Why do other player's armour look so bad in non combat areas? - Page 2 - Guild Wars Forums

Former Ruling · Dec 11, 2006, 06:58 AM // 06:58

Quote:

- And If rendering peoples armours to medium in an outpost at least (not necessary a town) will burn up the Video cards , then Either Humanity has NOT come as far as I think we have in terms of personal computer technology , or the average gamer needs to get a better video card ....

The average gamer does need a better video card...

Guild Wars wants to uphold the "lower requirements than other games" thing it has going for it...Guild Wars (the original) was quite nice in that its graphics and such worked great while having somwe of the lowest system reqs of its time.

I wouldn't object to higher end systems having the option of atleast medium grade armor detail though (high might lag out great systems in full districts). Seems good enough to become an option.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 07:08 AM // 07:08

- I agree 100% about the Kings new clothes comment. You may think you look good with your Wammo primeval armour , but truth to tell , at the very best , others are not impressed and are humouring you when they say they are , at the worst they might even be laughing at you...

Now I dearly hope 'm wrong about my own Vabbian Ascended armour and HOPE that it doesnt look like it does on lowest resolution , to others (maybe medium - see later) , but going by what ive seen from other suits I know that I probably do look very bad.

Vabbian Armour suffers terribly at lowest res due to it having high detail at medium /high. At low res however , the suit is utterly broken and the once beautiful belt/seams (dyeable colours) -totally lose their shape , and become the mess i mentioned earlier with a sapphire in the middle.

Now I almost desperately want to see another suit of the same type to confirm if I should even wear it anymore or not.

Nope not kidding at all.I guess its my view only then.I tend to prefer my rangers armor to look how i want it instead of making sure others gaze upon it in awe.

Yet I would say that you'd be living a kind of phalasy here , seeing that to all other eyes but yours , it does NOT look to how you would want it to in all probability. You may think you look good but you do not - its just that simple.

I also agree with what Former Ruling says. Making all 15k sets perfectly rendered in outpost would be hell

Speculation, - yet also I never said anything about perfection (although that is the ideal) , Why cant this be a setting for those with stronge graphics cards in options to give the minimum graphical power for a suit of armour to at least look like the designer INTENDED. For some this may indeed be at low res , but for others , low res just is not passable.

and can someone answer whats the point in buying 400-1,000 k armour if NOT to impress people??

Iuris · Dec 11, 2006, 07:23 AM // 07:23

I have a pretty good machine, and I have every setting set to highest, and still other people's elite armor looks extremely low on detail. Whatever the cause is, I say it must be a bug.

When I started playing, I was actually wondering why people would spend millions on their armor just so they could look extremely pixellated.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 07:29 AM // 07:29

Maybe looking pixilated is the prestige and the new honour ...

The new rule to bear in mind when looking at other ppl's armours innon combat areas : the more pixillated a suit looks , the more expensive it probably is....

A net 's revenge at us over farmers I think!

LicensedLuny · Dec 11, 2006, 07:35 AM // 07:35

I understand that one reason people buy the expensive armors is to show off.

But no way is it ok to lag everyone else's game just to try to force strangers into seeing your armor at higher res.

You want the fancy, cool, expensive armor? Great, you got it. It looks pretty for you, as it should, since you paid for it. If you want to show it off to friends, go for it! Form a team and go outside, telling everyone to max out their graphics. Stand in outposts spamming something like "GLF ppl to step outside and check out my cool new armor!"

You want strangers to oogle it? Take high res screenies, in a great setting with great lighting and post them in the armor galleries on the fansites. (The people that would really be checking out others' armor in a town are more likely to go there anyway.)

The suggestion that ANet effectively up the required hardware and add to everyone's lag so the world might see your armor in towns is, at best, very poorly thought out, and at worst, incredibly self-centered. This thread both shocks and disappoints me.

Luny

Cow Tale · Dec 11, 2006, 07:50 AM // 07:50

wait a minute, does this mean that fow armor isnt really as ughly as i always thought it was? now i have to find someone with fow and go out of an outpost to see what it really look like lol.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 08:16 AM // 08:16

I understand that one reason people buy the expensive armors is to show off.

Wrong. Its the only reason people buy expensive armour. It has no other benefit over thestandard variant.

But no way is it ok to lag everyone else's game just to try to force strangers into seeing your armor at higher res.

