high the edges seem to blend a lot better. Look closely and it's CLEARLY game-rez normal mapped geo. The DOF is obviously not in-game, and neither are the character poses or action shots - it's all carefully constucted promo material. But I don't see anything in those screens that says they are Max/Maya/LW/whatever renders.

Come to mention it, maybe someone can post some screenshots of the full game running on GOOD HARDWARE. All I've seen so far are badly chosen angles captured without AA. And that (besides the post-processed DOF) is the only difference I see between the promo stuff and the few screenshots posted. Taking a pic of a wall from three inches away is not going to look mind blowing on any engine. Even the god like ooo-aaah! beast that is Crysis.

And on that token, Crysis looks stunning. I run a top-end PC, and can run the game max at about 25fps, or a step down here and there for 40fps. It's sooooo pretty.... for about 30 minutes. Three hours later it looks the same as it did at the start. Twelve hours in... no change. It's an incredibly rich engine, sure. But it's one hell of a resource hog, and the game itself is fun but hardly mind blowing (invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide, invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide, throw chicken, invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide) and already I'm finding myself easily walking away. It's not gripping. It doesn't make me howl with delight. It's Farcry on visual steroids.

At least UT3 runs a dream and has some actual DESIGN behind it. It doesn't look 'photo-real' in either the promo or the game material, but it doesn't need to. It's beautiful. Though I'm kinda over brown.

[DeltaKiller]

Full version looks mutch better than the demo of Unreal3.
The graphic is awesome and the game runs perfect on 1920x1200

Crysis looks great but it runs crappy on 1920x1200
and Crysis do not support Ageias PhysX card
and its EA Sports

I love EpicGames
They have the "know how"

EA suck

[btcomm]

Show me where in those screenshots, fake or otherwise, they're using 'million poly characters'. That's all game-rez geometry. It's just the shading samples are so high the edges seem to blend a lot better. Look closely and it's CLEARLY game-rez normal mapped geo. The DOF is obviously not in-game, and neither are the character poses or action shots - it's all carefully constucted promo material. But I don't see anything in those screens that says they are Max/Maya/LW/whatever renders.

Come to mention it, maybe someone can post some screenshots of the full game running on GOOD HARDWARE. All I've seen so far are badly chosen angles captured without AA. And that (besides the post-processed DOF) is the only difference I see between the promo stuff and the few screenshots posted. Taking a pic of a wall from three inches away is not going to look mind blowing on any engine. Even the god like ooo-aaah! beast that is Crysis.

And on that token, Crysis looks stunning. I run a top-end PC, and can run the game max at about 25fps, or a step down here and there for 40fps. It's sooooo pretty.... for about 30 minutes. Three hours later it looks the same as it did at the start. Twelve hours in... no change. It's an incredibly rich engine, sure. But it's one hell of a resource hog, and the game itself is fun but hardly mind blowing (invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide, invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide, throw chicken, invisibility, sneak, shoot, hide) and already I'm finding myself easily walking away. It's not gripping. It doesn't make me howl with delight. It's Farcry on visual steroids.

At least UT3 runs a dream and has some actual DESIGN behind it. It doesn't look 'photo-real' in either the promo or the game material, but it doesn't need to. It's beautiful. Though I'm kinda over brown.

Do you think there is a way to get the shading samples that high in game if not now but in the future?

[Luseferous]

Talking of Cryteks new game, On their forums is a long thread complaining that the visuals don't live up to the promo shots and how certain people consider it a ripoff because of that.


[edit]
Can't find the thread I mentioned above but this one covers the same ground.
http://incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=11972&p=1

[Ultron]

Source?

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html...ogy/ue30.shtml

This page goes into some detail for you.

BTW these million poly models (or whatever they are) and the models used to be rendered in-game, they're not going to be that high quality, for real, in the game. But that's why we have tricks like Transformation and Lighting and other features to sort of trick us into seeing higher quality objects in-game.

But this is what happens in literally _every_ 3D game out there. Higher polygon source material is used in creating what ends up in the game.

Good lord let's get over this.

[GG-Xtreme]

Talking of Cryteks new game, On their forums is a long thread complaining that the visuals don't live up to the promo shots and how certain people consider it a ripoff because of that.


[edit]
Can't find the thread I mentioned above but this one covers the same ground.
http://incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=11972&p=1

It's just the demo, the game looks beautiful on DX9 medium-high settings (but performance SUCKS in firefights).

[[404]Cham3l3on]

Yeah, constructive criticism is one thing, but to be disappointed? I'm blown away.

+1

I am blown away looking at pics that peeps are posting of the full version. Man am I itching to run this thing. I don't see how, if you are running high end hardward, that this game could be called 'ugly'. It is nigh unto mastery in terms of visual appeal to date.

[exil3]

Source? Or you just making that up?

Why would i lie..
There's are two folders in the full version fxmax and fxmaya their pluggins for
3dsmax and maya.
Even if there was hardware capable of handling thos screeens provided by epic in "realtime gameplay" the game would be ridiculous in size. well over 7.1 gigs