Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 60 of 60
  1. #41
    Network Hub Taidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    270
    /back on topic

    Relevant news post:

    http://www.swtor.com/community/showt...74#edit1499874

    As stated, cinematic scenes use high resolution textures because we have control over how many characters are rendered on-screen at once. This is how the game was always intended to look in cinematics. We did not 'remove' high resolution textures - they were always in the game for use in cinematics.

    With that said, thank you for all of your responses. We understand everyone's desires around this issue, and although it's not going to be an overnight fix, as mentioned we're working on addressing this. Many of the suggestions you have made are similar to potential changes the development team is investigating.

    I rounded up the development team once more and had another discussion, and wanted to update you with a better timeline and some more precise details on what we're doing right now.

    The first major changes will be in our next major Game Update, which will have the version number of 1.2. Those changes will bring greater visual fidelity to your character and those around you, but will still allow for good performance in situations where a lot of characters are on-screen at once. In other words, for those screenshots of your character in their best gear, you should see a marked improvement.

  2. #42
    Activated Node
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    56
    I quite like the 1st part of the statement as I've recently had a few cutscenes which random passers by have managed to appear in (great when they stand on top of/in the way of the person who is talking). So no it doesn't seem like they have control over how many characters appear in the cinematic bits either.

  3. #43
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus c-Row's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Anus Mundi, Germany
    Posts
    1,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    It just makes no sense. He's saying that if a game set in Eberron was a D&D one he'd play it even if it was made by BioWare. Now, Eberron is a D&D setting anyway. Both Eberron games that have been released carry the D&D logo on the cover. Therefore I'm finding it really difficult to get any meaning whatsoever from this post. The best I can come up with is something like "I would love BioWare to make a D&D game set in Eberron." And even then it's largely irrelevant to anything talked about previously.
    People were ranting about how the BioWare logo was a seal of quality. You were stating that the D&D logo on a box usually stood for quality as well (which was totally irrelevant to the discussion to begin with, mind you). I was saying that if there was a D&D logo on a new Eberron game, I would even buy it if it came from BioWare, as I value both of the former high enough to not let such an opportunity pass, thereby supporting your view on the quality a D&D logo usually suggests. Then you got all pissed for no apparent reason.

  4. #44
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,996
    Quote Originally Posted by c-Row View Post
    People were ranting about how the BioWare logo was a seal of quality. You were stating that the D&D logo on a box usually stood for quality as well (which was totally irrelevant to the discussion to begin with, mind you). I was saying that if there was a D&D logo on a new Eberron game, I would even buy it if it came from BioWare, as I value both of the former high enough to not let such an opportunity pass, thereby supporting your view on the quality a D&D logo usually suggests. Then you got all pissed for no apparent reason.
    No. I suggested that the main reason Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II sold the millions of copies that they did and made BioWare famous was the D&D attachment. BioWare were a relatively new company at the time and weren't well known for their previous game. Even the Interplay connection couldn't have helped that much considering Fallout sales were a whole lot less. And Knights of the Old Republic? Considering it was primarily a console game, and a lot of console gamers had no clue about Baldur's Gate, I'm sure it sold mostly off the Star Wars name.

    So yeah, for a big part of BioWare's existence it wasn't the BioWare label that sold their games, it was the licenses they used. Which is exactly what I replied to originally when the following was posted:

    Quote Originally Posted by db1331 View Post
    This. There was a time when seeing Bioware on the box was all you needed to know to buy a game. Not so much anymore.

  5. #45
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Skalpadda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    So yeah, for a big part of BioWare's existence it wasn't the BioWare label that sold their games, it was the licenses they used.
    I'm thinking the fact that a lot of people loved the games might have had something to do with it.

  6. #46
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Skalpadda View Post
    I'm thinking the fact that a lot of people loved the games might have had something to do with it.
    You can only love a game after you play it.

  7. #47
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Skalpadda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    You can only love a game after you play it.
    Because good press and word of mouth have never led to increased sales, right?

  8. #48
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Skalpadda View Post
    Because good press and word of mouth has never led to increased sales, right?
    And good press and word of mouth don't often stand up to well regarded licenses. Just compare the sales of Baldur's Gate and Fallout.

  9. #49
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Skalpadda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,300
    I didn't say it was the only factor, but you were making it sound like the licences were the one major reason why the games sold, which sounds like nonsense to me. Making games a lot of people want to play and marketing them to the right audience is still the best way to sell games.

  10. #50
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Bishopric of Utrecht
    Posts
    2,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Skalpadda View Post
    I didn't say it was the only factor, but you were making it sound like the licences were the one major reason why the games sold, which sounds like nonsense to me. Making games a lot of people want to play (Emphasis mine - Grizzly) and marketing them to the right audience is still the best way to sell games.
    Making a game Dungeons and Dragons is a sound way of attracting quite a large audience (as D&D is much more then a licence).

    EDIT: The idea is that the FIFA games wouldn't have sold as well if football hadn't been a popular sport, for example.
    Last edited by Grizzly; 12-01-2012 at 08:01 PM.

  11. #51
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Skalpadda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,300
    Sure, I'm not in any way saying that licences don't play a big part in getting a game attention, but they also wouldn't have sold well if people hadn't enjoyed the games for what they are. There have been plenty of games with big licences that haven't done well and plenty of original IPs that have.

    What I objected to was Wizardry's notion that "the main reason Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II sold the millions of copies that they did and made BioWare famous was the D&D attachment" and "for a big part of BioWare's existence it wasn't the BioWare label that sold their games, it was the licenses they used". I think it had more to do with them being good at making games that a lot of people enjoyed.

  12. #52
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Skalpadda View Post
    Sure, I'm not in any way saying that licences don't play a big part in getting a game attention, but they also wouldn't have sold well if people hadn't enjoyed the games for what they are. There have been plenty of games with big licences that haven't done well and plenty of original IPs that have.
    But we aren't comparing the quality of the game with a label on the box. We are comparing one label on the box with another label on the box. Did you even read the original post I replied to?

    Quote Originally Posted by db1331 View Post
    This. There was a time when seeing Bioware on the box was all you needed to know to buy a game. Not so much anymore.
    All I meant was that for a period of time it was the D&D label rather than the BioWare label that was the most important label on the box. I'm not at all playing down the positive reviews.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skalpadda View Post
    What I objected to was Wizardry's notion that "the main reason Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II sold the millions of copies that they did and made BioWare famous was the D&D attachment" and "for a big part of BioWare's existence it wasn't the BioWare label that sold their games, it was the licenses they used". I think it had more to do with them being good at making games that a lot of people enjoyed.
    Sure. But then you have to consider than Baldur's Gate wouldn't have been made if it weren't for the D&D license.

  13. #53
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Skalpadda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,300
    But why on earth would you assume "a time when seeing Bioware on the box was all you needed to know to buy a game" was referring to before or at the time the Baldur's Gate games came out? If people had bought the games on the strength of the D&D licence but then didn't enjoy them then surely that wouldn't have made Bioware famous?

    To be absolutely clear, what I'm saying is that while the licence may have gotten them a lot of initial attention, the reason they became a big name studio was primarily because people liked their games.

    Anyway, this is all off topic so I'll leave it be.

  14. #54
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus c-Row's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Anus Mundi, Germany
    Posts
    1,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    And Knights of the Old Republic? Considering it was primarily a console game, and a lot of console gamers had no clue about Baldur's Gate, I'm sure it sold mostly off the Star Wars name.
    I think "being sure" is still quite an understatement in that case - the Star Wars license pretty much sells anything it's tacked on.

  15. #55
    Network Hub Taidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by csuzw View Post
    I quite like the 1st part of the statement as I've recently had a few cutscenes which random passers by have managed to appear in (great when they stand on top of/in the way of the person who is talking). So no it doesn't seem like they have control over how many characters appear in the cinematic bits either.
    Either you're making up stories, or that's a hell of a bug. I'd report it just to be sure, because the SWTOR the rest of us are playing doesn't render players in cutscenes unless they're grouped with the person who triggers said scene. Even then, the game itself positions each player according to the script for that scene, so you should never see anybody standing on an NPC during a conversation.

  16. #56
    Activated Node
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    56
    It's certainly a bug and it doesn't happen regularly. The rogue players aren't actually part of the cut scene, they just appear in them as they would in normal game play, most likely they were going to talk to the same NPC I was. I never saw it while getting my Sorcerer to 50 but I've seen it a handful of times on my mid 20s Trooper.

  17. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    936
    Either I've got insane or WIZARDRY IS STARTING TO MAKE SENSE.

  18. #58
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Bishopric of Utrecht
    Posts
    2,155
    Wizardy has always made sense. Sometimes one simply does not get the context.

  19. #59
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by archonsod View Post
    I'm starting to wonder whether it's called The Old Republic because of the era, or whether it's actually because the player base seem to spend most of their time moaning like a bunch of old women.
    Because making a relatively polite and entirely reasonable complaint categorises the person or people responsible as moaners. And I'm not even touching the misogyny there, sport. :p

    Funny thing is is that I agree with you. This is a very minor consideration, and nothing compared to the shenanigans that have gone on (that were very news-worthy). However, responses like this one really don't help things.

  20. #60
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus duff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,170
    Choose your weapon!

    guess-handbags.JPG
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by duff; 14-01-2012 at 07:32 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •