PDA

View Full Version : We need to Stop Comparing this to GoW Graphically



dynas2001
11-22-2006, 08:11 AM
Why?

Gears MP has four vs four
Gears MP has Four character models per side.

Rainbow has 8 vs 8?
Rainbow has 5 MILLION different combinations on their models.

They are completly different products no? Gears isn't selling the whole big battle team work realism. Rainbow is.

Maybe the graphics are toned down on top of the above too so that they can port them easily though.

TEXAStwist
11-22-2006, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by dynas2001:
Why?

Gears MP has four vs four
Gears MP has Four character models per side.

Rainbow has 8 vs 8?
Rainbow has 5 MILLION different combinations on their models.

They are completly different products no? Gears isn't selling the whole big battle team work realism. Rainbow is.

Maybe the graphics are toned down on top of the above too so that they can port them easily though.
BRAVO!!!

Lawman3091
11-22-2006, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by dynas2001:
Why?

Gears MP has four vs four
Gears MP has Four character models per side.

Rainbow has 8 vs 8?
Rainbow has 5 MILLION different combinations on their models.

They are completly different products no? Gears isn't selling the whole big battle team work realism. Rainbow is.

Maybe the graphics are toned down on top of the above too so that they can port them easily though. How do you know thats the reason why the graphics were "toned" down? The reason why people compare this game to GOW is because Epic (a smaller company) took their time and made a very good polished product and Ubisoft (a company twice as large of Epic) seems to focus on the single player mode than the Mp modes in all of their games (regardless if its 3vs3 or 16vs16). In Vegas online this game has the exact same sound and graphic glitches as in RB6 3 and BA and you think thats an improvement? If nothing else Epic exploited the true power of the 360. Vegas online appears to only use 1/3 of the power and there is NO reason for this.

P.S If graphics are not important to you guys then why do you have a 360 in the 1st place? Graphics and gamplay go together especially when these games cost so much! Oh,one more thing... Vegas online is soooo tactical and real that you can't even shoot the lights out in a small room to gain a tactical advantage. Lastly,it is obvious that you have not played GOW for you to say team work is not required in that game because you cannot live without the help of your team. I suggest that you play both games and see which one has more tactical movement.

BHUK
11-22-2006, 09:58 AM
GOW online isn't all that. Just a lot of dull colours IMHO.

Take him out Ding http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

www.rainbowsixleague.com (http://www.rainbowsixleague.com)

dynas2001
11-22-2006, 10:31 AM
How do you know thats the reason why the graphics were "toned" down? If nothing else Epic exploited the true power of the 360. Vegas online appears to only use 1/3 of the power and there is NO reason for this

I am saying that because of exactly what i posted up above. Rainbow has a HUGE amount of customizing and different models plus twice as many playing on-line. That equates to having to push more graphics out to more systems and displaying different things.

I am sure if they took out all that and just gave you four models to pick from and four or five guns or whatever they could upgrade the graphics. I am sure if they cut the MP down to only 4 vs 4 they could also boost the graphics.

dynas2001
11-22-2006, 10:33 AM
Maybe one of the dev's could answer straight up I guess.

Did UBI tone down the graphics so they could port to the older systems more easily or not?

Are they attempting to get the most out of the system or not?

zoompooky
11-22-2006, 10:40 AM
Graphics has almost nothing to do with the number of players supported in multiplayer.

There is no "push" of graphics to anyone (other than the face maps which apparently are broken). Everything else is just numbers. My character uses FaceID 5, GunIDs 2,6,23,and 24, etc.

So please stop saying "They toned down the graphics so it could support more players" because that's not how it works. The graphics are stored locally, the textures are on the disk, and the rendering happens on YOUR 360.

Nobody but the developers really knows why they alter the look from SP to MP. In GRAW it was supposedly because two seperate teams wrote the two halves of the game. In R6V? Who knows... they're not talking.

If I had to guess? It would be that COD3, R6V, and GOW were all slated to launch at the same time and Ubi didn't want to miss out on the chance to cash in and rushed it to market. This would be supported by the number of bugs and glitches threads that are already showing up.

Brownsnakeeyes
11-22-2006, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by dynas2001:
Why?

Gears MP has four vs four
Gears MP has Four character models per side.

Rainbow has 8 vs 8?
Rainbow has 5 MILLION different combinations on their models.
<span class="ev_code_RED">GRAW has 8 vs 8?</span>
<span class="ev_code_RED">GRAW doesn't have that many but it still has much better graphics and is made by the same company= UBISOFT</span>
They are completly different products no? Gears isn't selling the whole big battle team work realism. Rainbow is.

Maybe the graphics are toned down on top of the above too so that they can port them easily though. <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l270/NSA-Spy/brownsnakeeyessig1asr2.jpg
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l270/NSA-Spy/PSPOwner.gif
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l270/NSA-Spy/psp.jpg
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l270/NSA-Spy/pspo9rz.gif
When Death is Entreated, the Battle is Decided

KimberTech
11-22-2006, 10:55 AM
The Graphics arent as good as the single player game. Big. Friggin. Whoop.

If I remember correctly, there was a similar issue with GRAW. People were complaining about how GRAW was nothing more than a 'retouched GR2'.

I have an HDTV, and while I notice some graphical hic-ups, it's nothing I would seriously consider giving up the whole game for. From all the complaints I have seen, most of them shut up after someone asks "Do you have an HDTV"?

So overal, I choose the lights of a Realistic but slightly muddled Las-Vegas over a steryotypical Alien Stalingrad. Who cares if the graphics are any good if all it renders 'beautifuly' are wrecked buildings and piles of rocks.

Besides, Graphics are nothing without gameplay. As long as we are not talking about Sega Saturn style graphics here, I would be perfectly happy as long as the gameplay works.

Oh, and while we are on the subject, could it have anything to do with the fact that GoW's multiplayer is limited to Four players while Vegas has the option to have 14 (16 on a dedicated server)?

Goliath.Ubi.Dev
11-22-2006, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by zoompooky:
Graphics has almost nothing to do with the number of players supported in multiplayer.

There is no "push" of graphics to anyone (other than the face maps which apparently are broken). Everything else is just numbers. My character uses FaceID 5, GunIDs 2,6,23,and 24, etc.

So please stop saying "They toned down the graphics so it could support more players" because that's not how it works. The graphics are stored locally, the textures are on the disk, and the rendering happens on YOUR 360.

Nobody but the developers really knows why they alter the look from SP to MP. In GRAW it was supposedly because two seperate teams wrote the two halves of the game. In R6V? Who knows... they're not talking.

If I had to guess? It would be that COD3, R6V, and GOW were all slated to launch at the same time and Ubi didn't want to miss out on the chance to cash in and rushed it to market. This would be supported by the number of bugs and glitches threads that are already showing up.

Sorry but you are extremely wrong, graphics have alot to do with how many players you have in MP.

We couldnt push the same level of detail in MP as SP because we wanted 16 players online. Its as simple as that. It's a simple fact that what you see right now in MP is what we could push considering the current state of the engine.

dynas2001
11-22-2006, 11:22 AM
I had my response out there but I may as well delete it now. Thanks Goliath.


Is the same Engine used in both?

OUT FOX EM
11-22-2006, 11:51 AM
One other big thing not mentioned here is MP level size. The MP levels in Vegas are HUGE. Seriously, they're huge. I like big levels; it helps keep the monotony down. The biggest level on Gears of War is a joke, and that doesn't even take into consideration that the maps are mirrored. I'd bet the poly count for each level in Vegas is the same or comparable to each level in Gears, but Gears can pack all the polygons into a smaller area and make it look nicer. I'll take the larger levels and 8v8, thank you.

I also noticed that everyone on my friend's list who was playing Gears is now playing Rainbow Six. Obviously I'm not the only one who got bored with slaughtering locust.

zoompooky
11-22-2006, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Goliath.Ubi.Dev:

Sorry but you are extremely wrong, graphics have alot to do with how many players you have in MP.

We couldnt push the same level of detail in MP as SP because we wanted 16 players online. Its as simple as that. It's a simple fact that what you see right now in MP is what we could push considering the current state of the engine.

Ok I'll bite: Why?

Why, when everything is being rendered on the console and the textures, shadowing, etc are all happening on the console does the number of players have anything to do with it?

When you're sending the same information over the wire regarding player positioning, movement, firing, etc... what does it matter if the lighting is more complex when that stuff is all local anyway?

EDIT:

Also, I'm sorry if I'm coming off rude, I don't mean it to. I've played both demos and enjoyed them.

Part of what I don't understand is when you refer to "pushing the level of detail". I thought that the number of players you could put online was almost completely determined by networking bandwidth and netcode. If my console is talking to yours, and sending information about position and actions of the players - how does that affect it's ability to render the game environment?

Lawman3091
11-22-2006, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Goliath.Ubi.Dev:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zoompooky:
Graphics has almost nothing to do with the number of players supported in multiplayer.

There is no "push" of graphics to anyone (other than the face maps which apparently are broken). Everything else is just numbers. My character uses FaceID 5, GunIDs 2,6,23,and 24, etc.

So please stop saying "They toned down the graphics so it could support more players" because that's not how it works. The graphics are stored locally, the textures are on the disk, and the rendering happens on YOUR 360.

Nobody but the developers really knows why they alter the look from SP to MP. In GRAW it was supposedly because two seperate teams wrote the two halves of the game. In R6V? Who knows... they're not talking.

If I had to guess? It would be that COD3, R6V, and GOW were all slated to launch at the same time and Ubi didn't want to miss out on the chance to cash in and rushed it to market. This would be supported by the number of bugs and glitches threads that are already showing up.

Sorry but you are extremely wrong, graphics have alot to do with how many players you have in MP.

We couldnt push the same level of detail in MP as SP because we wanted 16 players online. Its as simple as that. It's a simple fact that what you see right now in MP is what we could push considering the current state of the engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I think that its great for Ubisoft to actually respond to the forums. It really shows that you honestly care about what your customers think. However, how can MMO games have killer graphics with thousands of players but a 16 mp game cannot? I get that they have dedicated servers but can't Ubisoft do the same in order to bring the best gaming experience possible? Your thoughts?

Samuel_Jacks0n
11-22-2006, 01:23 PM
Because consoles are limited to hardware, whereas PCs could be upgraded. 512MB of memory could only do so much on the 360. In PC terms, 512mb of memory is minimum specs for PC gaming now.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

- Samuel L. Jackson
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/610/pulpfictionduout3.jpg

Goliath.Ubi.Dev
11-22-2006, 01:28 PM
The server tells you what other players look like, the more variations the more textures you have to load and that takes up memory. Then you have all the MP code, the levels, the guns, planning for 16 players throwing 16 smoke grenades while stepping through 16 soft bodies etc....

Its pretty complex but yeah pretty much, the more stuff you have to load the more you have to compromise on quality. If we had only 4 players in the game we could have used ultra high-rez textures, but we didnt feel that would have been very fun.

Gameplay > Higher res textures in my very humble opinion.

I still think the MP characters look cool though.

TW_Night_Fox
11-22-2006, 01:30 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l211/icednightfox/01-1.jpg

Biohazard12JGF
11-22-2006, 03:18 PM
I agree Goliath.

I can't complain about any of this game (besides for some minor bugs). It has gone above and beyond my expectations. I started with R6 on PC and have owned every R6 game since, except for Lockdown. I enjoy this as much as Rogue Spear and Ravenshield.

Bugs I have noticed are:
1. No weapon sounds sometimes in single player terrorist hunt.
2. Loss of sound from Irena Morales in the first mission during her speech. It cut off half way through and I didn't do anything to her.
3. You can hear the enemies online through your headset and can't tell if it is them talking or your teammates.

Once again I want to thank you for this game. And to all of those GoW fans who just want to compare, go to a GoW forum and talk about how much more you like the small games of monotonous multiplayer.

Showdown78
11-23-2006, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by Goliath.Ubi.Dev:
The server tells you what other players look like, the more variations the more textures you have to load and that takes up memory. Then you have all the MP code, the levels, the guns, planning for 16 players throwing 16 smoke grenades while stepping through 16 soft bodies etc....

Its pretty complex but yeah pretty much, the more stuff you have to load the more you have to compromise on quality. If we had only 4 players in the game we could have used ultra high-rez textures, but we didnt feel that would have been very fun.

Gameplay > Higher res textures in my very humble opinion.

I still think the MP characters look cool though.

Ok you commented on the issues I wanted answers on. With what you said I wonder why a game like COD3 can have 24 players with high res graphics and everything plus you can use vehicles. If you could tell me why that is possible then I would be happy.

I mean is it the 360s limitations or is the limitations on the Devs end?

fbernard2004
11-23-2006, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by Showdown78:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Goliath.Ubi.Dev:
The server tells you what other players look like, the more variations the more textures you have to load and that takes up memory. Then you have all the MP code, the levels, the guns, planning for 16 players throwing 16 smoke grenades while stepping through 16 soft bodies etc....

Its pretty complex but yeah pretty much, the more stuff you have to load the more you have to compromise on quality. If we had only 4 players in the game we could have used ultra high-rez textures, but we didnt feel that would have been very fun.

Gameplay > Higher res textures in my very humble opinion.

I still think the MP characters look cool though.

Ok you commented on the issues I wanted answers on. With what you said I wonder why a game like COD3 can have 24 players with high res graphics and everything plus you can use vehicles. If you could tell me why that is possible then I would be happy.

I mean is it the 360s limitations or is the limitations on the Devs end? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't have the link, but I read that CoD3 really does not have the high res you think it does. They do a great job rendering their graphics, making you believe it is really high res, when it's really not...hance why they could push 60 fps.