• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Exclusive Invitation for an Xbox One Alpha Trial [Titanfall]

Backfoggen

Banned
Jul 21, 2009
12,279
0
0
"Hey the Titanfall alpha build is ready to deploy, looks like it's about 5.6gb."
"Make it 3.4gb. We need to get this build to people as fast as possible."
Yes? It's "just" a short server test for Respawn. It's the gamers that see it as a weird advance demo.

BF3 alpha had awful grainy looking textures too. They got better and the client bigger once they went open beta.
 

sangreal

Member
May 19, 2005
36,226
0
1,365
35
Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?
Because we see this excuse all the time (especially at e3) and I can't name a single game that received a drastic upgrade and released 2 months after the "dont worry it's alpha". Hell the entire 360 launch was wrapped in a big "dont worry it's alpha kits" excuse. EA/Respawn knew footage of the game would go viral and nobody would see whatever disclaimer they put on the launch. If it was really below their standards, they simply wouldn't have made it public To save a few GB? Really? We've already seen the game running on high-end PCs without having to download anything and it doesn't look much better.
 

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Dec 7, 2006
27,115
0
1,290
www.vertigogaming.net
Yes? It's "just" a short server test for Respawn. It's the gamers that see it as a weird advance demo.

BF3 alpha had awful grainy looking textures too. They got better and the client bigger once they went open beta.
Alright, I could be wrong. Just seems silly to me. :p We'll find out soon enough.

edit: I was indeed wrong. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=97508552&postcount=1239

Chubigans reeaching for straws trying to make an Xbox One game look/sound bad. I for one am SHOCKED.
oh no i've been found out nooooooooo
 

Chobel

Member
Mar 26, 2013
15,673
3
515
Yes? It's "just" a short server test for Respawn. It's the gamers that see it as a weird advance demo.

BF3 alpha had awful grainy looking textures too. They got better and the client bigger once they went open beta.
lower quality textures in this case was for game performance not file size.
 

iamvin22

Industry Verified
Jan 22, 2010
3,133
1,000
1,150
Alright, I could be wrong. Just seems silly to me. :p We'll find out soon enough.



oh no i've been found out nooooooooo
off topic but my wife is in love with your game and tries to sell it to everyone she comes into contact with. bravo dude.
 

Shaunboy97

Member
Jun 6, 2013
688
0
410
Because we see this excuse all the time (especially at e3) and I can't name a single game that received a drastic upgrade and released 2 months after the "dont worry it's alpha". Hell the entire 360 launch was wrapped in a big "dont worry it's alpha kits" excuse. EA/Respawn knew footage of the game would go viral and nobody would see whatever disclaimer they put on the launch. If it was really below their standards, they simply wouldn't have made it public To save a few GB? Really? We've already seen the game running on high-end PCs without having to download anything and it doesn't look much better.
You don't remember the drastic upgrade in fidelity for Ryse?
 

antitrop

Member
Feb 19, 2011
46,348
3
550
34
Colorado Springs, CO
twitter.com
I would honestly say it looks pretty bad on a 55 inch TV and actually playing it. Not as bad as the compression on Imgur...but yeah.
I think the HQ 1080p/60fps E3 Gameplay Demo from Gamersyde looks pretty great, so I'm honestly not worried about the graphics one bit.

I'll be playing it on my PC, anyway, I'm just here because Titanfall. :p
 

Mononoke

Banned
Dec 26, 2012
20,941
0
0
Los Angeles, CA
I think the HQ 1080p E3 Gameplay Demo from Gamersyde looks pretty great, so I'm honestly not worried about the graphics one bit.

I'll be playing it on my PC, anyway, I'm just here because Titanfall. :p
I'll be playing it on PC as well. So no doubt it should be looking much better for that release. :) Whether people want to believe the graphics for X1 will look better at launch or not, the fact is in the alpha build, it looks bad. Playing it on a proper 55 inch HDTV, it looks worse than Call of Duty. But the gameplay lives up to the hype.

Game is incredible to play. It's so much fun. So yeah, can't wait for the PC release.
 

Rayme

Member
Apr 21, 2007
1,010
0
0
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Now that half of you are browsing crappy unauthorized cellphone pics...

TO BE EXPLICIT:

All textures in this Alpha Test build are at 25% of the final game's resolution. So if you're staring at a 256x256 texture, that's actually a 512x512 texture in the real game. 512? That's a 1024. It's a huge, huge, huge difference. Especially on terrain, weapons, cockpits, hands, effects, etc.

There's a reason the build is under NDA. It's not for showing off, or giving people a fair idea of what the game looks like, or for pixel counting. You'll still have your chance to scream "lolz pixels lazy devs Goldeneye N64 lololololol", but now is not the time.

(Well; menu images are probably full res.)
 

Caayn

Member
Mar 10, 2013
12,378
374
700
The Netherlands




A part of me feels joy to see the privileged press that gets early access to almost every game (and often rubs it in the face of "consumer peasants") moaning about this on Twitter.
This is gold. It's strange but it gives such a good feeling to "journalist" not getting access for once.

Yeah I know I'm a couple pages late. Who cares.
 

Iced_Eagle

Member
Apr 8, 2007
6,235
0
0
Now that half of you are browsing crappy unauthorized cellphone pics...

TO BE EXPLICIT:

All textures in this Alpha Test build are at 25% of the final game's resolution. So if you're staring at a 256x256 texture, that's actually a 1024x1024 texture in the real game. 512? That's a 2048. It's a huge, huge, huge difference. Especially on terrain, weapons, cockpits, hands, effects, etc.

There's a reason the build is under NDA. It's not for showing off, or giving people a fair idea of what the game looks like, or for pixel counting. You'll still have your chance to scream "lolz pixels lazy devs Goldeneye N64 lololololol", but now is not the time.

(Well; menu images are probably full res.)
Thanks for the clarification.

Funny how even though it says multiple times "This build is for testing network functionality, and does not represent the final quality of the game", that quickly gets ignored.
 

Chobel

Member
Mar 26, 2013
15,673
3
515
Now that half of you are browsing crappy unauthorized cellphone pics...

TO BE EXPLICIT:

All textures in this Alpha Test build are at 25% of the final game's resolution. So if you're staring at a 256x256 texture, that's actually a 1024x1024 texture in the real game. 512? That's a 2048. It's a huge, huge, huge difference. Especially on terrain, weapons, cockpits, hands, effects, etc.

There's a reason the build is under NDA. It's not for showing off, or giving people a fair idea of what the game looks like, or for pixel counting. You'll still have your chance to scream "lolz pixels lazy devs Goldeneye N64 lololololol", but now is not the time.

(Well; menu images are probably full res.)
Where did you get this info? and it's 1/16 = 6.25% not 25%.
 

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Dec 7, 2006
27,115
0
1,290
www.vertigogaming.net
Now that half of you are browsing crappy unauthorized cellphone pics...

TO BE EXPLICIT:

All textures in this Alpha Test build are at 25% of the final game's resolution. So if you're staring at a 256x256 texture, that's actually a 1024x1024 texture in the real game. 512? That's a 2048. It's a huge, huge, huge difference. Especially on terrain, weapons, cockpits, hands, effects, etc.

There's a reason the build is under NDA. It's not for showing off, or giving people a fair idea of what the game looks like, or for pixel counting. You'll still have your chance to scream "lolz pixels lazy devs Goldeneye N64 lololololol", but now is not the time.

(Well; menu images are probably full res.)
Ah, I was totally wrong then. *hangs head in shame*