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

Noaani

Atash wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Atash wrote: »

i posted it a few hours ago

You posted it on April 29th last year.

the second part i ment which i posted it in Q/A

Yes, but the point made that no one had replied to you was specifically being made to the fact that it was posted in April last year.

Songcaller

patrick68794 wrote: »

Song_Warden wrote: »

I'm not debating a console can play with upscaling. I've stated upscaling is not as good as native. Furthermore, I don't doubt consoles will be brought into the fold at some point except the fact that a pc exclusive game can have much better textures. All consoles use dynamic resolution scaling which means it not true 4k at all. It's exactly the same when I get 144fps on a game without dlss and 2567fps with dlss. All those thousands of fps more are not true resolution, they are amalgamated upscaled resolution.

A lot of newer games on PC use upscaling and dynamic resolution scaling as well and not all console games use either technique. There are plenty of native 4K games on console. Regardless you're not arguing against the actual point because you can't. There is no technical reason this game shouldn't be able to run on the current gen consoles.

I'm not saying it can't run on consoles. Hell, most people will run the game at 1080p. My point was the top end will not be the highest grade possible if it is ported to consoles. My stance does not change at all and you will understand what I mean in the next generation of consoles.

Azherae

Ah, so nostalgic.

I was but a wee lass during the console wars, followed by the PC/Console wars, followed by the 'FLOPS measuring contests'...

This thread takes me back to my childhood...

patrick68794

Song_Warden wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

Song_Warden wrote: »

I'm not debating a console can play with upscaling. I've stated upscaling is not as good as native. Furthermore, I don't doubt consoles will be brought into the fold at some point except the fact that a pc exclusive game can have much better textures. All consoles use dynamic resolution scaling which means it not true 4k at all. It's exactly the same when I get 144fps on a game without dlss and 2567fps with dlss. All those thousands of fps more are not true resolution, they are amalgamated upscaled resolution.

A lot of newer games on PC use upscaling and dynamic resolution scaling as well and not all console games use either technique. There are plenty of native 4K games on console. Regardless you're not arguing against the actual point because you can't. There is no technical reason this game shouldn't be able to run on the current gen consoles.

I'm not saying it can't run on consoles. Hell, most people will run the game at 1080p. My point was the top end will not be the highest grade possible if it is ported to consoles. My stance does not change at all and you will understand what I mean in the next generation of consoles.

I don't think that will ever make sense because it's nonsense. The game being on consoles wouldn't stop Intrepid from making it the way they want and intend for it to be. There are countless examples of games with settings, effects, and even cutdown and missing game modes and features not available on consoles, so it's also simply untrue that consoles hold back what games are capable of, it all comes down to the developers and their resources. Alan Wake 2 has path tracing on PC and no ray tracing options at all on console for example. And Battlefield 3 back in the day had 64 player multiplayer on PC but only 24 player on consoles and larger maps than the console versions had. Again, there is zero technical reason that the game they're building right now as it's designed would not be able to run on the current consoles. There are far more technically demanding games running on them right now.

Songcaller

Yeah I see no reason for the game not being able to run on consoles in the current rate of accession. However, the texture packs could be downgraded further or the pvp zone numbers might be lower. We just do not know what the plan is in terms of performance changes because right now the devs haven't shown a siege since A1. Consoles might have 250vs250 and pc might have 500vs500 or perhaps both console and pc will have the same numbers. My point remains we won't get the highest grade of graphics because the textures won't be 4320p immediately.

GreatPhilisopher

BDO got nice graphics but for some reason compared to ashes its areas look dull ..like even the places that is supposed to be colorful and happy look dull , maybe cuz of the colors they use . ashes colors are more bright which i like a lot

VexXes

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

patrick68794

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

Because things like preferring high quality graphics aren't black and white like that. I can want AAA studios to push fidelity as much as possible and still enjoy stuff like Stardew Valley or Dwarf Fortress

VexXes

patrick68794 wrote: »

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

Because things like preferring high quality graphics aren't black and white like that. I can want AAA studios to push fidelity as much as possible and still enjoy stuff like Stardew Valley or Dwarf Fortress

It kinda is.. most people don't even know the differences between graphics and art style. If they push the boundaries of the graphics to max alot won't even be able to play the game, where if they create a style that suites most of the players a game wil last longer. Les chance of it looking out dated 2 years after launch.

patrick68794

VexXes wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

Because things like preferring high quality graphics aren't black and white like that. I can want AAA studios to push fidelity as much as possible and still enjoy stuff like Stardew Valley or Dwarf Fortress

It kinda is.. most people don't even know the differences between graphics and art style. If they push the boundaries of the graphics to max alot won't even be able to play the game, where if they create a style that suites most of the players a game wil last longer. Les chance of it looking out dated 2 years after launch.

It really isn't, and that's a huge assumption you're making. Let's see some proof that most people don't know the difference. Nothing else you said is relevant to what I said.

Enigmatic Sage

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

I agree. Graphics or art style are not top priority on what draws me into a game as it is the the quality of design in the game, systems and skill cap to play. A game could have the best graphics and coolest art style and still not appeal to me.

Noaani

patrick68794 wrote: »

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

Because things like preferring high quality graphics aren't black and white like that. I can want AAA studios to push fidelity as much as possible and still enjoy stuff like Stardew Valley or Dwarf Fortress

Pushing graphics boundaries forward isn't the role of new independent game developers.

You should be looking at Intrepid as being more like those indie game developers.

patrick68794

Noaani wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

VexXes wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Atash

To be honest, it all comes down to the art style and texture quality which I am assuming you mean by graphics since graphics is such a broad term misused to describe things quite often.

This is so true.. if graphics where that big of a deal for "most people" how come some indie games that look like they where made in 1980 become top played games.

Fun part is I played tons of games where the art style did not suite my needs but still game play was awesome. The beauty in an MMO is not the graphic.. its the way you can spend your time in game with friends and family

Because things like preferring high quality graphics aren't black and white like that. I can want AAA studios to push fidelity as much as possible and still enjoy stuff like Stardew Valley or Dwarf Fortress

Pushing graphics boundaries forward isn't the role of new independent game developers.

You should be looking at Intrepid as being more like those indie game developers.

While I never said I was expecting Ashes to push graphical boundaries, this is definitely not some indie game being made in a garage by a few people. Intrepid is close to the size of a AAA studio. They have nearly 200 full time developers. Bethesda only had roughly 110 when Fallout 4 released in 2015 and I don't think anyone would argue that wasn't a AAA game.

Yenn0war

Better or worse graphics doesn't matter to me.
What this game lacks is a mood. Everything looks and feels the same. Saturated colors are almost always present. There is no overcast, strong winds and rain, mist, storms, floods, snowstorms etc. That purple haze that is present in almost all biomes in distance is so immersion breaking too. Everything is sunshine and rainbows.

patrick68794

Yenn0war wrote: »

Better or worse graphics doesn't matter to me.
What this game lacks is a mood. Everything looks and feels the same. Saturated colors are almost always present. There is no overcast, strong winds and rain, mist, storms, floods, snowstorms etc. That purple haze that is present in almost all biomes in distance is so immersion breaking too. Everything is sunshine and rainbows.

So you just haven't watched any of the videos showing off their weather system then? It's not as in-depth as the weather system in Red Dead Redemption 2 but it's definitely a big step up from most other MMOs.

Also, who actually expects "floods" in a video game, especially in an MMO? lol talk about unrealistic expectations.

Noaani

patrick68794 wrote: »

Intrepid is close to the size of a AAA studio.

AAA games have exponentially larger development teams than Ashes has.

GTA5 had over a thousand people working on it.

While Ashes isn't Dwarf Fortress sized in terms of development team, it is closer to that than it is to GTA5's development team.

patrick68794

Noaani wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

Intrepid is close to the size of a AAA studio.

AAA games have exponentially larger development teams than Ashes has.

GTA5 had over a thousand people working on it.

While Ashes isn't Dwarf Fortress sized in terms of development team, it is closer to that than it is to GTA5's development team.

Rockstar games are an exception, not the norm. The only other games that come close that amount of manpower and resources are some Ubisoft games and Call of Duty. Most AAA games are made by studios less than half the size of Rockstar.

I do like how you ignored the fact that Bethesda was smaller when Fallout 4 released than Intrepid is right now to try and make your point.

And in fact, this is what the Intrepid website says about their development team: Intrepid has assembled a veteran AAA team of tremendous talent and experience in the MMORPG industry.

Noaani

patrick68794 wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

Intrepid is close to the size of a AAA studio.

AAA games have exponentially larger development teams than Ashes has.

GTA5 had over a thousand people working on it.

While Ashes isn't Dwarf Fortress sized in terms of development team, it is closer to that than it is to GTA5's development team.

Rockstar games are an exception, not the norm. The only other games that come close that amount of manpower and resources are some Ubisoft games and Call of Duty. Most AAA games are made by studios less than half the size of Rockstar.

And Bethesda games.

We have basically just outlined the AAA game market here though. There are a few others, but honestly not many.

Child Item