maybe not the best graphic game. but i think its 1 of the best Looking game of this years
Wow, those are probably the best videos I've seen to show off the graphics in the game. Stunning at 1080P and you can see the quality of the high resolution textures, the phenominal art design and the superb draw distance. Haters debunked on all counts.
I'm confused I'm planning on getting GW2 and I don't really care about a game graphically, I'm amongst the crowd that says gameplay > graphics.
YET, some of those textures look pretty low rez even on 1080, are those all taken with the highest settings? I notice the char's face and horns and such are AMAZING! I am very impressed with his hands and his weapon and armor textures... yet I notice a lot of Jaggies and the trees are pretty terrible.
Some of the cities textures are really low rez looking, like the pipe work and the fencing and such, but yes its beta.
And again, I don't really care, I just wanted to point out that it does seem to have flaws.
Edit: Upon reading further reviews I wanted to point out that the objects in the world seem to repeat a lot, I notice a lot of the same trees just rotated, and their leaves are just poor.
Frankly, I don't see much difference between GW2 graphics and any other MMO out their. There is a YouTube video out there that shows a range of video setting in game that he showed off. Other then draw distance and "shinny eyes" I just could not see much difference. What most people seem to be doing is going by pre-made trailers that claim to us "in game footage". Problem is, it appears that a lot of what is out there is doctored to some extent. That is not a slame but it is what many game companies do to trick people to play their games (just like using that term "free-to-play").
Obviously a little someone never played AoC. Graphics are nice in an MMO but having too much graphics can cause serious lag and other complications that ever sooo many had with AoC. Beautiful world and details but sometimes playing was autrocious du to the techical demand on a rig.
Anyways the graphics look awesome to me in GW2. Sure not top of the line PC quality but I don't expect that. It is a rich and fullfilling unlike that cartoon pre-school stuff like WoW or SWTOR.
<>The Graphics in GW2 seem like a updated version of GW1. Looks like they use GW 1.5 engine now.
<>
Don't feel disappointed already please. Once you're in Tyria you will be flooded with the same feeling you got from exploring Tyria in GW1. It "feels" the same, and even though the graphical fidelity is not up to CryEngine3 or UE3 levels the art direction really carry the game. It's gor-geous.
You won't be disappointed, I promise.
I really, really hope you are right. So far the videos are OK, but nothing compared to the orginal game.
<>The Graphics in GW2 seem like a updated version of GW1. Looks like they use GW 1.5 engine now.
<>
Don't feel disappointed already please. Once you're in Tyria you will be flooded with the same feeling you got from exploring Tyria in GW1. It "feels" the same, and even though the graphical fidelity is not up to CryEngine3 or UE3 levels the art direction really carry the game. It's gor-geous.
You won't be disappointed, I promise.
I really, really hope you are right. So far the videos are OK, but nothing compared to the orginal game.
The immersion that this game has in PvE blew me away honestly, with all the little details this game as, I don't think anyone is gonna be disapointed with the graphics because of how good the game simply looks.
Good you are laughing but beauty is in eye of beholder..not everyone is going to agree that GW2 looks amazing. Thanks for the video though..i love the gameplay but i think in graphics department GW2 is just ok.
He forgot to say "set the graphics quality to 1080p"
and btw... my screen resolution is a lot better than 1080p.
Notice: While it seems like a huge improvment to Guild Wars 2, the threes and rendering distance is almost as bad as in GW 1.
I think the graphics look great. I think most people are looking at it as the traditional graphics we are used to seeing in games. Unfortunately, most are mistaking graphics, for art style.
When it comes to the rendering distance looking bad, its really not. Again that is based on the art style of making it look like a painting. ArenaNet has mentioned over and over again that they want the background to look like a painting and as you get closer look like the painting is coming alive.
Obviously a little someone never played AoC. Graphics are nice in an MMO but having too much graphics can cause serious lag and other complications that ever sooo many had with AoC. Beautiful world and details but sometimes playing was autrocious du to the techical demand on a rig.
Anyways the graphics look awesome to me in GW2. Sure not top of the line PC quality but I don't expect that. It is a rich and fullfilling unlike that cartoon pre-school stuff like WoW or SWTOR.
In AoC the real culprit was the unoptimized engine.
But yeah, too pretty graphics means higher sys reqs which means fewer potential buyers.
The solution to all this is of course to mix between good art and good enough graphics to make the game look good anyways.
TERAs engine make it look great but the art there is just so-so. GW2s art is a lot better so the game still looks good with less sys reqs. GW2 is made so a lot of people can be on the screen at the same time whle many of the games with better graphics (like AoC) opens up new instances as soon as a few people get in the same zone.
GW2 looks good enough to me, making it prettier at the expense of WvWvW wouldn't be worth it.
I really think that there is absolutely nothing objectively bad with GW2's graphics. Render distance looks fine, textures are pretty, shadows look nice, etc. etc.
If anyone has a problem with the graphics...then they just don't like the style. And well, that's subjective and people are entitled to their opinions. Personally, I love the graphics.
Notice: While it seems like a huge improvment to Guild Wars 2, the threes and rendering distance is almost as bad as in GW 1.
While I do agree that the graphics of GW2 is not that of Blade and soul (Which I have been anticipating for years!!!) I am going to have to play advocate for GW2 in regards to the vids you gave as examples.
1st, Out of all the vids out there of GW2 this had to have been the worst example of graphics so I would call other vids to stand in place. 2nd, GW1 (Though I never played) looked completely mediocre to GW2 in graphics and not to mention, the days of GW1 would have counted that awesome for its time (I know you werent saying otherwise).
There are also other things to consider; for example Aion has awesome graphics, but even on my high-end gaming lap top I lagged like crazy, they also have a lack of content and its a time sink with the grind. What I'm getting at is that they needed more balance in that game. Yes we want graphics but dont affect my gaming experience by giving me great graphics in place of lag and content lack.
I want a game that has balance.
I would rather have a game that can run on a low end machine (I dont play on those :-p) and still offer me a great experience in spite of the fact that I didnt take the time to get the shiney new I7 proccessor and new graphic crads w/e.
Since Aion is the only game on that list that I played I can only really talk about that in comparison to what I've read on GW2, so I can say this much; if I have to sacrifice some rendering for less to no lag then please by all means I'll take it. I hate being out-played because 1 minute I'm flying around, lag, lag, lag, lag and the next minute I'm at the crystal again, frustrating for someone who likes pvp believe me.
Anyhow I'm rambling now so in closing I have included a better example of GW2 graphics :-)
Aside from the well known fact that when developers want to hit the widest audience they aim for the oldest graphics cards especially in this economy where people can't afford new computers every minute, this post is completely irrelevant and here's why. If this were the 1980's when there was a big need to drive the cards into bigger more powerful versions i can see this being an issue if the game was 16 bit cubes, there's a reason the characters look the way they do and that's so that it's easier to make them look alive with motion without fear of collision problems on their own person. (clothing etc that the character's limbs move through). Second, games that have made the character's too real haven't been very popular and any research into this shows, and Anet is definitely done their homework.
And finally, who cares. ZZZZzzzzzzzz.
your worried about graphics for only the toons, because i know that you aren't saying the graphics are bad in the scenery. Seriously, get your eyes checked.
And worrying over how the characters look makes about as much sense as THIS.
When the graphics/art style goes "retro"/pixelated...then say the graphics look outdated. If they manage to avoid the "retro" crap and not go all super cartoon/anime looking then that is all right with me.
Just going on what I have seen of the game as I was not blessed with beta.
Lol,why on earth do people like the OP say the graphics are out dated funnily enough it is still in Beta,and i'm fairly critical but even the beta graphics look bloody great but i've been around since Realm Online then they really would have something to moan about.
I really think that there is absolutely nothing objectively bad with GW2's graphics. Render distance looks fine, textures are pretty, shadows look nice, etc. etc.
If anyone has a problem with the graphics...then they just don't like the style. And well, that's subjective and people are entitled to their opinions. Personally, I love the graphics.
I wonder if the person that complained about render distance was looking at the night and murky water vids.. now yes there the VIEW distance is low and at night some things in the distance like the wizard's tower vid might seem to be a render issue but its dark or unclear on purpose.
Concerning the graphics of Guild Wars 2 IN BETA, what game are you considering comparatively to say that GW2 graphics look dated? I'm interested in your frame of reference on the current gaming MMORPG Market.
Do you know that graphics are not optimised usually until the last couple weeks directly before launch? Infact in this last weekends Beta within one patch they improved the graphics a little more. So there is a giant over head cushion for them to optimise the games graphics.. ITS BETA!!!! this isn't everyone going in to see if they like the game they are supposed to test the game and find bugs not judge the graphics.
When watching other people play the game via their videos, are you comparing full graphic detail vs full graphic detail or just unkown Guild Wars 2 random settings vs high detail in other games?
Logically we can not review the graphics of any video from this games beta since the graphics are not optimised and we would have to consider that Anet has stated they are interested in allowing 3D settings which would mean it'll have higher graphical output then any game on the market to date. I might have misread the part about the 3D settings but I'm pretty sure they were indicating what I'm assuming.
Have I seen some bad graphics in Guild Wars 2 Videos? Yes, but taking into consideration the above and the limitations between my computer displaying someone elses video and the graphic settings they used to record that video, I'll have to say that it is premature and pointless at this time to judge the graphics of this game compared to released products.
I dont get it why everyone complaining about the graphics?
they are just fine and i love them(because i have low end pc im regular to see this low graphic games)
i dont see 12million ppl the complain about WoWs graphics
Dont change this topic into a wow debate pls. Your statement is so wrong. WoW has like 2mil subs, and the rest uses pay 2 play cards in china. Back to GW 2.
If A-Net would focus on the demographic of your kind with low systems, they would go bankrupt faster then you can count to 10.
You cant sell a game with low end graphics. Not these days.
they are good enough for me gameplay > graphics and i am a total graphics snob of the first order i totally admit it , and these graphics are more than good enough for my snobby pallete , APB graphics were great how did that game do again......
I dont get it why everyone complaining about the graphics?
they are just fine and i love them(because i have low end pc im regular to see this low graphic games)
i dont see 12million ppl the complain about WoWs graphics
Dont change this topic into a wow debate pls. Your statement is so wrong. WoW has like 2mil subs, and the rest uses pay 2 play cards in china. Back to GW 2.
If A-Net would focus on the demographic of your kind with low systems, they would go bankrupt faster then you can count to 10.
You cant sell a game with low end graphics. Not these days.
Some people not only have a bad eye for graphics, but a lack of logic as well. It makes discussions like this a little frustrating.
It's always a good thing when a game has low quality settings that can be played on even the most modest of gaming rigs. It greatly broadens the market and recognizes that not everyone requires top notch graphics to have fun. GW2 does that and even though some of use might groan at the though of having to play the game on such low settings and missing out on the beautiful high res presentation, others will just be happy there are settings that they find playable.
For players who do put a large emphasis on graphical quality, it's been shown that at the highest settings of this game offer absolutely stunning visuals and, at launch, will offer perhaps one of the most impressive graphical presentations of any MMO to date, for those with systems to handle it. (One would presume that people who need top notch graphics will then be willing to spend the money to make sure they have a rig capable of running these games at the highest settings. You can't complain if low quality settings don't look as good as high quality settings)!
GW2 has the proper approach. The lowest settings are playable by a large swath of the gaming public, while the highest settings truly reward players with capable systems with jaw dropping visuals. The superb art design will come through at any setting, for those who put environmental aesthetics above rendering bells and whistles, even low quality settings will provide a beautiful game world to play in.
Well i hope those are jsut the low texture resolutions that are shown in closed beta. The landscape may be fine art but many textures have just pictures aka Bump mappings over the place and some lighning over them. they try to simulate the tesselation effect, bcz if you watch the vids and look at the ground , mountains, stones, thress you notice its really cheaply done.
Comments
I'm confused I'm planning on getting GW2 and I don't really care about a game graphically, I'm amongst the crowd that says gameplay > graphics.
YET, some of those textures look pretty low rez even on 1080, are those all taken with the highest settings? I notice the char's face and horns and such are AMAZING! I am very impressed with his hands and his weapon and armor textures... yet I notice a lot of Jaggies and the trees are pretty terrible.
Some of the cities textures are really low rez looking, like the pipe work and the fencing and such, but yes its beta.
And again, I don't really care, I just wanted to point out that it does seem to have flaws.
Edit: Upon reading further reviews I wanted to point out that the objects in the world seem to repeat a lot, I notice a lot of the same trees just rotated, and their leaves are just poor.
Frankly, I don't see much difference between GW2 graphics and any other MMO out their. There is a YouTube video out there that shows a range of video setting in game that he showed off. Other then draw distance and "shinny eyes" I just could not see much difference. What most people seem to be doing is going by pre-made trailers that claim to us "in game footage". Problem is, it appears that a lot of what is out there is doctored to some extent. That is not a slame but it is what many game companies do to trick people to play their games (just like using that term "free-to-play").
Let's party like it is 1863!
Obviously a little someone never played AoC. Graphics are nice in an MMO but having too much graphics can cause serious lag and other complications that ever sooo many had with AoC. Beautiful world and details but sometimes playing was autrocious du to the techical demand on a rig.
Anyways the graphics look awesome to me in GW2. Sure not top of the line PC quality but I don't expect that. It is a rich and fullfilling unlike that cartoon pre-school stuff like WoW or SWTOR.
I really, really hope you are right. So far the videos are OK, but nothing compared to the orginal game.
The immersion that this game has in PvE blew me away honestly, with all the little details this game as, I don't think anyone is gonna be disapointed with the graphics because of how good the game simply looks.
"I am not a robot. I am a unicorn."
He forgot to say "set the graphics quality to 1080p"
and btw... my screen resolution is a lot better than 1080p.
I think the graphics look great. I think most people are looking at it as the traditional graphics we are used to seeing in games. Unfortunately, most are mistaking graphics, for art style.
When it comes to the rendering distance looking bad, its really not. Again that is based on the art style of making it look like a painting. ArenaNet has mentioned over and over again that they want the background to look like a painting and as you get closer look like the painting is coming alive.
In AoC the real culprit was the unoptimized engine.
But yeah, too pretty graphics means higher sys reqs which means fewer potential buyers.
The solution to all this is of course to mix between good art and good enough graphics to make the game look good anyways.
TERAs engine make it look great but the art there is just so-so. GW2s art is a lot better so the game still looks good with less sys reqs. GW2 is made so a lot of people can be on the screen at the same time whle many of the games with better graphics (like AoC) opens up new instances as soon as a few people get in the same zone.
GW2 looks good enough to me, making it prettier at the expense of WvWvW wouldn't be worth it.
Oh look, another internet Art critic trying his new magnifying glass ...
***** Before hitting that reply button, please READ the WHOLE thread you're about to post in *****
I really think that there is absolutely nothing objectively bad with GW2's graphics. Render distance looks fine, textures are pretty, shadows look nice, etc. etc.
If anyone has a problem with the graphics...then they just don't like the style. And well, that's subjective and people are entitled to their opinions. Personally, I love the graphics.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
While I do agree that the graphics of GW2 is not that of Blade and soul (Which I have been anticipating for years!!!) I am going to have to play advocate for GW2 in regards to the vids you gave as examples.
1st, Out of all the vids out there of GW2 this had to have been the worst example of graphics so I would call other vids to stand in place. 2nd, GW1 (Though I never played) looked completely mediocre to GW2 in graphics and not to mention, the days of GW1 would have counted that awesome for its time (I know you werent saying otherwise).
There are also other things to consider; for example Aion has awesome graphics, but even on my high-end gaming lap top I lagged like crazy, they also have a lack of content and its a time sink with the grind. What I'm getting at is that they needed more balance in that game. Yes we want graphics but dont affect my gaming experience by giving me great graphics in place of lag and content lack.
I want a game that has balance.
I would rather have a game that can run on a low end machine (I dont play on those :-p) and still offer me a great experience in spite of the fact that I didnt take the time to get the shiney new I7 proccessor and new graphic crads w/e.
Since Aion is the only game on that list that I played I can only really talk about that in comparison to what I've read on GW2, so I can say this much; if I have to sacrifice some rendering for less to no lag then please by all means I'll take it. I hate being out-played because 1 minute I'm flying around, lag, lag, lag, lag and the next minute I'm at the crystal again, frustrating for someone who likes pvp believe me.
Anyhow I'm rambling now so in closing I have included a better example of GW2 graphics :-)
Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KocXN1xDA8A
IMO I ABSOLUTLEY LOVE GW2 GRAPHICS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Aside from the well known fact that when developers want to hit the widest audience they aim for the oldest graphics cards especially in this economy where people can't afford new computers every minute, this post is completely irrelevant and here's why. If this were the 1980's when there was a big need to drive the cards into bigger more powerful versions i can see this being an issue if the game was 16 bit cubes, there's a reason the characters look the way they do and that's so that it's easier to make them look alive with motion without fear of collision problems on their own person. (clothing etc that the character's limbs move through). Second, games that have made the character's too real haven't been very popular and any research into this shows, and Anet is definitely done their homework.
And finally, who cares. ZZZZzzzzzzzz.
your worried about graphics for only the toons, because i know that you aren't saying the graphics are bad in the scenery. Seriously, get your eyes checked.
And worrying over how the characters look makes about as much sense as THIS.
Omgosh I Lol'd @ "This looks like something by Oscar the grouch cause he lives in a trash can..... BUT I love your name" LOL
Archage and recent UE3 games(TERA,B&S) has better graphics but the graphics are not outdated just watch a video in HD with the game maxed
When the graphics/art style goes "retro"/pixelated...then say the graphics look outdated. If they manage to avoid the "retro" crap and not go all super cartoon/anime looking then that is all right with me.
Just going on what I have seen of the game as I was not blessed with beta.
Lol,why on earth do people like the OP say the graphics are out dated funnily enough it is still in Beta,and i'm fairly critical but even the beta graphics look bloody great but i've been around since Realm Online then they really would have something to moan about.
Graphics is not a big problem atm, what IS problem is not-so-great performance with this not-so-great technically graphics.
According to some videos comments (i.e TB vids) and leaks.
Hope they fix it though...
Performance I mean , graphics can stay , they are maybe not great but they definately are good enough.
I wonder if the person that complained about render distance was looking at the night and murky water vids.. now yes there the VIEW distance is low and at night some things in the distance like the wizard's tower vid might seem to be a render issue but its dark or unclear on purpose.
for murky water
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mIXx1HyPXA&feature=g-u-u&context=G216ee3aFUAAAAAAACAA
for night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSHNee0OAvM
but you can clearly see that in most of the video there is zero issues and can see quite far, and well.
couple questions:
Concerning the graphics of Guild Wars 2 IN BETA, what game are you considering comparatively to say that GW2 graphics look dated? I'm interested in your frame of reference on the current gaming MMORPG Market.
Do you know that graphics are not optimised usually until the last couple weeks directly before launch? Infact in this last weekends Beta within one patch they improved the graphics a little more. So there is a giant over head cushion for them to optimise the games graphics.. ITS BETA!!!! this isn't everyone going in to see if they like the game they are supposed to test the game and find bugs not judge the graphics.
When watching other people play the game via their videos, are you comparing full graphic detail vs full graphic detail or just unkown Guild Wars 2 random settings vs high detail in other games?
Logically we can not review the graphics of any video from this games beta since the graphics are not optimised and we would have to consider that Anet has stated they are interested in allowing 3D settings which would mean it'll have higher graphical output then any game on the market to date. I might have misread the part about the 3D settings but I'm pretty sure they were indicating what I'm assuming.
Have I seen some bad graphics in Guild Wars 2 Videos? Yes, but taking into consideration the above and the limitations between my computer displaying someone elses video and the graphic settings they used to record that video, I'll have to say that it is premature and pointless at this time to judge the graphics of this game compared to released products.
Okay first sorry for my bad english
I dont get it why everyone complaining about the graphics?
they are just fine and i love them(because i have low end pc im regular to see this low graphic games)
i dont see 12million ppl the complain about WoWs graphics
Dont change this topic into a wow debate pls. Your statement is so wrong. WoW has like 2mil subs, and the rest uses pay 2 play cards in china. Back to GW 2.
If A-Net would focus on the demographic of your kind with low systems, they would go bankrupt faster then you can count to 10.
You cant sell a game with low end graphics. Not these days.
they are good enough for me gameplay > graphics and i am a total graphics snob of the first order i totally admit it , and these graphics are more than good enough for my snobby pallete , APB graphics were great how did that game do again......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsOwim1uCp8
/end of thread
Some people not only have a bad eye for graphics, but a lack of logic as well. It makes discussions like this a little frustrating.
It's always a good thing when a game has low quality settings that can be played on even the most modest of gaming rigs. It greatly broadens the market and recognizes that not everyone requires top notch graphics to have fun. GW2 does that and even though some of use might groan at the though of having to play the game on such low settings and missing out on the beautiful high res presentation, others will just be happy there are settings that they find playable.
For players who do put a large emphasis on graphical quality, it's been shown that at the highest settings of this game offer absolutely stunning visuals and, at launch, will offer perhaps one of the most impressive graphical presentations of any MMO to date, for those with systems to handle it. (One would presume that people who need top notch graphics will then be willing to spend the money to make sure they have a rig capable of running these games at the highest settings. You can't complain if low quality settings don't look as good as high quality settings)!
GW2 has the proper approach. The lowest settings are playable by a large swath of the gaming public, while the highest settings truly reward players with capable systems with jaw dropping visuals. The superb art design will come through at any setting, for those who put environmental aesthetics above rendering bells and whistles, even low quality settings will provide a beautiful game world to play in.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Well i hope those are jsut the low texture resolutions that are shown in closed beta. The landscape may be fine art but many textures have just pictures aka Bump mappings over the place and some lighning over them. they try to simulate the tesselation effect, bcz if you watch the vids and look at the ground , mountains, stones, thress you notice its really cheaply done.