Game Graphic

Hello,
will the game graphic be better at launch or it will be the same as we see on your preview vods? if this game graphic is not as good as for example new world or hogwarts legacy it will be a big disappointment for most of us include me since we are in 2023 and we spend money on our pcs to exprince the games with high graphic and get a better look, no deny this game and what you made is amazing and look promising But i just want to know how much better graphic will be compared to what we see in recent vods and how much better the world will look like?
Please answer.

thanks

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Atash

You all need to chill i just asked this question to see what devs say but i do wish for a better graphic so things would look better it was just a question so we all can get a confirmation about the future of visual and graphics in this game i didnt say or excpect that game in phasing test look so damn good and i gen want this game to be the next biggest mmo that we all can enjoy cuz no mmo has been this promising

Nerror

Atash wrote: »

will the graphic be enhaned in new release for tresting stage of the game? and can you please tell us how good is graphic going to be ? will it be able to reach the nowadays graphic level like new world or new games like hogwarts legacy ? for me if im being honest i love the game so far when i watch the new updates stream but the only down side for me is the graphic its just doesnt look good enough to minipluate me to buy the game

Posts like these just make me shake my head. Did you only look at twitch vods? Yeah things look pretty bad in those due to low bitrate and compression. But even if you check the 4K footage on Youtube, it still looks worse than it does when you're actually in the game playing.

Even Alpha 1 of Ashes was close to New World and Hogwarts Legacy in graphics fidelity once you were in the game. It was a beautiful game in UE4, especially if you zoomed in a little so you could actually see all the detail. With UE5, unless the devs really mess up, it'll surpass both those games.

You might not like the art-style and such, but that is a different topic. That is completely subjective. It also has little to do with how good the graphics are. If you don't like the art-style it doesn't matter how good the graphics fidelity is.

Trickster

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

I kinda agree that the graphics are not the best out there, but at the same time, the graphics are amazing... I hope with time they change some textures etc... Since they upgraded to Unreal 5 (they have already improved a lot compared to Alpha 1) but as gamers we always want more...

Meanwhile, there is Archeage 2 trailer that looks out of this world in graphics... We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics... If so even if I paid the 250$ pack I will switch my hype and focus to Archeage 2, which should ''come out'' this year as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prXHgdsouYA
Edit: Honestly if there is something I dislike about Ashes of creation it's the armor design... Interpret decided to go with medieval style while for me the game looks more ''fantasy style'' I think even some modded Skyrim armors look much better than the ones shown so far in the live streams (Even from old Tera)

Few issues 1. you are comparing an alpha to a game.

2. Please use gameplay if you are going to compare, why are you linking marketing footage??

*Edit Doing a bit of comparison you are saying tera looks better?

Tera looks old unsure how you are suggesting that is better.

1st there isn't a game yet to compare on both sides, I compared to a trailer of a ''game'' that not even alpha 1 was released yet from that game

2nd There isn't gameplay to besides what is in the trailer, which shortly shows some gameplay that looks better than Ashes so far so how am I supposed to provide something that doesn't exist? lmao
Did you even read what I said? the line ''We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics''

3rd Yep I still think it's better, not in texture quality but on design, but OBVIOUSLY I didn't say that armor specifically, the one you choose yourself to compare, but still yep, better design, worse quality textures

Mag7spy wrote: »

Also on archage. Prediction more single player focused (akin to bdo) combat dumbed down and a lot more action focused leaning towards consoles over more complex combat that leans towards Pc.

Hype is always foe things far away and what is closest, though being ready to write something off so quickly on your hype list is questionable in itself.

I'm interested in Archage, though my hype is 0 since there is 0 information on a game, and thinking it is going to release this year just because a trailer said so is find of funny if you look at games the past few years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d7unljUt3U

There isn't even an alpha, to begin with, everything could be subject to changes since they are building the game for the Western public, and also I played Archeage since it's Korean close beta 4, it's a game I've played over years and even ashes wouldn't exist if wasn't for Archeage since it's a game based on it... Anyway you said yourself, 0 information about the game whatsoever, my hype again was on the gameplay shown in the trailer and due to Archeage being the best MMO I ever played in my opinion (which the list goes to more than 30)

Mag7spy

Trickster wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

I kinda agree that the graphics are not the best out there, but at the same time, the graphics are amazing... I hope with time they change some textures etc... Since they upgraded to Unreal 5 (they have already improved a lot compared to Alpha 1) but as gamers we always want more...

