• 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.

Tintnfall - 16 maaps fo laucnh, bxone alph a textures ARE fin@l assets

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deadbeat

Banned
Jun 7, 2010
8,533
0
0
Guns Capital
Speaking out of your buttocks on the textures. From what I can tell there is no way they will ship like that since they certainly would not be maxing out memory usage.
There is no reason for the textures to be that low res. I dunno. Maybe cboat means all other graphical effects. But textures? There worse than previous cod textures right now. MW2 has better graphics.
 
May 18, 2010
4,245
1
775
16 maps is a great number to launch with, as long as all game types are playable on all maps. Great to hear though, I hate to see a multi only game be hamstrung by a lack of maps, but that doesn't seem to be the case for titanfall.
 

antitrop

Member
Feb 19, 2011
46,348
4
550
34
Colorado Springs, CO
twitter.com
I'll quote the Respawn dev's post, for reference:

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.)
 

SneakyStephan

Banned
Jan 23, 2011
18,401
0
0
720p, with those textures, plus lighting and effects, 12 players, would make Titanfall and absolute disaster graphically.


Thank god for the PC version. You would thing this was just a 360 port at this point, not the other way around.
It's funny because they were talking about how they were modifying the source engine for this game

source, the engine that can run 8x msaa on your toaster at 1080p 100+ fps, and they ended up with this uglyness at 720p

I'm willing to bet they somehow managed to break it to the point where there's no msaa support on pc , there's input lag, there's mouse acceleration/smoothing etc
 
K

kittens

Unconfirmed Member
The alpha textures are final? Holy shit, that's terrible.
 

GavinGT

Banned
Jan 26, 2007
21,687
0
0
Here's the Respawn guy's post, for reference:

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.)
 

Bornstellar

Member
Jan 18, 2012
7,361
0
0
There is no reason for the textures to be that low res. I dunno. Maybe cboat means all other graphical effects. But textures? There worse than previous cod textures right now. MW2 has better graphics.
It's certified BS. Maybe they were final assets, but definitely downrezzed. And I'll take the word of the Respawn guy that posts here over Cboat on the product he works on.
 

tkalamba

Member
Aug 27, 2013
757
0
0
There is no reason for the textures to be that low res. I dunno. Maybe cboat means all other graphical effects. But textures? There worse than previous cod textures right now. MW2 has better graphics.
Maybe assets are final by res isn't? Who knows but I feel like that one has potential to be incorrect.
 

GravyButt

Member
Aug 29, 2013
2,634
0
475
Maybe the textures are the same as far as how everything looks. Aka certain colors or patterns ect? Dunno just a guess, cant picture the NDA and multiple sites saying the textures were 25% all of a sudden to be the final product.
 

Neuromancer

Member
Jan 13, 2009
61,813
4
1,130
Baltimore, MD
twitter.com
How many maps did BF4 and Ghosts ship with?
Ghosts shipped with 15 (including the preorder bonus map.)

The maps are bigger in Titanfall, and I'm sure you can argue what the better MP game is, but Titanfall is not exactly overdelivering value in my mind. No single player campaign, no offline play with bots, no nothing except online competitive MP.
 

i-Lo

Member
Dec 23, 2008
14,759
0
0
Canada
When people would be playing the game in motion all this texture malarkey would be overlooked due to "fun" factor. If people want pure visual splendor on xbone, they should buy Ryse.
 

bistromathics

facing a bright new dawn
Feb 24, 2008
5,626
0
0
35
Well look who's back. Though this hardly anything surprising. Are the Bone textures complete shit or something?
 

komplanen

Member
Jun 23, 2013
9,435
2
0
As much as nothing about the Xbox One being a piece of shit surprises me anymore, I don't believe those ugly ass textures are final. I just don't. CBOAT has a really good track record but I don't believe that that's how bad that game could possibly look.
 

Ol No Bones

Banned
Jan 8, 2013
6,733
1
0
He never said anything about the Xbox One's version's final resolution. That quote could only apply to the PC version.
nobody was talking about a pc alpha though. If that's what he meant it was purposefully deceptive. The Xbox one footage shown prior looked better. I'm hoping cboat got misinformed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.