Then read the topic and stop being ignorant. I wanted the OPTION to see othe armour at a passable resolution , at a level which accurately represents what the designer intended - not a mass of pixels.

You want the fancy, cool, expensive armor? Great, you got it. It looks pretty for you, as it should, since you paid for it. If you want to show it off to friends, go for it! Form a team and go outside, telling everyone to max out their graphics. Stand in outposts spamming something like "GLF ppl to step outside and check out my cool new armor!"

Ok this comment is rather dumb imho. Why dont you mention things that actually happen. If someone spams that, WILL YOU actually go outside to check it out? No I thought not.

You want strangers to oogle it? Take high res screenies, in a great setting with great lighting and post them in the armor galleries on the fansites. (The people that would really be checking out others' armor in a town are more likely to go there anyway.)

Guildwiki already does that -that doesnt excuse what would otherwise be beautiful armour being a mess of pixels in non combat areas. I'm not only talking about mine , but clearly from the comments - Obsidian is one of the worst rendered.

The suggestion that ANet effectively up the required hardware and add to everyone's lag so the world might see your armor in towns is, at best, very poorly thought out, and at worst, incredibly self-centered. This thread both shocks and disappoints me.

Read what I've posted before. I think Its sad that people like you are happy with horrible resolution of your armour - but others are not. If it shocks and disappoints you than simply dont read it.

And no I think its fair that the "world" sees armour as its designed , sometimes low resolution IS sufficient for this - other times it is clearly and obviously not.

If you lag than either buy a better video card , or keep your settings to how they would be now.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 09:03 AM // 09:03

ok I've had it confirmed that the leggings to my armour look pitiful , so from now on I'll wear a more "forgiving" suit in towns , Ill be less of a laughing stock huh.

fRag_Doll · Dec 11, 2006, 09:30 AM // 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haijiibirdhead

"I understand that one reason people buy the expensive armors is to show off."

Wrong. Its the only reason people buy expensive armour. It has no other benefit over thestandard variant.

Sorry, but you're wrong too.
I bought 15k Kurz for my warrior because I think it's the best looking armour in the game. I don't give a crap what anyone else thinks of it.
So

, that's two reasons people buy 15k armor.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 10:28 AM // 10:28

I bought 15k Kurz for my warrior because I think it's the best looking armour in the game

I consider this a form of showing off but w/e works for you.

But anyway I think I'll put in a kind of warning to those who arent aware of this - to think hard before buying 15k and above armour , If youre doing it to feel good about yourself or a sense of achievement than fine , but if youre doing it with the intention to impress/ look good to others , imo you should choose very carefully which ones you go for , or forget it entirely , because you wont the vast majority of the time. Often 1.5 k armour will look better in non combat areas - sad but true.

And I AM aware that there are limitations as far as peoples personal computers go , but I think that SOME suits do need tidying up in these areas , I would say badly.

The general rule is - that Ive noticed is that armour with a large surface area and/or is more detailed , will suffer alot more at low resolution than armour that is not.

Hence generally :
1.5 k > 15k >/= Obsidian armour at lowest resolutions

strcpy · Dec 11, 2006, 10:41 AM // 10:41

It would take quite a bit of processing and graphical prowess to display a full district of people at full detail - I'm not sure any home computer on earth could do so at this point (I doubt it). I think their default is pretty decent.

However, if you really want .5fps nice armor for everyone - just let it happen. The game engine already can display that (it has too for explorable areas). But then, how many posts of "OMG - I can't be in town with max settings on my Wonder Computer" threads would we have? Regardless of if they had several warnings and check boxes. I can also understand simply automatically reducing the textures - most will never know and with the other way many many more complaints.

Personally, I wish they had two graphics options - one for in town and one for explorable areas. I have an older computer, I can handle max setting in most explorable areas (sometimes it can really slow down, but if the game were to ever really take advantage of dual procs I would still be OK) but can not in towns. Nor can I upgrade my graphics - as it turns out my northbridge (asus a7m266-d with a 762 northbridge) has an error that in both Nvidia and ATI cards their newer cards do not work (under windows, supposedly Linux doesn't have the issue so it is a matter of a driver). Asus's reply is basically that I purchased a server class motherboard so who cares (I can somewhat understand that as few gamers purchased it).

Ah well. The option that makes the largest section happy and the smallest section rage quit is pretty much what they have done.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 11:08 AM // 11:08

full detail - I never said it would be currently viable to go full detail on armour in towns , except maybe higher detail in some outposts with few ppl in.

All Ive suggested is that they render what would otherwise be amongst the most detailed and best armour in the game (at high res) , better than a pixilated mess.

Just making it look like armour and not pixels is not even in the same league as going full high res detail , as you all seem to think I want. Which I dont , because itd be impractical , although in the future who knows.

I'm not even asking for a big improvement here , just tweaks in suits of armour for them to look passable , and not "pitiful" (as Ive been rightfully told)

and embarrasing.

Snow White Tan · Dec 11, 2006, 11:09 AM // 11:09

Haijiibirdhead, don't tell me YOU're not showing off, running around with your crys and stormbows. Although I must admit, it looks damn good.

I have noticed this graphics problem, but I don't mind. Only a few armors catches my eye because of their bad resolution (warrior primeval and war obsidian), but as i rarely see any of these armors, I really donot care. I know it's sad that people can't see your armors full potential within towns and outposts, but when I buy Ascended armor or generally good looking armor (male necromancer fanatics armor, blue), I buy them for my own leisure, not others. Sure, it's fun to show off your brand new armor, but is the disappointment from the lack of quality of OTHER peoples armor gonna prevent You from buying the armor of your dreams?

Highly unlikely.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 11:23 AM // 11:23

Err I just got 1 storm bow

And yea I've been put off loads of armour sets because of this , heck if i knew how vabbian armour would look at low res I'd probably of not wasted my gold!

well like i said I think this armour deserves better than that anyway - so ill reserve it for explorable area /pvp play I suppose.

Not like anyone will bother to look then anyway.....

Snow White Tan · Dec 11, 2006, 11:31 AM // 11:31

One storm bow, many storm bows. You're missing my point. That post wasn't entirely pointing at you. It was another (or perhaps a supporting) point of view in this debate.

Basicly what I'm saying is, YOU choose your armor. Not the oppinions of others. If you see an armor you like, you have the money for and the will to get it, then get it!

You're never gonna hear the remark "Damn, You're armors graphic quality sucks!", 'cause most people don't notice. And some peoples vocabulary is limited to "Good Heal", "50/50 ecto?" and "Kick (insert name)".

And if you feel inferior because your armor might or might not look bad, just remember this: You're not the only one. Everyone else has the same exact problem. Unless, of course, their video card is low quality. They might experience an improvement

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 11:47 AM // 11:47

Basicly what I'm saying is, YOU choose your armor. Not the oppinions of others. If you see an armor you like, you have the money for and the will to get it, then get it!

Lol you dont quite get it either - I simply dont understand the point in getting something that expensive (anyway) thinking that you look a million bucks , when in reality you look the opposite. Ok granted i know towns cant really have high res , but some of the graphics of other players is so very disappointing, others outright embarrasing as i said earlier. I think its a real "Emperors new clothes" situation.

1- Expensive armour looks bad (usually) worse than their standard counterparts at low res /outposts.

2- Guild Wars is becoming more single player orientated in explorable areas.

Which kind of nulifies the point of even having markedly more expensive armour imo - your paying all that extra for what? to look worse than before the vast majority of the time? or to look good to yourself even though its only a phalasy?

You're never gonna hear the remark "Damn, You're armors graphic quality sucks!", 'cause most people don't notice. And some peoples vocabulary is limited to "Good Heal", "50/50 ecto?" and "Kick (insert name)".

Actually Ive already heard the remark similar to those lines, albeit I had to push for the opinion. and yes most people may not say it to you because they are either too polite , or cannot be bothered to. Yet they sure as hell think it dont they.

And if you feel inferior because your armor might or might not look bad, just remember this: You're not the only one. Everyone else has the same exact problem.

Untrue , like I said before , different armours (quite a few , maybe ost) are invariably more forgiving than others at low resolution and still look respectable. Others look like trash....

Snow White Tan · Dec 11, 2006, 12:04 PM // 12:04

You seem to be stuck at thinking about other peoples oppinion. Which is exactly, what I just advised to ignore. When you look at your armor in outposts, do you then see the simplified version of it? No, you see exactly the version you baught.

Unless you can explain what other purpose the ingame money has, other than buying armor and items, I can't accept "waste of money" as an argument. Yes, you might have worked hard to get that money, but often people work hard so they can be the happy owners of their new armor. Should the outpost effect really stop you from enjoying your wearable piece of art?