Meanwhile, there is Archeage 2 trailer that looks out of this world in graphics... We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics... If so even if I paid the 250$ pack I will switch my hype and focus to Archeage 2, which should ''come out'' this year as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prXHgdsouYA
Edit: Honestly if there is something I dislike about Ashes of creation it's the armor design... Interpret decided to go with medieval style while for me the game looks more ''fantasy style'' I think even some modded Skyrim armors look much better than the ones shown so far in the live streams (Even from old Tera)

Few issues 1. you are comparing an alpha to a game.

2. Please use gameplay if you are going to compare, why are you linking marketing footage??

*Edit Doing a bit of comparison you are saying tera looks better?

Tera looks old unsure how you are suggesting that is better.

1st there isn't a game yet to compare on both sides, I compared to a trailer of a ''game'' that not even alpha 1 was released yet from that game

2nd There isn't gameplay to compare besides what is in the trailer, which shortly shows some gameplay that looks better than Ashes so far so how am I supposed to provide something that doesn't exist? lmao
Did you even read what I said? the line ''We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics''

3rd Yep I still think it's better, not in texture quality but on design, but OBVIOUSLY I didn't say that armor specifically, the one you choose yourself to compare, but still yep, better design, bad quality textures

Market trailer is not an exact indication how combat will be or play. you are filling in blanks and assuming a lot.

It doesn't look good to me so its subjective at that point. Even more so you are trying to say the style is why it is better which makes 0 sense since you were talking about graphics earlier. You got called out and double downed imo.

Songcaller

The game will be horribly optimised because it is ue5. The game will also have the ue5 'look' because all ue5 games look the same. It's why some people call the game 'generic'. Also, a lot of the textures are still from ue4 because the final cuts have not been made. Furthermore, graphics can be updated at a later date like BDO.

We might get fsr or dlss but these technologies also reduce graphical fidelity - upscaling will never be as good as pure native rasterisation. We should have better graphics overall because the game is windows only right now, thus, consoles are not forcing a graphical downgrade.

Trickster

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

I kinda agree that the graphics are not the best out there, but at the same time, the graphics are amazing... I hope with time they change some textures etc... Since they upgraded to Unreal 5 (they have already improved a lot compared to Alpha 1) but as gamers we always want more...

Meanwhile, there is Archeage 2 trailer that looks out of this world in graphics... We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics... If so even if I paid the 250$ pack I will switch my hype and focus to Archeage 2, which should ''come out'' this year as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prXHgdsouYA
Edit: Honestly if there is something I dislike about Ashes of creation it's the armor design... Interpret decided to go with medieval style while for me the game looks more ''fantasy style'' I think even some modded Skyrim armors look much better than the ones shown so far in the live streams (Even from old Tera)

Few issues 1. you are comparing an alpha to a game.

2. Please use gameplay if you are going to compare, why are you linking marketing footage??

*Edit Doing a bit of comparison you are saying tera looks better?

Tera looks old unsure how you are suggesting that is better.

1st there isn't a game yet to compare on both sides, I compared to a trailer of a ''game'' that not even alpha 1 was released yet from that game

2nd There isn't gameplay to compare besides what is in the trailer, which shortly shows some gameplay that looks better than Ashes so far so how am I supposed to provide something that doesn't exist? lmao
Did you even read what I said? the line ''We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics''

3rd Yep I still think it's better, not in texture quality but on design, but OBVIOUSLY I didn't say that armor specifically, the one you choose yourself to compare, but still yep, better design, bad quality textures

Market trailer is not an exact indication how combat will be or play. you are filling in blanks and assuming a lot.

It doesn't look good to me so it's subjective at that point. Even more so you are trying to say the style is why it is better which makes 0 sense since you were talking about graphics earlier. You got called out and double downed imo.

I ONLY MENTIONED the trailer of a different game and said that IF THE GAME HAD THE SAME GRAPHICS OF THE TRAILER I would change my hype towards that game instead Ashes of creation because it's based on my favorite game, I don't get why you got so butt hurt by me saying I'm hyped by a trailer and I got to see if the trailer would be real or not, so I never made any assumptions that the gameplay shown in the trailer was real

And about the armor stuff I wrote it down as an ''Edit'' in the last thing I wish to complement is that I dislike the armor designs of the game I didn't write together in the same paragraph that I was saying about the graphics in all, but obviously, design/graphics are on the same page, but I guess you are unable to comprehend since it makes ''0 sense''

Anyway It's not just me but many YouTube channels pointed out that Ashes lacks some ''its own art design'' and looks too generic sometimes, but I guess no one is allowed to have different opinions on graphics or anything else besides you, otherwise it's questionable lmao

Edit: I highlighted some stuff so maybe you will manage this time to understand simple English

Mag7spy

Trickster wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Trickster wrote: »

I kinda agree that the graphics are not the best out there, but at the same time, the graphics are amazing... I hope with time they change some textures etc... Since they upgraded to Unreal 5 (they have already improved a lot compared to Alpha 1) but as gamers we always want more...

Meanwhile, there is Archeage 2 trailer that looks out of this world in graphics... We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics... If so even if I paid the 250$ pack I will switch my hype and focus to Archeage 2, which should ''come out'' this year as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prXHgdsouYA
Edit: Honestly if there is something I dislike about Ashes of creation it's the armor design... Interpret decided to go with medieval style while for me the game looks more ''fantasy style'' I think even some modded Skyrim armors look much better than the ones shown so far in the live streams (Even from old Tera)

Few issues 1. you are comparing an alpha to a game.

2. Please use gameplay if you are going to compare, why are you linking marketing footage??

*Edit Doing a bit of comparison you are saying tera looks better?

Tera looks old unsure how you are suggesting that is better.

1st there isn't a game yet to compare on both sides, I compared to a trailer of a ''game'' that not even alpha 1 was released yet from that game

2nd There isn't gameplay to compare besides what is in the trailer, which shortly shows some gameplay that looks better than Ashes so far so how am I supposed to provide something that doesn't exist? lmao
Did you even read what I said? the line ''We have to see if it's not just pre-generated or literally the game will have those insane graphics''

3rd Yep I still think it's better, not in texture quality but on design, but OBVIOUSLY I didn't say that armor specifically, the one you choose yourself to compare, but still yep, better design, bad quality textures

Market trailer is not an exact indication how combat will be or play. you are filling in blanks and assuming a lot.

It doesn't look good to me so it's subjective at that point. Even more so you are trying to say the style is why it is better which makes 0 sense since you were talking about graphics earlier. You got called out and double downed imo.

I ONLY MENTIONED the trailer of a different game and said that IF THE GAME HAD THE SAME GRAPHICS OF THE TRAILER I would change my hype towards that game instead Ashes of creation because it's based on my favorite game, I don't get why you got so butt hurt by me saying I'm hyped by a trailer and I got to see if the trailer would be real or not, so I never made any assumptions that the gameplay shown in the trailer was real

And about the armor stuff I wrote it down as an ''Edit'' in the last thing I wish to complement is that I dislike the armor designs of the game I didn't write together in the same paragraph that I was saying about the graphics in all, but obviously, design/graphics are on the same page, but I guess you are unable to comprehend since it makes ''0 sense''

Anyway It's not just me but many YouTube channels pointed out that Ashes lacks some ''its own art design'' and looks too generic sometimes, but I guess no one is allowed to have different opinions on graphics or anything else besides you, otherwise it's questionable lmao

Edit: I highlighted some stuff so maybe you will manage this time to understand simple English

ok you are from asmongold I'm good lol.

Enigmatic Sage

@Song_Warden considering that consoles have a more direct purpose compared to pc's, they can ideally perform just as well in most categories for MMORPG'S. If you can play ashes on a 30XX RTX with decent frame rate, you can probably play it on the current generation of consoles with decent frame rate. That said, with the next generation of consoles coming out in 2028, many developers could be ideally aiming for console launches as well for their MMORPG's. There are already several MMORPG'S and LITE-MMORPG'S on console now. Fun fact, with the right drivers, we've been able to connect keyboard and mice to them for years assuming players choose to use those peripherals. The biggest hurdle is the networking and servers which can be an easy fix in the next generation. Consoles are essentially pc's with a direct purpose opposed to pc's multi-purpose design.

unknownsystemerror

They have said that they have no current plans to develop for consoles. Just like they have no plans to develop for Linux users. Consoles require vetting of patches uploaded and have other issues that bottleneck getting updates out to users. Steam the same. I played ESO back in the day and remember the big push to get everyone to link to Steam. I refused. Sure enough a while later, their own launcher people could get into the game and play, while Steam had some issue that locked people out for more than a week. Intrepid knows what they have the resources for to get the game out. Don't be thinking you are going to get something more.

Enigmatic Sage

@unknownsystemerror never said they were currently planning to go to console. Just pointing out that consoles can run and have been currently able to run MMORPG'S based on tech specs. Who knows what Intrepid plans in 4 years. No new xbox or ps6 until 2028. Most games are developed around a standardisation in terms of performance for sales which implies the standard for the next four years is basically what we see now.

Songcaller

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Song_Warden considering that consoles have a more direct purpose compared to pc's, they can ideally perform just as well in most categories for MMORPG'S. If you can play ashes on a 30XX RTX with decent frame rate, you can probably play it on the current generation of consoles with decent frame rate. That said, with the next generation of consoles coming out in 2028, many developers could be ideally aiming for console launches as well for their MMORPG's. There are already several MMORPG'S and LITE-MMORPG'S on console now. Fun fact, with the right drivers, we've been able to connect keyboard and mice to them for years assuming players choose to use those peripherals. The biggest hurdle is the networking and servers which can be an easy fix in the next generation. Consoles are essentially pc's with a direct purpose opposed to pc's multi-purpose design.

You need to check the facts. Console 4k is not the same as pc 4k. That's why xbox can offer 8k resolution. There are many tricks used for console games much akin to CryEngine's software based Ray tracing. The truth remains that cross platform titles are downgraded for pc. We can discuss the next generation of consoles in theory, but the truth is the consoles are designed with hardware immediately available after the previous release. Thus, the consoles will always be less powerful than an up to date pc.

Enigmatic Sage

Song_Warden wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Song_Warden considering that consoles have a more direct purpose compared to pc's, they can ideally perform just as well in most categories for MMORPG'S. If you can play ashes on a 30XX RTX with decent frame rate, you can probably play it on the current generation of consoles with decent frame rate. That said, with the next generation of consoles coming out in 2028, many developers could be ideally aiming for console launches as well for their MMORPG's. There are already several MMORPG'S and LITE-MMORPG'S on console now. Fun fact, with the right drivers, we've been able to connect keyboard and mice to them for years assuming players choose to use those peripherals. The biggest hurdle is the networking and servers which can be an easy fix in the next generation. Consoles are essentially pc's with a direct purpose opposed to pc's multi-purpose design.

You need to check the facts. Console 4k is not the same as pc 4k. That's why xbox can offer 8k resolution. There are many tricks used for console games much akin to CryEngine's software based Ray tracing. The truth remains that cross platform titles are downgraded for pc. We can discuss the next generation of consoles in theory, but the truth is the consoles are designed with hardware immediately available after the previous release. Thus, the consoles will always be less powerful than an up to date pc.

Considering the percentile of 4k gamers on pc compared to 1440p and 1080p, it's still irrelevant. You should probably check the facts yourself lol. Most gamers are not even pushing 120 frames regardless of resolution except for the ones trying to be super competitive in esport games which are usually small scale deathmatches. Even with frame generation it doesn't actually improve the performance of the game itself, it just makes it seem like it has better performance but the back end performance is still the original performance.

Yes, they will be working on 8k eventually but to praise 8k gaming now is stupid as most developers are not even wasting their time with that as 4k gaming hasn't even reached an optimal frame rate standard yet or a majority of the market. Playing ashes in 4k regardless of pc or console is still pointless trade off for performance in my opinion. You're probably a bit confused on what engines do for the game vs hardware as consumerism can be quite confusing with so much marketing around GPU's AI performance gains vs the actual software. I never said PC's would not out perform the limitations of a console but that consoles can technically run an mmorpg regardless of 30-60 frames per second on 4k. Tech is advancing, just like ps6 and the new xbox in 2028 will probably be a lot more capable in performance than the current generation. lol.

Songcaller

We are discussing the fidelity of graphics and you never use consoles as the benchmark for fidelity in graphics. You don't even use fsr or dlss as the benchmark for graphical fidelity. You use the average mean of technological advancement to create the fidelity of the benchmark. Its not even about the 0.1% of graphics cards either. Its about price to performance on consoles and medium power capabilities.

