I don't know jack about jack... but I think the engine is a big part of the technical issues (textures... instancing need).
I have been saying it many topics. The biggest mistake on their part was to license the Hero Engine. It's a pile of unoptimized and bad performing piece of junk!
I think they had to do a lot of inhouse tweaking on their own to make it all even work as it is today.
I am pretty sure that's the primary reason why they had to go the so called stylish route with crappy lowrez textures.
I completely disagree. Gamebryo takes the cake as the worst MMO engine IMO.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Wow, that is some pretty sad numbers for this game. Seems you need mid range cards to run the game pretty well on low. Even worse, at max, a 570 just inching above 30fps. Trying to give Crysis and The Witcher 2 a run for its money, eh.
Wow, thats some bad performance statistics for this type of graphics. People will actually have to use high end graphic cards, to run SWTOR at decent framerate.
Ehh? i have old 5770 it is anything but high end and i maxed out everything and got 45 to 50 fps. 30 fps? not even once framerate went below 40.
Not saying I doubt you, but I'm going to pay attention to the guys that actually do benchmarking for a living.
I will post a video with fraps on if you like? my system is quite decent and like i said never went below 40 fps.
Concerning scenery and characters graphics design, what you see on the last stages of beta is what you get on launch. Why? Becouse all these takes time to make and at this stage they are tweaking and bug fixing. So no, we will not get high resolution textures on launch. You can quote me on that and throw a pie to my face if I'm wrong.
I don't know jack about jack... but I think the engine is a big part of the technical issues (textures... instancing need).
I have been saying it many topics. The biggest mistake on their part was to license the Hero Engine. It's a pile of unoptimized and bad performing piece of junk!
I think they had to do a lot of inhouse tweaking on their own to make it all even work as it is today.
I am pretty sure that's the primary reason why they had to go the so called stylish route with crappy lowrez textures.
I completely disagree. Gamebryo takes the cake as the worst MMO engine IMO.
And as far as I know they already went under long ago.
Wow, that is some pretty sad numbers for this game. Seems you need mid range cards to run the game pretty well on low. Even worse, at max, a 570 just inching above 30fps. Trying to give Crysis and The Witcher 2 a run for its money, eh.
Wow, thats some bad performance statistics for this type of graphics.
People will actually have to use high end graphic cards, to run SWTOR at decent framerate.
In fact i was talking a lot about this.The enviroment textures are indeed of very low textures.Lets hope they have them high on release otherwise good fail for them.
Hero engine is capable of much more and can be even upgraded to dx 11. So far Bioware has mentioned that they will keep tweaking graphics after release. Graphics oesn't matter to me much but it is good to know that they will keep working on it.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6. US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian. Subs will be so low there is no need for more Snoocky-How many servers? The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
There was a post about this at the official forums, the breakdown of the posts there was something like; 15% people posting screenshots that has nothing to with textures and/or that actually showed the bad textures, 25% people talking about things that has nothing to do with textures, 40% people telling OP to go play GW2 ( because he had the misfortune to post a screenshot of that game as a high texture example). So its been talked but as anyone can guess not advertised as a strong point.
The textures we had at the beta was very bad, i really hope they do something about it.
However it is not something gamebreaking, syrim had the same kind of bad textures, we played it and enjoyed.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
i heard that one too, which actually makes sense, 2-3gb is nothing for just one person to download but it probably adds up to something when you have to upload it for everyone in beta, besides texture has no role to play in testing server stability, they are trying to test their system, not ours.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
i heard that one too, which actually makes sense, 2-3gb is nothing for just one person to download but it probably adds up to something when you have to upload it for everyone in beta, besides texture has no role to play in testing server stability, they are trying to test their system, not ours.
Well, every build of course we all had to re-download the client from scratch. There were a lot of people voicing concerns over using up their bandwidth caps for the month, etc.
This is one reason that it kinds makes sense to me.....but then as I said....it could be BS.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
i heard that one too, which actually makes sense, 2-3gb is nothing for just one person to download but it probably adds up to something when you have to upload it for everyone in beta, besides texture has no role to play in testing server stability, they are trying to test their system, not ours.
Well, every build of course we all had to re-download the client from scratch. There were a lot of people voicing concerns over using up their bandwidth caps for the month, etc.
This is one reason that it kinds makes sense to me.....but then as I said....it could be BS.
Testing launch client should be testing launch client, thats the client that got shipped in boxes, and for open beta weekend people needed to download it only once, and they said you dont need to download new client for live, just patch that one.
So it would make more sense to let people download everything they need then since it doesnt make any difference except everyone patching client on start of EGA.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
i heard that one too, which actually makes sense, 2-3gb is nothing for just one person to download but it probably adds up to something when you have to upload it for everyone in beta, besides texture has no role to play in testing server stability, they are trying to test their system, not ours.
Well, every build of course we all had to re-download the client from scratch. There were a lot of people voicing concerns over using up their bandwidth caps for the month, etc.
This is one reason that it kinds makes sense to me.....but then as I said....it could be BS.
Testing launch client should be testing launch client, thats the client that got shipped in boxes, and for open beta weekend people needed to download it only once, and they said you dont need to download new client for live, just patch that one.
So it would make more sense to let people download everything they need then since it doesnt make any difference except everyone patching client on start of EGA.
Actually....they recommended that we re-download the entire client for launch again. The same build was used from one weekend test to another, so there was no reason to re-download then. But the "launch build" was not even the finalised client, just the build that the released game would be based off, if that makes any sense.
Bioware's beta system was quite different than any other that I've taken part in. Instead of having one build that they patched incrementally, where progress toward a launch client could be seen by all testers, we had entirely different builds of the game.
Now that they have the build that they are going to use, they can patch to that. So the last build we saw wasn't the final game....just the core that they intend to build on in live.
Actually....they recommended that we re-download the entire client for launch again. The same build was used from one weekend test to another, so there was no reason to re-download then. But the "launch build" was not even the finalised client, just the build that the released game would be based off, if that makes any sense.
Bioware's beta system was quite different than any other that I've taken part in. Instead of having one build that they patched incrementally, where progress toward a launch client could be seen by all testers, we had entirely different builds of the game.
Now that they have the build that they are going to use, they can patch to that. So the last build we saw wasn't the final game....just the core that they intend to build on in live.
Unless theres big patch tomorrow...yes it is final game. Because its pretty much same client as it was on open beta weekend with minor downloads.
One thing - they word things like "we want to have x ready for launch". Launch is on 20th. So chance is - no difference for EGA from open beta client (xept some bug squishing).
This thread is hopeless, The OP has already stated his hatred for SWTOR days and weeks ago. The people who dislike SWTOR graphics will never change their mind and assume the graphics are better than 95% of MMO's out there like I do. Not to mention the OP started this thread by asking questions no one could possibly answer.
I'd recommend just cutting these few people as a loss and not bother wasting your time and effort trying to show a better version of graphics they have no intention of liking or respecting.
I would disagree about the topic being a bad one. The person starting it may be against the game, but it seems to have generated some good discussion about the quality of the graphics, the Hero engine, AA, and several other observations. I don't think that because someone is questioning something about the game in a negative way means its a bad topic.
Having said that, I think the graphics look fine. Not cutting edge nor state of the art. But I like em. They convey what they need to convey in such a way that I will enjoy myself. If they improve them or add the option for higher resoluations, I will gladly take em. But its not something weighing on my mind.
A lot of assertions on what the HERO ENGINE can and cannot do. I did a little searching and came up to the HERO ENGINE WIKI. http://hewiki.heroengine.com/wiki/Main_Page. I'm not sure if it has all the answers that people are looking for, but it might be a way to validate or disprove what people are saying. Its pretty complicated, and I really don't have a problem with the graphics, but for those who are interested in the topic, this should prove a useful resource.
You managed to play the game with never under 80fps on ultra detail with this system:
Intel Core i7 2600k 4.8ghz
Asus P8P67 Pro
8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
2x Radeon HD 6950 2GB Unlocked
Dell e248wfp x2 + others
2x 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 [Raid 0]
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Do you actually wonder why you never drop under 80?
[Mod Edit]
Not really. I play at 3x the normal resolution most people will. The problem is that on Tom's test, they use the 6970 and get what seem to me to be really low framerates for just 1080p. Making a valid point when I say that they are misleading many people with their numbers on a VERY similar system to mine. The only real difference was they used a 2500k instead of a 2600k. Also, even with crossfire disabled I was hitting better numbers than them while at 6048x1200 sooooo... seems odd.
There was a bug in beta where high quality was actually not high quality, but low was high quality. So people set it on high but actually got lower detail :P
The actual client has only grown about 1gb since beta closed so I doubt many more textures have been added. Apparently they removed a lot of un-used crap from the client some time ago, which is why it shrunk so much.
Comments
I completely disagree. Gamebryo takes the cake as the worst MMO engine IMO.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
BOOYAKA!
Concerning scenery and characters graphics design, what you see on the last stages of beta is what you get on launch. Why? Becouse all these takes time to make and at this stage they are tweaking and bug fixing. So no, we will not get high resolution textures on launch. You can quote me on that and throw a pie to my face if I'm wrong.
And as far as I know they already went under long ago.
It's because the Hero Engine is just crap.
In fact i was talking a lot about this.The enviroment textures are indeed of very low textures.Lets hope they have them high on release otherwise good fail for them.
Hero engine is capable of much more and can be even upgraded to dx 11. So far Bioware has mentioned that they will keep tweaking graphics after release. Graphics oesn't matter to me much but it is good to know that they will keep working on it.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6.
US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian.
Subs will be so low there is no need for more
Snoocky-How many servers?
The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
There was a post about this at the official forums, the breakdown of the posts there was something like; 15% people posting screenshots that has nothing to with textures and/or that actually showed the bad textures, 25% people talking about things that has nothing to do with textures, 40% people telling OP to go play GW2 ( because he had the misfortune to post a screenshot of that game as a high texture example). So its been talked but as anyone can guess not advertised as a strong point.
The textures we had at the beta was very bad, i really hope they do something about it.
However it is not something gamebreaking, syrim had the same kind of bad textures, we played it and enjoyed.
I need more vespene gas.
Guess we'll have to wait until launch to see.
I had heard somewhere that the "good" textures had been disabled for beta, due to us having to re-download the game client constantly, and itimisation not being finalised.
Could be bullshit though. We'll have to wait and see.
The site is from some greek noobs.They say bst
I tell u that cause im also Greek and i know they are total noobs.
i heard that one too, which actually makes sense, 2-3gb is nothing for just one person to download but it probably adds up to something when you have to upload it for everyone in beta, besides texture has no role to play in testing server stability, they are trying to test their system, not ours.
I need more vespene gas.
Well, every build of course we all had to re-download the client from scratch. There were a lot of people voicing concerns over using up their bandwidth caps for the month, etc.
This is one reason that it kinds makes sense to me.....but then as I said....it could be BS.
Testing launch client should be testing launch client, thats the client that got shipped in boxes, and for open beta weekend people needed to download it only once, and they said you dont need to download new client for live, just patch that one.
So it would make more sense to let people download everything they need then since it doesnt make any difference except everyone patching client on start of EGA.
Actually....they recommended that we re-download the entire client for launch again. The same build was used from one weekend test to another, so there was no reason to re-download then. But the "launch build" was not even the finalised client, just the build that the released game would be based off, if that makes any sense.
