no dx11. nuff said. this games behind the times. runs dx9 by default lol
dont get me wrong, i think the game is pretty when ur zoomed in on your toons. thats more that i like the art though. many games that are years older then gw2 look way better.
Maybe you can show us some Tera screen shots you feel look better? I looked and I couldn't find any. I also participated in the Tera Beta and I can tell you GW2 on Ultra looks better than Tera on Ultra in an actual game setting as well.
It seems many speak of "style" and not "polygon count"
To do a graphics comparasion, it is all about the polygon count in a 3d game.
To compare style is to compare Dali and Michalanglo, and comment that Dali is better because you dont like churches.
no. i already made this clear graphics in video games are more then about the polygon count.
Your "logic" includes subjective opinion.
Logic is NOT subjective, validating MY argument.
BOTH Dali and Michalanglo are amazing, but choose to paint in vastly different styles appealing to vastly different groups. Making an argument about which is better is, again, fail.
By doing a comparasion with just polygon count and maybe what dx a game runs on, leaves us with a simple technical argument that is free from opinion and therefore more solid.
GW2 art style is nice and so is TERAs imo...but which graphics actually win in terms of quality, no one here can determine that but here, have some competition that challenges the title of this thread.
Took all of these shots in game yesterday.
Those are quite nice indeed, however I don't see them as being better or worse than GW2, just a different flavor. I much prefer the underwater of GW2 over Tera... the bay at Lion's Arch reminds me of Scuba diving irl. It was almost like swimming in a fish tank, gorgeous. Now, that's only one water shot of Tera, maybe they also have a more reef-like environment to compare with, I don't know. Tera, based on those shots, does do some very interesting things with purple.
People are comparing Gw2 Beta State,yet does not support DX10 and DX11 will support in future, with tera have already one year and is fully optimized....
People are comparing Gw2 Beta State,yet does not support DX10 and DX11 will support future, with tera have already one year and is fully optimized....
You do realise I hope that Tera does not support DX11 either. The main difference between the two engines is the seamless as opposed to zoned world. Graphically speaking GW2 obviously still has room for improvement, since it hasn't launched yet.
Those are quite nice indeed, however I don't see them as being better or worse than GW2, just a different flavor. I much prefer the underwater of GW2 over Tera... the bay at Lion's Arch reminds me of Scuba diving irl. It was almost like swimming in a fish tank, gorgeous. Now, that's only one water shot of Tera, maybe they also have a more reef-like environment to compare with, I don't know. Tera, based on those shots, does do some very interesting things with purple.
I agree, I can't compare the two, but both are graphically impressive.
One thing I do wonder though is that I have not seen enough variety or "wow" factor from GW2, where you just step into a new zone and are impressed by how fresh and different it is. Doesn't seem like there are too many varying landscapes in GW2 but i'd love for someone to show me some pictures if they have any.
In my opinion I have yet to see a game pull it off quite like TERA, art style or not they've got jungle, arctic, desert, fantasy, medieval, pine forests, open plains, sci-fi and whatever else I can't classify as anything within my vocabulary.
It seems many speak of "style" and not "polygon count"
To do a graphics comparasion, it is all about the polygon count in a 3d game.
To compare style is to compare Dali and Michalanglo, and comment that Dali is better because you dont like churches.
no. i already made this clear graphics in video games are more then about the polygon count.
Your "logic" includes subjective opinion.
Logic is NOT subjective, validating MY argument.
BOTH Dali and Michalanglo are amazing, but choose to paint in vastly different styles appealing to vastly different groups. Making an argument about which is better is, again, fail.
By doing a comparasion with just polygon count and maybe what dx a game runs on, leaves us with a simple technical argument that is free from opinion and therefore more solid.
I'd still prefer WoW to an hypothetical game with the highest polygon count ever where all the polygons are covered with a simple gray texture.
