visual Quality of FFO: XI

[Macht]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

Doubtful, it should be in the standard C library.

C was designed not to change across platforms. The compiler on the other hand does know how to do optimizations dependent on what you tell it the target is. That's the benefit of writing in a high level language.

And since it wasn't until around the P3 that ia32 machines could do what SGI machines of the early 90's could do, the performance difference between a PS2 and the minimum requirements for FFXI on the PC aren't that different when you think in terms of actual performance.

I know in terms of actual performance the requirements aren't that different. I just have doubts that a library for a game console would have the same stuff a PC would. I mean part of the PS2s stuff in increasing its performance basically was stripping away stuff in the library that the PC may of been more dependant on that the PS2 really didn't need.

When in the game it shows it can get the time on your system just use /time, but being able to effectively use in codding and keep the codding down to do with the world that they have I doubt would be possible with the PS2.

[Mhurron]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

I know in terms of actual performance the requirements aren't that different. I just have doubts that a library for a game console would have the same stuff a PC would. I mean part of the PS2s stuff in increasing its performance basically was stripping away stuff in the library that the PC may of been more dependant on that the PS2 really didn't need.

But if you had to do this with a ton of #IFDEF's or something then you might as well take the time to make a full PC engine and PS2 engine that are separate anyway, since you pretty much did just that. The point of using a high level language like C or C++ for a cross platform application is that the language libraries are pretty much standard (less so for C++) and all platform specific optimizations happen in the compiler when you call it.

So i have a helloworld.c app that I want to run as fast as it can (I really want to say hello before anyone else) on an P4 i would take that .c file and do something like (with gcc)
gcc -mtune=pentium4 -march=pentium4 -o helloworld helloworld.c

for the PS2 i would take that exact same helloworld.c and call gcc like this:
gcc -mips3 [other-magic-here] -o helloworld helloworld.c

The -march & -mtune or -mips3 tell gcc how to optimize the object code that is produced. You don't really write optimizations in C because the compiler decides how best to implement the actual calls you want. Other compilers will have different flags, but they would have the same sort of end result. You do magic in the compiler, not in source code that has to be maintained by others.

However, even if there wasn't the standard time libraries available for the PS2 that are on Windows with a full standard C library, when writing portable code you would create your own time libraries that abstracted the differences, and then just pointed the compiler to link against your windowstime library when compiling the PC version and the pstwotime library when you compile it for the PS2. That way you still minimize the amount of platform specific code in the game source itself.

[Balfree]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

You people love to talk smack..

[Kafeen]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

Then to add out of all the MMORPGs there is only 1 MMO that currently has actually attempted to update their graphics. That is EverQuest still in my opinion it's graphics are incredibly crappy, but it is an improvement to how they were previously.

Everquest isn't the only one, I know Dark Age of Camelot upgraded its graphics engine aswell with one of its expansion packs.

[Murphie]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

Everquest isn't the only one, I know Dark Age of Camelot upgraded its graphics engine aswell with one of its expansion packs.

I said this earlier. No one ever reads my posts.

I'm tempted to go and find a pre/post Catacombs photo, but that's really more effort than is necessary.

[Kailea]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

You people love to talk smack..

yeah when someone comes in with something stupid -.-

[Karinya]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

Well, as someone who owned an original generation gameboy (and played a pretty long RPG all the way through on it, at least twice IIRC), my minimum graphics standards are pretty low. Heck, I still remember playing on my big brothers' Atari 2600. It was fun, too.

But if you're THAT much of a graphics whore... no, they haven't changed much, except that a lot of the newer armors are prettier than the old ones. The detailing on something like Seer's or Homam pretty much blows away the original-RoZ era armors. Some of the new monsters are pretty cool looking too. But things like spell effects haven't changed at all.

Look at the live cam on the website, it's pretty much the graphics quality you'll get actually playing, except for framerate and maybe some compression artifacts. (Since the webcam is rendered on SE's machines and then streamed to your PC, your framerate on the webcam is highly dependent on your bandwidth. The actual game uses client-side rendering making it much less of a bandwidth hog.)

[Kailea]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

yeah loved my gameboy as well....until it fell apart in my hand lol....poor little thing, anyway :p

I dont care about the way the game looks, but I do have standers.....

anything SNES and up for a current game is fine by me, depends on the styal of the game as well.

I love playing my old games, but now that tech has enhanced so has my standered, but as it being (16-Bit) it is still pretty low :p

[Ellipses]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

I'd just like to say that the abbreviation "FFO:XI" is okay with me, because this game looks fuh-foxy!

[Murphie]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

I'd just like to say that the abbreviation "FFO:XI" is okay with me, because this game looks fuh-foxy!

You really are on a roll.

[Ellipses]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

Sorry, it's a hard habit to break.

[Murphie]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

It wasn't a complaint.

[Nottz]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

All you guys talking about how SE needs to upgrade their graphics engine probably didn't use the registry fix to update the game for their PCs. It's a simple change to 2 settings in the registry, and it made the game look 10x better with no additional slowdowns whatsoever. Just don't take the OP's advice on that thread with the instructions, he claims it runs best at 2048x2048, which isn't true..that's higher than most of the video cards even on today's market can handle...go with 1280x1280 or 1600x1600 for best performance:visuals. It's almost like something Square Enix put in for us to change just for PCs, it's so simple and the difference is incredible.

[Raydeus]

Re: visual Quality of FFO: XI

All you guys talking about how SE needs to upgrade their graphics engine probably didn't use the registry fix to update the game for their PCs.

That's common knowledge, what the game needs is at least a textures upgrade to high res (and 32bit color), and increased drawing distance.

Those two are the upgrades most people agree are needed.

Like you say, there's little advantage on using 2048x2048 over 1600x1600 background resolution, and no matter how much you force AF on textures, low res will always look low res.

Higher poly-number models are also on the list, but that would be really difficult to get unless SE implemented a True-form kinda thing, still, I don't think many would have the horse power to run that kinda thing.


Edit> I also remember other stuff related to models, things like modifying the way hair moves, adding capes, etc.

But that would be impossible to do as long as the PS2 is supported, and even if the PS2 was phased out a new game would be a better idea rather than a complete model/engine remake.

I think the game looks great, if only they gave use those 2 little things I mentioned...