| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eudoxia
   |
Posted - 2005.11.03 21:58:00 -
[1]
Their looking a bit dated. Don't get me wrong their nice and all but their a few years old now and showing their grey hairs.
Do do the devs intend of a rewrite or upgrade of the graphics engine of EVE?
Check screenshots of this game. Their UI is crap but their graphics are excellent. Linkage
|
Galk
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:02:00 -
[2]
Thing is i like to run multiple accounts from one machine, id imagine im not alone in that.
As i understand it, X3 barely runs on one machine for most people.
Most definately not a fan here, eve doesn't look that bad, it's not as spiffy as X3, or 2 for that matter, but it's allright.
-----------
When they asked me if i knew you, id smile and say you were a friend of mine.
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:03:00 -
[3]
ship and station skins need an update.
that's all.
-------------------
Celestial Horizon: we go zerg on you |
Nelix Trist
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:08:00 -
[4]
Belive me when i tell you, X3 is a superd game!... But the graphics are a bit future dated, my friend played X3 and compared it with eve. X3 would be the GAME of the year in about 3 years time... the graphics in X3 are not for the standard todays computer... eve is on the edge of ok/old but i think they should hold out untill there is hardware out there that can support what is being relesed today.
Valve have relesed a Demo to there new graphics code over steam and i have a 6800 128mb and well at medium i got anbout 12-15 FPS... havent tryed X3 yet and well from what i heard im not going to try eather.
Eve are working on a new graphics engin i belive but well, if they relese it, it'll be like it was on relese "why cant i play eve - i get a black screen when i load the splash screen", "Thats because your GFX card cant handle eve. sorry"
Kep up the great work CCP its doing great, just my advise about the new graphics, make sure most people can run it... i still know a few running it with a Geforce 4 :(
----------------------------------
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:09:00 -
[5]
The graphics are fine. The only things we need are reskins of the badly-skinned ships, like, uh...
THE APOCALPYSE.
Yeah, that and reskins of the other ships that have holes in their geometry or the like and it would be fine.
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
Sam Bacon
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:11:00 -
[6]
I love the graphics, i just think textures, could do with a re-do, many people have high res screens the textures wern't intended for!
|
Rekh Wuthrich
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:18:00 -
[7]
Pretty super RAM-heavy graphics do not a fun game make.
|
Januk
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:20:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Januk on 03/11/2005 22:21:52
the ship models are okay in high res... but everything else such as planets, moons, etc looks very 2d and could use some updates.
each solar systems looks so empty to me too.
oh.. and i wish we could see our ships landing like in the X3 trailer...
speaking of x3.. what kind of game is it? like Freespace?
|
Januk
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:20:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Januk on 03/11/2005 22:21:52
the ship models are okay in high res... but everything else such as planets, moons, etc looks very 2d and could use some updates.
each solar systems looks so empty to me too.
oh.. and i wish we could see our ships landing like in the X3 trailer...
speaking of x3.. what kind of game is it? like Freespace?
|
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:21:00 -
[10]
omg I missed another space game somehow, gonna try it out and see what I think :D
Latest Video: In memory of The Sioux |
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:21:00 -
[11]
omg I missed another space game somehow, gonna try it out and see what I think :D
Latest Video: In memory of The Sioux |
Nelix Trist
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:21:00 -
[12]
 Originally by: Januk
the ship models are okay in high res... but the background and most other models like plants, moons, etc looks very 2d and could use some updates.
oh.. and i wish we could see our ships landing like in the X3 trailer...
speaking of x3.. what kind of game is it? like Freespace?
Sort of, have you never played X2, its just a better graphic game than X2 (so i have been told)
----------------------------------
|
Januk
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:23:00 -
[13]
the fact that you can land on a terrain looks sweet to me... gonna try out X3 for sure. I think my new laptop would cut it.
|
Nelix Trist
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Januk
the fact that you can land on a terrain looks sweet to me... gonna try out X3 for sure. I think my new laptop would cut it.
I dout it.. laptop playing X3 would more than likly over heat... but allways worth a try :D
i have been thinking about it... atm i cant buy it due to RL issues but allways waiting :D
----------------------------------
|
El Yatta
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:42:00 -
[15]
I think EVE's graphics look better than the linked screenies. Sure, EVE's planets need up-sizing, and possibly re-texturing, as do moons. Stations could use a facelift, as could some ships (Apoc, Exequeror, Omen, few others). Space backdrops, effects and a lot of ships look way better than what is linked, although to be fair, I've not seen X3 im motion.
---:::---
|
Januk
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:47:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Januk on 03/11/2005 22:56:17
Edited by: Januk on 03/11/2005 22:50:38
watch the trailer here:
http://www.egosoft.com/download
|
RedClaws
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:55:00 -
[17]
The Devs already said the graphics are a bit outdated on eve and are getting an upgrade
|
GC13
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 23:36:00 -
[18]
Eve's graphics are bad? 