The fact remains that you can easily push the boundaries of graphics on a console - see Gran Turismo, just the same as you can push the graphics on pc - see 2007 Crysis. There is a reason for the meme 'Can it run crysis?' And more to the point there is a reason why exclusive games will always look better than cross platform. Especially on pc.

However, the devs have to cater to top end and low end again. Another reason why the game will look worse the closer we get to launch. Can't alienate the majority of players even on pc. In some ways, we'd have been better off with an exclusive console release so the graphics can be pushed rather than reigned in.

WHIT3ROS3

Hogwarts Legacy is a single player $150/ $200 million dollar game from a multi Billion dollar studio based around one of the largest and most successful IP's of all time. If you think comparing something like that in terms of graphical fidelity with an MMORPG from a relatively small upstart studio like Intrepid then you are completely detached from reality.

Enigmatic Sage

Song_Warden wrote: »

We are discussing the fidelity of graphics and you never use consoles as the benchmark for fidelity in graphics. You don't even use fsr or dlss as the benchmark for graphical fidelity. You use the average mean of technological advancement to create the fidelity of the benchmark. Its not even about the 0.1% of graphics cards either. Its about price to performance on consoles and medium power capabilities.

The fact remains that you can easily push the boundaries of graphics on a console - see Gran Turismo, just the same as you can push the graphics on pc - see 2007 Crysis. There is a reason for the meme 'Can it run crysis?' And more to the point there is a reason why exclusive games will always look better than cross platform. Especially on pc.

However, the devs have to cater to top end and low end again. Another reason why the game will look worse the closer we get to launch. Can't alienate the majority of players even on pc. In some ways, we'd have been better off with an exclusive console release so the graphics can be pushed rather than reigned in.

I remember the Crysis meme lol.

I agree, should not have to use upscalers if the game is properly designed and optimised. I was reading up on AMD getting into AI chips for GPU's so we could see a lot more potential from team RED and team Blue for gamers since team Green (nvidia) is going all in on AI chips now. Plus the potential for generational compatibilities and synergies between cpu's and gpu's assuming apu's do not expand in the way they hope which also suggests that handhelds and smart gaming devices are going to get a significant boost.

Will obviously have to wait to see what the consoles decides to go with with their next consoles. They can perform quite well for the industries standard. The quality of product is going to plateau for a few years. I hate to say it but consoles hold the gaming gaming back in terms of larger advancements in graphical quality and performance. It comes down to the art direction of the game with optimisation for performance which I brought up in my much earlier posts.

Enigmatic Sage

Imagine if they designed motherboards in the future to have a socket each for a CPU and GPU with their own dedicated ram slots instead of having these oversized block heaters and limited ram scams for graphic cards. Imagine being able to upgrade your gpu's ram within the chips limitations like a cpu. There's a lot of unused space on motherboards that they're overfilling with storage slots currently lol.

one day

Sevariel

It is bonkers to me to see anyone suggest it’s not the best looking mmo and it’s in alpha. BDO remastered on ultra is a ridiculously beautiful game, better than new world in my eyes and Ashes looks better so.. we’ll see how it really looks soon but I’m personally feeling confident it’s worth upgrading my you and cou to run it on max settings ☺️

Songcaller

I love your enthusiasm but the game does not look better than BDO right now. The final iterations have not even been attempted in Ashes. I'm not sure what you've seen beyond concept art and 3d renders of concept art that makes you think the game (as in the actual game footage) is anywhere near BDO.

Mag7spy

BDO is one of the most generic looking mmorpgs and their textures being from textures.com reflect that. All BDO does is ramp up the post process. Their shaders and textures are not that good, or atleast reflect a company that has a ton of money and could hand make their own stuff.

Kilion

I don't get why high end graphics are so hyped. 99% of people can't even play on the graphic settings they drool over, all the visuals being crisp doesn't mean sh!t when that is all everyone ever talks and cares about. That is why New World was released the way it did, because they were comfortable releasing BS game mechnics but hey "Looks nice".

Stephen is on record saying that the primary focus of Intrepid is to develop good game mechanics and a compelling story, while graphics are only a vehicle through which players will experience those two things. The goal being that the graphics will be good enough to look nice and atmospheric, but not distract from what is actually important in the game.

And if nothing short of the best graphics is already a disappointment to you, then I guess Intrepid will have to do without you. And this is not me trying to be mean, but it would be a logic consequence because having below "high end" graphics mean losing you but gaining access to everyone not having a high end PC / laptop.

Child Item