Bioware's beta system was quite different than any other that I've taken part in. Instead of having one build that they patched incrementally, where progress toward a launch client could be seen by all testers, we had entirely different builds of the game.
Now that they have the build that they are going to use, they can patch to that. So the last build we saw wasn't the final game....just the core that they intend to build on in live.
Unless theres big patch tomorrow...yes it is final game. Because its pretty much same client as it was on open beta weekend with minor downloads.
One thing - they word things like "we want to have x ready for launch". Launch is on 20th. So chance is - no difference for EGA from open beta client (xept some bug squishing).
I would disagree about the topic being a bad one. The person starting it may be against the game, but it seems to have generated some good discussion about the quality of the graphics, the Hero engine, AA, and several other observations. I don't think that because someone is questioning something about the game in a negative way means its a bad topic.
Having said that, I think the graphics look fine. Not cutting edge nor state of the art. But I like em. They convey what they need to convey in such a way that I will enjoy myself. If they improve them or add the option for higher resoluations, I will gladly take em. But its not something weighing on my mind.
I self identify as a monkey.
A lot of assertions on what the HERO ENGINE can and cannot do. I did a little searching and came up to the HERO ENGINE WIKI. http://hewiki.heroengine.com/wiki/Main_Page. I'm not sure if it has all the answers that people are looking for, but it might be a way to validate or disprove what people are saying. Its pretty complicated, and I really don't have a problem with the graphics, but for those who are interested in the topic, this should prove a useful resource.
I self identify as a monkey.
Seriously, you need to ask this question of an MMO?
Oooh we havn't got the full game yet something missing from mine as it's 18.5 GBs and Pre-order FAQ says:
"The size of the final Game Client is approximately 27GB when fully installed."
That means that 8.5 Gigabytes or 31% of the game missing. So what can it be? Only thing I can think of is High Res Textures.
Indeed. my client size has always been around the 30gb mark in the past. I just checked, and my findings are the same as yours.
The reason they say keep 27 gb is for all the other laungages. The client size is about 19 gb. Its nto quite but close.
They are gonna add anti aliasing and stuff but not sure if thats at launch or after launch.
I played the game in eyefinity and still managed like 80 fps... soooo theyre results must be pretty off. Here's a vid I made during beta:
Star Wars: TOR in eyefinity
I'll be posting more up once I get in this week sometime.
Intel Core i7 2600k 4.8ghz
Asus P8P67 Pro
8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
Diamond Radeon 7970 3GB
3x Dell U2412M 6048x1200
2x 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 [Raid 0]
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
You managed to play the game with never under 80fps on ultra detail with this system:
Intel Core i7 2600k 4.8ghz
Asus P8P67 Pro
8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
2x Radeon HD 6950 2GB Unlocked
Dell e248wfp x2 + others
2x 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 [Raid 0]
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Do you actually wonder why you never drop under 80?
[Mod Edit]
http://www.youtube.com/user/chopgr?feature=mhee
"The Heavens burned, the stars
cried out
And under the ashes of infinity,
Hope, scarred and bleeding,
breathed its last."
Not really. I play at 3x the normal resolution most people will. The problem is that on Tom's test, they use the 6970 and get what seem to me to be really low framerates for just 1080p. Making a valid point when I say that they are misleading many people with their numbers on a VERY similar system to mine. The only real difference was they used a 2500k instead of a 2600k. Also, even with crossfire disabled I was hitting better numbers than them while at 6048x1200 sooooo... seems odd.
[Mod Edit]
Intel Core i7 2600k 4.8ghz
Asus P8P67 Pro
8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
Diamond Radeon 7970 3GB
3x Dell U2412M 6048x1200
2x 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 [Raid 0]
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
There was a bug in beta where high quality was actually not high quality, but low was high quality. So people set it on high but actually got lower detail :P
The actual client has only grown about 1gb since beta closed so I doubt many more textures have been added. Apparently they removed a lot of un-used crap from the client some time ago, which is why it shrunk so much.