Silly me. I always thought they looked quite pretty.
|
LegendHawk
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 00:36:00 -
[19]
X3 looks like EVE on ***** 
... well a game is not judge by its graphic
|
Gonada
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 00:57:00 -
[20]
Pretty super RAM-heavy graphics do not a fun game make.
-----------------------------------------------------
sorry, but if you can afford to play eve, pay a monthly fee, then you can afford 1-2 gigs of ram, notlike its expensive anymore eh ?
/no excuses for crappy computers
-Baby can you dig your man-
|
Chade Malloy
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 01:27:00 -
[21]
Well, the X-series was always famous for next-gen graphics (and sluggish control/interface) DonŠt know the latest part, but i just hope they did overhaul the controls and management systems.
The game itself is like a crossover from freespace with elite / eve, its singleplayer only as fas as i know, and you can practically do all you want, building stations in space, set up trade routes, fight in fast small ships or even heavy battlecruiser etc etc...
IŠm not crazy, i just have another consciousness in my mind! |
Daniel Jackson
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 01:43:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Daniel Jackson on 04/11/2005 01:45:56
Originally by: Rekh Wuthrich
Pretty super RAM-heavy graphics do not a fun game make.
actualy the fun of a game is because of that
atleast to me :)
as uber graphics is the funnest thing ever and pvp is the boringest thing ever
unless your in a capital ship
i have a ATi X850 XT 256MB AGP video card
and hehe once i live on my own ill try best as i can to get the most best crahpic card out ther in the entire world and the best pc mother bord etc to run ultra high graphic games
im justlike thT HEHE.
I ALWAYS gotta have the best stuff
best stuff = fun
Caldari will once again rise above the Gallente and take back Caldari Prime!
Image done by Denrace |
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 02:13:00 -
[23]
I'm in a DJ thread \o/
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
prsr
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 02:54:00 -
[24]
tbh those graphics you linked don't look that hot. Maybe it's just me but some of those textures look like they spent all of 5 minutes on them.
|
BlackHawk177
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 03:50:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
I'm in a DJ thread \o/
\o/ Me too
Can we shoot them yet? |
Rekh Wuthrich
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 05:53:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Gonada
Pretty super RAM-heavy graphics do not a fun game make.
-----------------------------------------------------
sorry, but if you can afford to play eve, pay a monthly fee, then you can afford 1-2 gigs of ram, notlike its expensive anymore eh ?
/no excuses for crappy computers
My statement has nothing to do with spending money and everything to do with a game that has zero depth and replay value behind the pretty pictures. |
Tripoli
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 06:06:00 -
[27]
Pretty screenshots. You know what they made me realize?
Our planets are WAY too small!!! 
---
|
Illegal Alien
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 06:17:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Tripoli
Pretty screenshots. You know what they made me realize?
Our planets are WAY too small!!!
No, your just not as close to them.
|
Lardarz B'stard
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 06:22:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Januk
the fact that you can land on a terrain looks sweet to me...
why are people so obsessed with this?
(and "W00T I'm in (another) DJ thread")
<Hammerhead> whine on the forum, the mods love it |
Tripoli
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 06:34:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Illegal Alien
Originally by: Tripoli
Pretty screenshots. You know what they made me realize?
Our planets are WAY too small!!!
No, your just not as close to them.
I dunno, man. I've flown my Apoc to where it was literally touching the surface of a planet at its pole. My ship looked much too big compared to the planet. That was a LONG time ago, but I actually still have the screenshot. Obviously that's a VERY old shot, but the size of the Apoc/planet hasn't changed since then. Heh, gotta love that super-low resolution on the planet. 
---
|
SengH
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 06:50:00 -
[31]
Edited by: SengH on 04/11/2005 06:53:20
not sure if this is a repost or if its allowed.. mods if its not dont ban me pls kthxs.
Edit: uploaded to eve files.
2004 Fanfest planetary flight shakey cam vid
Warping through the atmosphere to the surface  . Not my recording, just a vid that someone sent to me over TS.
|
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 07:09:00 -
[32]
I wouldn't be surprised if EVE progress moved away from better graphics towards "less laggy graphics"
As lag becomes more and more of an issue, you'll see gradual decrease of graphical features, texture resolutions, levels of detail, and smaller far clip plane.
|
Majestik
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 07:34:00 -
[33]
Originally by: LegendHawk
X3 looks like EVE on *****
... well a game is not judge by its graphic
I can't really judge X3 at all because it is not a MMORPG.
Unless I have missed something.
|
ian666
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 12:47:00 -
[34]
Edited by: ian666 on 04/11/2005 12:48:45
Edited by: ian666 on 04/11/2005 12:48:19
Yeah X3 graphics are cool, but I'm with Galk I would rather not have the latest graphics but can run multiple accounts at once with out a problem on dual monitors.
Eve is about game play, I do feel that most game developers now a days are going for great graphics but no game play, I remember Elite 2 loved that game but dam tho 3d graphics were poor but I still played it to death.
Also with High end graphics come more lag issues not only on the servers but Locally mmm best left along for now I feel
|
HighlanderUK
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 14:59:00 -
[35]
Just fixing some of the naff thumbnails will do for me, and some ship skins. Like the idea of potentially having ur corp logo on your ship - nice touch Devs.
Can someone PLEASE fix the Vespa drone thumbnail!!!!!!!!!! The rest of the drone gfx are just not legible enough. Some ship thumbnails, just need less heavy use of the CROP command, and acually have the ship in the middle of the image.
******************
*The Flying Scotsman*
****************** |
Eudoxia
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:04:00 -
[36]
Originally by: HighlanderUK
Can someone PLEASE fix the Vespa drone thumbnail!!!!!!!!!! The rest of the drone gfx are just not legible enough. Some ship thumbnails, just need less heavy use of the CROP command, and acually have the ship in the middle of the image.
For some reason, that just made me laugh. Its so true.
Anyway, i did not intend this to be a EVE vs X3 thread. I did intend to point out that the EVE graphics are looking dated and could use some DirectX 9 loving.
|
St Dragon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:29:00 -
[37]
The reason why the graphics are not up to the level of X games is not becuse they havent had time to program them or because eve is just fine as it is....Its because eve is a MMORPG therefor it needs to be accessable to the majhoraty of the paying public.
If the graphics were super advanced like X3 then most of eve's potential customers wont be able to run it. So to make it runable by most people whay you need to do is make a game that can run on the average computer like what was done for eve.
Dispite this i feel that eve looks pretty good even if the graphics engine is looking a bit old whats important is that it works and is immersive.
|
Eudoxia
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:19:00 -
[38]
Originally by: St Dragon
The reason why the graphics are not up to the level of X games is not becuse they havent had time to program them or because eve is just fine as it is....Its because eve is a MMORPG therefor it needs to be accessable to the majhoraty of the paying public.
If the graphics were super advanced like X3 then most of eve's potential customers wont be able to run it. So to make it runable by most people whay you need to do is make a game that can run on the average computer like what was done for eve.
Dispite this i feel that eve looks pretty good even if the graphics engine is looking a bit old whats important is that it works and is immersive.
Thats an old argument and its not holding water anymore with todays engines imo.
The Source engine has amazing DX9 graphics but it can scale down to DX7 with no problems at all.
|
Majir Kry
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:24:00 -
[39]
If CCP change the graphics and I'm unable to play it from my laptop then they will lose a subscription frm me and I am sure many others with older or non upgradeable pc's.
The graphics are fine for me and graphics dont really add to gameplay.
At the moment with have server side lag, think how many complaints we would have from fps based lag added to the mix.
|
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:30:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Majir Kry
If CCP change the graphics and I'm unable to play it from my laptop then they will lose a subscription frm me and I am sure many others with older or non upgradeable pc's.
The graphics are fine for me and graphics dont really add to gameplay.
At the moment with have server side lag, think how many complaints we would have from fps based lag added to the mix.
This is actually a very good point.
This game plays BEAUTIFULLY on laptops. Not all MMOs can say that. If they can add better textures to the game then great, but please don't do so at the expense of those folks who don't like to spend a couple grand a year ricing up their computers.
Or at the very least, build in some scaling mechanisms so people can tweak the performance more. Looking at Everquest 2, there's a game that looks unbelievably great on high end systems, but also scales back so it can play well on lower end PCs. It's user configurable, so you can put the emphasis on pretty wherever you want.
|
Nomaar
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:40:00 -
[41]
There was a panel during the fanfest entirely devoted to EVE graphic upgrades, but nobody in attendance has bothered to report what happened. With that said, EVE's graphics have held up pretty well over the past few years. They still have an immersive effect and make me feel like I'm traveling through space.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:46:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The graphics are fine. The only things we need are reskins of the badly-skinned ships, like, uh...
THE APOCALPYSE.
Yeah, that and reskins of the other ships that have holes in their geometry or the like and it would be fine.
Aw, she doesn't look that bad for an old girl.
(Thanks again to CCP for kindly letting me show some of this stuff)
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Majestik
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:57:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Eudoxia
Originally by: St Dragon
The reason why the graphics are not up to the level of X games is not becuse they havent had time to program them or because eve is just fine as it is....Its because eve is a MMORPG therefor it needs to be accessable to the majhoraty of the paying public.
If the graphics were super advanced like X3 then most of eve's potential customers wont be able to run it. So to make it runable by most people whay you need to do is make a game that can run on the average computer like what was done for eve.
Dispite this i feel that eve looks pretty good even if the graphics engine is looking a bit old whats important is that it works and is immersive.
Thats an old argument and its not holding water anymore with todays engines imo.
The Source engine has amazing DX9 graphics but it can scale down to DX7 with no problems at all.
That argument can end quickly when X3 can handle at least 5000 people online.
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 17:14:00 -
[44]
Please cut the "my video games willy is bigger than yours" stuff. X3 is a totally different game to Eve.
The Eve fan-boys might think CCP wrote the perfect engine but let me tell you, it is possible to create FX that scale up from DirectX 6 to DirectX 10 with a good enough design and clever algorithms. It's nothing to do with Multiplayer, MMORPG or Single Player, it's all about designing an engine and the media to do it. It isn't easy and I can see why CCP didn't do it properly in the first place: they didn't have the resources then that they have now.
Eve looks rubbish these days. It used to look amazing. Give me a proper system model any day with realistic sized planets. X3 engine is one of the best created so far with the Infinity engine looking like it's going to be even better.
One of the things that does my gnads in about Eve is the completely non-existent/incorrect lighting model. I can rotate my camera drone around my ship seeing the light source (sun) in the distance and the environment/specular doesn't look right at all. It needs some work!
Finally: Planets/Flight/Landing: it's a big deal because it's like part of the Holy Grail. Seamless flight simulation from 1st Person in-buildings, through atmospheric flight simulation all the way up to space flight. No idea if it will ever be done, but if it is, it'll be one hell of a video game.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 17:18:00 -
[45]
Originally by: babyblue
It isn't easy and I can see why CCP didn't do it properly in the first place: they didn't have the resources then that they have now.
Er...
I think you'll find the reason is that CCP wrote shaders which were way ahead of what was available on most gfx cards.
As gfx card technology has advanced it became clear to the manufacturers that pure poly-fill speeds weren't everything, and they started intergrating some pretty cool shader technologies - which have eventually matched, or exceeded, those written by CCP.
That is why Eve used to be the best looking game out there, because quite simply it really was ahead of its time.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Dameaus
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 17:19:00 -
[46]
geeeez i just looked at a few movies and pics of X3 and im blown away... it looks absolutely amazing
|
Majestik
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 17:37:00 -
[47]
I will subscribe to X3 when it can handle 5000 people online.
|
Kurren
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 18:09:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Daniel Jackson
Edited by: Daniel Jackson on 04/11/2005 01:45:56
Originally by: Rekh Wuthrich
Pretty super RAM-heavy graphics do not a fun game make.
actualy the fun of a game is because of that
atleast to me :)
as uber graphics is the funnest thing ever and pvp is the boringest thing ever
unless your in a capital ship
i have a ATi X850 XT 256MB AGP video card
and hehe once i live on my own ill try best as i can to get the most best crahpic card out ther in the entire world and the best pc mother bord etc to run ultra high graphic games
im justlike thT HEHE.
I ALWAYS gotta have the best stuff
best stuff = fun
Haven't played X3, TBH... but RAM-heavy didn't make HL2 fun... I woulda settled for lesser graphics if it meant the game wouldn't automatically pause every 5 minutes to load up the next 20 feet. (and yes, my computer is uber... not super-uber... but uber)
The graphics are not what make Eve... though they are nice... Eve is complex... and fun... and all around a great game.
$20 says the Devs at X3 don't give a rat's a$$ about you... $20 says the expansions (if there are any) won't be free...
AND... this thread is in the wrong forum... it should probably have been posted in the "Out of Pod Experiences" Forum
************************************************
I'm not a pirate, I'm a business-extremist... |
Minsc
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 18:15:00 -
[49]
The graphics in EVE are fine, they still rival and even beat many mmo's that are current and forthcoming.
Some of the textures do need updating on some of the older ships (Exequor anyone?) and some of the planets too, but overall the graphics and effects are still good.
IMO EVE still has some of the prettiest explosions anywhere in any game.
that said because the engine is dx8/9 based it should be pretty easy to use shader progams to make a lot of really cool effects possible without too horrible of a performance hit on newer gpus.
The planets and space in general in x3 look great, and the ships look pretty good too. My one beef with the graphics in that game was the explosions...they look like animated sprites and really detract from the overall visual quality of the engine.
I'm gonna give x3 a try eventually but if the controls are no better than the clunky mess that was x2 I probably won't spend too much time on it.
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 18:52:00 -
[50]
Edited by: babyblue on 04/11/2005 18:52:17
Originally by: Avon
As gfx card technology has advanced it became clear to the manufacturers that pure poly-fill speeds weren't everything, and they started intergrating some pretty cool shader technologies - which have eventually matched, or exceeded, those written by CCP.
That is why Eve used to be the best looking game out there, because quite simply it really was ahead of its time.
Eve doesn't use them, or if it does they are pretty well hidden from the results. Eve requires hardware T&L it's true but it does not require a PS enabled graphics card and there are hard limits on what you can do with multi-pass rendering. It was never ahead of it's time. It did look good for a while though.
I think however that the difference is in the eye of the viewer - I find it harder to suspend my disbelief in Eve than I used to with all these other games/engines/demos around. The planets look like big billboards from a distance and stations just hang in space. Lighting doesn't look "right" somehow on anything.
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 18:54:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Minsc
IMO EVE still has some of the prettiest explosions anywhere in any game.
This I have to agree with however. The explosions are superb. They look HDR although I'm sure they aren't.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 18:57:00 -
[52]
Originally by: babyblue
Edited by: babyblue on 04/11/2005 18:52:17
Originally by: Avon
As gfx card technology has advanced it became clear to the manufacturers that pure poly-fill speeds weren't everything, and they started intergrating some pretty cool shader technologies - which have eventually matched, or exceeded, those written by CCP.
That is why Eve used to be the best looking game out there, because quite simply it really was ahead of its time.
Eve doesn't use them, or if it does they are pretty well hidden from the results. Eve requires hardware T&L it's true but it does not require a PS enabled graphics card and there are hard limits on what you can do with multi-pass rendering. It was never ahead of it's time. It did look good for a while though.
I think however that the difference is in the eye of the viewer - I find it harder to suspend my disbelief in Eve than I used to with all these other games/engines/demos around. The planets look like big billboards from a distance and stations just hang in space. Lighting doesn't look "right" somehow on anything.
I know Eve doesn't use them, THAT WAS THE POINT of my post!
CCP wrote their own shaders (which are pretty damn good) way before they were standard fare for graphics cards.
You were saying that CCP couldn't do it right, my point is that they did.
The fancy effects you see now aren't down to cleverly coded shaders and good programming, they are down to better HW shaders which are easy to call and manipulate.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 19:07:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The graphics are fine. The only things we need are reskins of the badly-skinned ships, like, uh...
THE APOCALPYSE.
Yeah, that and reskins of the other ships that have holes in their geometry or the like and it would be fine.
Aw, she doesn't look that bad for an old girl.
(Thanks again to CCP for kindly letting me show some of this stuff)
You notice that all the little pokey things are low-res ALPHA TEXTURES, and there are holes in the bottom of the model? 
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
Dameaus
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 19:08:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: babyblue
Edited by: babyblue on 04/11/2005 18:52:17
Originally by: Avon
As gfx card technology has advanced it became clear to the manufacturers that pure poly-fill speeds weren't everything, and they started intergrating some pretty cool shader technologies - which have eventually matched, or exceeded, those written by CCP.
That is why Eve used to be the best looking game out there, because quite simply it really was ahead of its time.
Eve doesn't use them, or if it does they are pretty well hidden from the results. Eve requires hardware T&L it's true but it does not require a PS enabled graphics card and there are hard limits on what you can do with multi-pass rendering. It was never ahead of it's time. It did look good for a while though.
I think however that the difference is in the eye of the viewer - I find it harder to suspend my disbelief in Eve than I used to with all these other games/engines/demos around. The planets look like big billboards from a distance and stations just hang in space. Lighting doesn't look "right" somehow on anything.
I know Eve doesn't use them, THAT WAS THE POINT of my post!
CCP wrote their own shaders (which are pretty damn good) way before they were standard fare for graphics cards.
You were saying that CCP couldn't do it right, my point is that they did.
The fancy effects you see now aren't down to cleverly coded shaders and good programming, they are down to better HW shaders which are easy to call and manipulate.
eve...doesnt...use....shaders....at all. its not that CCP wrote their own shaders... its that it doesnt use ANY shaders. it uses T&L which has been around forever, and thats it. sorry ot burst your bubble
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 19:15:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Avon
I know Eve doesn't use them, THAT WAS THE POINT of my post!
CCP wrote their own shaders (which are pretty damn good) way before they were standard fare for graphics cards.
You were saying that CCP couldn't do it right, my point is that they did.
The fancy effects you see now aren't down to cleverly coded shaders and good programming, they are down to better HW shaders which are easy to call and manipulate.
Err Avon, with MP rendering, their "shaders" aren't really shaders at all. Quake III had a shader system before hardware shaders. Basically, you had 3 operations you could perform: "Add, Subtract and Multiply" - Mutiply being modulation - at least I think thats how it went.
What you are calling shaders would be classed more "Effects" in the DirectX framework: that is combining textures with blending in a certain order. Actual per-pixel or per-vertex shader programs allow a much broader range of FX to be generated, procedural textures to be used (procedural textures require no memory to store them!) and realistic lighting models but unfortunately use a crap load of GPU power.
However, the latest buzz is all about HDR (high dynamic range), shader programs are old hat these days.
|
EXek
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 19:48:00 -
[56]
This is a bit off topic but speaking of graphics have you checked out the demos of the new elder scrolls game. They are simply amazing.. made me speechless, combined with the the interesting npc AI and physics engine. Its out December.
Check the videos at http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=1688
Simply the best graphics ever
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) |
Sobeseki Pawi
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 20:39:00 -
[57]
In my opinion, people who run multiple accounts at the same time with one machine should never be the main consideration when designing/developing a game.
To deliberately retard a game for that, is a bit silly imo.
~Captain Cutie, HFS Event Horizon
Biomass fears me.
Sovereignty 2.0 |
Morhon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 20:43:00 -
[58]
Glad to here people say that X3 is future dated. I just got X3 and am gonna take it back. My PC is well over recommended spec and it falls on it's arse and crys like a girl when I try to run it. I was thinking it was just some weird problem with my PC.
I agree that the graphics in eve are a little bit dated, but they are still very nice. I just hope they don't go bonkers like egosoft if they do revamp eve.
for those considering getting X3 my PC is:
P4 640 3.2Ghz
2GB RAM
256MB Geforce 6800GT PCI Express
2x 160GB Hard disks
MSI mainboard
And gets about 5000 points in 3D mark 2005, But runs like a bag of spanners with X3!!!
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Aitrus
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:00:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The graphics are fine. The only things we need are reskins of the badly-skinned ships, like, uh...
THE APOCALPYSE.
Yeah, that and reskins of the other ships that have holes in their geometry or the like and it would be fine.
QFT
So many texture errors on such a nice ship. :(
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:04:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Morhon
Back to PC world the game goes!.
Don't be too hasty. The X games are ALWAYS released by the publisher before they are ready and generally don't start to play well until patch 3. I read they released a 90mb patch on the day the game went into the shops!
I had no end of trouble with X2 for the same reasons.
|
Morhon
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:17:00 -
[61]
Originally by: babyblue
Originally by: Morhon
Back to PC world the game goes!.
Don't be too hasty. The X games are ALWAYS released by the publisher before they are ready and generally don't start to play well until patch 3. I read they released a 90mb patch on the day the game went into the shops!
I had no end of trouble with X2 for the same reasons.
Well I downloaded the first patch but it made no difference tbh... I might give it a few more days cus there is another patch due. But can't leave it too long since my right to return it will run out in 13 days!
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Zoralla
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:32:00 -
[62]
To all those thinking of buying X3 - I would hold off until mid to end November-ish.
The game was basically released in an unfinished state and the latest patch, 1.2, does little to help. Problems include invisible gates/stations and abysmal performance on low, medium and high end systems (except if you turn the HUD off, oddly). A new patch addressing the performance issues has been mooted for around mid November.
Also, it's worth noting that the UK version will install the much maligned Starforce copy protection drivers/software on your PC without asking, as do all Starforce protected games. I don't know whether the US version does as well (the UK version of X2 employed Starforce, but the US version did not).
|
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:44:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Zoralla
To all those thinking of buying X3 - I would hold off until mid to end November-ish.
The game was basically released in an unfinished state and the latest patch, 1.2, does little to help. Problems include invisible gates/stations and abysmal performance on low, medium and high end systems (except if you turn the HUD off, oddly). A new patch addressing the performance issues has been mooted for around mid November.
Also, it's worth noting that the UK version will install the much maligned Starforce copy protection drivers/software on your PC without asking, as do all Starforce protected games. I don't know whether the US version does as well (the UK version of X2 employed Starforce, but the US version did not).
Do you have any ranting links related to star force? If it's a root kit I'm not going anywhere near it.
|
Commodore Andrews
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:48:00 -
[64]
LOL WOW....
Ya we need gfx updates :)
If eve looked liek that id get 2x cards in sli just to play eve :D
|
Zoralla
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 21:49:00 -
[65]
Wikipedia has some interesting links.
And there's always Boycott Starforce.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 00:14:00 -
[66]
Originally by: babyblue
Originally by: Avon
I know Eve doesn't use them, THAT WAS THE POINT of my post!
CCP wrote their own shaders (which are pretty damn good) way before they were standard fare for graphics cards.
You were saying that CCP couldn't do it right, my point is that they did.
The fancy effects you see now aren't down to cleverly coded shaders and good programming, they are down to better HW shaders which are easy to call and manipulate.
Err Avon, with MP rendering, their "shaders" aren't really shaders at all. Quake III had a shader system before hardware shaders. Basically, you had 3 operations you could perform: "Add, Subtract and Multiply" - Mutiply being modulation - at least I think thats how it went.
What you are calling shaders would be classed more "Effects" in the DirectX framework: that is combining textures with blending in a certain order. Actual per-pixel or per-vertex shader programs allow a much broader range of FX to be generated, procedural textures to be used (procedural textures require no memory to store them!) and realistic lighting models but unfortunately use a crap load of GPU power.
However, the latest buzz is all about HDR (high dynamic range), shader programs are old hat these days.
Heh, I bow down before your technical expertise.
What the hell would I know about textures and shaders and stuff? I just sketched that apoc picture with a bunch of crayons, scanned it and tried to pass it off as a render (which uses radiosity, and I have a lovely HDRI backdrop on the HDR version).
How about you show us your work? I am especially interested in how you resolve the .blue files without considering them shaders.
I'm sure you can then further explain to me how little I know, and what an expert you are.
Looking forward to learning from a master such as yourself.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 00:17:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Avon on 05/11/2005 00:17:22
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Avon
Aw, she doesn't look that bad for an old girl.
(Thanks again to CCP for kindly letting me show some of this stuff)
You notice that all the little pokey things are low-res ALPHA TEXTURES, and there are holes in the bottom of the model?
