Sikkpin@Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:18 pm :
BJA wrote:
What's with all those tiling normalmaps in the 2nd screen? :?:shock:

Tell me about it. That is what has bothered me the most since the first shots I saw (the mag scans). You mean to tell me that they couldn't add some variety to "The Shroud" textures. Just one very small detail bump texture is all they can produce? That's is going to be such a distraction when playing this game.

And for those who say that they are limited by the engine seem to forget that ETQW is also idTech 4 which aside from the stencil shadows and lack of architectural detail (flat, empty rooms and such) looked visually, from a rendering standpoint, this generation. And why they can't have self shadows when they are using shadow maps is beyond me.

These visual problems with Wolf and the fact that Rage probably won't be out for at least a year has left me very disappointed.



aardwolf@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:07 am :
evilartist wrote:
aardwolf wrote:
You can tell from looking at that that they dont care about that game

Comments like that seriously bug me. "These models look awful. They must hate their game". "This game looks ugly. They're purposely sabotaging their own game." I swear, it's almost as if you actually mean it. *Ugh*


They dont hate their game. They just dont give much of a crap about it. And they know it will sell well no matter what.



obihb@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:33 am :
I think rather this game suffers from it's engine tech rather than Raven people not being able to make models. Sure, there seems to be some issues but so does Doom3. And don't get me wrong, I love Doom3 and it's graphics and quality but lets face the fact of real time engines being limited in their own respects.

I think if they were gonna release this game 2 years ago it might go down easier but right now, maybe Tech5 is a better choice. It'll suit this game much better than Tech4. The UE3 would suit this game much better. But as it happens sometimes the timing is just off and that choice should have been made like a year or 2 back already.

The funny thing to me is why they still didn't upgrade the Tech4 shaders for Wolf. Everything still looks like Doom3 which didn't use any real shader effects. Compare this to UE3, I mean, nice material shaders makes a huge difference. And trying to render real world environments in the Doom3 enigine is pretty hard to do it to the same standards as set by Crysis or even CoD. Of course the lighting system also plays a big role but I think that can be sorted even directly inside Doom3, let alone a game coming out years after with time to upgrade stuff.

Either way, I don't think the models are pure crap like people say although I think skinning and rigging can be cleaner in some areas.



evilartist@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:58 am :
obihb wrote:
I think rather this game suffers from it's engine tech rather than Raven people not being able to make models. Sure, there seems to be some issues but so does Doom3. And don't get me wrong, I love Doom3 and it's graphics and quality but lets face the fact of real time engines being limited in their own respects.

I think if they were gonna release this game 2 years ago it might go down easier but right now, maybe Tech5 is a better choice. It'll suit this game much better than Tech4. The UE3 would suit this game much better. But as it happens sometimes the timing is just off and that choice should have been made like a year or 2 back already.

That's something that's been bothering me, too. It just seems like tech4 is too limited by its own advancements. You can't do too much open-area ultra-detail like you see in Call of Duty 4, all because of realtime stencil shadows instead of pre-calced lightmapping. As flawed as lightmaps are, they're definitely the way to go for next-gen gaming, as long as some clever and awesome features are applied, like in CoD4. Maybe someday, Carmack will come up with the perfect realtime lighting engine.



shaviro@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:09 am :
I don't know. I think it's wrong to just blame the engine here. The art for this game is just horrible and bland. The models and areas showcase some very poor skills. You can create some really nice looking stuff with idtech4 still. Doom3, Quake4, Prey, ETQW and several custom Doom3 mods all look better than this. It's not-knowing-your-limitations and "poor" craftsmanship.
I would agree with some of the others; While the game may be awesome(we don't know), they are marketing this as if they don't give a shit about the game. The screenshots really don't show that any love has gone intro producing them.



BNA!@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:53 am :
Take it this way - mass market instead of cutting edge. Activision needs money more than showcase projects.



Kristus@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:39 am :
Wolfenstein isn't using the stencil shadow technique though. Raven rewrote that for this game. Or at least that's what 've understood it as.



aaa111@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:49 am :
Yeah,some of the previously released screens shows that they are using soft shadowing instead of stencil shadow.



BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:03 pm :
I think we shouldn't whine about graphics, I'm pretty certain Raven is focussing on gameplay rather than gimmicks and we should be thankful instead of being rash in judgement about a handful of screens from a work in progress.

This is one of the main reasons why I'm personally against releasing any kind of media before releasing the final game, be glad I'm not president of marketing for EA cause we wouldn't have seen anything at all, not up till 1-2 months before the release date is certain. :mrgreen:

Gameplay... gameplay... gameplay first.. graphics come second, people!



shaviro@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:20 pm :
BloodRayne wrote:
I think we shouldn't whine about graphics, I'm pretty certain Raven is focussing on gameplay rather than gimmicks and we should be thankful instead of being rash in judgement about a handful of screens from a work in progress.

This is one of the main reasons why I'm personally against releasing any kind of media before releasing the final game, be glad I'm not president of marketing for EA cause we wouldn't have seen anything at all, not up till 1-2 months before the release date is certain. :mrgreen:

Gameplay... gameplay... gameplay first.. graphics come second, people!


Hmm. I think that is a gross simplification.
It's just not that simple. It's a tried and tired cliché to divide a game into graphics and gameplay. The enjoyment of a game (which is gameplay) is also very dependant on graphics. The style and the quality of the graphics go a long way in creating the atmosphere for a game, and graphics is one of the keys in conveying your game. So far all I have read about the game mechanics (except perhaps the super powers) sounds good. The problem is that the graphics they have shown so far don't support the written word at all. We have seen pretty much nothing but bland, colourless (or monochrome) flat areas with exceptionally bad character models. And why exactly is it that you assume you can't work on great game mechanics and great graphics at the same time?

And in progress title? Sure. In progress for more than 3 years with now 50 people assigned to it. And if they have nothing worthwhile to show, then they shouldn't show it.

So to sum up, of course we should whine about graphics. The graphics look awful, even compared with 4½ year old games. A professional game studio ought to be better than that.



leifhv@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:37 pm :
Yes, gameplay is more important than graphics. But releasing poor preview screenshots is not the norm. If you look back at recent releases (ETQW, Crysis, Far Cry 2,COD*,...) the images released during development has looked great and fairly close to how the released versions look.

I think it's probable that the Wolfenstein images we've seen are representative of how the finished game will look, at least if we consider how these things have worked for other games in the past. It might be that Raven is trying something different here ("Release poor images during development; then surprise everyone with amazing graphics in the released version") but it doesn't seem like a very good marketing scheme in my eyes. I was quite excited about this game until they started releasing screenshots. :roll:



shaviro@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:46 pm :
I would be extremely surprised if the finished game doesn't look like this. That would just be so very out of the ordinary.



New Horizon@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:41 pm :
The modelling and level design does look pretty bad in these shots, especially for a 'professional' game. I also notice that the characters hands and faces have that horrid D3 'shine' that makes the characters look like plastic. Speculars simply aren't needed on everything...and especially not specular maps that are so strong. It's as if they're just spitting these textures out with an automated program of some sort and not bothering to consider places where speculars simply aren't needed.



pbmax@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:23 pm :
here's some hi-res shots of COD: World at War Xbox 360 to compare...

http://xbox360media.gamespy.com/xbox360 ... 317345.jpg
http://xbox360media.gamespy.com/xbox360 ... 328641.jpg
http://xbox360media.gamespy.com/xbox360 ... 358828.jpg

and Raven's last id game, Quake 4 Xbox 360...

http://xboxmedia.gamespy.com/xbox/image ... 656899.jpg


My hands! Hitler's black magic turned them into Silly Putty! Can't pull trigger...
Image

Who ever released this screen shot should be taken out back and shot.



Ww3@Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:21 pm :
On second observation, only the first screenshot is the truely terrible one. The others actually look ok (except for the lame-ass shoulder mounted Slurm canisters, which is a concept-artist's crack-nightmare). Sure they screwed the lighting system in that shadows are bad (no self-shadowing), this can be looked around.
They just screwed up in releasing this first screenshot, even giving it in ultra-high resolution, which has virtually everything wrong with it, modelling-wise. Let's just hope they correct these bullshit models, release the game soon and move on to Rage, D4... and SD's ETDW?



spinny@Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:37 am :
I really really really really really miss grey matter :(



aardwolf@Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:48 am :
spinny wrote:
I really really really really really miss grey matter :(


Theyre now called Treyarch and work for someone named Activision i think. :D



qwertz123@Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:28 am :
pbmax wrote:
Who ever released this screen shot should be taken out back and shot.

why? he isn't responsible for the fact that wolf2 mainplattform is the xbox. look at gta4 and the horrible lod for the human models: ten feet away and they look like grunt from quake2 :shock:

so now imagine what could be done IF the PC would be all the way to go :D but hey, iam just dreaming....



6th Venom@Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:42 am :
qwertz123 wrote:
why? he isn't responsible for the fact that wolf2 mainplattform is the xbox.

Lol, didn't you see the COD xbox 360 screenshots?

Too easy to justify everything with the xbox/consoles power, cause as everybody here said, the new Wolf looks like it's older than Q4 about characters (and generally models).



qwertz123@Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:42 am :
Quote:
screenshots...


...don't do allways the juctice. and like thousend times said in all rtcw2 threads, the tech4 engines does make things not easier, so i would wait for a final product and then we can argue either it failed or not.

not a fanboy, just patient :D



Kristus@Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:47 pm :
In this case they do. It's pretty obvious what is going on with the models in those shots. Shoddy models, with shoddier rigs and a terribly narrow lod limit.
Id Tech 4 really has nothing to do with how good you make your models or how good you rig them. And as we've seen with previous games with the engine the lod limit isn't nearly this narrow. (ETQW)

The game might be very fun but I'm really annoyed by this noobish visual work.



Mordenkainen@Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:42 am :
qwertz123 wrote:
Quote:
screenshots...


...don't do allways the juctice.


But you can still compare them. Compare these shots with DOOM3 shots released throughout 2003.

Quote:
and like thousend times said in all rtcw2 threads, the tech4 engines does make things not easier, so i would wait for a final product and then we can argue either it failed or not.


Who's saying the game has failed already? All we're saying is that visually the game looks uninspiring and at times, downright 1998-amateurish looking.



evilartist@Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:44 pm :
Mordenkainen wrote:
Who's saying the game has failed already? All we're saying is that visually the game looks uninspiring and at times, downright 1998-amateurish looking.

That's the problem I'm having. People here mention it so frequently and so passionately that it implies they already think the game sucks, and I will admit that I think some people on this website are actually that shallow (I won't name anyone). All I ask is for people to give the model thing a rest already. If some of you think you can do better, apply to Raven as modelers.



pbmax@Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:09 pm :
evilartist wrote:
If some of you think you can do better, apply to Raven as modelers.


So unless a person is an expert at something, they can't have an opinion? If that were true, then no one could really ever say anything about anything.



6th Venom@Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:34 pm :
Usually, Raven's modelers do a great job, so i guess there is 'something' with the LOD technology they used, or the fact there is no loading between maps, or anything like that...



evilartist@Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:18 am :
pbmax wrote:
evilartist wrote:
If some of you think you can do better, apply to Raven as modelers.

So unless a person is an expert at something, they can't have an opinion? If that were true, then no one could really ever say anything about anything.

I just mean why bring it up over and over again? I definitely agree that their models are sub-par, especially in comparison to Quake 4. But it's getting a bit boring reading the same comments from the same people in every Wolf thread on D3W. Apparently, I'm the only person who feels that way.

6th Venom wrote:
Usually, Raven's modelers do a great job, so i guess there is 'something' with the LOD technology they used, or the fact there is no loading between maps, or anything like that...

I wonder about that myself. What the hell did happen at Raven, anyway? The Quake 4 marines and strogg all looked kick-ass. If everyone is going to keep mentioning the models, can someone at least explain to me why Wolf isn't getting the same treatment? And please don't say "Because they hate their game".

What does LOD stand for, anyway? I see a few applicable matches on wikipedia, but which do you mean?



Mordenkainen@Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:22 am :
evilartist wrote:
What the hell did happen at Raven, anyway? The Quake 4 marines and strogg all looked kick-ass. If everyone is going to keep mentioning the models, can someone at least explain to me why Wolf isn't getting the same treatment? And please don't say "Because they hate their game".


Raven has been after Wolf since before SoF actually so at least at a management level where some of the old guys like Eric operate in it's going to be well looked after. It's quite possible that it's a separate team from the guys who did Q4 (those may be working on Singularity). Regardless, I just don't want to believe Raven can produce such content, B-Team or no. I can see it now: first mod for Wolfie! "Hands done right-mod". Okay, that was uncalled for. :lol:

Quote:
What does LOD stand for, anyway? I see a few applicable matches on wikipedia, but which do you mean?


Level of Detail. The implication being that somehow the models are reverting to their higher-LoDed counterparts despite being in plain view/at close range/etc.



Kiltron@Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:39 am :
A fudged hand, big deal. Will probably never notice it during gameplay. Look on the bright side. Nobody really talks about how awesome a screenshot is anymore............they only point out the flaws on forums all day. Mission accomplished...........talk about the game has commenced. Negative or not...........press is press and that's a positive!

My hands are cold!



kat@Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 1:10 pm :
Kiltron wrote:
.....My hands are cold!
But well formed :wink:



Sikkpin@Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:18 pm :
BJA wrote:
What's with all those tiling normalmaps in the 2nd screen? :?:shock:

Tell me about it. That is what has bothered me the most since the first shots I saw (the mag scans). You mean to tell me that they couldn't add some variety to "The Shroud" textures. Just one very small detail bump texture is all they can produce? That's is going to be such a distraction when playing this game.

And for those who say that they are limited by the engine seem to forget that ETQW is also idTech 4 which aside from the stencil shadows and lack of architectural detail (flat, empty rooms and such) looked visually, from a rendering standpoint, this generation. And why they can't have self shadows when they are using shadow maps is beyond me.

These visual problems with Wolf and the fact that Rage probably won't be out for at least a year has left me very disappointed.