Curse

Lord Sojar · Jun 19, 2011, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadar

To make the game look good turn off post process effects. I can't stand that fake bloom/glow look.
GW2 will hopefuly have support for HDR and other modern graphics features. Yes, it's all just eye candy but it's expected from high-budget titles these days.

HDR, linear shadow/lightning, geometry shading, and sub-lighting per pixel rasterization.

GW2's engine is horrifically advanced compared to GW1's. It also relies a lot on the art style as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Premium Unleaded

I have a gtx 460, yet still run it all on low except vsync and the res itself. I don't need my system to run warmer than needed and really don't give a damn about the graphics outside of what's necessary at this point tbh. I also started this game way back on a mid-low tier pc w/ a MX440, and it ran fine then from what I remembered.

Frankly, that person is just talking complete shit. My personal preferences aside, the concept/design of the game world is very good as mentioned

Uh, running GW1 on high will barely increase the temps on your GTX 460... the 460 breezes through Guild Wars as if it was Pong or Tetris.... Seriously, crank it up. You have the hardware, use it. Silicon only starts to really degrade past 80C.

jimbo32 · Jun 19, 2011, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Anyone who's done any modeling work for games (for instance, in gmax for mods or whatever) will tell you that it takes real skill to make a model that looks amazing while also having a low poly count. Any stooge can make high poly models - that just leads to engine bloat, and games that have trouble running on older or low-end machines. And like that "Graphics vs Aesthetics" video says, it doesn't always lead to games that look better.

I think GW looks great considering how long it's been around. More aesthetically pleasing than WoW, for sure (imo).

LordDragon · Jun 19, 2011, 07:34 PM // 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo32

Anyone who's done any modeling work for games (for instance, in gmax for mods or whatever) will tell you that it takes real skill to make a model that looks amazing while also having a low poly count. Any stooge can make high poly models - that just leads to engine bloat, and games that have trouble running on older or low-end machines. And like that "Graphics vs Aesthetics" video says, it doesn't always lead to games that look better.

I think GW looks great considering how long it's been around. More aesthetically pleasing than WoW, for sure (imo).

100% agreed. What are we going to have with graphics bloat in 10 years? A GPU that takes half the power your house uses to process the polygons? GW looks great for its age and polygon count is certainly not the end all be all of graphics.

thedarkmarine · Jun 20, 2011, 03:25 AM // 03:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordDragon

100% agreed. What are we going to have with graphics bloat in 10 years? A GPU that takes half the power your house uses to process the polygons? GW looks great for its age and polygon count is certainly not the end all be all of graphics.

we have those already, and they are used for science, not silly video games

guess what, they're still not fast enough

LordDragon · Jun 20, 2011, 02:34 PM // 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedarkmarine

we have those already, and they are used for science, not silly video games

guess what, they're still not fast enough

lol, too true!

Things are getting better GPU and power wise though. My latest system has Dual GT460's and uses less power than my old single GT275.

Then again, if I had gone to the very top of the graphics mountain today I would need a new panel in my house with 400 amp service. Okay, maybe not that bad.

Ximvotn · Jun 20, 2011, 05:55 PM // 17:55

I like the post process effects and cool glowy nonsense. It adds more glow to my chaos gloves.

aspi · Jun 20, 2011, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Well for me the gfx of WoW has made me not want to play it so gfx do count for me.

Amy Awien · Jun 20, 2011, 09:50 PM // 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by hunter

Remember that a high end computer now will be considered shitty 3 years down the road.

At the time of release the min reqs for guildwars were easily met by a three years old mainstream pc. Older games then guildwars frequently had higher demands.

They did a remarkable job.

Ximvotn · Jun 21, 2011, 02:55 AM // 02:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspi

Well for me the gfx of WoW has made me not want to play it so gfx do count for me.

I still think Guild Wars looks better than WoW. It's all cartoons anyway which might be the reason.

thedarkmarine · Jun 21, 2011, 03:27 AM // 03:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

At the time of release the min reqs for guildwars were easily met by a three years old mainstream pc. Older games then guildwars frequently had higher demands.

They did a remarkable job.

they didn't cater to mac's

aspi · Jun 21, 2011, 11:46 AM // 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedarkmarine

they didn't cater to mac's

lol why the hell would they.

thedarkmarine · Jun 21, 2011, 01:29 PM // 13:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspi

lol why the hell would they.

lol why the hell would they cater to old pc's?

Elfblade · Jun 21, 2011, 01:39 PM // 13:39

it is logical Guildwars came out in 2005 and the popularity of mac started to increase post 2006 with the release of the macbooks. The share of gamers in 2005 using an apple product/OS was too small to cater too at that time. I guess it was not worth the trouble at that time as probably as the costs were estimated higher than expected sales.

catering for old pc's is because of the competition in the mmo market (WoW taking most of it) if you expand your target group (as in lower the requirements so more computers are able to run GW) You will achieve more sales instead of losing customers because they cant run the game.

thedarkmarine · Jun 21, 2011, 02:37 PM // 14:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elfblade

it is logical Guildwars came out in 2005 and the popularity of mac started to increase post 2006 with the release of the macbooks. The share of gamers in 2005 using an apple product/OS was too small to cater too at that time. I guess it was not worth the trouble at that time as probably as the costs were estimated higher than expected sales.

catering for old pc's is because of the competition in the mmo market (WoW taking most of it) if you expand your target group (as in lower the requirements so more computers are able to run GW) You will achieve more sales instead of losing customers because they cant run the game.

wow can run on mac's

Elfblade · Jun 21, 2011, 04:02 PM // 16:02

wow was an established franchise and not a new IP, Warcraft III was immensely popular.

still following the biggest player does not always guarantee the maximum profit/sales.

from a research in gartner in 2006 apple:
Worldwide Mac Market Share
1Q 2005: 2.2%
1Q 2006 (ZDNet): 2.3%
1Q 2006 (AI): 2.0%

From these percentage a part is gamer and will buy games and then not even all will consider buying gw.

thedarkmarine · Jun 21, 2011, 04:33 PM // 16:33

i don't get how being a new ip is relevant

additionally, your argument only satisfies if you are calling anet/ncsoft incompetent at forecasting

thus, any argument you apply to defend gw's catering to old hardware can be used to attack their inability to adapt to a different platform

Quaker · Jun 21, 2011, 06:50 PM // 18:50

-One thing I like about GW - especially when compared to titles like WoW or LOTRO - is the realistic look to the graphics. Just because an RPG is a 'fantasy' game, doesn't mean it needs to look like a cartoon.

-GW runs fine on a Mac, provided, of course, that you install Windows or an emulator. And in case you think that's 'unfair', it's basically the same for any PC. Considering what a Mac costs, you'd think it would come with Windows.

thedarkmarine · Jun 21, 2011, 07:11 PM // 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaker

-GW runs fine on a Mac, provided, of course, that you install Windows or an emulator. And in case you think that's 'unfair', it's basically the same for any PC. Considering what a Mac costs, you'd think it would come with Windows.

lol, right

0/10

Elfblade · Jun 21, 2011, 09:42 PM // 21:42

A new Ip makes a difference, You are not sure if they will buy your product. With a set franchise you have a following, who will buy your product no matter what. A new Ip will at best have a miniscule group who will buy the at its introduction period.

Not adepting to a new platform does not always stem from inability. New products/Ip's always need decisions on what not to include in their product. (again cost vs possible profit).

Their decision to cater towards older computers is probably based on increasing their target group and pitting that against a 2.2% market share of mac's globally of which not all owners are people who buy games, the decision is easily made.

Lets make it clear that i am not bashing mac's they are an fine alternative to an traditional windows pc.

Guildwars graphics mainly its art style is great (its much more refined than other mmo's from the same era).

Eternal Equinox · Jun 22, 2011, 02:07 AM // 02:07

For a six year old game, Guild Wars has aged gracefully and still looks fantastic.