Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Looking forward to HD textures with DX11?Follow

#1 Jan 09 2014 at 2:39 PM Rating: Sub-Default
Not happening.

Quote:
GW: You mentioned today we can hear some more regarding PS4 version, before that I would like to ask you regarding DirectX 11 version. Starting with graphics, currently we have the highest settings in the PV version but what’s going to change from there?

Yoshida: Basically the shader will change, and we’ll be using the features already on DirectX11 side for the shadow, lighting and reflections. We don’t have to use the shaders we spent a lot of work on since DirectX 11 side has those features, so it should change the image a lot.

GW: How’s the texture resolution?

Yoshida: We have no plans to change the resolution. I explained this before, but current games are not built on resolutions any more. For photo realistic effect the quality of normal map, for sculpt model it will depend on the amount of time spent, and for the quality seeing how realistic you can get the engravings to show by shining realistic light. These are the kind of things we need to tackle down. There are things which uses really low texture resolutions, but I think, you won’t be able to tell that it was even used. Game structure like the “previous FFXIV” are the only one that required resolution to fight, therefore I don’t think around resolutions.
#2 Jan 09 2014 at 2:51 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,175 posts
The level of textures they had in the game prior to ARR were high enough that the vast majority of people couldn't really enjoy them anyway. Even if they were, it was taking far too long to render characters on screen. You pretty much stated the obvious here preludes.

That said, there will be a lot more they can do with DX11 to make the game look better. It's not always about textures. My biggest beef with the change from 1.0 to ARR was shadows. There will be much more they can do in that area to make things look more realistic.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#3REDACTED, Posted: Jan 09 2014 at 3:12 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I keep hearing players stating that they are looking forward to it, so apparently the obvious needed to be stated for some.
#4 Jan 09 2014 at 4:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Not to mention you haven't filled your "Crap on everyone else's enjoyment of the game" quota for a while Smiley: wink

Edited, Jan 9th 2014 4:11pm by Wint
#5 Jan 09 2014 at 4:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Resolution's fine. 99% of players can't run at higher than 1080p anyway. I have no plans to buy a 4K monitor.

What I'm also hoping is that DX11 will take some of the software rendering burden off my video card (which was built for DX11) and allow it to run more on the hardware side of things. That'll allow it to run at the same quality on the new client with less stress.
#6 Jan 09 2014 at 7:10 PM Rating: Good
****
4,175 posts
preludes wrote:
I keep hearing players stating that they are looking forward to it, so apparently the obvious needed to be stated for some.

DX11 will be a seperate client that offers these extra graphic shaders etc, which ofc will mean you will need a stronger PC to handle it anyway.


It won't look like it used to, but it'll look and perform better than it does now. XIV is arguably the best looking MMO on the market right now anyway. The fact that it will be improving(however slight) is just fondant Smiley: nod

Also just to point out... most people who built a PC for XIV already went way above and beyond. All you have to do is look at the benchmark thread to see what sort of hardware people have. Hardware from several years ago is still competitive.


Edited, Jan 9th 2014 8:13pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#7 Jan 09 2014 at 7:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
***
1,675 posts
I hope that openGL on PS4 will take advantage of any DX11-like features. Or in other words I hope the PS4 version has these new updates and includes the refresh.

My PC is finally starting to show its age and I'll probably be playing on PS4 when it comes out, albeit, hopefully with a KB and mouse.
#8REDACTED, Posted: Jan 10 2014 at 5:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I don't think you understand what the topic is about.
#9 Jan 10 2014 at 6:57 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,175 posts
Most players are more concerned how the game plays than how it looks. Two things...

1) There are other more pressing issues that need to be dealt with(economy, endgame content, responsiveness, ect)
2) XIV's graphics are on par or better than anything else out right now anyway

If you really think people will be upset, you should make a poll. Ask people if they'd rather have high res textures or the ability to render objects on their screen more quickly. Ask people who do large scale FATEs if they actually want to be able to see the mob or if they want to wait until it's dead when it renders to see a high res corpse.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#10 Jan 10 2014 at 7:24 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,232 posts
Oooo...Ooooo... Pick me... I can answer those questions!!!

Render the damn objects. Nobody's zoomed in close enough to see the detail he's ******** about any way.

Edit: I was a bit crude with the rest of my post, so I deleted it...

Edited, Jan 10th 2014 5:26am by LebargeX
#11 Jan 10 2014 at 7:39 AM Rating: Excellent
preludes wrote:
Catwho wrote:
Resolution's fine. 99% of players can't run at higher than 1080p anyway. I have no plans to buy a 4K monitor.

What I'm also hoping is that DX11 will take some of the software rendering burden off my video card (which was built for DX11) and allow it to run more on the hardware side of things. That'll allow it to run at the same quality on the new client with less stress.


I don't think you understand what the topic is about.

Textures are wrapped ontro the models, any painted texture is low res. A tiny small box of painted artwork, lots of people have this idea that DX11 will bring in hi-res texture boxes. It's a commonly held idea which is wrong.

See picture below, see the drawn logo on his chest that is all jaggy? it's a tiny low-res box which means when it's stretched over the model it looks blocky.

[img=http://i.imgur.com/YQpiU2t.png]


Oh, that kind of resolution.

That never bothered me. Actual real world textiles can look like that. Ever see a Navajo rug? Needlepoint or cross stitch?
#12 Jan 10 2014 at 9:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
LebargeX wrote:
Oooo...Ooooo... Pick me... I can answer those questions!!!

Render the damn objects. Nobody's zoomed in close enough to see the detail he's ******** about any way.


This.

Preludes' trolling aside, games are not designed to look absolutely fantastic when zoomed in all the way. The textures, lighting, mapping, etc. are all done so it looks gorgeous at a reasonable distance. The zooming in to try to analyze and discredit something is faulty and pointless because you can do this with *every* single game ever made.

FFXIII, for a PS3 game, looks really good. You can obviously tell there's not any anti-aliasing but the overall picture is great. Yet, once again, zoom in on those textures and what do you see? FFXIV looked "pretty" for a bland landscape in terms of textures, but even there if you zoomed in to look you'd see that they're just as 'low' a resolution as everything else. Skyrim looks great at a distance, but zoomed in you see the same texture stretching.

Zomg not as high a resolution as you thought!

Yet it works because at a distance it looks beautiful. That's what happens in virtually every game.

Secondly, the picture referenced was a piece of armor. From the front. That no one will ever realistically look at longer than 5 seconds because you're always staring at your character's ***/back when doing anything. Plus, it's only that one artifact that's horribly stretched in the center of the chest area, so maybe 4-5% of the entire armor look?

#13 Jan 10 2014 at 3:37 PM Rating: Good
****
4,175 posts
Viertel wrote:
Yet it works because at a distance it looks beautiful.


The point is that you can actually see it at a distance. If you were to use high res textures, players wouldn't actually render on your screen unless they're only 5 feet away from you. This is exactly the reason why they scaled back textures in the first place.

I really don't even understand why preludes brought this up though. He obviously quoted something he didn't even read past the first sentence he bolded...

YoshiP wrote:
We have no plans to change the resolution. I explained this before...


Edited, Jan 10th 2014 4:37pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#14 Feb 02 2014 at 3:28 PM Rating: Default
19 posts
Catwho wrote:
Resolution's fine. 99% of players can't run at higher than 1080p anyway. I have no plans to buy a 4K monitor.

What I'm also hoping is that DX11 will take some of the software rendering burden off my video card (which was built for DX11) and allow it to run more on the hardware side of things. That'll allow it to run at the same quality on the new client with less stress.


Wrong kind of resolution....
I run at >4k and it still looks like sh*t due to the texture resolution. Not sure what most people run at or can run at has to do with it anyhow. That's the wow mentality. If it exists then everyone regardless of capability or situation is entitled to use it or should be able to without effort on their end.

It's called entitlement. The newest generation has a Huge issue with it, and if something isn't done it will only get worse. I look up to my grandfather so much, men have lost the majority of their masculinity these days.

The older generations had chutzpah! Rose to the occasion! Of course these are the days where women believe they are equal through and through. They want in the special forces now lol. Perhaps we should start whimpering that we should be able to bear children! Since we need gender equality and all.

/off topic OFF

Edited, Feb 2nd 2014 4:32pm by klepp0906
#15 Feb 02 2014 at 3:34 PM Rating: Default
19 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
preludes wrote:
I keep hearing players stating that they are looking forward to it, so apparently the obvious needed to be stated for some.

DX11 will be a seperate client that offers these extra graphic shaders etc, which ofc will mean you will need a stronger PC to handle it anyway.


It won't look like it used to, but it'll look and perform better than it does now. XIV is arguably the best looking MMO on the market right now anyway. The fact that it will be improving(however slight) is just fondant Smiley: nod

Also just to point out... most people who built a PC for XIV already went way above and beyond. All you have to do is look at the benchmark thread to see what sort of hardware people have. Hardware from several years ago is still competitive.


Edited, Jan 9th 2014 8:13pm by FilthMcNasty


This. The game was well written to handle mid range hardware. If you have a old p4 and a 8800gtx and are pitching a fit, just..... Derp
#16 Feb 02 2014 at 3:41 PM Rating: Decent
19 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:


If you really think people will be upset, you should make a poll. Ask people if they'd rather have high res textures or the ability to render objects on their screen more quickly. Ask people who do large scale FATEs if they actually want to be able to see the mob or if they want to wait until it's dead when it renders to see a high res corpse.


Sounds like a PC issue. Time to turn thr settings down. I see the mobs just fine. I vote textures! Especially since moving from that outdated **** API should improve performance by a good 20-30% as it is.

That's assuming it ever happens. So far all seems to be behind schedule.
#17 Feb 02 2014 at 3:43 PM Rating: Default
19 posts
LebargeX wrote:
Oooo...Ooooo... Pick me... I can answer those questions!!!

Render the damn objects. Nobody's zoomed in close enough to see the detail he's ******** about any way.

Edit: I was a bit crude with the rest of my post, so I deleted it...

Edited, Jan 10th 2014 5:26am by LebargeX


So u mean zoomed in like max camera distance showing a flat monopolygonal plane for grass?

Your mixing up character models and environment texture resolution. The models are already epic. It's the one area they didn't cheese on, animations aside
#18 Feb 02 2014 at 3:44 PM Rating: Good
****
4,175 posts
klepp0906 wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:


If you really think people will be upset, you should make a poll. Ask people if they'd rather have high res textures or the ability to render objects on their screen more quickly. Ask people who do large scale FATEs if they actually want to be able to see the mob or if they want to wait until it's dead when it renders to see a high res corpse.


Sounds like a PC issue. Time to turn thr settings down. I see the mobs just fine. I vote textures! Especially since moving from that outdated **** API should improve performance by a good 20-30% as it is.

That's assuming it ever happens. So far all seems to be behind schedule.


The textures were reduced so that players on PS3/PS4 would have a similar experience to those on PC. The changes were made because of the consoles, not PC.

I think it's great that you can see mobs just fine, but you're clearly a PC player. If you had been able to play the game before the nerf on a PS3, you'd see exactly why the changes were made. Actually, you wouldn't see them because they would take all day to render Smiley: laugh


Edited, Feb 2nd 2014 4:44pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#19 Feb 02 2014 at 3:44 PM Rating: Default
19 posts
Viertel wrote:
LebargeX wrote:
Oooo...Ooooo... Pick me... I can answer those questions!!!

Render the damn objects. Nobody's zoomed in close enough to see the detail he's ******** about any way.


This.

Preludes' trolling aside, games are not designed to look absolutely fantastic when zoomed in all the way. The textures, lighting, mapping, etc. are all done so it looks gorgeous at a reasonable distance. The zooming in to try to analyze and discredit something is faulty and pointless because you can do this with *every* single game ever made.

FFXIII, for a PS3 game, looks really good. You can obviously tell there's not any anti-aliasing but the overall picture is great. Yet, once again, zoom in on those textures and what do you see? FFXIV looked "pretty" for a bland landscape in terms of textures, but even there if you zoomed in to look you'd see that they're just as 'low' a resolution as everything else. Skyrim looks great at a distance, but zoomed in you see the same texture stretching.

Zomg not as high a resolution as you thought!

Yet it works because at a distance it looks beautiful. That's what happens in virtually every game.

Secondly, the picture referenced was a piece of armor. From the front. That no one will ever realistically look at longer than 5 seconds because you're always staring at your character's ***/back when doing anything. Plus, it's only that one artifact that's horribly stretched in the center of the chest area, so maybe 4-5% of the entire armor look?



Derp
#20 Feb 27 2014 at 12:45 PM Rating: Default
19 posts
Viertel wrote:
LebargeX wrote:
Oooo...Ooooo... Pick me... I can answer those questions!!!

Render the damn objects. Nobody's zoomed in close enough to see the detail he's ******** about any way.


This.

Preludes' trolling aside, games are not designed to look absolutely fantastic when zoomed in all the way. The textures, lighting, mapping, etc. are all done so it looks gorgeous at a reasonable distance. The zooming in to try to analyze and discredit something is faulty and pointless because you can do this with *every* single game ever made.

FFXIII, for a PS3 game, looks really good. You can obviously tell there's not any anti-aliasing but the overall picture is great. Yet, once again, zoom in on those textures and what do you see? FFXIV looked "pretty" for a bland landscape in terms of textures, but even there if you zoomed in to look you'd see that they're just as 'low' a resolution as everything else. Skyrim looks great at a distance, but zoomed in you see the same texture stretching.

Zomg not as high a resolution as you thought!

Yet it works because at a distance it looks beautiful. That's what happens in virtually every game.

Secondly, the picture referenced was a piece of armor. From the front. That no one will ever realistically look at longer than 5 seconds because you're always staring at your character's ***/back when doing anything. Plus, it's only that one artifact that's horribly stretched in the center of the chest area, so maybe 4-5% of the entire armor look?



fail arguement. Cmon man, think before you post. You HAVE to know this extends far far past the logo on the front of a particular peice of gear. this was an EXAMPLE. One of hundreds of thousands. Look a the textures on the roads or the landscape ffs. Its awful. WTB Tesselation pls.

Anyhow, textures aside, the dx11 client itself wont be coming for atleast another year. Yoshi lied thru his little asian teeth. First it was a few months after launch, then it was coinciding w/ the ps4 client.. now its after the first expansion pack.

awesome.

(Ha! Just noticed I post previously regarding the same post. Fail by me.)

Edited, Feb 27th 2014 1:46pm by klepp0906
Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
#21 Feb 28 2014 at 12:34 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,313 posts
The Hive has spoken Prelude... lol.

I agree that they should push this game to it's limits in every way possible.. but I'm more concerned with the content of the game at this point. I'll take new features and gameplay over improved visuals any day of the week.
#22 Feb 28 2014 at 1:38 PM Rating: Default
I don't mind tossing $4,000 to $5,000 for a PC, just for one or two games. I really don't. Everyone's financial situation is very different.

Having said that, why can't I get both?

Why can't I get really high texturing, similar to what White Engine did for 1.0, at the same time enjoy better lighting and shadowing?

Why can't I have the best in both worlds? Current generation PC hardware can very well handle it, so what's the ******* problem?

Why even bring up this whole Rendering Speed vs. Graphic Quality argument?

If you ask me which one I prefer, I'd flat out tell you that I prefer Graphic Quality over Rendering Speed. I'm very used to standing in front of a crowded Auction House in FFXI, where I can't see anyone until minutes later, I didn't ever see that as a problem.

Also, if you have a powerful enough machine, you CAN have the best of both worlds.

That is the #1 reason I disagree with Yoshida, because he hasn't answered me the question yet, why can't the game be designed in a sense where people with machines $5000+ can adjust their graphic quality into insane territory, while leaving those with their moms' E-Machine tone it down to a point where it looks like Paper Mario?

Maybe that's a bit exaggerating but you get the point.

I've always said this and I always will say it, 1.0's graphic quality was way better than ARR and 1.8, 1.9 worked just fine for me. Never had any lags in parties, never had lags in cities, never had UI slow down issue, never had all these weird **** people complain about all day.

Simple fact, ARR was a toned down version of 1.0, so that more people with crappy machines can enjoy the game. After all, S.E. is turning into Blizzard little by little, day by day. So basically, ARR is shaping up to be just like WoW, where it's really designed for people with ADD/ADHD. That's how WoW can get the high subscriber amount. Everything is spoon fed, hand held and instanced. Reward is almost guaranteed as long as time is invested.

Anyway, this is going in circles again. People that don't like ARR will never like it, now nor future, like me. People that really enjoy ARR, will always enjoy it. I can accept that.

I wanted a FFXI reboot with FFXIV 1.9 graphics, apparently Yoshida wanted a WoW reboot with FF theme. He got what he wanted, I jumped off the SE fan bus, done deal.
#23 Feb 28 2014 at 1:41 PM Rating: Excellent
If all you want to do is stare at HQ renders all day, you can generate your own CG in Maya or Blender or whatever.

I'm more concerned about doing something with the graphics. Like playing a game.
#24REDACTED, Posted: Feb 28 2014 at 2:13 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Your response is almost similar to Yoshida's and his bandwagon of blind followers, which doesn't answer my questions at all.
#25 Feb 28 2014 at 5:40 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,175 posts
GiftedChild wrote:
Why can't I get really high texturing, similar to what White Engine did for 1.0, at the same time enjoy better lighting and shadowing?

Why can't I have the best in both worlds? Current generation PC hardware can very well handle it, so what's the @#%^ing problem?


The textures won't run on current hardware and maintain a level of performance that keeps the game playable. If you were a baker and you had to make the decision, which would you choose...

1) A cake that looks like a pile of poo, but tastes like heaven...
2) A cake that tastes like a pile of poo, but looks like heaven...
3) A cake that isn't godlike, but looks and tastes great...


This was the problem the developers ran into with XIV. It was developed on PC, but had to be nerfed to port over to PS3. It makes more sense to water-down the current engine and expand on it into the future than to develop and maintain an engine that most players will never realize the potential of, but still sacrifice gameplay to witness.

____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#26 Feb 28 2014 at 8:49 PM Rating: Excellent
****
5,745 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
If you were a baker and you had to make the decision, which would you choose...

1) A cake that looks like a pile of poo, but tastes like heaven...
2) A cake that tastes like a pile of poo, but looks like heaven...
3) A cake that isn't godlike, but looks and tastes great...

And here I was thinking, "You can't have your cake and eat it too."
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 234 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (234)