FFXIV Closed Alpha/Beta Discussion (Cancelled for this week)

[joxerthemighty]

good example of PC version just being better: Dragon Age, higher details, better interface, non-restricted zoom/angles

[Gokulo]

Or, you know, they can do what they did w/ XI and only allow "X" number of ppl to load at once.. unless your specifically targeting somebody.

Thats stuff was so annoying :\

[joxerthemighty]

Or, you know, they can do what they did w/ XI and only allow "X" number of ppl to load at once.. unless your specifically targeting somebody.

....so the game doesn't load all the people in the area? that's even a bigger reason to go for the PC version

[Gwynplaine]

Spoiler: show

http://i42.tinypic.com/16gzdyw.jpg

Wow armor with some actual style and bright colors, finally! Very Red Mage-y. That looks spectacular as do most of the environments.

[DeathbySnoosnoo]

good example of PC version just being better: Dragon Age, higher details, better interface, non-restricted zoom/angles

its too bad all the humans in dragon age look autistic, bioware just has a terrible time modeling humans, everything else looks wonderful, sad really

[Katlan]

....so the game doesn't load all the people in the area? that's even a bigger reason to go for the PC version

The PC version of XI didn't either, its how the game was coded. And I wouldn't be surprised if XIV is done the same way. I mean if there is 200+ ppl crunched into a tiny area.. there is no reason for the game to load them all... especially in a PvE game

[Zumi]

PS3 versoin could be good as long as SE doesn't do a fast sloppy unoptimized port of the game like they did for FFXI on Xbox360. PS3 can put out some good graphics just look at FF13. It may even run better if your PC is old and be a whole lot cheaper then upgrading.

[King Zuca]

God of War 3 has pre rendered backgrounds like the early Resident Evils had. That cuts down dramatically on hardware strain because the PS3 is only having to render what you see, which is one camera angle.. That's completely different from a game where you can spin around and see everything in the world. Uncharted 2 is the same way, though to a lesser extent.. Alot of the game has preset camera angles.

are you certain of this? because while you might be running on gaia's back fighting posieden, there are actual full-scale titans in the background climbing mount olympus fighting posiedens horses at the same time, and this goes on through the whole game. were the camera not fixed, you could have panned around and seen everything going on. you're talking about a game that had you fight a monster roughly the size of the sears tower, while fighting other monsters on his arm. ultimately what im trying to say, without constantly throwing out god of war as a reference, is the ps3 is more then capable of at least loading a full town of PCs and NPCs, a full alliance, etc. even if the backgrounds were pre-rendered, none of the character models were, and we're talking about models 100 times the size of anything you will see in FFXIV, with much higher polygon counts. 40 players on screen would'nt probably amount to cronos alone. the ps3 can keep up.

[Jinko]

PS3 versoin could be good as long as SE doesn't do a fast sloppy unoptimized port of the game like they did for FFXI on Xbox360. PS3 can put out some good graphics just look at FF13. It may even run better if your PC is old and be a whole lot cheaper then upgrading.

The 360 version was ported from the PC version which was emulated from the PS2 version, so you can see why there was so many problems.

FF11 on the PC was terribly optimised to start with, thankfully we don't have that problem this time, well lets hope. :S

[King Zuca]

good example of PC version just being better: Dragon Age, higher details, better interface, non-restricted zoom/angles

also remember they had to be fair for the xbox 360 when they made the console port of dragon age. not to start a flame war or anything, but ps3 can do way more then the 360 can, its just no match technologicaly. but yes i agree, dragon age was way better on pc. but thats just one game.

[qpoiuwer]

are you certain of this? because while you might be running on gaia's back fighting posieden, there are actual full-scale titans in the background climbing mount olympus fighting posiedens horses at the same time, and this goes on through the whole game. were the camera not fixed, you could have panned around and seen everything going on. you're talking about a game that had you fight a monster roughly the size of the sears tower, while fighting other monsters on his arm. ultimately what im trying to say, without constantly throwing out god of war as a reference, is the ps3 is more then capable of at least loading a full town of PCs and NPCs, a full alliance, etc. even if the backgrounds were pre-rendered, none of the character models were, and we're talking about models 100 times the size of anything you will see in FFXIV, with much higher polygon counts. 40 players on screen would'nt probably amount to cronos alone. the ps3 can keep up.

While developers can take advantage of the fact that all consoles use the same hardware, it doesn't make up for the difference in computing power that higher end PCs are capable of. There are tricks you can do in certain cutscenes, certain genres, certain gameplay scenarios that work in some cases but not in others. While FFXIV will run fine on a PS3, it will obviously have the potential to run better on computers whose hardware can support it.

That's pretty much all there is to say about it.

[King Zuca]

While developers can take advantage of the fact that all consoles use the same hardware, it doesn't make up for the difference in computing power that higher end PCs are capable of. There are tricks you can do in certain cutscenes, certain genres, certain gameplay scenarios that work in some cases but not in others. While FFXIV will run fine on a PS3, it will obviously have the potential to run better on computers whose hardware can support it.

That's pretty much all there is to say about it.

absolutely true, but thats where the cost difference comes into play. like i said, you would have to have a serious machine in your hands to make a ps3 user jealous. not everyone has that, and i think SE is well aware of this. so im not worried about someone $3,000 pc running FFXIV better, since i know the ps3 will run it just fine, without it feeling handicapped for the system

[Jinko]

also remember they had to be fair for the xbox 360 when they made the console port of dragon age. not to start a flame war or anything, but ps3 can do way more then the 360 can, its just no match technologicaly. but yes i agree, dragon age was way better on pc. but thats just one game.

Oh god ...

[Malumultimus]

I run TF2 at less than 30 FPS and I don't notice anything wrong.

ITT people who play RPGs and care about graphics?

[King Zuca]

Oh god ...

what? lol

[Sinzfeldt]

I run TF2 at less than 30 FPS and I don't notice anything wrong.

ITT people who play RPGs and care about graphics?

Then you must be a special case, on my old rig i used to get 19-40 it was near unplayable for me, now i get a constant 180+. Point being usually people care more about their fps in first person shooters because your fps can be the difference between life and death.

[viperlasson]

there is a hardware thread for a reason >_>. This thread is getting too random

[FREDTHETARU]

Did anyone test if there is a difference in spell damage if you cast it as anything other than a conjurer? Since your stats remain the same between class change, I'm curious about the effectiveness of abilities/skills when used by another class.

Yes, a few posts back i posted all that good stuff.

Basically, as a conj fire did 120-150 dmg

i casted it once with an axe and it did 45 damage.

the reason is in the weapon stats. a staff adds a lot of magic potency and magic acc, while an axe adds a lot of attack power and accuracy.

[Eisen]

Yeah the hardware talk is getting a little old now. Someone find some pictures/videos of the game =0

[Katlan]

This thread is now about cake. What is your favorite type?