![]() ![]() That is another bestiary of situation that is suited for another discussion. I am not critiquing DE performance on the design, graphic modeling and other aspects of texture cleaning and level designing. The work on many levels looks amateur to say the least with culling problems, texture surfing out of the geometry, wrong texture scaling and ancient graphic issues of pixelated textures on the edges. Models are juxtaposed creating derivatives that shows work done by first year university animators. The level of detail in War Frame is not even close to strict modeling. The standards are working with real cast shadows, global illumination and the first excerpts of ray tracing. There are many light sources that makes the game looks cartooned, caricature and even fictitious in terms of lighting projection. They are nowhere near global illumination. They are not flat images projected over a sphere or bitmaps applied to square boxes. This game uses old technology such as sky boxes when next generation games use full modeled back grounds. This game rarely has destructibility environments and almost everything are simple static meshes. They are not phonon bouncing effects or rancidity or cascaded consequences of umbra, penumbra and antumbra. Lately they where updating the system with accurate non dynamic projected shadows on the floor as bit maps. The material library is old and their global illumination is one of the worst seen in the current market. Second, current War Frame models are low polygons, normal mapped, bump mapped clay models with low resolution on the textures. You don't have the slightest idea what is going on because you don't work with 3d engines. You don't know anything of what is going on that video. When Epic starts releasing actual intense in-game footage I might be impressed, but so far it is just just UE and nothing else. There are several games out there that look stunning, but their performace in heavy action tanks. It shows nothing but really nice graphics, which is completely pointless if the engine wont let the performace be high when alot is going on. The thing is, the next gen consoles will already be behind PC's so what WF currently can manage at the highest setting possible will be more than enough. And they will take lightyear leaps with the corpus ship revamp, just as the gas city did. Corpus ships are still old as the grave yet look alot different than the early days. Which can be seen in WF too when you compare 2013 graphics to 2020, heck, just comparing old tiles between then and no shows a great difference and those have only really been touched up by new lighting effects etc. Game looked like night and day and can be seen now when comparing classic to normal WoW. WoW alone took a massive step between WotLK and Cata, no new engine, just massive improvements to the one they use. That is what the doom and gloomers just dont get. AC1 survived for like a couple decades with updates, still running I think w/o new content.Īdding in extensions to the engine to further convey the IP and setting are done by these GAAS's all the time.without a full re-write to another engine. AC2 was graphically awesome at the time and the game itself was not only not AC, it was barely a game. IME, all of the live games that last do innovate and improve the engines used as well.Īsheron's Call is a classic example. There are just so many out there right now that are what these people would call outdated or old and dead, but they are very much alive and kicking since people dont care about the graphics not being the latest or even from the last 10 years. The biggest reasons they've shut down is because they've been extremely missmanaged or have had another company taking over the IP rights and made a new game, forcing a shut down of the previous. Only a very select few of them have had sequels and even fewer have actually shut down due to age. Alot of those doom and gloomers should also take a look at the history of most online games that are of "mmo" style.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |