Dude you say the engine is build for the future, but everything about it looks from the past. Dude you believe in stuff that simply won't happen. And dont say its because i like toony graphics, i don't like toony graphics, if theres one thing i hate about WoW its the toony graphics and i was looking forward to play in a more realistic world, but not if that world is a bland, badly textured, unfinished buggy empty box .
So you didn't like the graphics. Cool.
I don't like cartoony graphics either. Although the undead characters in WoW were cool. I think a couple more polygons wouln't hurt the game though. And I'm sure thier engine can support it.
I think that CoX has some nice graphics. They went with the physics as far as advancing thier engines technology though. It's interesting, but without a specific card I'll never get to see it in action. It does make for some interesting mechanics they could incorperate into the game though. Not woth the upgrade for me though.
Lineage 2 however, in my opinion, is the best looking MMO on the market. The art direction in that game is pretty hot, but the engine is just your stock UR, noting special. VG, I think is second to L2 as far as look, and art direction in my opinion; it's def. using a lot more polygons then L2 does.
You following me here lord? You already convinced me you didn't like that graphics; that's cool.
First of all, who is going to pay the bills if this game is free to play. That $60-$100 million spent on developing the game wasn't just given to the Sigil. Who is going to pay for the ongoing bug fixing/server costs/updates if the game is free? To the person who suggested 1/2 price until the game is bug free... ok, then all games should be half price because no game is bug free. WoW had stability problems for their first year after release. No game, ever, is bug free. Just look at EveOnline for proof of that. If you try to play Vanguard on the same box you play WoW, chances are your performance will suffer (and in most cases alot). Buy an E6600 with 4+ gigs of ram and twin Nvidia 8800s and you will cruising pretty good in Vanguard. The days of being able to be playing a new MMOG on a $500 Wal-mart system are about over. These game developers are pushing the edge of technology and we should be happy for it and not knocking them when they games won't run lag free on minium spec computers. Developers really have two choices. Go after the high end gamer market and push technology or develop games on $500 systems like WoW. There is nothing wrong with that. Blizzard was successful and I commend them for it. You can't run a game with the graphics that Vanguard has on a $500 computer without serious performance issues. People in game complain how they crash every time they go near a city. You ask them their video card and they say 128 meg card or how much ram do you have, and they say 1gig. I'd be having trouble on a machine like that also. As far as the bugs in the game, not to worry.... every patch they fix a lot of them. Every patch they create new bugs. It's a vicious cycle but at least Sigil acknowledges them and lets us all know what they did or didn't do to a class. They don't "stealth nerf" like Blizzard does.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
LordFarid, first of all... you lost me with your first insult. You make yourself look two. But since you insist on insults.... Secondly, you may have the latest and greatest but when mommy and daddy are buying it for you, who cares. Lastly, talking about insults.... Putting LoTRO & GuildWars in the same league as Oblivion is pure b.s. and you know it. Putting LoTRO in the same sentence as Oblivion tells me your parents work for Turbine. Vanguard graphics on highest quality settings are on par with Oblivion. LoTRO and GuildWars have garbage graphics compared to those two. Show me another MMOG on the market today with better graphics than Vanguard. You'll be hard to find one.
Brad had two options, ship it or ditch it.... He shipped. Over 100,000 active accounts are giving them the time to fix it. Their choice, not yours or mine.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
First of all, who is going to pay the bills if this game is free to play. That $60-$100 million spent on developing the game wasn't just given to the Sigil. Who is going to pay for the ongoing bug fixing/server costs/updates if the game is free? To the person who suggested 1/2 price until the game is bug free... ok, then all games should be half price because no game is bug free. WoW had stability problems for their first year after release. No game, ever, is bug free. Just look at EveOnline for proof of that. If you try to play Vanguard on the same box you play WoW, chances are your performance will suffer (and in most cases alot). Buy an E6600 with 4+ gigs of ram and twin Nvidia 8800s and you will cruising pretty good in Vanguard. The days of being able to be playing a new MMOG on a $500 Wal-mart system are about over. These game developers are pushing the edge of technology and we should be happy for it and not knocking them when they games won't run lag free on minium spec computers. Developers really have two choices. Go after the high end gamer market and push technology or develop games on $500 systems like WoW. There is nothing wrong with that. Blizzard was successful and I commend them for it. You can't run a game with the graphics that Vanguard has on a $500 computer without serious performance issues. People in game complain how they crash every time they go near a city. You ask them their video card and they say 128 meg card or how much ram do you have, and they say 1gig. I'd be having trouble on a machine like that also. As far as the bugs in the game, not to worry.... every patch they fix a lot of them. Every patch they create new bugs. It's a vicious cycle but at least Sigil acknowledges them and lets us all know what they did or didn't do to a class. They don't "stealth nerf" like Blizzard does.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
PS: Thanks for killin my buzz dude.
