| NEVERWINTER VAULT - DUNGEON SIEGE VS. NEVERWINTER NIGHTS -> These graphics aren't impressive. | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: These graphics aren't impressive. |
| Posted By: RightBastard Posted On: Apr 22, 2002 Views: 540 | These graphics aren't impressive. Gimme a break. The graphics are from games that have come out 3+ years after Quake 3 (and NWN still hasn't been released). The texture resolutions are a pitiful 256x256 (back in the hayday of the Voodoo 2 that might've been acceptable). I'm not too sure of the exact specs for NWN but their 'blocky' and somewhat dis-jointed looking models show that they aren't as blended as the models in DS. Ground Control came aout a few years ago and offers the same 'perspective' for their game and yet their graphics seem so much better. I'd like to know who started the rumor that these games have amazing graphics because they Don't! I understand that many of us can't afford an uber-computer but that still doesn't make an excuse to limit those woh can afford one to the same low-poly limitations that these game show. I'm running a 1.2 GHz Athlon TBird with 512 MB of Ram, DS should scream on my system (especially with a Geforce 4 to 4600). Unfortunately it doesn't. The meager 7-29 fps is pathetic next to my Quake 3 benchmarks of 87-135 fps. The polys are higher in Quake 3, the texture resolutions are more than double (than DS's anyways). Some one please trounce this FPS engine! (Oh wait, Asheron's Call 2 might). |
| Posted By: GuruChaz Posted On: Apr 22, 2002 Views: 501 | RE: These graphics aren't impressive. Get a life, little boy. |
| Posted By: Psycho Posted On: Apr 23, 2002 Views: 440 | RE: These graphics aren't impressive. Ummmm....RightBastard is apparently wrong !! Enough said on that topic. Has no idea what he is talking about, he just wants to throw up these lame numbers in an attempt to look cool. Makes him look like a dork. |
| Posted By: Majin Vegeta Posted On: Apr 23, 2002 Views: 419 | RE: These graphics aren't impressive. I kinda agree with Rightbastard on this one. I think all he's sayin is that the games that are being made today aren't really pushing the envelope of graphics like they did a few years ago. Games that are coming out for the Xbox, Gamecube and PS2 can easily be bested by the specs our computers offer. Does Dungeonsege and NwN really hold a candle to the graphics on those systems? I don't think so. Why are you so quick to insult someone when they bring up a valid point? |
| Posted By: Cliff Posted On: Apr 23, 2002 Views: 414 | RE: These graphics aren't impressive. Hrm... I would assume he's not played Dungeon Siege. The screenshots do not do the game justice, and I honestly can't say for sure whether NWN or DS has better graphics until after I see NWN in motion on my own screen. |
| Posted By: Old dogs don't like new tricks Posted On: Apr 23, 2002 Views: 386 | RE: RE: These graphics aren't impressive. Quake 3 is old school. Bragging rights for the good ole guys that used to be the college brats. Yeah, your game was a definate landmark in gameing graphics(and other things), but please tell me you can see their facial features in quake like you can in DS without hanging your head in shame. |
| Posted By: foobar Posted On: Apr 23, 2002 Views: 364 | RE: These graphics aren't impressive. Anyone who knows enough to quote things like texture resolution, 'polycount', etc should know that Q3 and DS are not really directly comparable (that's why we are comparing with NWN here... I bet your PC has a pretty good framerate for Doom as well right?) The Q3 type (portal) engines are very good at what they do, but don't usually handle the rich DS/BnW style open scenes with lots of foliage and things very well. You might need to update your video drivers too, my GeForce256 can do better than that... |