Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Prelaunch characters > Actual characters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Here's a thought. Would you guys rather the characters look as good as they did in the screenshots during gameplay and run like crysis does on highest settings, or have them look as good as they do and run at very playable framerates on the highest settings?

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by LordDemitri View Post
      Here's a thought. Would you guys rather the characters look as good as they did in the screenshots during gameplay and run like crysis does on highest settings, or have them look as good as they do and run at very playable framerates on the highest settings?
      Why would anyone not want the option to scale up if they can?

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by _freespace_ View Post
        Here's how Reaper looks in-game with all settings at maximum. Compare it to his picture up here on the UT3 forum. Feels like a 5 years' worth of technology gap.



        Any chance there will be any improvements on character heads? Maybe improved normal maps for the head material? Because back in UT2004 they looked better, to be honest.
        I dont know what settings you are playing on but I just launched my game on the highest detail and heres what I get.

        [shot]http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/4585/screenshot00030zj9.jpg[/shot]

        Comment


          #19
          Guys... there ARE higher-quality character models in the game (as good or better than the screenshots) but for some reason they cannot be used while you are actually playing.

          To prove this, set your settings at 5 and 5 (max detail). Now go into settings and go to custom character creation. There you go, the full detail model, and I bet your computer runs it like ****. Mine sure does. For some reason the detail is then lowered back down to around 2 or 3 when you actually play the game.

          No idea why, but I know my computer sure couldnt run that kind of detail on all characters if just displaying one with a simple background drops it to 5 fps or so.

          Comment


            #20
            If people do not want to try to view those characters on a low end machine heres mine on a low end machine.

            [shot]http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/5453/screenshot00031hw0.jpg[/shot]

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by _freespace_ View Post
              Here's how Reaper looks in-game with all settings at maximum. Compare it to his picture up here on the UT3 forum. Feels like a 5 years' worth of technology gap.
              The picture at the top of the forum looks like a piece of artwork to me not an ingame rendering. Apart from that though, maybe the game is dynamically dropping the detail level for some reason.

              Comment


                #22
                The jaggies are what makes them look so bad.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by _freespace_ View Post
                  Am I the only one that feels a bit cheated here?

                  I mean look at absolutely each and every screenshot of Unreal Tournament 3 that was shown before the demo. In all of them there are amazing details on the characters and flawless light&shadow. Basically, they were using the cinematic highpoly-highres characters, depicted in-game ( with facial expressions aswell ).

                  So for nearly over a year I was wondering how the hell do they look so good AND manage to get the game to run on anything less then quad-core. The answer is simple, they don't. What we get in-game are blockly poorly illuminated characters, whose heads actually look worse off than they did in UT2004. I'm really dissapointed in this. ( and yes, I play the game at max visual levels, with a Geforce 7900 ) And their range of facial expressions is as profound as that of a block of concrete.
                  HOW DARE YOU!!!!!

                  lets get one thing straight mister..

                  I am the only one, I repeat ONLY ONE who is allowed to complain about the low res character models in this game!!!!!!!!!

                  You have violated holy grounds
                  You will be terminated
                  You and your babies will be eaten, by me

                  Good day sir.


                  and btw: a few things to prove that the character models are different quality than officially released screenshots..

                  - Harlins' eye colors are different in-game versus his High Res counter-part
                  - BarkTooth's face is a dead giveaway, use playersonly and zoom into his face and compare that to his Custom Character screen display
                  - If anybody can't tell the difference between Akasha Sexy version vs Akasha in game version, they need to get their eyes checked

                  I could probably name a hell of a lot more reasons like armor texture proportions, the helmet issue for the iron guards, Othello, mew mew mew mew kittens!!!!

                  Originally posted by Oddside View Post
                  The picture at the top of the forum looks like a piece of artwork to me not an ingame rendering. Apart from that though, maybe the game is dynamically dropping the detail level for some reason.
                  A lot of console games used that technique to improve framerate during gameplay, as UT3 was suppose to be cross-platform with an anonymous console, they decided to make them similar in design.

                  Game still looks great though!

                  Comment


                    #24
                    I have some early 1990's games that still look amazing to this day. Sonic the Hedgehog is one of them.

                    Game development is going in the wrong direction in my opinion. Everything has to be done to make the games look as realistic as possible now. High polygon count maps, high res textures and dynamic lights. It's not good, because most people are fools that go along with trends, and get sucked into this standard of beauty. That's not meant to be offensive, I don't blame anyone. But it's gone too far.

                    You can make games look great with UT2 engine if you tweak it a little. You don't even have to use textures at all, you can just use cell-shading like Warsow, and complement it with cool lightening effects, proper motion blurring and explosions. But people will argue that it doesn't look good, because they judge it by the standards of the time. I don't think it's helping.

                    What makes games look good is the creativity in designing the maps, the surroundings, the buildings, the characters and landscapes. Not higher and higher resolution textures and what have you. You can do so much more with current PC hardware than just make everything look "real". But nobody ever tries anything :\

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Those screenshots with highly detailed characters always looked a bit dubious to me.

                      First, because I know that more often than not, screenshots (especially those made for the purpose to hype the game during its development) don't reflect the final game. When you publish screenshots, FPS don't matter so you can use experimental, very high resolution meshes (and textures and shaders) and have the game run like a slideshow for all you care.

                      For instance on the last game I've worked on, at some point the coders had been asked to implement a special screenshot key that would automatically set every graphic option to the max just for the screenshot, as the game was nearly implayable with such settings.

                      And the second reason I found those screenshots dubious: such amount of details for the characters in a fps as fast paced as UT is utterly pointless. Do you often find yourselves in a situation where you can look at some other character from such a close distance that you could count the pores on their skin?
                      If the character WERE so detailed, it would be a waste of hardware resources. One of the basics of game development is to add details where they actually matter, not where you'll never notice them.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        i also noticed that the characters looked better in the prelaunch demos of the game, but maybe I imagined it cause it's been a while and the standards were lower back then. I'm pretty sure someone from epic said that they did indeed plan to improve the graphics over a patch, and I'm sure they did this with 2004 too.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Skill View Post
                          i also noticed that the characters looked better in the prelaunch demos of the game, but maybe I imagined it cause it's been a while and the standards were lower back then. I'm pretty sure someone from epic said that they did indeed plan to improve the graphics over a patch, and I'm sure they did this with 2004 too.
                          bloody marvelous

                          That scratches one topic to make multiple complaining threads over.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by sekazi View Post
                            I dont know what settings you are playing on but I just launched my game on the highest detail and heres what I get.

                            [shot]http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/4585/screenshot00030zj9.jpg[/shot]
                            Yep. Me too. Not sure what all the griping is about, to be honest. If you have to run the game in slomo in order to see that the characters aren't cinematic-quality, in order to complain, you've lost me. By the time I get this close to another character, blood's about to fly.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Mark Rein did an interview where he said the computer with CPU/GPU to run UT3 at its max details was a wasn't out yet. This was just before the beta demo launch. For the life of me I can't find a link to it. Anyway at the time I thought these and others were dubious remarks being that people with new fast rigs would be expecting models/levels akin to the screen shots from years past.

                              The idea is that the engine is robust enough to scale to meet demand for years to come for console and PC developers. All game engines are optimized/improved over time, so I'm not really buying that angle. It's my belief that Epics successful shift to Gears of War helped lock their focus to console 1st with PC 2nd.
                              I imagine what you see on the PS3 version of UT3 will be identical to what you get on the PC regardless of your PC's specs.

                              With all that said, I am still enjoying UT3 even with its reduced models appearance.
                              (C2Quad 6600@3.2GHz, 8800GT, Corsair Dominator 2Gigs sysRam, Creative X-Fi)

                              Comment


                                #30
                                In regards to all these xxx = fales/true tweaks, what the hell is going on? Clearly the developers set them this way, what for?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X