Curse

bhavv · Jun 08, 2007, 07:14 PM // 19:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by bamm bamm bamm

I think its designed to accommodate graphics cards with low on-board memory, or on-board graphics chips using shared RAM.

And who exactly has onboard graphics with shared ram nowadays? I doubt that would even run GW.

Most gamers have a card around the Nvidia 6600 or 7600 range at least, both of which are fully capable of running this game maxed out. Im sure a 512meg X1900/7900+ would be able to handle max texture details with ease for those of us that have one.

Again, if you dont have a powerful machine, You dont have to use the higher settings.

Another thing I would really like to see is support for higher modes of AA. 4x is just fugly compared to 6x adaptive AA.

bamm bamm bamm · Jun 08, 2007, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

Again, if you dont have a powerful machine, You dont have to use the higher settings.

I agree. I don't know why you've jumped down my throat about it. If you think I was trying to argue with you, you should look at the post times.

bhavv · Jun 08, 2007, 08:08 PM // 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by bamm bamm bamm

I agree. I don't know why you've jumped down my throat about it. If you think I was trying to argue with you, you should look at the post times.

Sorry, only the first line of my last post was intended to you. The rest is just my usual moronic 'I want this now waaaah waaaah' type of post.

Lonesamurai · Jun 08, 2007, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

And who exactly has onboard graphics with shared ram nowadays? I doubt that would even run GW.

Most gamers have a card around the Nvidia 6600 or 7600 range at least, both of which are fully capable of running this game maxed out. Im sure a 512meg X1900/7900+ would be able to handle max texture details with ease for those of us that have one.

Again, if you dont have a powerful machine, You dont have to use the higher settings.

Another thing I would really like to see is support for higher modes of AA. 4x is just fugly compared to 6x adaptive AA.

Where did you get your figures about graphics cards from? from the recent study by Steam, or the recent study by Xfire? or sales figures?

look, unless you can show me some actually graphic cards figures of usage, then please don't assume peoples usage... I on the other hand will find and post both Steams recent figures and XFires aswell

deadman_uk · Jun 08, 2007, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Where did you get your figures about graphics cards from? from the recent study by Steam, or the recent study by Xfire? or sales figures?

look, unless you can show me some actually graphic cards figures of usage, then please don't assume peoples usage... I on the other hand will find and post both Steams recent figures and XFires aswell

What graphics card people use is irrelevant, the fact is I and many others pay a lot of money for our good PC's, we want the best graphics possible and we know GW can have high quality textures and I am pretty sure this is all done on your own hard drive. If this is the case, then this should be implemented into GW.

bhavv · Jun 08, 2007, 08:48 PM // 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Where did you get your figures about graphics cards from? from the recent study by Steam, or the recent study by Xfire? or sales figures?

look, unless you can show me some actually graphic cards figures of usage, then please don't assume peoples usage... I on the other hand will find and post both Steams recent figures and XFires aswell

Oh sorry, I base my figures on the many computer tech forums I trolll on

I guess those are only used by leet gamers and everyone else runs onboard intel graphics then?

Seriously andyone of working age with a job and that is a gamer will by now have a 6600 at least. I dont take figures from school children into account. Also, I dont use steam, xfire or any of these other programs, so imo they arent relible either.

Even so, you can get a 7600gt for £65 now, thats the same cost as two games. If you need to upgrade, its hardly expensive at all, unless you need a new mobo/cpu/ram to, but in that case you havnt upgraded since 2002 when PCI-E was first released, which is also a little silly.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...=56&subcat=356

freekedoutfish · Jun 08, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

And who exactly has onboard graphics with shared ram nowadays? I doubt that would even run GW.

Most gamers have a card around the Nvidia 6600 or 7600 range at least, both of which are fully capable of running this game maxed out. Im sure a 512meg X1900/7900+ would be able to handle max texture details with ease for those of us that have one.

Again, if you dont have a powerful machine, You dont have to use the higher settings.

Another thing I would really like to see is support for higher modes of AA. 4x is just fugly compared to 6x adaptive AA.

My card (I think) is lower then the 6600 or 7600, and I have no intention of buying a new one or a new PC. The reason is that I play most games on my xbox360. GWs is the only PC game I play. Plus I dont have £1000 to spend on a new machine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_uk

What graphics card people use is irrelevant, the fact is I and many others pay a lot of money for our good PC's, we want the best graphics possible and we know GW can have high quality textures and I am pretty sure this is all done on your own hard drive. If this is the case, then this should be implemented into GW.

I can completely appreciate your view on that, and I accept i cant be fun having a sooped up PC but not being able to have a game look amazing.

But as I said before, this is a 2 year old game!

You would have bought the game, or started playing on an older machine knowing fine well its an old game now. What expectations did you have visually?

If you want an up-to-date, state of the art, lush looking game, then buy a more recent one that has more modern technology running it. Something with the Unreal 3 or HL2 engine.

Yes Anet is capable of and does update the game. But visuals are a low priority in terms of updating or fixing. The priority is on errors, bugs, balancing skills, new campaigns, new expansions.

Especially when we have GW2 coming out in 2 or 3 years, we can expect better and improved graphics.

As I've said myself, I understand the want for better visuals. I would love them myself, but they do the job and they are nice. Their not horrible graphics that you cant stand looking at them.

You cant really ask or expect a company to completely refit the graphics of a 2 year old game, when there are more important issues. If everything else was fixed and perfect, and they werent busy doing other stuff, then I would be all for a graphics uphall.

But with GW:EN and GW2 coming out, they cant really take time and effort out to over-hall the entire games graphics engine.

Lonesamurai · Jun 08, 2007, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

My card (I think) is lower then the 6600 or 7600, and I have no intention of buying a new one or a new PC. The reason is that I play most games on my xbox360. GWs is the only PC game I play. Plus I dont have £1000 to spend on a new machine.

I can completely appreciate your view on that, and I accept i cant be fun having a sooped up PC but not being able to have a game look amazing.

But as I said before, this is a 2 year old game!

You would have bought the game, or started playing on an older machine knowing fine well its an old game now. What expectations did you have visually?

If you want an up-to-date, state of the art, lush looking game, then buy a more recent one that has more modern technology running it. Something with the Unreal 3 or HL2 engine.

Yes Anet is capable of and does update the game. But visuals are a low priority in terms of updating or fixing. The priority is on errors, bugs, balancing skills, new campaigns, new expansions.

Especially when we have GW2 coming out in 2 or 3 years, we can expect better and improved graphics.

As I've said myself, I understand the want for better visuals. I would love them myself, but they do the job and they are nice. Their not horrible graphics that you cant stand looking at them.

You cant really ask or expect a company to completely refit the graphics of a 2 year old game, when there are more important issues. If everything else was fixed and perfect, and they werent busy doing other stuff, then I would be all for a graphics uphall.

But with GW:EN and GW2 coming out, they cant really take time and effort out to over-hall the entire games graphics engine.

Bingo and well said...

There is another very good reason that this doesn't need doing, nor will it be done anytime soon:

If they did this, it would yet again, be something else for people to moan to ANet about not spending time on things like Skill updates, etc... Its unnesecary and so doubtful it'll happen

grogxz · Jun 09, 2007, 02:48 AM // 02:48

There is no technical reason not to do it. Its already implemented, because we get hires textures outside of outposts and towns. We just need a switch to toggle this setting for towns and outposts.

I guess it takes as much time as preparing a weekend event. I would gladly sacrifice one of this events for this small upgrade.

/signed

MithranArkanere · Jun 09, 2007, 09:27 AM // 09:27

This ONLY happens inside towns and outposts. In 'battle' areas, you get the same quality in allies and enemies.

Althouht this very same suggestion has been made some times already.

I seggested to have the 'texture quality' have a 'highest' option that bypass the limit in cities, since the GW.dat already have the textures and would not be any lag trouble or something.

bhavv · Jun 09, 2007, 10:21 AM // 10:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Its unnesecary and so doubtful it'll happen

It is neccassary for one reason, that I can admire other peoples high end armors which I cant get on my elementalist or monk. I would love to be able to run up to a warrior in 15k luxon and his/her armor the same way he/she can see it on their computer, because it looks nice.

This isnt really asking for a major update that would take ages to do, as someone pointed out, all it requires is a little tweak to show other peoples armors in outposts the same way that they are in missions/explrable areas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

But with GW:EN and GW2 coming out, they cant really take time and effort out to over-hall the entire games graphics engine.

It isnt asking to change the entire graphics engine, it is pretty much just a minor tweak to enable armors to be drawn at a higher quality which already exists in the game.

All they need to do is add a new option line in the code with a higher pixel limit on rendering armor

Also, with enabling higher modes of AA support in the game, isnt a major update. Games from way before GW were relesed operate with 6x temporal/adaptive AA, but GW is capped at 4x max, even driver settings cant over-ride the ingame option.

If you could actually bother to read and understand how minor these tweaks are, you wouldnt have any need to complain. They are as small as tweaking the number 1024 to 2048 in the ini file yourself for oblivion or gothic 3, and installing a new driver set for your GPU.

Nevin · Jun 09, 2007, 10:51 AM // 10:51

/signed

- I just spent 500 bucks upgrading my computer to DDR2 ram with an AGP videocard, new mother board and an Athlon processor, I want to be able to max it out at its best...

Rusty Deth · Jun 09, 2007, 10:56 AM // 10:56

You know I play alone alot and for months I thought what I was seeing in towns and outposts was because my PC sucked.

But one day my friend with PigMail ran me to LA and I put two and two together. In town crappy. Outside pretty cool.

I mentioned in the Obsidian Armor thread hwo I like checking out peoples stuff. Wether be high end, a mix of armors, or colorfully dyed.

I understand what the OP is saying, We shoudl at least have "the option" to crank up the res of other peoples armor. But even with my pimped out pc, going to large towns like LA and Droks takes a toll on it as it is.

Just now there isn't any hard evidence that a badass PC could take it since we don't have the option to see for ourselves.

So I'm all with the option to crank it up so individuals can see if their machine can handle it.

On a side note, personally the crappy textures seem to be more noticeable on certain types of armors. Pigmail, warrior FOW, monk tats, ranger druids, necro scars, and since i got the set, Elite Sunspear for the warrior.

Yeah I want to see everyone pimped out in high res, since out in the game you don;t alot of time to check people out.

But i also want to play the game on my notebook from time to time.

/signed for the option to do it.

william1975 · Jun 09, 2007, 11:55 AM // 11:55

If it doesn't affect the server then /signed
if it does /notsigned

I don't get lag at the moment unless the server is overloaded where i am or i have webpages in the background and im jumping fromt hem to the game,
I liek the way the game runs on my pc, any change that decreases this will not make me happy, but if a change doesn't affect it then I'm all for it

bhavv · Jun 09, 2007, 08:09 PM // 20:09

Wiliam, as i stated before, improving texture quality does not affect server speed as the textures are loaded from your HD. You can see this from swapping between the current texture settings, each higher setting can be instantly loaded in less then a second without requiring any data sent via the server. All it affects is the strain on your graphics card.

deadman_uk · Jun 12, 2007, 12:31 AM // 00:31

If Anet won't give us the option, is there a way we can force it? as in edit the files?

blackjoker4215 · Jun 12, 2007, 09:29 AM // 09:29

Editing files of an online game such as guild wars might be considered hacking. But I could be wrong, because games such as CS:S and DoD:S let you modify the files. Best thing to do is see if any texture mods could work. Then seeing if they are considered no no's.

Thomas.knbk · Jun 12, 2007, 10:33 AM // 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_uk

I think you are being a bit selfish. OK you and some others may not or cant afford to upgrade their PC and that's fine but don't say it's a waste of time because of that and don't say people will survive without it, I like good graphics, please appreciate that. People like me have powerful PC's, we want better graphics and it wouldn't require much work. ANET have all the textures already made, not much work would have to be done to get this to work in my opinion.

I think you are a bit selfish.
I think you really underestimate how many people do not have a high speed connection and a monster pc. I know several players (one of the best monks in the game actually) who don't even have a video card.

deadman_uk · Jun 12, 2007, 11:21 AM // 11:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas.knbk

I think you are a bit selfish.
I think you really underestimate how many people do not have a high speed connection and a monster pc. I know several players (one of the best monks in the game actually) who don't even have a video card.

Me selfish? You obviously haven't read the entire thread, that in itself is selfish of you... to make a comment without reading my new posts and the posts of others on here.

Giving players THE OPTION, THE CHOICE to allow higher resolution textures is no way selfish, I don't understand how it can be seen as selfish. People have the CHOICE to select a higher texture setting IF THEY PLEASE and people with low end PC's can just run the game as normal.

Most of us think this can be done from your hard drive and not the server itself. If this is possible, it is selfish of anyone to say no to this, because it won't affect you but it can make gamers like me happier.

bhavv · Jun 12, 2007, 11:29 AM // 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas.knbk

I think you are a bit selfish.
I think you really underestimate how many people do not have a high speed connection and a monster pc. I know several players (one of the best monks in the game actually) who don't even have a video card.

WTF does it matter if you dont have a decent PC? You still have the ability to use low settings, letting others play with higher settings if they choose to and can doesnt affect your game in the slightest bit.

By definition, you dont even need a damn monster PC to play this game. As I have posted before, you can get a graphics card for £65 that can play this game maxed out on full detail with no struggle at all, and I'm suse it could easilly handle these higher texture settings.

AND You dont need a faster connection for better graphics for the freaking last time.

Read threads before responding nonscence comments.

I could Build a PC from scratch for £300 that can play GW maxed out, full detail AA + AF. That is hardly a monster PC. If you cant afford that then you have more serious things to worry about.