Conclusion: no, polygon count and art matters. And yes, the result is subjective - well that's life!
no dx11. nuff said. this games behind the times. runs dx9 by default lol
dont get me wrong, i think the game is pretty when ur zoomed in on your toons. thats more that i like the art though. many games that are years older then gw2 look way better.
no DX11? and so what? since when DX11 mean anything in terms of graphic quality?? lool.
btw you know that GW2 is only on beta right? many games that are years older look way better than GW2? obvious, i can find many games that are much better looking compared with FF14.....like, Skyrim, BF3, GTA IV, U3, crysis etc, could name more than 30 games that have much better graphics than any MMORPG.
i suppose you are talk about any game and not only MMORPG, because will be funny to see you make a list of MMORPG that have much better graphics than GW2. lol
for me AoC have same graphics of LOTRO in world , but have much more details and better texture on armour and characters.
Those are quite nice indeed, however I don't see them as being better or worse than GW2, just a different flavor. I much prefer the underwater of GW2 over Tera... the bay at Lion's Arch reminds me of Scuba diving irl. It was almost like swimming in a fish tank, gorgeous. Now, that's only one water shot of Tera, maybe they also have a more reef-like environment to compare with, I don't know. Tera, based on those shots, does do some very interesting things with purple.
I agree, I can't compare the two, but both are graphically impressive.
One thing I do wonder though is that I have not seen enough variety or "wow" factor from GW2, where you just step into a new zone and are impressed by how fresh and different it is. Doesn't seem like there are too many varying landscapes in GW2 but i'd love for someone to show me some pictures if they have any.
In my opinion I have yet to see a game pull it off quite like TERA, art style or not they've got jungle, arctic, desert, fantasy, medieval, pine forests, open plains, sci-fi and whatever else I can't classify as anything within my vocabulary.
I didn't have that "wow" factor immediately either, but then again that because as soon as I logged in I was involved in combat and didn't really have time to notice things.
Then I stepped into Diviniity's Reach.
There is a lot of the game out there where you simply stop and look around. You can see mobs and people fighting from a crazy distance away (compared to what I'm used to), things are gorgeous. You take a step and the plants move back and forth at your passing. You see patches of moss or algae on the walls, and it's not in a repeating cut-and-paste pattern. Distant mountains and structures nearly look like paintings but come to life as you approach. It really appeals to me.
This 1 minute video I made was a quick look at the beauty and detail of Guild Wars 2 graphics. I don't even understand how the graphics can be so good in GW2 when it is not yet set for multi-threading or multi-core natively, and is not optimized for GPUs. GW2 is running on one core of my quad-core AMD CPU. I am blown away thinking about how much room for improvement the game has given how stunning it looks already. I talk over the vid, and you can hear my excitement for the graphics of GW2, and my boredom with WoW graphics. As a years long Warhammer player I am proud to see the genre incorporating all the important aspects (PvE, PvP, imagery) into one big title game. We are closer to perfection now.
have you played ffxiv on max settings? makes you wonder what 2.0 is going to look like.
i have and ff14 doesn't have anything interesting to look at in the world. its copy and paste landscape all over the place. guild wars 2 world is more alive than any other mmo its not just about graphics its about what you fill the world with. ff14 is like a waste land, same as age of conan.
It seems many speak of "style" and not "polygon count"
To do a graphics comparasion, it is all about the polygon count in a 3d game.
To compare style is to compare Dali and Michalanglo, and comment that Dali is better because you dont like churches.
no. i already made this clear graphics in video games are more then about the polygon count.
Your "logic" includes subjective opinion.
Logic is NOT subjective, validating MY argument.
BOTH Dali and Michalanglo are amazing, but choose to paint in vastly different styles appealing to vastly different groups. Making an argument about which is better is, again, fail.
By doing a comparasion with just polygon count and maybe what dx a game runs on, leaves us with a simple technical argument that is free from opinion and therefore more solid.
so your telling me that you will take a cement barrier from crysis 2 (which had been insanlely overdone on the pony count in the pc DX11 patch) and say that cinderblock looks better then any cinderblock ever because it has alot of ponygons. even though its texture left more to be desired and was lax in the art department? but it was the best because its poly count was just that high?
no dude, you have to look at the whole plicure (get it... graphics are visual) you have to tace art, style of art, the polies are a factor... but you cant just say poly is all you need to call something better. you need to put it all together and with art you got to be subjective
Those are quite nice indeed, however I don't see them as being better or worse than GW2, just a different flavor. I much prefer the underwater of GW2 over Tera... the bay at Lion's Arch reminds me of Scuba diving irl. It was almost like swimming in a fish tank, gorgeous. Now, that's only one water shot of Tera, maybe they also have a more reef-like environment to compare with, I don't know. Tera, based on those shots, does do some very interesting things with purple.
I agree, I can't compare the two, but both are graphically impressive.
One thing I do wonder though is that I have not seen enough variety or "wow" factor from GW2, where you just step into a new zone and are impressed by how fresh and different it is. Doesn't seem like there are too many varying landscapes in GW2 but i'd love for someone to show me some pictures if they have any.
In my opinion I have yet to see a game pull it off quite like TERA, art style or not they've got jungle, arctic, desert, fantasy, medieval, pine forests, open plains, sci-fi and whatever else I can't classify as anything within my vocabulary.
I didn't have that "wow" factor immediately either, but then again that because as soon as I logged in I was involved in combat and didn't really have time to notice things.
Then I stepped into Diviniity's Reach.
There is a lot of the game out there where you simply stop and look around. You can see mobs and people fighting from a crazy distance away (compared to what I'm used to), things are gorgeous. You take a step and the plants move back and forth at your passing. You see patches of moss or algae on the walls, and it's not in a repeating cut-and-paste pattern. Distant mountains and structures nearly look like paintings but come to life as you approach. It really appeals to me.
I've had a few of those just stop to admire moments in TERA and i'd love for that to happen in GW2 so it's always positive to read that.
Glad to know GW2 also did the "everything moves" thing TERA went with, love the fact all trees/shrubs/grasses blow in the breeze and the fact clouds move in some places. Dust, fog, rain and snow also help.
screenshots don't do this game justice, you have to be in the game to see why people are in awe of the game world. it's a combination of music, visuals and ambient sound that totally immerse you in your surroundings. i was completely blow away with the hustle and bustle of the cities. i just stood in the midde of the city with my character and watched everything unfold around me.
Some more screenshots to show off the environments as well:
Wow at what resolution did you play? XP
For me GW2 simply wins in details. Everywhere I looked there were a lot of small details. It really shows ANet/NCSoft created a very high amount of assets in this game. Environments in GW2 are actually more detailed than those in TERA or TSW (after playing betas). I only wish GW2 had higher view distance. TERA really excells in this amd it makes the world feel very big.
screenshots don't do this game justice, you have to be in the game to see why people are in awe of the game world. it's a combination of music, visuals and ambient sound that totally immerse you in your surroundings. i was completely blow away with the hustle and bustle of the cities. i just stood in the midde of the city with my character and watched everything unfold around me.
true, still this SS are great. im just curious about skill bar...
i love the charr city even more than LA. sylvary forests zones must be amazing. common release the game now, after i try BW cant play any other game. i will try todar dragon age origins, i bet i will desintall after 1 day . xD
This 1 minute video I made was a quick look at the beauty and detail of Guild Wars 2 graphics. I don't even understand how the graphics can be so good in GW2 when it is not yet set for multi-threading or multi-core natively, and is not optimized for GPUs. GW2 is running on one core of my quad-core AMD CPU. I am blown away thinking about how much room for improvement the game has given how stunning it looks already. I talk over the vid, and you can hear my excitement for the graphics of GW2, and my boredom with WoW graphics. As a years long Warhammer player I am proud to see the genre incorporating all the important aspects (PvE, PvP, imagery) into one big title game. We are closer to perfection now.
To me, graphics mean nothing to me if I can't actually go to where I am looking. Some games are beautiful to look at, but I can't actually visit the beautiful area.
This 1 minute video I made was a quick look at the beauty and detail of Guild Wars 2 graphics. I don't even understand how the graphics can be so good in GW2 when it is not yet set for multi-threading or multi-core natively, and is not optimized for GPUs. GW2 is running on one core of my quad-core AMD CPU. I am blown away thinking about how much room for improvement the game has given how stunning it looks already. I talk over the vid, and you can hear my excitement for the graphics of GW2, and my boredom with WoW graphics. As a years long Warhammer player I am proud to see the genre incorporating all the important aspects (PvE, PvP, imagery) into one big title game. We are closer to perfection now.
have you played ffxiv on max settings? makes you wonder what 2.0 is going to look like.
i have and ff14 doesn't have anything interesting to look at in the world. its copy and paste landscape all over the place. guild wars 2 world is more alive than any other mmo its not just about graphics its about what you fill the world with. ff14 is like a waste land, same as age of conan.
I do overall agree with you the style of GW2 makes it stand out way more than FF14.
It does not change the fact that FF14 (especially the armors) just has better quality after playing 14 and than playing GW2 right afterwards the difference in quality of the armors and characters were clear as day.
Also about the more alive world i am not too sure about that depends on how you judge it i didn't play any game yet (MMO or otherwise) that can match the weather changes in FF14 just stay still and watch how the wind starts picking up blowing loose grass and dust around while the sky darkens for a storm that sure as hell felt alive to me and is unmatched so far.
In terms of feeling alive due to events and NPC i will agree however GW2 is very good in that aspect (possible the best yet)
Glad to know GW2 also did the "everything moves" thing TERA went with, love the fact all trees/shrubs/grasses blow in the breeze and the fact clouds move in some places. Dust, fog, rain and snow also help.
Yeah, it's great that those touches are being added to games these days. Just seeing the moon traverse the sky at night really adds that "nice!" factor to things. Even adding audio changes to go with it enhances the visual... night falls, fireflies and crickets come out... totally suck-you-in immersion. It's a good day for MMOs with developers thinking in this detail.
Comments
no. i already made this clear graphics in video games are more then about the polygon count.
Maybe you can show us some Tera screen shots you feel look better? I looked and I couldn't find any. I also participated in the Tera Beta and I can tell you GW2 on Ultra looks better than Tera on Ultra in an actual game setting as well.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Your "logic" includes subjective opinion.
Logic is NOT subjective, validating MY argument.
BOTH Dali and Michalanglo are amazing, but choose to paint in vastly different styles appealing to vastly different groups. Making an argument about which is better is, again, fail.
By doing a comparasion with just polygon count and maybe what dx a game runs on, leaves us with a simple technical argument that is free from opinion and therefore more solid.
Those are quite nice indeed, however I don't see them as being better or worse than GW2, just a different flavor. I much prefer the underwater of GW2 over Tera... the bay at Lion's Arch reminds me of Scuba diving irl. It was almost like swimming in a fish tank, gorgeous. Now, that's only one water shot of Tera, maybe they also have a more reef-like environment to compare with, I don't know. Tera, based on those shots, does do some very interesting things with purple.
Oderint, dum metuant.
People are comparing Gw2 Beta State,yet does not support DX10 and DX11 will support in future, with tera have already one year and is fully optimized....
Lol
Ok currently GW2 = TERA.
It is not better or worse. They are diffrent style so some ppl will think one is better over other ,but they are very much comparable.
Same thing with AoC on max settings it is also comparable to GW2 .(don't play it though - I don't reccomend it as game).
ArcheAge will also be of similar graphic quality. Its polygon count may be even better , but style will be quite diffrent.
I don't agree that any of those games totally triumphs over other in graphic itself.
Well GW2 have very nicely designed world and ArcheAge will have totally seamless world and open world epicness - but those are not strict graphics.
You do realise I hope that Tera does not support DX11 either. The main difference between the two engines is the seamless as opposed to zoned world. Graphically speaking GW2 obviously still has room for improvement, since it hasn't launched yet.
I agree, I can't compare the two, but both are graphically impressive.
One thing I do wonder though is that I have not seen enough variety or "wow" factor from GW2, where you just step into a new zone and are impressed by how fresh and different it is. Doesn't seem like there are too many varying landscapes in GW2 but i'd love for someone to show me some pictures if they have any.
In my opinion I have yet to see a game pull it off quite like TERA, art style or not they've got jungle, arctic, desert, fantasy, medieval, pine forests, open plains, sci-fi and whatever else I can't classify as anything within my vocabulary.
I'd still prefer WoW to an hypothetical game with the highest polygon count ever where all the polygons are covered with a simple gray texture.
Conclusion: no, polygon count and art matters. And yes, the result is subjective - well that's life!
I haven't seen anything to even match AOC ...let alone exceed it.
no DX11? and so what? since when DX11 mean anything in terms of graphic quality?? lool.
btw you know that GW2 is only on beta right? many games that are years older look way better than GW2? obvious, i can find many games that are much better looking compared with FF14.....like, Skyrim, BF3, GTA IV, U3, crysis etc, could name more than 30 games that have much better graphics than any MMORPG.
i suppose you are talk about any game and not only MMORPG, because will be funny to see you make a list of MMORPG that have much better graphics than GW2. lol
for me AoC have same graphics of LOTRO in world , but have much more details and better texture on armour and characters.
I didn't have that "wow" factor immediately either, but then again that because as soon as I logged in I was involved in combat and didn't really have time to notice things.
Then I stepped into Diviniity's Reach.
There is a lot of the game out there where you simply stop and look around. You can see mobs and people fighting from a crazy distance away (compared to what I'm used to), things are gorgeous. You take a step and the plants move back and forth at your passing. You see patches of moss or algae on the walls, and it's not in a repeating cut-and-paste pattern. Distant mountains and structures nearly look like paintings but come to life as you approach. It really appeals to me.
Oderint, dum metuant.
i have and ff14 doesn't have anything interesting to look at in the world. its copy and paste landscape all over the place. guild wars 2 world is more alive than any other mmo its not just about graphics its about what you fill the world with. ff14 is like a waste land, same as age of conan.
so your telling me that you will take a cement barrier from crysis 2 (which had been insanlely overdone on the pony count in the pc DX11 patch) and say that cinderblock looks better then any cinderblock ever because it has alot of ponygons. even though its texture left more to be desired and was lax in the art department? but it was the best because its poly count was just that high?
no dude, you have to look at the whole plicure (get it... graphics are visual) you have to tace art, style of art, the polies are a factor... but you cant just say poly is all you need to call something better. you need to put it all together and with art you got to be subjective
Some more screenshots to show off the environments as well:
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
I've had a few of those just stop to admire moments in TERA and i'd love for that to happen in GW2 so it's always positive to read that.
Glad to know GW2 also did the "everything moves" thing TERA went with, love the fact all trees/shrubs/grasses blow in the breeze and the fact clouds move in some places. Dust, fog, rain and snow also help.
fiontar amazing SS. in what resolution you take them? skill bar seem so litle, you redimension ?
screenshots don't do this game justice, you have to be in the game to see why people are in awe of the game world. it's a combination of music, visuals and ambient sound that totally immerse you in your surroundings. i was completely blow away with the hustle and bustle of the cities. i just stood in the midde of the city with my character and watched everything unfold around me.
Wow at what resolution did you play? XP
For me GW2 simply wins in details. Everywhere I looked there were a lot of small details. It really shows ANet/NCSoft created a very high amount of assets in this game. Environments in GW2 are actually more detailed than those in TERA or TSW (after playing betas). I only wish GW2 had higher view distance. TERA really excells in this amd it makes the world feel very big.
true, still this SS are great. im just curious about skill bar...
i love the charr city even more than LA. sylvary forests zones must be amazing. common release the game now, after i try BW cant play any other game. i will try todar dragon age origins, i bet i will desintall after 1 day . xD
^^THIS^^
I agree. I have played Tera, GW2, and most other MMO's, but nothing comes close to the realism of AoC.
To me, graphics mean nothing to me if I can't actually go to where I am looking. Some games are beautiful to look at, but I can't actually visit the beautiful area.
I do overall agree with you the style of GW2 makes it stand out way more than FF14.
It does not change the fact that FF14 (especially the armors) just has better quality after playing 14 and than playing GW2 right afterwards the difference in quality of the armors and characters were clear as day.
Also about the more alive world i am not too sure about that depends on how you judge it i didn't play any game yet (MMO or otherwise) that can match the weather changes in FF14 just stay still and watch how the wind starts picking up blowing loose grass and dust around while the sky darkens for a storm that sure as hell felt alive to me and is unmatched so far.
In terms of feeling alive due to events and NPC i will agree however GW2 is very good in that aspect (possible the best yet)
Yeah, it's great that those touches are being added to games these days. Just seeing the moon traverse the sky at night really adds that "nice!" factor to things. Even adding audio changes to go with it enhances the visual... night falls, fireflies and crickets come out... totally suck-you-in immersion. It's a good day for MMOs with developers thinking in this detail.
Oderint, dum metuant.