This is a flawed argument. You won't alienate your base if the game, like all MMOs have graphic settings that scale the game. Low can look like WoW and run on the oldest settings. Medium can have more bells and whistles and run on a more modern system. High can have all the wonderful modern graphics we enjoy. Hell you don't even have to do it that way. You can specify each feature and detail what it does.

 

So you have an PC that will run X modern game fine save for the insane physic engine that makes your CPU cry? Fine, turn it down a bit. Those soft shadows killing your game? No problem we've got lower shadows than that, or turn them off! The lighting is killing your FPS? No problem we have HDR to bloom to none at all, make a choice.

 

Bottom line, graphics scale and the above argument doesn't make much sense.

Do you honestly think people would be like, "Well at least I can play on low! Sure wish i could use those medium and high settings, but my computer cannot handle it! So glad my friend can though!"

lol..seriously dude..

Does nothing for texture resolution, and bugs out textures for many ( makes water and other items invisible, etc. ).

Certainly doesn't do anything for the texture resolution - but I'm not having any issues with forcing it through catalyst. The odd "green bar" glitch, but I think that sometimes happens regardless and I'll take it over the jaggies everywhere.

Certainly doesn't do anything for the texture resolution - but I'm not having any issues with forcing it through catalyst. The odd "green bar" glitch, but I think that sometimes happens regardless and I'll take it over the jaggies everywhere.

Yeah, the green bar is another graphic bug altogether. It's not related to forcing AA.

This is a flawed argument. You won't alienate your base if the game, like all MMOs have graphic settings that scale the game. Low can look like WoW and run on the oldest settings. Medium can have more bells and whistles and run on a more modern system. High can have all the wonderful modern graphics we enjoy. Hell you don't even have to do it that way. You can specify each feature and detail what it does.

 

So you have an PC that will run X modern game fine save for the insane physic engine that makes your CPU cry? Fine, turn it down a bit. Those soft shadows killing your game? No problem we've got lower shadows than that, or turn them off! The lighting is killing your FPS? No problem we have HDR to bloom to none at all, make a choice.

 

Bottom line, graphics scale and the above argument doesn't make much sense.

Dont waste your breath, Aisar has no clue what he is talking about. Its like having a conversation with a brick wall. Hes drunk and trolling the s*** out of this forum and your all falling for it. Dont even acknowledge him.

Do you honestly think people would be like, "Well at least I can play on low! Sure wish i could use those medium and high settings, but my computer cannot handle it! So glad my friend can though!"

 

lol..seriously dude..

That is moot if high is only low at best in the first place. And you know what? Yeah, they SHOULD be happy that their friend who has a much nicer PC than them can take advantage of it. Why should a company cater to envious people who want everyone else to have to play with terrible settings because they chose to stick with an ancient computer? A rig that can play those high end games aren't even that expensive, I could build a system that can run Crysis 2 with DX11 settings for less than 800 dollars, even less, I could probably squeeze 700 or 600.

Dont waste your breath, Aisar has no clue what he is talking about. Its like having a conversation with a brick wall. Hes drunk and trolling the s*** out of this forum and your all falling for it. Dont even acknowledge him.

Thank you for the constructive post.

Does nothing for texture resolution, and bugs out textures for many ( makes water and other items invisible, etc. ).

Doing it on the GPU caused no ill effects, editing the settings config for the game as per google instructions did cause things to disappear.

Odd but true.

That is moot if high is only low at best in the first place. And you know what? Yeah, they SHOULD be happy that their friend who has a much nicer PC than them can take advantage of it. Why should a company cater to envious people who want everyone else to have to play with terrible settings because they chose to stick with an ancient computer? A rig that can play those high end games aren't even that expensive, I could build a system that can run Crysis 2 with DX11 settings for less than 800 dollars, even less, I could probably squeeze 700 or 600.

I don't even know where to start. "envious people who want everyone to play with terrible settings". what? you are out there man. lol

Dont waste your breath, Aisar has no clue what he is talking about. Its like having a conversation with a brick wall. Hes drunk and trolling the s*** out of this forum and your all falling for it. Dont even acknowledge him.

He's the same kind of technological cro-magnon that will emphatically proclaim that EAware can't add DX10/DX11 because then noone with DX9 cards could play.

Do you honestly think people would be like, "Well at least I can play on low! Sure wish i could use those medium and high settings, but my computer cannot handle it! So glad my friend can though!"

 

lol..seriously dude..

That is exactly the point of having different graphics settings. For reals. That way people with low PCs can still play, and folks with fancy PCs can turn everything up. You seem to be satisfied with medium settings - well that's fine, I imagine a lot of people who can't run games with everything on are likewise happy to stay on medium.

Anyway, WoW has much better texture resolution, as does Lotro, etc. Some people play with everything on, others turn it down a little - people aren't running away screaming.

He's the same kind of technological cro-magnon that will emphatically proclaim that EAware can't add DX10/DX11 because then noone with DX9 cards could play.

What?

That is exactly the point of having different graphics settings. For reals. That way people with low PCs can still play, and folks with fancy PCs can turn everything up. You seem to be satisfied with medium settings - well that's fine, I imagine a lot of people who can't run games with everything on are likewise happy to stay on medium.

 

Anyway, WoW has much better texture resolution, as does Lotro, etc. Some people play with everything on, others turn it down a little - people aren't running away screaming.

Yeah you are forgetting that the higher the graphics, the less subscriptions. It's all about money, bottom line.

While high-res textures are somewhat in the middle as far as priority goes (there are lots of other gameplay issues that should have high priority), I can't imagine how hard it would be to implement.

That said, my wishlist is for SWTOR to use the FrostBite 2 engine. DiCE created this awesome engine for EA games, and yet the SWTOR developers want to use some seemingly random third party engine with absolutely no proven track record.

Doing it on the GPU caused no ill effects, editing the settings config for the game as per google instructions did cause things to disappear.

 

Odd but true.

I think that may be because most of the instructions for editing the .ini were made when AA was only disabled ingame. Then EAware completely removed it. so anyone still trying to edit the .ini per those instructions were basically telling the game to access something that was only partially there or not at all, thus the anomalies.

Whereas through the GPU, it bypasses the ingame settings completely, therefore the game can't misinterpret the instructions.

Just a hypothesis, though.

Massively Multiplayer Onlines will never have those kind of graphics, period. Never, ever, ever.

You've obviously never played WoW on ultra settings.

(Disclaimer: I want this game to succeed and have no intention of "going back to WoW". I am a firm believer in games as a valid story-telling medium and always look for that cinematic feel in my games, which is what makes me am absolutely in love with the Bioware's lore-centric games.)

All I'm saying really, is if all these modern games circa 2009-2011 give us the option to turn the eye candy up as far as it can go (including an MMO like WoW), why doesn't ToR?

He's the same kind of technological cro-magnon that will emphatically proclaim that EAware can't add DX10/DX11 because then noone with DX9 cards could play.

To be honest, in general I'd rather companies just pick a standard and go with it. 90% of the time DX10/11 features are sort of tacked in a gimmicky fashion, on top of a DX9 engine, and it doesn't do anyone good. Most of the time the DX10 version is poorly optimized, looks a teeny bit better, and runs at half the speed.

There are definite exceptions though. DX:HR looked fabulous in DX11 and ran very well. The later STALKER games also did it well. But usually it's sort of a mess.

Witcher 2 did it right, they stuck with DX9, squeezed the best they could out of it, and optimized it as well as they could. And it looks amazing.

But now DX11 cards are fairly standard and have been for years. Maybe it is time to switch the focus. Unfortunately the XBOX is a DX9 platform so we're stuck as long as people make multi-platform games (meaning, they want to make money).

I don't even know where to start. "envious people who want everyone to play with terrible settings". what? you are out there man. lol

Why don't you try? Just choose something to argue against, you have already shown that you are more than capable of putting up an argument sp please do so, how about starting with the fact that graphics are SCALABLE! You can play with me in a group in TOR with low rez graphics while I could use high rez graphics.

Yeah you are forgetting that the higher the graphics, the less subscriptions. It's all about money, bottom line.

I don't really understand the logic of this. If that were the case then everything would be text based and selling billions. Also, Nvidia and AMD wouldn't exist as no one would buy anything that would handle graphics well or games that are blockbusters due to graphics as a main differentiation point.

It's like saying, you don't think they should sell fast cars because you drive a GEO metro. You don't subscribe to the communist political philosophy by any chance do you? Just curious.

To be honest, in general I'd rather companies just pick a standard and go with it. 90% of the time DX10/11 features are sort of tacked in a gimmicky fashion, on top of a DX9 engine, and it doesn't do anyone good. Most of the time the DX10 version is poorly optimized, looks a teeny bit better, and runs at half the speed.

 

There are definite exceptions though. DX:HR looked fabulous in DX11 and ran very well. The later STALKER games also did it well. But usually it's sort of a mess.

 

Witcher 2 did it right, they stuck with DX9, squeezed the best they could out of it, and optimized it as well as they could. And it looks amazing.

Honestly, the majority of consumers are either stuck in the stone age still using DX9 cards ( like the diehards who still think XP is a premium OS ) or have upgraded to more recent to DX11 cards. DX10 as a whole never really got that much of a foothold outside of the 8800/9000 series for Nvidia and whatever the equivelant cards were for AMD, and they probably wouldn't alienate very many leaving DX10 completely out of the equation since all DX10 cards still support DX9.

DX11 just adds so much more to the table in terms of functionality and performance that it really makes no sense to not have it in a game released in 2011/2012.

High probably ought to be higher in this game. Relabeling Medium to mean High is a pretty insulting, backhanded attempt at a sneaky move by BioWare, and not saying anything about it (like the player base won't find out about it... haha... PLEASE; you guys must think we're pretty dumb) is snarky at best.

BioWare has gotten this game about 95% right in my estimation, but some of the stuff they have gotten wrong (no hoodless option for Jedi Knights, this) have been terrible, horrible, awful mistakes that borderline on inexcusable.

Anti-aliasing is coming in 1.1. Let's hope that will improve graphical quality at least noticeably.

Honestly, the majority of consumers are either stuck in the stone age still using DX9 cards ( like the diehards who still think XP is a premium OS ) or have upgraded to more recent to DX11 cards. DX10 as a whole never really got that much of a foothold outside of the 8800/9000 series for Nvidia and whatever the equivelant cards were for AMD, and they probably wouldn't alienate very many leaving DX10 completely out of the equation since all DX10 cards still support DX9.

 

DX11 just adds so much more to the table in terms of functionality and performance that it really makes no sense to not have it in a game released in 2011/2012.

It's because consoles, which the majority of gaming are done on at the moment, still use DX9, once you see the next gen AKA current gen come out, you're going to see many more PC games take advantage of modern tech, of course they won't be taking advantage of the far more advanced stuff that PC will be using by the time the next gen of consoles go commercial.

Your posts are like flash-bang grenades packed with concentrated stupid.

Ohh, I like that.

Your posts are like flash-bang grenades packed with concentrated stupid.

Lol! Stupidly does have the ability to stun.

Heh, looks like he ran out of troll juice.

So I wonder if someone who works at BW is reading this. If they are, then they ought to consider how much better it is for their bottom line to communicate over being silent.