You've said it yourself, to me, that you love your armor, and that it looks great. Why should the fact that total unknowns see your armor in a lesser graphical quality really destroy that? Are you willing to throw away 400k worth of awesome armor because some guy mentioned the lack of pixels? Yes, they will notice the lack of quality, but at the same time, they will know that they are in the same situation. THEIR armor looks like crap too.

I, for one, does not care if other peoples armors look eroded, because I know what the armor looks like. And if the armor is awesome, I ALWAYS give them a compliment, even though it looked like a pixelsoup. I would never tell people if the quality of their armor was bad. Because they know.

Don't base your choice of armor on pixelcounts. Don't buy Shing Jea armor if you want luxon/kurzick.

Think for yourself, dont let others do it.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 12:25 PM // 12:25

You seem to be stuck at thinking about other peoples oppinion. Which is exactly, what I just advised to ignore. When you look at your armor in outposts, do you then see the simplified version of it? No, you see exactly the version you baught.

True , yet I know that others do not see anything even CLOSE to what I see , people wear things for what reason? - to look good or for functionality - functionality is the same so it comes down to looks.
I think we can agree on that.
It comes down to the reason that you bought it at the end of the day , I know I look crap when others players see me in vabbian armour in towns etc,
so theres no way it even makes sense for me (or anyone who has the choice) to wear it at that point, maybe Arena net never intended for it/other armour in the same boat (obsidian springs to mind) to be worn in outposts , who knows.

I challenge anyone who has actuallybought this suit of armour to turn the graphics right down lol ......i'd rather it was 2D..

!

Unless you can explain what other purpose the ingame money has, other than buying armor and items, I can't accept "waste of money" as an argument. Yes, you might have worked hard to get that money, but often people work hard so they can be the happy owners of their new armor. Should the outpost effect really stop you from enjoying your wearable piece of art?

YES. It already has and I no longer wear it there. In game money can be spent on better armour/ more cost effective armour perhaps - but i very well cant take back my 450 odd k now can I , for good or bad I'm stuck with it.

You've said it yourself, to me, that you love your armor, and that it looks great.

To me only. 99% of the time, does the suit look anything close to the designer's "work of art" as you put it.

Why should the fact that total unknowns see your armor in a lesser graphical quality really destroy that?

Its not lesser graphical quality its a Total Graphical Disaster Zone!

Are you willing to throw away 400k worth of awesome armor because some guy mentioned the lack of pixels?

I've already thrown It away , not much i can do about it now. except maybe change the dye (which i wont) Like I said before I'm stuck with it. 5 slots of wasted inventory.....

Yes, they will notice the lack of quality, but at the same time, they will know that they are in the same position. THEIR armor looks like crap too.

You know there are different degrees of crappiness....

I, for one, does not care if other peoples armors look eroded, because I know what the armor looks like. And if the armor is awesome, I ALWAYS give them a compliment, even though it looked like a pixelsoup. I would never tell people if the quality of their armor was bad. Because they know.

Exactly, I know and Its a terrible feeling. I am VERY glad that I have back ups..

Think for yourself, dont let others do it.

We agree here.

Snow White Tan · Dec 11, 2006, 12:40 PM // 12:40

I will not force you to change your mind. Just advise you to see it from a different angle.

By focusing on all the bad about the armor, you forget about the great looks, though partly unsharable, that it has! If you can't accept the resolution problem, then stop buying the armors, and miss out on one of the great things about the game: The art!

I'm sorry that you can't live with the quality and actually have thrown out a great armor. But if you can't live with it, you can't live with it. And nothing is gonna alter that.

So fine, don't buy the Primeval armor you want, or any of the other great looking armors. It's not gonna stop me from equiping my dervish with the awesome Primeval armor. I'm not buying it for prestige. I'm buying it for it's looks. The fact that some people reacts like me with cool armor, giving compliments, is just a bonus.

I like to be able to look at my characters and enjoy what i see.

Hopefully, you can do the same.

Haijiibirdhead · Dec 11, 2006, 12:44 PM // 12:44

I have not thrown out the armour - my comment was on the gold I've flushed down the sewer in buying /crafting it ...

I still intend to wear it in combat areas. But boy is it a shame.

