Blue Dragon is gonna be a beautiful game..

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 2, 2006, 1:26 pm

Check out this HD vid of the protagonist of BD walking around a town.

http://www.news4gamers.com/ClickOut.aspx?ObjID=13846

I normally hate the "Next-Gen visuals" buzzword but DAMN...

miir · Post by **miir** » November 2, 2006, 2:22 pm

Nice high res textures.
Nice water effects.

But "next gen" WTF?

The character models look only slightly more detailed than WOW.
The environments and characters are fairly unimpressive and have low poly counts... and what's the deal with the over-the-top lens flare? That's so 90s.

They made a nice attempt to mimic film with the exaggerated depth of field effects. Looks cool in a 40 second trailer but I think it would be annoying to play a game where your focal point is the only thing in focus (literally).

It's a good looking game but I have no idea why you're creaming your pants over those visuals.

miir · Post by **miir** » November 2, 2006, 2:26 pm

Doesn't look there is any bump mapping or specular lighting/shadows either.

These are "last gen" visuals.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 2, 2006, 2:30 pm

I totally disagree Miir, but you are in the Everquest 2 everything has to be detailed to the point it looks like shit (which eq2 unarguably does) and annoys me to no end mindset, so I understand that.

I think it's nice to see a game like this or the last Zelda once in a while where they use the cartoonish characters. I mean, how much more detailed were you expecting a cartoonish game to look? I think it would defeat the purpose, but that just me.

I think the visuals looked great.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 2, 2006, 2:36 pm

The character models in Blue Dragon are simple looking by design.

They look 1000000X's better than WoW models and aren't meant to look like the stiff mannequin models of EQ2.

miir · Post by **miir** » November 2, 2006, 3:35 pm

I wasn't being subjective.

You obviously don't need to have all the latest and greatest technology to have a good looking game. The characters and environments don't have to be photorealistic. Hell, I even said that it's a good looking game.

But objectively, the visuals do not come anywhere near being next gen.
Compare DX10 videos and screenshots from Crysis and Flight Simulator X.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 2, 2006, 3:45 pm

But the only problem is that to acheive the level of details that DX10 will bea ble to push, you'll need a graphic card that rivals the PS3 pricepoint.

If you compare this to anything out there on consoles, this looks as good as what the others are offering (at least in terms of what's displayed in promo videos.)

miir · Post by **miir** » November 2, 2006, 4:36 pm

If you compare this to anything out there on consoles, this looks as good as what the others are offering (at least in terms of what's displayed in promo videos.)

What makes it look good is really just a bunch of tricks.

Depth of field is the main one that gives it the cool cinematic look. It's not a new trick though, it's been used in games for years. Just not in the hyper-exaggerated way it's used here.

The character models are nice, but they really lack detail. The clothing looks painted on... it doesn't move, flow, fold, crease or crumple.

I totally disagree Miir, but you are in the Everquest 2 everything has to be detailed to the point it looks like shit

What the fuck are you on about?
I play a hell of a lot more games than just EQ2.

I can appreciate different graphical and artictic styles. but that wasn't the point of my post. To qualify as 'next-gen', something should be groundbreaking and new. There is nothing graphically new or groudbreaking about this game.

The point of using these 'next gen' features is to make a game that is nearly photorealistic. If you have seen those 2 games I mentioned, you'd know what I'm talking about. some of the FSX scenes are nearly impossible to tell from a photograph.

If your goal is to make a game that looks like a 3d cartoon, then you obviously don't need all the bells and whistles. You could use 5 year old technology and achieve the same effect.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 2, 2006, 4:48 pm

miir wrote: The character models are nice, but they really lack detail. The clothing looks painted on... it doesn't move, flow, fold, crease or crumple.

It's the animation style. It's not supposed to look "crumpled"

You may not like it. It's not a favorite of mine although I recognize its quality.