Underappreciated: Extras and Graphical features that might not be worth the effort.

[Dr. Nick]

Spawned from the IBM thread.

I don't think people care as much about the crowd compared to the action. In the end they were able to achieve the highest specs possible with good gameplay, plus some SPU bells-n-whistles.

I look forward to see MLB 2K next year, lest the "MLB The Show" team becomes complacent.

I think sometimes extras ,like 3d crowds, are underappreciated by gamers now of days and makes you wonder if it's really worth the effort when another game gets away without using it and ends up being considered the best looking. Another example is the Grand Canyon level in GT4 which had a 2D backdrop that in many cases ended up being so close to the camera that anyone could tell that it is 2D but is probably one of the best looking racing levels of last generation while games that tried thier best to keep most things 3D weren't considered up to snuff.

Can you guys think of anything features that you feel that devs might be wasting their time on?

 

[E2K]

Spawned from the IBM thread.

I think sometimes extras ,like 3d crowds, are underappreciated by gamers now of days and makes you wonder if it's really worth the effort when another game gets away without using it and ends up being considered the best looking. Another example is the Grand Canyon level in GT4 which had a 2D backdrop that in many cases ended up being so close to the camera that anyone could tell that it is 2D but is probably one of the best looking racing levels of last generation while games that tried thier best to keep most things 3D weren't considered up to snuff.

Can you guys think of anything features that you feel that devs might be wasting their time on?

The "HDR" in Halo3;
because of it, the game lacked AA, and ran at 1000*600 or something.
It also never felt like there was true HDR, imo with some bloom they could have almost achieved the same result, but this time with less muddy graphics.

 

[obonicus]

Considering all the 'MW2 is the best-looking game this year' talk we hear even from this forum, everything other games do that MW2 doesn't?

 

[Murakami]

Considering all the 'MW2 is the best-looking game this year' talk we hear even from this forum, everything other games do that MW2 doesn't?

Resolution?

 

[obonicus]

Resolution?

Sure. And hire better artists, fire your effects programmers. That's what joker's been saying and that we've known all along, that art-style far outweighs tech as far as the majority of people is concerned.

 

[Neb]

Resolution?

Good call, also 60fps.

 

[Dr. Nick]

Resolution?

Hey, the biggest HD games this generation have been sub-hd including GTA4 on PS3. If you can produce a game that looks killer ,runs well and is under 720p you have my vote. I didn't think I would like MW2 graphics partly because of 600p, I never played COD4 and didn't think I would like MW2 but I really like it including all of the 3d grass.

 

[zed]

The "HDR" in Halo3;

yes good call, I expect haloreach wont use the same technique. though in that game u can replace the 'might' with 'definitely' not worth the effort, if they didnt use this technque halo3 would of been 720p 2xAA solid 30fps

Ill get some disagreement on the following two points

Ild add a lot of HDR in general
also SSAO
non graphical FX -
large battles, resistence2 had 40 player battles or something, noone cared, theres a new game with 256 players I think, also bad move

 

[obonicus]

It's OT, but as far as gameplay elements I think there should be far more exploration than there should be for graphics elements. 256 players may be a mistake, but mostly because of implementation, not because you can't make something worthwhile from it. The chaos 2 of Tribes or Battlefield 2 when you got crazy numbers of players was really something else.

 

[Dr. Nick]

Ill get some disagreement on the following two points
also SSAO

Yes you will. I say boo to you good sir.

I do agree that going out of your way for that kind of HDR seems like a mistake. Despite what I said earlier when your flagship franchise isn't 720p you can't blame people for thinking something is wrong. I still think HDR is important though.

 

[Neb]

SSAO is good or atleast baked AO. Just imagine games like Fallout 3 and KZ2 would look crap without baked AO loosing depth. HDR is good though some proper one and not the one that most console games have that makes surfaces pretty much 'bleed' color like if range is not enough that and perhaps bad tonemapping use fix. Better stick with something that wont look like 'burnholes' on image and spares perfomance to put in other places.

Also bloom abuse. Sure games with dream esque scenes but Heavy Rain or Haze type bloom use is something not worth it. Better then to ditch bloom pass. Huh and I wo got with the hype and was thinking 'bloomy' was nice several years ago. New times chaps, new times!

 

[Neb]

Hey, the biggest HD games this generation have been sub-hd including GTA4 on PS3. If you can produce a game that looks killer ,runs well and is under 720p you have my vote. I didn't think I would like MW2 graphics partly because of 600p, I never played COD4 and didn't think I would like MW2 but I really like it including all of the 3d grass.

If there was a way to weight all the tech related ingridients in a game and compare this way. A game might look average but might be doing far more techwise in larger scope. Like in GTAIV and people compare other open space games to it and forgeet that GTAIV has advanced animation system and other nice effects like full world collision sparks, HDR particles, POM, 3D water, tons of dynamic objects... all fogotten!

Maybe realtime procedural clouds is something that might get chopped off if it isn't noticed. Like FC2 that has it and others.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

yes good call, I expect haloreach wont use the same technique. though in that game u can replace the 'might' with 'definitely' not worth the effort, if they didnt use this technque halo3 would of been 720p 2xAA solid 30fps

Was quite solid 30fps to me...and honestly 640p is not that far away from 720p. Imo the outdoor lighting looks amazing in Halo 3 despite the one picture you managed to find. I don't think the HDR method was the primary reason why Halo 3's overall visual quality was not top of the class, but the fact that the engine was not very well tailored to X360 in the first place. Dropping the lighting for 80 lines of resolution and maybe 2X AA, while everything else remained the same, would in my opinion result a lesser looking game.

 

[N_B]

resistence2 had 40 player battles or something, noone cared, theres a new game with 256 players I think, also bad move

I think everything Insomniac did with Resistance 2 was underappreciated. A very stable framerate, very high quality textures and models, 3d water, good shadows and a lot of objects on screen, but everyone seems to take issues with the lighting and ignore everything else; no HDR, blatantly baked shadows, no AO....and now they're saying Ratchet's 60fps is underappreciated so they're not doing it anymore.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

It also never felt like there was true HDR, imo with some bloom they could have almost achieved the same result, but this time with less muddy graphics.

HDR is a lot more than just bloom effects. Halo3's lighting engine is still the highest quality implementation and its hardsurface stuff (vehicles) are unmatched by any other game.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Ild add a lot of HDR in general

HDR maybe. Most games fail to use it effectively, such that the games would be better off without. If you have dark and light areas, you want to maintain the contrast with HDR and tone-map accordingly. If you've basically got a constant contrast with some overlights, stick to LDR.

also SSAO

An absoutely refutation from me! SSAO is a big step forwards towards the essential global illumination solvers we need. Lighting without any AO effect is rubbish.

Looking at the title, I think you prove the case! SSAO is clearly underappreciated by you, but it should stay as it's vital to the current arsenal of lighting techniques.

 

[corduroygt]

The most underappreciated features would be the features most gamers are unable to see.
This would first be HD resolution:
Mark Rein: Over half the users who played Gears of War 2 so far do not have HDTVs
The second would be HDR, since who knows how many people have an LCD with a decent contrast ratio, or calibrated properly. Some people don't even remove the clear plastic film from the screen to preserve their monitor's "newness."
The third would probably go to lossless 7.1 audio, due to not many people having such a set up, I have a lossless 5.1 setup but can't turn up the volume too high to really notice the difference due to neighbors.

 

[assen]

Proponents of 60 fps should pay attention to the flak Dante is receiving for its "PS2 level" graphics.

 

[corduroygt]

I have God of War collection and played the Dante demo, and Dante looks way better, no comparison. Saying Dante has "PS2 level" graphics is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Billy Idol]

Halo3's lighting engine is still the highest quality implementation

When playing this game, I never (ever) think/thought that the lighting is special...to be honest, it never wowed me once and I am really quite surprised that it is (at least seems to be) common B3D consensus that HALO3 lighting is "the best implementation".
Seems to be again an personal opinion thingy?

Question to you and to the guys who praise HALO3 HDR all the time...did you play Fable 2?