Will PlanetSide 2 ever look better?

TGxCraig · 2013-02-18, 06:32 PM

I recently uploaded this video:

And it has me thinking if the game will ever look much better (getting better hardware aside). I know that SOE will continue to work on the optimization and the game will (hopefully) run much better as time goes on, but will we ever see a patch that give the game some updated effects, such as the Physx?

I know that the Physx was in the beta for a time, so they are not exactly 'new'. I wouldn't mind seeing some optimization done to the Physx somewhere down the road. It seems that sometime, the Physx effects don't run at as smooth a rate as what I'm actually getting in game. In that video, I was getting 60fps for 95% of those shots, but in some the particles seemed like they were only 30fps (don't get confused with with the segments of the video in which I slowed the footage down).

Whether or not we do get a graphics patch or something of the sort, the game is still, and will continue to be, a fantastic game that looks great. But I do still hope for an update, maybe in 2-3 years if the game is still popular and SOE supports it for as long as they are hoping to.

Hamma · 2013-02-18, 10:50 PM

The development team has claimed numerous times that there is no video card that can handle Forgelight in the highest possible settings so they haven't even enabled them in the game.

seanman · 2013-02-18, 10:59 PM

agree with hamma
the engine game is a for future engine

.

SturmovikDrakon · 2013-02-18, 11:17 PM

Oh yeah... it definitely can, and probably will

If you look at some of the alpha screenshots, Vanu specifically, you can probably see what Forgelight is capable of

(right click, open in new window)

Even with the .ini tweaks, the character models just don't look anywhere as good as these guys. Look at those textures, those details. Look at the arms of guy in the first picture.

Look at that gorgeous lighting. Makes me wish some part of Indar actually had this, I think the game's missing that full-out sci-fi athmoshphere

In all honesty, I can't wait to see what they have in store for the future

TGxCraig · 2013-02-19, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

The development team has claimed numerous times that there is no video card that can handle Forgelight in the highest possible settings so they haven't even enabled them in the game.

Well that is true, but do you think they will in the future (2-3 years) add a patch that provides higher resolution textures, better/more Physx, etc...

I'm sure that a new game using this engine will have the added effects, but will they ever patch them into PS2? Somewhat similar to the High-rez texture pack for Sleeping Dogs or the DX11/High-rez pack for Crysis 2.

I'm sure we can all agree that it would be nice, and clearly more taxing on our hardware, but in 2-3 years we will have some GPUs much more capable (and CPUs as well, as that is the clear bottlenecker for PS2 currently).

Sturmhardt · 2013-02-19, 02:38 AM

My main grudge with the graphics are the textures, they are just insanely blurry. Everything else is pretty nice, but some of the textures look like from planetside 1.

.sent via phone.

Kon · 2013-02-19, 02:53 AM

i would say when they decide to give up on legacy support and move fully to dx11 and 64 bit in a couple of years majority of the gamers will have at minimum gaming rigs better than what high end systems are today

Koadster · 2013-02-19, 03:03 AM

Go watch alpha videos. They removed so so much graphical content before release. Biolabs actaully were complete jungles.. But as Adam the level dev said, as soon as you went in one even with their well optimized PCs it would be single digits.

Another thing that devs have said numerous times. There current is NO tech available that can handle the forgelight at max graphics.. Even in 10 years time the engine will still compete with future engines.

Kon · 2013-02-19, 04:07 AM

i think soe are underestimating the rate at which computers accelerate i meant 10 years ago the top dog card was a 9800 xt

spent a few mins on wiki

9800xt Fillrate 3300 mpixels/s (2003)
x1950 xtx 31200 mpixels/s ( 2006)
7970 29 gigapixels (2012)

unfortunatly i cbf with conversion
1 Mpixel = 1 million pixels
1 gigapixel = 1 billion pixels

cards have come a long long way in 10 years 6 years from now the top end cards will be light years ahead who knows how much grunt they will have

Gatekeeper · 2013-02-19, 06:01 AM

Those alpha screenshots remind me how excited I was when I saw pics of the Beamer actually shooting a beam instead of going pew pew pew... shame that didn't actually make it into the game

Koadster · 2013-02-19, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by Kon

i think soe are underestimating the rate at which computers accelerate i meant 10 years ago the top dog card was a 9800 xt

10 years was just a figure to point out that the gfx will still be good for many many years to come

Figment · 2013-02-19, 06:40 AM

IMO, excellent graphics are realy nice, but they're pretty low on the priority list when they have to compete with gameplay affecting mechanics.

And currently that's simply the case:

We don't have backpacks for scavenging.
We don't have large amounts of deployables per player.
We don't have vehicle entry/exit animations (fixed positions)
We don't have holstered weapons (would cost 25% of players on screen).
We don't have extensive stair well and walkway structures due to requiring too many polygons, hence the anti-grav escalators.

Despite of that, we have severe render issues already and it gets worse if you have a few years old rig. I really don't see major improvements in the graphics department until the average PC standard has risen. And that'll probably have to wait till after the economic crisis. Doesn't mean they can't do it, of course.

Now, I would assume that before any graphical improvements would come, we'd get ragdoll physics implemented. Another thing I personally could do without, but eh.

People complaining about texture quality should IMO remember where a game's priority should be: being able to play the game optimally with as little concessions to gameplay as possible. Graphics mostly contribute to emersion and aesthetic quality, but do very little to improve the quality of gameplay.

It's great when it's done, but priority should be given to ensuring the content functions optimally and has expansive options and variety.

Graphics, to me, are a tertiary factor. Unfortunately a lot of gamers that pay less attention to reviews, game trailers and gameplay, judge books by their cover focus entirely on graphics. "It looks good, therefore it must be better". Even more unfortunately, by the time people find out the truth, that the less visible gameplay systems are more important, they've already chosen their game and made up their mind about other games and leave and ignore the others. So even if a graphically nice game disappoints, they'll often still claim it is better, because hey: lense flare. If the nifty looking game disappointed, then surely the worse looking game must be worse? :/

Satanam · 2013-02-19, 06:42 AM

Well, I hope this game survive for so long that we can see updates like that while we'll still have a lot of active players. This game is too gorgeous to die young.

Riekopo · 2013-02-19, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Sturmhardt

My main grudge with the graphics are the textures, they are just insanely blurry. Everything else is pretty nice, but some of the textures look like from planetside 1.

.sent via phone.

That was my main gripe with the graphics too. Now that I changed to TextureQuality=0 everything looks much better.

Loban · 2013-02-19, 10:39 AM

The only thing that looks good in PS2 is the lighting, and even that isn't on par with many bleeding edge modern PC games. The explosions and textures look pretty terrible. PS2 looks pretty good from a distance at night and at dawn and dusk, but overall it's looks pretty old school. I really wish it was DX11.