Textures quality : Fallout: New Vegas

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:42 am

Dear devs, please answer. Did you really have skills to draw quality textures?! Your current textures from F3 and coming F:NV is really really ugly and looks like work of a child who get first impressions when using PhotoShop.

Please make your textures look like they must - realistic with very good quality. DONT BE LAZY!!!

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:02 pm

The engine is a piece of garbage. Deal w/ it

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:03 pm

Dear devs, please answer. Did you really have skills to draw quality textures?! Yuor current textures from F3 and cominf F:NV is really really ugly and looks like work of a child who get first impressionf when using PhotoShop.

Please make your textures look like they must - realistic with very good quality. DONT BE LAZY!!!

Your kind should stick to an art gallery.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:35 pm

The engine is a piece of garbage. Deal w/ it

What?

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:06 pm

Ugly?
Not really, they're not top of the line as most new new games but it's not ugly.

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:25 pm

What?

Gamebryo.

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:41 pm

Gamebryo.

Its that bad? Its a piece of garbage?

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:42 pm

:facepalm:

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:18 am

Example:
[img]http://images.cncrussia.ru/img/313b9a872083212728037d81466e51c4/fallout-new-vegas-screenshot-57.jpg[/img]

Is this work of skilled texture artist or five-minutes work in PS?

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:57 am

Its that bad? Its a piece of garbage?

Well there are a couple of vultures circling above it...

Nah I mean, it runs y'know.
It works for the moment.
But Bethesda seriously need to upgrade it or change because if there is another game using the same engine next year then it's going to hated on for oh so many reasons.

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:27 am

Its that bad? Its a piece of garbage?

For what the OP wants. Realistic and very good quality isn't gonna happen.

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:58 am

Is this thread a joke or is the op being serious?

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:39 pm

Is this thread a joke or is the op being serious?

Thriceius, it's not nice to call the OP's thread a joke. :unsure:

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:37 pm

Thriceius, it's not nice to call the OP's thread a joke. :unsure:

I meant is it a joke thread like is the op being funny? Wasn't there a new ign preview today praising the new graphical fidelity? Am I missing something?

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:03 pm

I meant is it a joke thread like is the op being funny? Wasn't there a new ign preview today praising the new graphical fidelity? Am I missing something?

Well the IGN guy was probably playing the PC version of the game which has better graphics than the 360 version.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:23 pm

that is not a joke. i'm just tired to see how this kind of quality of a commercial products =(

i'm not talking about game quality at all. models not too bad, and gameplays is nealry fine. but textures quality makes me cry

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:29 am

Example:
[img]http://images.cncrussia.ru/img/313b9a872083212728037d81466e51c4/fallout-new-vegas-screenshot-57.jpg[/img]

Is this work of skilled texture artist or five-minutes work in PS?

My ONLY complaint is the Lucky 38 looks like its kinda ready to collapse in that picture. Beyond that. I found Fallout 3s textures pretty good, and the reason I say this is, I know my art skills svck across the board. Most others like to bash graphics, and they know but wont admit they couldnt draw a line if it was pre-rendered. I'm greatful for what I get, but I do hope they fix that choppy looking Lucky 38 background.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:07 pm

Well the IGN guy was probably playing the PC version of the game which has better graphics than the 360 version.

What about ps3...

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:07 pm

that is not a joke. i'm just tired to see how this kind of quality of a commercial products =(

With the current engine, I doubt consoles could run the game with extremely high-res textures.

I'm looking forward for screenshots of the PC version on fully maxed out graphics.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:37 pm

What about ps3...

I'd say around the same level as the 360 version or worse.

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:07 pm

Gamebryo.

The texture quality can be great in Gamebryo, it's just that it doesn't have good enough lighting, shadows, and everything else for that to be enough. Although, some guy on Nexus is making a mod that overhauls lighting, and adds ambient occlusion to objects in game. At the moment the bloom is a tad overkill IMO, but the things being added are fantastic. Hopefully something like this will be released for Vegas. Sorry consolers

http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=11434

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:45 pm

i didnt talk about hi-res! i'm talking about accuracy in drawing. This textures not detailed and didnt have a touch of a quality care

» Sat May 14, 2011 12:19 am

My ONLY complaint is the Lucky 38 looks like its kinda ready to collapse in that picture. Beyond that. I found Fallout 3s textures pretty good, and the reason I say this is, I know my art skills svck across the board. Most others like to bash graphics, and they know but wont admit they couldnt draw a line if it was pre-rendered. I'm greatful for what I get, but I do hope they fix that choppy looking Lucky 38 background.

Whoa what happened to lucky 38's model why does it look weird?

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:00 pm

I'm sure upping the texture resolution would have a significant increase in resource usage while in a sandbox environment. Unlike normal fps games that have you going from stage to stage in a smaller space.

Edit: ok nevermind you weren't talking about higher res.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:54 pm

Whoa what happened to lucky 38's model why does it look weird?

Ehhh, my best guess is just most companies figure low-res textures (IE Outside of game barriers areas) are meant to be quickly glanced at as reference or ambience.