Graphics detail.

[alanspeckman]

Ok,

I am sitting here comparing BCG shots to Freelancer shots. This topic is just related to graphics, not gameplay.

First - Planets.

Compare the follwing 2 images.

See how the Freelancer planet has an atmosphere, halo over the planet.

In the battlecruiser shot, where planets edge meets space, it seems very 2d, flat. That is my humble opinion. Please let my know what you think.

Secondly, I like the battlecruiser ship and station better. Notice the light-green hue of the spacestation on the right. Also, the camera angles compared to what I have seen in freelancer, are far better in battlecruiser.

In the freelancer shot, I feel like I'm being made to look at the spaceships butt. I know, strange feeling.

Freelancer

http://www.gameaxis.com/img/data/imgshots/38/screen16.jpg

BCG.

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp...ry=0&picOrder=0

Next - Bases

Freelancer

http://www.gameaxis.com/img/data/imgshots/38/screen37.jpg

Battlecruiser

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp...ry=0&picOrder=0

Ok, Maybe not a fair comparison, because I just think the BCG shot is at a strange angle.

But, you can see the base differences. Freelancers base is smaller, but terrain is more detailed. I noticed how the BCG base has some sort of dark blotchyness to the base floor. Personally, I don't think you even need a base floor like that, just more detailed terrain and buildings.

In the freelancer shot, notice you can see far away. In BCG, there is always that border line seperating the sky from the ground, but it really doesn't look real. Its hard to describe, but here is a picture of what I mean.

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp...ry=0&picOrder=0

So, just a quick summary. I think all the planets need is that atmosphere looking halo to give the seperation between space and planet a more 3D look to it.

I think the surface shots in BCG look fine, but the distance exchange between the ground and the sky could be eliminated by more of a fog-looking fade-in and out as you are flying. The bases I think could use improvements on the ground.

Where the ground graphics excel in BCG is in this screenshot

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp...ry=0&picOrder=0

Notice the rugged nature of the mountains and the desert. It is just when you get to a base where this view breaks down. The base floor just looks too blotchy. I think that is a characteristic of the Battlecruiser though. When you get really close to the ground or a planet in space, it gets really blotchy.

Let me know you thoughts and opinions.

Al.

[Guest Remo Williams]

quote:

---

Let me know you thoughts and opinions.

---

Check your links.

[Epsilon 5]

the gamescreenshots.com website is down. bad timing.

[Epsilon 5]

Now I've seen what you mean - here's my take on what you say

- atmospheric halo

Yes that adds alot to realism, I agree, I'm not sure but I believe derek did say something about it. I'll have to check.

- ground bases

the BC bases are large with alot of space between the buildings, as opposed to simpler, compact, higher detailed bases in other games. I don't know how much/if the poly count will be upgraded, as the texture resolution in BCG

- Blochyness

I know what you mean, I'll quote what someone told me "BCM needs anistrotopic filering" - it's a different method to stretch textures so it doesn't look stretched. currently you can see where is each pixel, and a rectangular box which the color fades to the boundaries' color, making the texture less as seamless. With anistrotopic filtering it would just look undetailed - but it would still be clear and true. Currently you could almost draw boxes around the pixels.

[Viper2000]

What was the point of this?

[Chameleoki]

Sorry for the server downtime (first time in over a long time!) Mirrored drives locked up, blah blah blah. Anyway, up once again!

Oh, and check out the page for 22 new shots!

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/smallthumbs...=PC&game_id=690