Edit: I'll have to check myself, but I don't think that SLI works quite the way you imply it does. I don't think that it functions like a multicore, distributing specific processing responsebility between the 2 GPU's. Always thought it was as simple as increasing the overall power of the card. Like, combining 2 9800's to give it the power of a single x800 or something like that. I didn't think that SLI would allow each card to work independant of each other to handle multiple processing tasks but instead SHARED the responcebility of rendering lighting and such; thus making each card more efficient.
First of all, who is going to pay the bills if this game is free to play. That $60-$100 million spent on developing the game wasn't just given to the Sigil. Who is going to pay for the ongoing bug fixing/server costs/updates if the game is free? To the person who suggested 1/2 price until the game is bug free... ok, then all games should be half price because no game is bug free. WoW had stability problems for their first year after release. No game, ever, is bug free. Just look at EveOnline for proof of that. If you try to play Vanguard on the same box you play WoW, chances are your performance will suffer (and in most cases alot). Buy an E6600 with 4+ gigs of ram and twin Nvidia 8800s and you will cruising pretty good in Vanguard. The days of being able to be playing a new MMOG on a $500 Wal-mart system are about over. These game developers are pushing the edge of technology and we should be happy for it and not knocking them when they games won't run lag free on minium spec computers. Developers really have two choices. Go after the high end gamer market and push technology or develop games on $500 systems like WoW. There is nothing wrong with that. Blizzard was successful and I commend them for it. You can't run a game with the graphics that Vanguard has on a $500 computer without serious performance issues. People in game complain how they crash every time they go near a city. You ask them their video card and they say 128 meg card or how much ram do you have, and they say 1gig. I'd be having trouble on a machine like that also. As far as the bugs in the game, not to worry.... every patch they fix a lot of them. Every patch they create new bugs. It's a vicious cycle but at least Sigil acknowledges them and lets us all know what they did or didn't do to a class. They don't "stealth nerf" like Blizzard does.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
Thanks. ill gladly read any links if you have them. I dont want to talk for two long as i dont want to detract from the original intent of this posts question. However and im sure you will agree with me an engines capabilities and how it actually performs for a majority of users at this point in the real world are two very seperate items. Vanguards Engine "at this time" is certainly not optimized to a point you would expect of a release application and the well threaded complaints and technical support forum threads substantiate this point of view.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
Very true. However Blizzard released a highly polished and robust application client code that was built from the ground up in regards to the job it needed to do. It was highly optimized and the resulting out of the box performance and experience this gave its player base is testament to the number of subscribers it has today as a main stream Game and MMORPG. Like i said an engines complexities are not always guarentor's of its success, optimizations and hardware compatibility play a huge part even if the engine itself have limited capability.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
I never said it was not going to be beneficial. I fully agree. I dont want to drag this out as this could become a debate in its own right. ;-). For your information the XBox 360 uses 3 IBM Power PC CPU cores running at 3.2Ghz and with the ability to allocate 2 threads in hardware per CPU core. This design is somewhat considered more robust and general purpose for gaming than the Playstation 3's more advanced Cell architecture which is 1 3.2Ghz Core with 7 Synergitic processing units each capable of processing instruction threads seperately of the main core. However the down side of the cell architecture is that it takes more development cost and initial ground work to achieve similar and superior results to a more traditional CPU architecture aka current PC CPU technology and the XBox 360. The Xbox 360's architecture in terms of pure performance is certainly still ahead of the current PC market capabilities.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
GPU's currently do not seem to be pushing Multi GPU environments besides of course in SLI / Crossfire environments. The current High End, Nvidias 8800 and ATI's upcoming R600 series are still single GPU solutions but with an aim on providing more Shader and Vertex engines on board to process intense graphical environments. Further more these cards are moving away from model of seperate Pixel and Vertex shader processing in favour of Unified shader architecture like for example the 8800's stream processors. The amount of these Unified Shader engines a card has can be programmed how the developer wishes, with Nvidia even touting that the stream processors on the 8800 could be capable of physics calculations. My point is that is where the market is currently focused. Cell based technology for graphics cards is still essentially vapourware, also worth note is that the Cell's SPE's are not natively good at focused complex operations as dedicated as say a GPU which is a highly dedicated processor. SPE's are multi purpose and generally good calculation crunching to improve for example, video streaming and multimedia performance.
Multi GPU environments are perhaps on the cards but not the current focus of the industry.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
You didnt kick me ;-). I was simply reading what you said and responding how i saw fit. However if you do get the chance to read up on the upcoming R600 from AMD/ATI please do its quite interesting. They are based loosely from concepts introduced in the XBox 360's ATI GPU which in itself is an incredibly powerful beast. ;-)
I was just pointing out the tech the guy said wasn't there.
PS: Um,yeah. Developing new technology does take money and time, but if someone doesn't do it then nothing gets better. Wouldn't have the $500 8800's on store shelves now. Or the VG engine.
Psst. Magpie. I was just pointing out the tech the guy said wasn't there.
Absolutely fine with me. I didnt want to ditract in the way i did from the main topic anyhow as im sure you didnt either. ;-)
However i didnt 100% agree with some of your previous posts on "tech" and so just wanted too give you my opinion on vanguards engine, and a few other items... as you have also given me yours, which is great.
First of all, who is going to pay the bills if this game is free to play. That $60-$100 million spent on developing the game wasn't just given to the Sigil. Who is going to pay for the ongoing bug fixing/server costs/updates if the game is free? To the person who suggested 1/2 price until the game is bug free... ok, then all games should be half price because no game is bug free. WoW had stability problems for their first year after release. No game, ever, is bug free. Just look at EveOnline for proof of that. If you try to play Vanguard on the same box you play WoW, chances are your performance will suffer (and in most cases alot). Buy an E6600 with 4+ gigs of ram and twin Nvidia 8800s and you will cruising pretty good in Vanguard. The days of being able to be playing a new MMOG on a $500 Wal-mart system are about over. These game developers are pushing the edge of technology and we should be happy for it and not knocking them when they games won't run lag free on minium spec computers. Developers really have two choices. Go after the high end gamer market and push technology or develop games on $500 systems like WoW. There is nothing wrong with that. Blizzard was successful and I commend them for it. You can't run a game with the graphics that Vanguard has on a $500 computer without serious performance issues. People in game complain how they crash every time they go near a city. You ask them their video card and they say 128 meg card or how much ram do you have, and they say 1gig. I'd be having trouble on a machine like that also. As far as the bugs in the game, not to worry.... every patch they fix a lot of them. Every patch they create new bugs. It's a vicious cycle but at least Sigil acknowledges them and lets us all know what they did or didn't do to a class. They don't "stealth nerf" like Blizzard does.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
PS: Thanks for killin my buzz dude.
Edit: I'll have to check myself, but I don't think that SLI works quite the way you imply it does. I don't think that it functions like a multicore, distributing specific processing responsebility between the 2 GPU's. Always thought it was as simple as increasing the overall power of the card. Like, combining 2 9800's to give it the power of a single x800 or something like that. I didn't think that SLI would allow each card to work independant of each other to handle multiple processing tasks but instead SHARED the responcebility of rendering lighting and such; thus making each card more efficient.
Sorry i didnt intend to imply anything but ill gladly clear it up for you by all means. SLI (Scalable Link Interface) and its opposite number "Crossfire" from ATI use two graphics cards (GPU's) to share graphical processing loads in a 3d Rendered scene. The GPU's generally opporate in a Master / Slave relationship.
The first GPU core will recieve a scene to render. It will pass half of that scene from its own frame buffer, onboard memory, to the second cards GPU and frame buffer to render, thus each card handles effectively different elements of the same rendered scene. The slave card then passes the half of its rendered scene back to the master that compile the completely rendered scene into its own frame buffer and outputs to the display.
It is a first class example of Parrellel Processing. The GPU's are in fact sharing the load in a Master / Slave configuration, but are not a true dual GPU configuration as they do not share Pixel and vertex shader pipes nor on board memory. It is however as ive said parellel processing.
Well I am all ready paying for it and will continue paying for it. Personally I think it is the most enjoyable MMO on the market right now. yeah there are bugs but hell I have been playing MMO's since they were MUDS and there has never been an mmo or mud that wasnt released with lots of bugs in it. I am fine paying for an MMO every month because I know that my money is being used to improve the games performance and to allow the developers to create new content for me to enjoy. Free MMO's usually come with no support, lots of exploits, lack of new content, and/or cater to the people who have a lot of money to spend on buying in game currency or items through their item shops or whatever they call it.
LordFarid, first of all... you lost me with your first insult. You make yourself look two. But since you insist on insults.... Secondly, you may have the latest and greatest but when mommy and daddy are buying it for you, who cares. Lastly, talking about insults.... Putting LoTRO & GuildWars in the same league as Oblivion is pure b.s. and you know it. Putting LoTRO in the same sentence as Oblivion tells me your parents work for Turbine. Vanguard graphics on highest quality settings are on par with Oblivion. LoTRO and GuildWars have garbage graphics compared to those two. Show me another MMOG on the market today with better graphics than Vanguard. You'll be hard to find one. Brad had two options, ship it or ditch it.... He shipped. Over 100,000 active accounts are giving them the time to fix it. Their choice, not yours or mine.
First of all im 30 years old and have a fulltime job and paid for every single part of my computer (as well as the internet connection and the house it is stored in).
Secondly, Vanguard graphics on par with Oblivion? Dream on. Either you never saw Oblivion, you are completely blind or your just lying to protect your beloved game (i suspect the last). Anyone with two eyes and a brain sees a vast difference between the two.
MMo's with better graphics then Vanguard? I'd say CoH, Everquest 2, WoW (yes even wow with its toony graphics) and finally Lord of the Rings does blow Vanguard completely out of the water.
Comments
So you didn't like the graphics. Cool.
I don't like cartoony graphics either. Although the undead characters in WoW were cool. I think a couple more polygons wouln't hurt the game though. And I'm sure thier engine can support it.
I think that CoX has some nice graphics. They went with the physics as far as advancing thier engines technology though. It's interesting, but without a specific card I'll never get to see it in action. It does make for some interesting mechanics they could incorperate into the game though. Not woth the upgrade for me though.
Lineage 2 however, in my opinion, is the best looking MMO on the market. The art direction in that game is pretty hot, but the engine is just your stock UR, noting special. VG, I think is second to L2 as far as look, and art direction in my opinion; it's def. using a lot more polygons then L2 does.
You following me here lord? You already convinced me you didn't like that graphics; that's cool.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
LordFarid, first of all... you lost me with your first insult. You make yourself look two. But since you insist on insults.... Secondly, you may have the latest and greatest but when mommy and daddy are buying it for you, who cares. Lastly, talking about insults.... Putting LoTRO & GuildWars in the same league as Oblivion is pure b.s. and you know it. Putting LoTRO in the same sentence as Oblivion tells me your parents work for Turbine. Vanguard graphics on highest quality settings are on par with Oblivion. LoTRO and GuildWars have garbage graphics compared to those two. Show me another MMOG on the market today with better graphics than Vanguard. You'll be hard to find one.
Brad had two options, ship it or ditch it.... He shipped. Over 100,000 active accounts are giving them the time to fix it. Their choice, not yours or mine.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
PS: Thanks for killin my buzz dude.
Edit: I'll have to check myself, but I don't think that SLI works quite the way you imply it does. I don't think that it functions like a multicore, distributing specific processing responsebility between the 2 GPU's. Always thought it was as simple as increasing the overall power of the card. Like, combining 2 9800's to give it the power of a single x800 or something like that. I didn't think that SLI would allow each card to work independant of each other to handle multiple processing tasks but instead SHARED the responcebility of rendering lighting and such; thus making each card more efficient.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
Thanks. ill gladly read any links if you have them. I dont want to talk for two long as i dont want to detract from the original intent of this posts question. However and im sure you will agree with me an engines capabilities and how it actually performs for a majority of users at this point in the real world are two very seperate items. Vanguards Engine "at this time" is certainly not optimized to a point you would expect of a release application and the well threaded complaints and technical support forum threads substantiate this point of view.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
Very true. However Blizzard released a highly polished and robust application client code that was built from the ground up in regards to the job it needed to do. It was highly optimized and the resulting out of the box performance and experience this gave its player base is testament to the number of subscribers it has today as a main stream Game and MMORPG. Like i said an engines complexities are not always guarentor's of its success, optimizations and hardware compatibility play a huge part even if the engine itself have limited capability.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
I never said it was not going to be beneficial. I fully agree. I dont want to drag this out as this could become a debate in its own right. ;-). For your information the XBox 360 uses 3 IBM Power PC CPU cores running at 3.2Ghz and with the ability to allocate 2 threads in hardware per CPU core. This design is somewhat considered more robust and general purpose for gaming than the Playstation 3's more advanced Cell architecture which is 1 3.2Ghz Core with 7 Synergitic processing units each capable of processing instruction threads seperately of the main core. However the down side of the cell architecture is that it takes more development cost and initial ground work to achieve similar and superior results to a more traditional CPU architecture aka current PC CPU technology and the XBox 360. The Xbox 360's architecture in terms of pure performance is certainly still ahead of the current PC market capabilities.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
GPU's currently do not seem to be pushing Multi GPU environments besides of course in SLI / Crossfire environments. The current High End, Nvidias 8800 and ATI's upcoming R600 series are still single GPU solutions but with an aim on providing more Shader and Vertex engines on board to process intense graphical environments. Further more these cards are moving away from model of seperate Pixel and Vertex shader processing in favour of Unified shader architecture like for example the 8800's stream processors. The amount of these Unified Shader engines a card has can be programmed how the developer wishes, with Nvidia even touting that the stream processors on the 8800 could be capable of physics calculations. My point is that is where the market is currently focused. Cell based technology for graphics cards is still essentially vapourware, also worth note is that the Cell's SPE's are not natively good at focused complex operations as dedicated as say a GPU which is a highly dedicated processor. SPE's are multi purpose and generally good calculation crunching to improve for example, video streaming and multimedia performance.
Multi GPU environments are perhaps on the cards but not the current focus of the industry.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
You didnt kick me ;-). I was simply reading what you said and responding how i saw fit. However if you do get the chance to read up on the upcoming R600 from AMD/ATI please do its quite interesting. They are based loosely from concepts introduced in the XBox 360's ATI GPU which in itself is an incredibly powerful beast. ;-)
PS: Thanks for killin my buzz dude.
Psst. Magpie.
I was just pointing out the tech the guy said wasn't there.
PS: Um,yeah. Developing new technology does take money and time, but if someone doesn't do it then nothing gets better. Wouldn't have the $500 8800's on store shelves now. Or the VG engine.
Absolutely fine with me. I didnt want to ditract in the way i did from the main topic anyhow as im sure you didnt either. ;-)
However i didnt 100% agree with some of your previous posts on "tech" and so just wanted too give you my opinion on vanguards engine, and a few other items... as you have also given me yours, which is great.
Thanks Again.
Mag.
Haha, you are really a joke. Vanguard edge of technology, thats like saying Volkswagen Beetles are the fastest cars. I bet you either work at sony or still believe in santa clause. I got a AMD X2 4800 with 2 gigs of ram and dual 7900GTX SLI, Xfi soundblaster. I'm not talking about lag or personal PC problems. I'm talking about server crashes where the entire server is down and no one plays. I'm talking about bugs like group bugging, guild chat bugs, NPC's that don't work, countless of quests that are broken, areas not finished, being stuck and dying as a result, and failing to get your corpse because its stuck, animations not working, "areas" being offline (and if you try to reach them your character gets stuck until the area is fixed), server down times at the possible most inconvenient times for europeans and all that kind of shit that has nothing to do with the power of my computer.
Then there is also the fact that the emotes are lame, there is nothing implemented for the roleplayer, no drunk effects, no sitting, no cozy inns, no interesting towns, the world basically being a complete empty boring box, designed with horrible texturers and bland.
I can set the graphics on ultra high (though ran on high mostly) and basically it still looks like crap (except for some area's like Cael Bra'ial) and trust me, its not my computer, its really the game.
To compare wow's first year with what i experienced with Vanguard is really a joke. Yes WoW had some bugs. Some servers had crashes and downtimes during the first few weeks (though not in european launch), but at least wow only had maintenance once a week instead of EVERY FREAKING DAY and during EUROPEAN PRIME HOURS. WoW was smooth, the quests worked, the NPC's worked, PVP was not perfectly balanced but at least not as insanely inbalanced as Vanguard, all areas where basically finished. During WoW's first week i would get suprised if i saw a bug really, they where there but they weren't like a common occurance. During my weeks in Vanguard i'd frankly BE SUPRISED IF I DIDN'T SEE BUGS.
My computer is ready for that so called edge of technology. It runs every freaking game from LOTR:Online to Guild Wars and Oblivion without even slightly breaking into a sweat. But Vanguard isn't edge of technology, it doesn't show anything that hasn't been done better before, rather it's edge of insanity and frankly a load of crap. Your basically still paying to test a below average buggy as hell beta client, and thats fine, but dont go insult gaming in general by calling Vanguard edge of technology, because your insulting a lot of game developers out there that do develop games (relativly) bug free and truly BEAUTIFUL to behold at all times.
So dramatic.
The engine is doing things that engines in other MMO's aren't able to do. Because you don't see it doesn't mean that thier isn't tech there that is bleeding edge. Although I wouldn't call it bleeding edge, it is doing some advanced stuff that is a strain on current systems. It's more like advanced tech then bleeding edge.
Where are the technical white papers to prove or substantiate that this MMORPG applications engine is doing things that other MMORPG engines are unable to do. Im afraid again an argument / opinion without substance to back its claims. All we know is that Vanguard is using a Modified version of the unreal 2 code base, or in engine terms Unreal 2.5 which sigil have heavily modified to work in the MMORPG environment. For ALL we know world of warcraft or even Star Wars Galaxies engines might well be technically superior to vanguards engine because unless you have whitepapers and reference designs on both engines capabilities side by side this is an impossible point to prove. Also an engines integrity and reputation does not just rely on its ability to push graphical effects, a large part of its allure to game developers is also an engines ability to perform well while trading off against visuals and hardware compatibility favourably.
Something tells me that VG is going to benefit from cell processor technology. PS3 isn't doing so well, but thank you Sony for the RnD. Do some reading on the new Nvidia cards and the way the GPU's will work in the future, and then consider who SoE works very closely with. Hint, it's Nvidia. ATI is in trouble, wonder if they will hold on or go the way of Voodoo3d.
I am not going to get into the pros and cons of the Playstation 3 CPU cell architecture, when compared to a more traditional Multi Core / Multi Thread ,CPU architecture such as the XBox 360 for example. Suffice to say it isnt valid to this thread. However a sweeping comment such as ATI is in trouble is very generalistic and broad. Im an Nvidia card owner a lowly 7900GS in fact an awsome card that performs in anything i want it too. However to say AMD/ATI is in trouble is just plain wrong. Id do some reading into the upcoming R600 architecture and see the other side of the GPU implementation argument. Trust me my friend they are not in trouble, the competition in the GPU market is looking set to maintain its choice, health and ideals for a long time to come.
And no your PC isn't. SLI on those two cards isn't that impressive. Sorry, when you can bost your running 2 gfx cards with GPU's that are handling some of the processes that the CPU would normally be doing, and doing it with processors utilizing cell processing, then I'll be impressed and say your ready for bleeding edge tech.
Currently Vaporware. Also read up further on GPU architecture since the early 2000's. At every turn GPU (Graphical Processing Unit's) have been all about removing draw and texture and lighting operations from the CPU. So his current SLI setup of mulitple GPU's is actually doing this as it stands in hardware, thats the function of a GPU. As to performing this operation with cell technology you are referencing a CPU architecture and design that currently shares some commonology in ideas with GPU technology and architecture but the two at this time are not comparable.
The engine is built for the FUTURE; this would imply it will utilize FUTURE technology. Future being not today.
I believe EverQuest 2 launched with this mantra. And whilst Everquest 2 has certainly come about leaps and bounds and maintains today a Niche player base, this very fact hurt its launch sales and release subscriptions to a certain degree. So maybe this isnt something that is a good thing as it does come with ramifications for any game developers.
You may not like the look of the game and find the graphics to be substandard to your tastes, and that cool man. I don't like WoW's graphics; who gives a monkeys butt.
Ok.
It renders more portals then any other MMO engine out. More portals means more processing as it's drawing portals in the distance that other engines wouldn't draw. It has the ability, if I"m understanding it correctly, to render these portals under the already existing world as well as above it. It has the "potential" to render the geography at a very long distance while flying, using the same tech that Sigil created built off of an Unreal Engine. Also it does everything seemlessly. And if they wanted they could put in instance bases areas as well I believe.
You can find this in a post on these boards. Mcquaid talked about it. This is something you don't get to learn a lot of times. Most companies aren't that talkative about the engine they are running. I've never heard anyone from Blizzard talking about the capabilities of the WoW engine.
You're right. The latest technology in CPU processing is in no way going to be more beneficial to systems in the future. Having hundreds of small processors all running in unison working on dif. things all at the same time is no way going to be a benefit. Un, yeah. The cell processor is more advanced then the 360's single, what intel based, processor that can be found in any MID grade PC on the market. I'm silly i shouldn't think that multiple cards with hundreds of tiny little processors would be better then todays single processor cards.
It's about doing MORE of the same stuff that cards are doing already. Multicore will allow cards to do MORE then they already do as a single core gpu. Sort of like the way that the VG engine is doing MORE then the other engines running.
Relax, I was pondering the ATI thing. Didn't mean to kick you in the testes.
BTW, being all technical about things is fine, I don't know didley outside of what I understand about things. Hope that's not to vague.
PS: Thanks for killin my buzz dude.
Edit: I'll have to check myself, but I don't think that SLI works quite the way you imply it does. I don't think that it functions like a multicore, distributing specific processing responsebility between the 2 GPU's. Always thought it was as simple as increasing the overall power of the card. Like, combining 2 9800's to give it the power of a single x800 or something like that. I didn't think that SLI would allow each card to work independant of each other to handle multiple processing tasks but instead SHARED the responcebility of rendering lighting and such; thus making each card more efficient.
Sorry i didnt intend to imply anything but ill gladly clear it up for you by all means. SLI (Scalable Link Interface) and its opposite number "Crossfire" from ATI use two graphics cards (GPU's) to share graphical processing loads in a 3d Rendered scene. The GPU's generally opporate in a Master / Slave relationship.
The first GPU core will recieve a scene to render. It will pass half of that scene from its own frame buffer, onboard memory, to the second cards GPU and frame buffer to render, thus each card handles effectively different elements of the same rendered scene. The slave card then passes the half of its rendered scene back to the master that compile the completely rendered scene into its own frame buffer and outputs to the display.
It is a first class example of Parrellel Processing. The GPU's are in fact sharing the load in a Master / Slave configuration, but are not a true dual GPU configuration as they do not share Pixel and vertex shader pipes nor on board memory. It is however as ive said parellel processing.
Warp
First of all im 30 years old and have a fulltime job and paid for every single part of my computer (as well as the internet connection and the house it is stored in).
Secondly, Vanguard graphics on par with Oblivion? Dream on. Either you never saw Oblivion, you are completely blind or your just lying to protect your beloved game (i suspect the last). Anyone with two eyes and a brain sees a vast difference between the two.
MMo's with better graphics then Vanguard? I'd say CoH, Everquest 2, WoW (yes even wow with its toony graphics) and finally Lord of the Rings does blow Vanguard completely out of the water.
Open your freaking eyes and wake up.