All the textures in that picture are the ones used in-game, so yes I am fully aware of their resolution.
You have to confess that she scrubs up nice though, huh?
The point I was getting at is that the models and textures are pretty funky, so maybe the engine needs some tweaking to get the best from them?
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Munin Crow
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 00:28:00 -
[68]
Woha... we can fly into planetary atmospheres in Eve!!!! What is that vid of!
|
Romeda
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 01:22:00 -
[69]
Fancy graphics don't make a great game, I favour gameplay and proformace over graphics anyday.
|
Kadarin
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 01:26:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Nelix Trist
i still know a few running it with a Geforce 4 :(
Until a couple of months ago, I was running EVE on a GeForce 3.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 03:49:00 -
[71]
"Finally: Planets/Flight/Landing: it's a big deal because it's like part of the Holy Grail. Seamless flight simulation from 1st Person in-buildings, through atmospheric flight simulation all the way up to space flight. No idea if it will ever be done, but if it is, it'll be one hell of a video game."
Frontier: Elite 2 had it. While it's "big deal" as far as graphics engine is concerned, gameplay-wise it's a gimmick which in itself doesn't add anything.
"Err Avon, with MP rendering, their "shaders" aren't really shaders at all."
No, they are; i think you're confusing the concept of shader-based engine with specific implementation of these shaders based on gfx card hardware.
Shader is a 'skin' applied to 3d model. The actual visualisation of that skin can be done through vertex/pixel programs but doesn't have to be. That these programs are also called "shaders" is more of coincidence and source of confusion, than anything else... --;
|
Veronique Lamonte
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 07:13:00 -
[72]
Originally by: SengH
Edited by: SengH on 04/11/2005 06:53:20
not sure if this is a repost or if its allowed.. mods if its not dont ban me pls kthxs.
Edit: uploaded to eve files.
2004 Fanfest planetary flight shakey cam vid
Warping through the atmosphere to the surface . Not my recording, just a vid that someone sent to me over TS.
I want this wow well done dev's,I can sleep sound knowing you are on the ball with the future vision of EVE.
however a few better looking ships and moons would be good,and maybe removing some of those colour/cloudy skyboxes for real black space in some of the systems,maybe the lower the sec,the darker space gets.
NIKKI |
Hayzo
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 09:27:00 -
[73]
Gameplay's great. But lets face it, 75% of people who buy the game will base their choice off screenshots. Updating the graphics engine can't hurt gameplay, and provided it's scalable enough, it could probably work.
____________________
"Your safe boundries were once unknown frontiers"
Join channel: CAINCOM |
babyblue
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 09:44:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Avon
Heh, I bow down before your technical expertise.
What the hell would I know about textures and shaders and stuff? I just sketched that apoc picture with a bunch of crayons, scanned it and tried to pass it off as a render (which uses radiosity, and I have a lovely HDRI backdrop on the HDR version).
How about you show us your work? I am especially interested in how you resolve the .blue files without considering them shaders.
I'm sure you can then further explain to me how little I know, and what an expert you are.
Looking forward to learning from a master such as yourself.
Christ Avon you are such an arrogant **** who can't take any criticism. AVON IS ALWAYS ******* RIGHT! Actually, no. 3D Computer Graphics is my job (Software Engineer). Has been for years. Do you know what a Vertex or Pixel shader is? Eve requires hardware T&L (GeForce 2+) - it does not require Pixel Shader caps (GeForce 3+). Those files you see are just like Quake III "shaders" - they don't use shading hardware - they just describe the way you blend multi-pass. It's useful to have them in an engine because you can easily swap them in/out, describe an unlimited number of passes and you don't have to hardcode your effects.
Well done on making an Apoc picture with a Radiosity Engine.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 09:45:00 -
[75]
Originally by: j0sephine
"Finally: Planets/Flight/Landing: it's a big deal because it's like part of the Holy Grail. Seamless flight simulation from 1st Person in-buildings, through atmospheric flight simulation all the way up to space flight. No idea if it will ever be done, but if it is, it'll be one hell of a video game."
Frontier: Elite 2 had it. While it's "big deal" as far as graphics engine is concerned, gameplay-wise it's a gimmick which in itself doesn't add anything.
Actually, that's why planetary flight hasn't been released yet. The devs wanted it to be done right, not just some gimmick that doesn't add anything to gameplay. The video shows current frigate battles on a mock planet surface background, which is not what it'll end up being. I think it's safe to say planets will have more than flying near them - perhaps player owned and NPC bases for us to bomb, landing maybe?
|
SengH
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 09:52:00 -
[76]
Now if hardware gets to the stage where EVE can be done in real time with per pixel lighting and in Monte Carlo Rendering now that would be cool. I dunno, it would be nice if we could get a roadmap from a dev showing their plans on how the graphics engine is going to evolve... something on the drawing board at least.
I'd predict that EVE will move to SM 2.0/3.0 around the timeframe of Vista's release. They might move to a DX 10 based client about a year or two after vista because of the total overhaul in rendering methods of DX10. DX 10 is much more stringent than previous iterations of DirectX and it being the baseline for Vista's effects, it'll ensure a bigger penetration of DX 10 based hardware in OEMs.
|
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 10:33:00 -
[77]
For me good graphics do not require new technology. Eve has exceptionally good graphics, because the engine succeeds in bringing the artistic merits of Eve to the user. It creates a unique athmosphere which you will not find in many of the pixelshader-abounding games on the market these days.
One massive problem I have with current games is that they focus mainly on graphics but the gameplay is not improved at all. The X series is a good example. "Beyond The Frontier" was a brilliant, immersive and innovative game when it came out. Part 2 and now 3 however did not improve at all when it comes to gameplay. No innovations, just better graphics.
It does not take pixelshaders and all that fancy blabla to make a good game, which is why I prefer good performance and high framerates over fancy bumpmapping effects anyday.
Obviously there seem to be a lot more people thinking this way, considering Quake 4's "success".
Mai's Idealog |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 11:12:00 -
[78]
Originally by: babyblue
Originally by: Avon
Heh, I bow down before your technical expertise.
What the hell would I know about textures and shaders and stuff? I just sketched that apoc picture with a bunch of crayons, scanned it and tried to pass it off as a render (which uses radiosity, and I have a lovely HDRI backdrop on the HDR version).
How about you show us your work? I am especially interested in how you resolve the .blue files without considering them shaders.
I'm sure you can then further explain to me how little I know, and what an expert you are.
Looking forward to learning from a master such as yourself.
Christ Avon you are such an arrogant **** who can't take any criticism. AVON IS ALWAYS ******* RIGHT! Actually, no. 3D Computer Graphics is my job (Software Engineer). Has been for years. Do you know what a Vertex or Pixel shader is? Eve requires hardware T&L (GeForce 2+) - it does not require Pixel Shader caps (GeForce 3+). Those files you see are just like Quake III "shaders" - they don't use shading hardware - they just describe the way you blend multi-pass. It's useful to have them in an engine because you can easily swap them in/out, describe an unlimited number of passes and you don't have to hardcode your effects.
Well done on making an Apoc picture with a Radiosity Engine.
Thanks for the "Eve doesn't need shading hardware" newsflash, it is almost as if I didn't say that originally.
Your problem is that you think that if it isn't in hardware, or per pixel / vertex, it isn't a shader.
Well, dear boy, that may be how it is in the wonderful world of directX code scribes, but that is a very limited definition of what shaders actually are.
You see the nice dirt effect on that apoc render?
Cool huh?
Well, that is a vertex shader applied in the 3d software.
Written by the people who wrote the application.
I could render it from a text console on a machine with no 3d hardware.
It would render just the same.
CCP's trinity engine renders its shaders without hardware support. It looks the same on (almost) every gfx card, because it uses software shaders.
Now, you may think I am wrong, and maybe from your narrow experience the way I use the term is 'incorrect', but trust me the 3D industry laughs upon your rather odd definition.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Morhon
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 00:54:00 -
[79]
Starforce copy protection eh? not heard of that before... don't like the look of it from my google searches tho...
/me is about to do a system restore!
And to think I just installed the game I exchanged for X3 :(
Oh well current reg settings, I knew you so well
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Suze'Rain
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 18:10:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Suze''Rain on 06/11/2005 18:15:51
I'm sad to say eve is getting long in the tooth - the x3 screenshots particularly showed up Eve's planetary detail as being lacking - While CCP's "stick syrup in a fish tank and stir to make gas planet textures" technique was refreshing in 2001 (And oh my god, am I sad to remember Edge articles from 4 years ago, and have I been following the forums since all that time ago...?), it's now at a point of being in need of serious overhauls. Planets are one area that I notice are far too bland, but model detail level is equally deserving of some loving attention too - the first generation of models, particularly the amar ones are showing thier age.
Eve is beginning to need to have a lot of the software shaders replaced with hardware routines, which, I'm pretty certain could hack a fair amount of client-side workload off Eve. the game is horribly CPU-intensive, for what's going on, after all, so it really needs a cleanup. the DDS file format's mipmapping features could be exploited fully with a proper scaling LOD system in place that allows 2048xx or 1024xx textures, with the mipmaps being used for low-end machines - as it stands, it seems that model and texturemap LOD consists of "lets stop bothering with it once it's beond a few hundred metres range"
Eve was suitable for average hardware three years ago, a lifetime in GPU technology, with Geforce3, 4, and 5 series cards having come and gone, and 6 series' end on the horizon... that's a long time, and it shows, not as much as fantasy MMOs with figures, thankfully, but it shows...
hell, I have a sneaking suspicion that there is a good number of the paying player base with graphical skills who would happily undertake a "textures mark 2" project on ccp's behalf. each artist could take one texture, update to a nice 4096xx master file with alphamap, and let the CCP staff continue with new content.
Anyone else of that opinion?
(edited some typos)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |