EQ2 uses PS/VS 1.1 only

YOur thinking of diffrent spells

Embers for a conjuror is a 12 hour long buff that brings up like rocks all around me and the rocks + dust + little rocks on the whole party hits my framerates hard /

Yes the flames in dungons hit hard too but that is because of the extra shadows they cast i believe , as putting my shadows to simple stops that hit from accuring .


Performance has steadly gone up in the last few months . I used to run between high and very high now i'm between very high and extreme . Also i no longer have a memory leak problem and sometimes with selling i'm logged in for 24 hours strait

 

I dunno what to tell you as the down below and other places with tons of torches does not affect my performance with simple shadows on .

No slideshows thats how i deal with it .

 

Dumb question- so how does using SM1 make the game cpu limted?
Because it's not able to use the more advanced feats of SM2 so it has to to multible passes for things that only take 1 or a few with SM2?

 

my new DFI nf4 Ultra mb and ati x850XT PE card should arrive in the next few days. Any tests you want me to run? Will be using a AMD64 3800+ cpu.

epic

 

Yes. Test UPS's response time in shipping those to me, please.

 

No JVD, you are not Biased...that is just a ingornat statement which I'm not surprised coming from you.

 

Sure great , insult and add nothing of value to anything , way to go .

What a waste

 

hehe, fedex.
Got the MB, waiting on video card, should arrive tomorrow. *crosses finger*

epic

 

Sure, FedEx if you want! Heck, the Pony Express! I'm not picky...


Good luck gettin' your gear together.

 

There was no insult unless you do not like being called Biased. The value was that I'm calling you on such a huge blanket statement.

Do you have any data that backs up your statement in which you said: "Wow on the other hand looks like and dog and runs stellar, its only going to look worse in a few years?

Or, is it your opinion? Because you and I both know graphics are subjective. And if you want to use data, I'd wager the data that is matters at this point is subscriber base - and I think we both know who would win that hands down...

My opinion (NOTE: See how I say my opinion?)

EQ2 had the potential to be one of the best looking games to ever be released. I say potential because I feel they caved in and released it before it was really ready. I've played the game for a couple months but could not get past the UI. It just did not work for me. I had 2 accounts and played on two like comps using 1 gig of ram, intel mb, 3gzh P4's. Only difference between the two are the gfx cards - one sported a 6800 GT and the other a 9800 Pro. Prior to the upgrade of the GT I had a 5700 Ultra.

To be honest, I found the game played well on all at 1280x1024. Once I had the GT I fired it up on my Sony 60" hdtv and it still ran good. No complaints with that game other than the UI.

WoW - different game and looks amazing in its own right - again, my opinion. Blizzard is following their previous warcraft themes which is why it looks the way it does. However, they have addes some nice touches which I think make the environment really work. Breath effects when it is cold, jumping off a cliff into water you submerg a bit, foot prints in snow and sand, etc.

Wow has client side performance issues right now when you pvp. In order for Blizzard to make it long term and support pvp, they will need to address this issue.

What does this have to do with anything? Nothing really - other than we both know the engines will continue to evolve as expansion packs and content get release. To say one will look better is silly because that is not the case.

The most important question is - which one will keep the most subscribers going longer? I don't know - I think EQ2 is a more mature gaming env vs Blizzard and the script kiddies playing WoW. Makes me want to leave almost daily and go back to EQ2....

Anyway - your mileage may vary - but again, graphics are all subjecting.

 

No , i don't like being called ignorant

Sure they are , art can help alot , so much so that of course it wont matter that the engine is vastly inferior , the polygon counts are vastly lower and there are almost no advanced effects to speak of. I've posted shots showing how inferior the game looks , it looks like water and graphics just slightly higher quality than ultima 9

Because either of the two games were ready ? or should we listed the bugs and problems both games have and see where they stand ?

But more importantly it has nothing to do with what i listed which the graphics . The graphics of eq2 are vastly better than wow . The older the games get the better both will run , but the visuals will stay the same unless they redo the whole graphic engine

That is why they are using a dx 7 engine ? They could have at least went dx 8 and had some pixel shader effects , nice water effects and other things in the game esp shading and lighting . THey could have done all this and ended with a better engine .

Right , but eq2 has the more advanced engine . Its going to be hard for them to change code and move from dx 7 based effects to dx 8 or 9 effects , Actually they will most likely need a whole rewrite of thier code as sony had to do with thier dx 8 upgrade to eq1 .

To say eq2 will look better is stating fact. Not only is there extreme quality but then you can tweak even further to max settings and have the game look even better .

This has nothing to do with what you quoted me saying and then insulted me about .

Anyway , i think wow wil keep a constant stream of new subscribers going for a few years while retaining about a 5th of them , mabye having a slightly higher user base on average through out the years but having spikes and canyons in it .

Eq2 will most likely have the smaller but more stable user base . Thats hwo i see it going because of the fan bases they are going for and the type of content they are going for

 

It takes advantage of much newer hardware than wow does .

Also in future updates it will be easier to convert the shaders into less passes for sm 2.0 or sm3.0 than it will be to hack the engine to get shaders in the game for the first place or a complete rewrite .

From what i understand the second expansion pack should include 3dc and sm 2.0 /sm 3.0 and should be coming out in about 11 months .

 

jvd,

If you think being called Biased is an insult, more power to you. It does not change my opinion of you. Reading everything you have said so far including your reply still points to a biased opinion.

Ignorant is also a valid statement. When you spew biased remarks it fits the bill. Be glad I didn't call you stupid, then you would have reason to say I insulted you. And I know you are smart by reading some of your other posts.

You can not compare the graphics of the two games. One tried to go the route of a realistic look and feel and the other did not. You use a dx package that works for the design you chose. Guess what - whatever version Blizzard or Sony chose fits the bill. There are other reasons probably like knowing ahead of time how many subscribers you may have and their hardware layout...

Not everyone wants to upgrade to play a game nor should you be forced to.

But again, graphics are subjective.

Art? Most people would say Blizzards artists are by far the best in the industry. Your posted shots mean nothing when you are comparing two unique styles of game look and feel... That would be like comparing Gone with the Wind to Who Framed Roger Rabbit...

As I requested - please show proof how one is better than the other. I want to see these facts. But do you want to know the truth and why I called you biased? It is because there is no facts other than your stated opinion. Why? Because graphic quality is in the eye of the beholder.

But I will just say that with the number of subscribers playing Wow vs EQ2 - the graphics must not be all that bad...

Now - if you want to argue which looks more life like I would probably agree with you more.

 

Sigh , how one engine is better than the other ?

One is a dx 8.1 engine with shading effects and advanced textures all of which would make an engine that is on the cusp of being cutting edge .

The other is dx 7 and no amount of art can make up for it .

Billzard could have made a solid engine taking advantage of features that have been part of video cards for what now almost 4 years since dx 8 came out ?

Could have gone just as cartoony as they did and have a more advanced engine that looks much much better than what htey put out .


HOnestly though , I don't care what you think , you insulted me for no reason other than my apparent lack of blind love for wow which you apparently can't stand from your posts balantently defending the inferior engine .

THe things in your first reply to me have nothing to do with the engine of the game .

 

jvd,

Lets set the record straight and examine what I said and why. Shall we?

I said:
"No JVD, you are not biased...that is just a ingornat statement which I'm not surprised coming from you"

I said that because you made a blanket statement regarding WoW looking like a dog yet runs stellar and will only look worse in a few years. Did you not stay that?

I called you on it because that is a biased view. You can not compare the graphics of the two when they are intended to look different. Is that so hard to understand? Blizzard and Sony both took different directions, and for reasons. How on earth do you feel you can compare them? This is truely apples to oranges.

We are not discussing which engine is more advanced or uses more DX feature sets. We are discussing why I called you ignorant and biased. See the difference? My reply to you was only in regards to your statement about one looking worse in years to come, got it?

You can argue which is using more DX features and which uses a higher version. Sure. But that is not what I called you biased for. That is you trying to justify why Sony's engine is better in your eyes. You are focusing on technology used. I did not - nor do I care. See - if all you need to do is drive to the store a yugo will work. You do not need the XK8 with all the bells and whistles and leather out the wazoo to get there. You may want it, but you don't need it. I'm willing to bet that is what Blizzard did. Design the game, use the tools needed to do it, and go.

I'll let the subscribers decide which engine is better or is enjoyed more. Somehow I think you and I would agree that with over 1.2 million characters total, WoW is doing far better than EQ2 could have ever hoped for.

Be that as it may - let me clear the air for you since you think I'm biased.

I currently play SWG/JTL, DaOC (ToA only), Wow, and I did play EQ2 for two months. I recently canceled.

Which engine did I like the best? I would probably say SWG/JTL. I think some of the landscape within SWG was stunning. Warcraft can not be compared realalisticlly due to a different look and feel. Cartoonish as you said. However, there are some really stunning zones in it as well. But is a different look and feel which is why I found your comment originally so off the mark.

Graphic look and feel is subjective, and very opinion based. We will all look at them differently. Technology - sure, you win. I'm sure Sony used the latest version of dx. But I was not discussing that with you nor does it come into play.

There really is nothing here to get anyones panties all tied up in knots over.