Dec 11, 2006, 07:35 AM // 07:35	#25
LicensedLuny Badly Influenced Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Buying Humps! (No kidding! Check my buy thread) Guild: Hello Kitty Krewe [HKK] Forever!-ish	Are you kidding?? I understand that one reason people buy the expensive armors is to show off. But no way is it ok to lag everyone else's game just to try to force strangers into seeing your armor at higher res. You want the fancy, cool, expensive armor? Great, you got it. It looks pretty for you, as it should, since you paid for it. If you want to show it off to friends, go for it! Form a team and go outside, telling everyone to max out their graphics. Stand in outposts spamming something like "GLF ppl to step outside and check out my cool new armor!" You want strangers to oogle it? Take high res screenies, in a great setting with great lighting and post them in the armor galleries on the fansites. (The people that would really be checking out others' armor in a town are more likely to go there anyway.) The suggestion that ANet effectively up the required hardware and add to everyone's lag so the world might see your armor in towns is, at best, very poorly thought out, and at worst, incredibly self-centered. This thread both shocks and disappoints me. Luny

Dec 11, 2006, 10:28 AM // 10:28	#30
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	I bought 15k Kurz for my warrior because I think it's the best looking armour in the game I consider this a form of showing off but w/e works for you. But anyway I think I'll put in a kind of warning to those who arent aware of this - to think hard before buying 15k and above armour , If youre doing it to feel good about yourself or a sense of achievement than fine , but if youre doing it with the intention to impress/ look good to others , imo you should choose very carefully which ones you go for , or forget it entirely , because you wont the vast majority of the time. Often 1.5 k armour will look better in non combat areas - sad but true. And I AM aware that there are limitations as far as peoples personal computers go , but I think that SOME suits do need tidying up in these areas , I would say badly. The general rule is - that Ive noticed is that armour with a large surface area and/or is more detailed , will suffer alot more at low resolution than armour that is not. Hence generally : 1.5 k > 15k >/= Obsidian armour at lowest resolutions Last edited by Haijiibirdhead; Dec 11, 2006 at 10:54 AM // 10:54..

Dec 11, 2006, 11:23 AM // 11:23	#34
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	Err I just got 1 storm bow And yea I've been put off loads of armour sets because of this , heck if i knew how vabbian armour would look at low res I'd probably of not wasted my gold! well like i said I think this armour deserves better than that anyway - so ill reserve it for explorable area /pvp play I suppose. Not like anyone will bother to look then anyway..... Last edited by Haijiibirdhead; Dec 11, 2006 at 11:30 AM // 11:30..

Dec 11, 2006, 12:04 PM // 12:04	#37
Snow White Tan Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: Caliber Thirteen [CT] Profession: N/Mo	You seem to be stuck at thinking about other peoples oppinion. Which is exactly, what I just advised to ignore. When you look at your armor in outposts, do you then see the simplified version of it? No, you see exactly the version you baught. Unless you can explain what other purpose the ingame money has, other than buying armor and items, I can't accept "waste of money" as an argument. Yes, you might have worked hard to get that money, but often people work hard so they can be the happy owners of their new armor. Should the outpost effect really stop you from enjoying your wearable piece of art? You've said it yourself, to me, that you love your armor, and that it looks great. Why should the fact that total unknowns see your armor in a lesser graphical quality really destroy that? Are you willing to throw away 400k worth of awesome armor because some guy mentioned the lack of pixels? Yes, they will notice the lack of quality, but at the same time, they will know that they are in the same situation. THEIR armor looks like crap too. I, for one, does not care if other peoples armors look eroded, because I know what the armor looks like. And if the armor is awesome, I ALWAYS give them a compliment, even though it looked like a pixelsoup. I would never tell people if the quality of their armor was bad. Because they know. Don't base your choice of armor on pixelcounts. Don't buy Shing Jea armor if you want luxon/kurzick. Think for yourself, dont let others do it. Last edited by Snow White Tan; Dec 11, 2006 at 12:07 PM // 12:07..

Dec 11, 2006, 12:25 PM // 12:25	#38
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	You seem to be stuck at thinking about other peoples oppinion. Which is exactly, what I just advised to ignore. When you look at your armor in outposts, do you then see the simplified version of it? No, you see exactly the version you baught. True , yet I know that others do not see anything even CLOSE to what I see , people wear things for what reason? - to look good or for functionality - functionality is the same so it comes down to looks. I think we can agree on that. It comes down to the reason that you bought it at the end of the day , I know I look crap when others players see me in vabbian armour in towns etc, so theres no way it even makes sense for me (or anyone who has the choice) to wear it at that point, maybe Arena net never intended for it/other armour in the same boat (obsidian springs to mind) to be worn in outposts , who knows. I challenge anyone who has actuallybought this suit of armour to turn the graphics right down lol ......i'd rather it was 2D.. ! Unless you can explain what other purpose the ingame money has, other than buying armor and items, I can't accept "waste of money" as an argument. Yes, you might have worked hard to get that money, but often people work hard so they can be the happy owners of their new armor. Should the outpost effect really stop you from enjoying your wearable piece of art? YES. It already has and I no longer wear it there. In game money can be spent on better armour/ more cost effective armour perhaps - but i very well cant take back my 450 odd k now can I , for good or bad I'm stuck with it. You've said it yourself, to me, that you love your armor, and that it looks great. To me only. 99% of the time, does the suit look anything close to the designer's "work of art" as you put it. Why should the fact that total unknowns see your armor in a lesser graphical quality really destroy that? Its not lesser graphical quality its a Total Graphical Disaster Zone! Are you willing to throw away 400k worth of awesome armor because some guy mentioned the lack of pixels? I've already thrown It away , not much i can do about it now. except maybe change the dye (which i wont) Like I said before I'm stuck with it. 5 slots of wasted inventory..... Yes, they will notice the lack of quality, but at the same time, they will know that they are in the same position. THEIR armor looks like crap too. You know there are different degrees of crappiness.... I, for one, does not care if other peoples armors look eroded, because I know what the armor looks like. And if the armor is awesome, I ALWAYS give them a compliment, even though it looked like a pixelsoup. I would never tell people if the quality of their armor was bad. Because they know. Exactly, I know and Its a terrible feeling. I am VERY glad that I have back ups.. Think for yourself, dont let others do it. We agree here. Last edited by Haijiibirdhead; Dec 11, 2006 at 12:29 PM // 12:29..

Dec 11, 2006, 07:08 AM // 07:08	#22
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	- I agree 100% about the Kings new clothes comment. You may think you look good with your Wammo primeval armour , but truth to tell , at the very best , others are not impressed and are humouring you when they say they are , at the worst they might even be laughing at you... Now I dearly hope 'm wrong about my own Vabbian Ascended armour and HOPE that it doesnt look like it does on lowest resolution , to others (maybe medium - see later) , but going by what ive seen from other suits I know that I probably do look very bad. Vabbian Armour suffers terribly at lowest res due to it having high detail at medium /high. At low res however , the suit is utterly broken and the once beautiful belt/seams (dyeable colours) -totally lose their shape , and become the mess i mentioned earlier with a sapphire in the middle. Now I almost desperately want to see another suit of the same type to confirm if I should even wear it anymore or not. Nope not kidding at all.I guess its my view only then.I tend to prefer my rangers armor to look how i want it instead of making sure others gaze upon it in awe. Yet I would say that you'd be living a kind of phalasy here , seeing that to all other eyes but yours , it does NOT look to how you would want it to in all probability. You may think you look good but you do not - its just that simple. I also agree with what Former Ruling says. Making all 15k sets perfectly rendered in outpost would be hell Speculation, - yet also I never said anything about perfection (although that is the ideal) , Why cant this be a setting for those with stronge graphics cards in options to give the minimum graphical power for a suit of armour to at least look like the designer INTENDED. For some this may indeed be at low res , but for others , low res just is not passable. and can someone answer whats the point in buying 400-1,000 k armour if NOT to impress people??

Dec 11, 2006, 07:23 AM // 07:23	#23
Iuris Forge Runner Join Date: Nov 2006 Guild: Crazy ducks from the Forest Profession: W/	I have a pretty good machine, and I have every setting set to highest, and still other people's elite armor looks extremely low on detail. Whatever the cause is, I say it must be a bug. When I started playing, I was actually wondering why people would spend millions on their armor just so they could look extremely pixellated.

Dec 11, 2006, 07:29 AM // 07:29	#24
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	Maybe looking pixilated is the prestige and the new honour ... The new rule to bear in mind when looking at other ppl's armours innon combat areas : the more pixillated a suit looks , the more expensive it probably is.... A net 's revenge at us over farmers I think!

Dec 11, 2006, 07:50 AM // 07:50	#26
Cow Tale Lion's Arch Merchant Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Ocean Shores, Washington Guild: Last Sun Rise Profession: W/Mo	wait a minute, does this mean that fow armor isnt really as ughly as i always thought it was? now i have to find someone with fow and go out of an outpost to see what it really look like lol.

Dec 11, 2006, 08:16 AM // 08:16	#27
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	I understand that one reason people buy the expensive armors is to show off. Wrong. Its the only reason people buy expensive armour. It has no other benefit over thestandard variant. But no way is it ok to lag everyone else's game just to try to force strangers into seeing your armor at higher res. Then read the topic and stop being ignorant. I wanted the OPTION to see othe armour at a passable resolution , at a level which accurately represents what the designer intended - not a mass of pixels. You want the fancy, cool, expensive armor? Great, you got it. It looks pretty for you, as it should, since you paid for it. If you want to show it off to friends, go for it! Form a team and go outside, telling everyone to max out their graphics. Stand in outposts spamming something like "GLF ppl to step outside and check out my cool new armor!" Ok this comment is rather dumb imho. Why dont you mention things that actually happen. If someone spams that, WILL YOU actually go outside to check it out? No I thought not. You want strangers to oogle it? Take high res screenies, in a great setting with great lighting and post them in the armor galleries on the fansites. (The people that would really be checking out others' armor in a town are more likely to go there anyway.) Guildwiki already does that -that doesnt excuse what would otherwise be beautiful armour being a mess of pixels in non combat areas. I'm not only talking about mine , but clearly from the comments - Obsidian is one of the worst rendered. The suggestion that ANet effectively up the required hardware and add to everyone's lag so the world might see your armor in towns is, at best, very poorly thought out, and at worst, incredibly self-centered. This thread both shocks and disappoints me. Read what I've posted before. I think Its sad that people like you are happy with horrible resolution of your armour - but others are not. If it shocks and disappoints you than simply dont read it. And no I think its fair that the "world" sees armour as its designed , sometimes low resolution IS sufficient for this - other times it is clearly and obviously not. If you lag than either buy a better video card , or keep your settings to how they would be now.

Dec 11, 2006, 09:03 AM // 09:03	#28
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	ok I've had it confirmed that the leggings to my armour look pitiful , so from now on I'll wear a more "forgiving" suit in towns , Ill be less of a laughing stock huh.

Dec 11, 2006, 10:41 AM // 10:41	#31
strcpy Desert Nomad Join Date: Jul 2005 Guild: One of Many [ONE]	It would take quite a bit of processing and graphical prowess to display a full district of people at full detail - I'm not sure any home computer on earth could do so at this point (I doubt it). I think their default is pretty decent. However, if you really want .5fps nice armor for everyone - just let it happen. The game engine already can display that (it has too for explorable areas). But then, how many posts of "OMG - I can't be in town with max settings on my Wonder Computer" threads would we have? Regardless of if they had several warnings and check boxes. I can also understand simply automatically reducing the textures - most will never know and with the other way many many more complaints. Personally, I wish they had two graphics options - one for in town and one for explorable areas. I have an older computer, I can handle max setting in most explorable areas (sometimes it can really slow down, but if the game were to ever really take advantage of dual procs I would still be OK) but can not in towns. Nor can I upgrade my graphics - as it turns out my northbridge (asus a7m266-d with a 762 northbridge) has an error that in both Nvidia and ATI cards their newer cards do not work (under windows, supposedly Linux doesn't have the issue so it is a matter of a driver). Asus's reply is basically that I purchased a server class motherboard so who cares (I can somewhat understand that as few gamers purchased it). Ah well. The option that makes the largest section happy and the smallest section rage quit is pretty much what they have done.

Dec 11, 2006, 11:08 AM // 11:08	#32
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	full detail - I never said it would be currently viable to go full detail on armour in towns , except maybe higher detail in some outposts with few ppl in. All Ive suggested is that they render what would otherwise be amongst the most detailed and best armour in the game (at high res) , better than a pixilated mess. Just making it look like armour and not pixels is not even in the same league as going full high res detail , as you all seem to think I want. Which I dont , because itd be impractical , although in the future who knows. I'm not even asking for a big improvement here , just tweaks in suits of armour for them to look passable , and not "pitiful" (as Ive been rightfully told) and embarrasing.

Dec 11, 2006, 11:09 AM // 11:09	#33
Snow White Tan Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: Caliber Thirteen [CT] Profession: N/Mo	Haijiibirdhead, don't tell me YOU're not showing off, running around with your crys and stormbows. Although I must admit, it looks damn good. I have noticed this graphics problem, but I don't mind. Only a few armors catches my eye because of their bad resolution (warrior primeval and war obsidian), but as i rarely see any of these armors, I really donot care. I know it's sad that people can't see your armors full potential within towns and outposts, but when I buy Ascended armor or generally good looking armor (male necromancer fanatics armor, blue), I buy them for my own leisure, not others. Sure, it's fun to show off your brand new armor, but is the disappointment from the lack of quality of OTHER peoples armor gonna prevent You from buying the armor of your dreams? Highly unlikely.

Dec 11, 2006, 11:31 AM // 11:31	#35
Snow White Tan Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: Caliber Thirteen [CT] Profession: N/Mo	One storm bow, many storm bows. You're missing my point. That post wasn't entirely pointing at you. It was another (or perhaps a supporting) point of view in this debate. Basicly what I'm saying is, YOU choose your armor. Not the oppinions of others. If you see an armor you like, you have the money for and the will to get it, then get it! You're never gonna hear the remark "Damn, You're armors graphic quality sucks!", 'cause most people don't notice. And some peoples vocabulary is limited to "Good Heal", "50/50 ecto?" and "Kick (insert name)". And if you feel inferior because your armor might or might not look bad, just remember this: You're not the only one. Everyone else has the same exact problem. Unless, of course, their video card is low quality. They might experience an improvement

Dec 11, 2006, 11:47 AM // 11:47	#36
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	Basicly what I'm saying is, YOU choose your armor. Not the oppinions of others. If you see an armor you like, you have the money for and the will to get it, then get it! Lol you dont quite get it either - I simply dont understand the point in getting something that expensive (anyway) thinking that you look a million bucks , when in reality you look the opposite. Ok granted i know towns cant really have high res , but some of the graphics of other players is so very disappointing, others outright embarrasing as i said earlier. I think its a real "Emperors new clothes" situation. 1- Expensive armour looks bad (usually) worse than their standard counterparts at low res /outposts. 2- Guild Wars is becoming more single player orientated in explorable areas. Which kind of nulifies the point of even having markedly more expensive armour imo - your paying all that extra for what? to look worse than before the vast majority of the time? or to look good to yourself even though its only a phalasy? You're never gonna hear the remark "Damn, You're armors graphic quality sucks!", 'cause most people don't notice. And some peoples vocabulary is limited to "Good Heal", "50/50 ecto?" and "Kick (insert name)". Actually Ive already heard the remark similar to those lines, albeit I had to push for the opinion. and yes most people may not say it to you because they are either too polite , or cannot be bothered to. Yet they sure as hell think it dont they. And if you feel inferior because your armor might or might not look bad, just remember this: You're not the only one. Everyone else has the same exact problem. Untrue , like I said before , different armours (quite a few , maybe ost) are invariably more forgiving than others at low resolution and still look respectable. Others look like trash....

Dec 11, 2006, 12:40 PM // 12:40	#39
Snow White Tan Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: Caliber Thirteen [CT] Profession: N/Mo	I will not force you to change your mind. Just advise you to see it from a different angle. By focusing on all the bad about the armor, you forget about the great looks, though partly unsharable, that it has! If you can't accept the resolution problem, then stop buying the armors, and miss out on one of the great things about the game: The art! I'm sorry that you can't live with the quality and actually have thrown out a great armor. But if you can't live with it, you can't live with it. And nothing is gonna alter that. So fine, don't buy the Primeval armor you want, or any of the other great looking armors. It's not gonna stop me from equiping my dervish with the awesome Primeval armor. I'm not buying it for prestige. I'm buying it for it's looks. The fact that some people reacts like me with cool armor, giving compliments, is just a bonus. I like to be able to look at my characters and enjoy what i see. Hopefully, you can do the same.

Dec 11, 2006, 12:44 PM // 12:44	#40
Haijiibirdhead Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Dec 2006 Guild: None Profession: R/Mo	I have not thrown out the armour - my comment was on the gold I've flushed down the sewer in buying /crafting it ... I still intend to wear it in combat areas. But boy is it a shame.