Viera Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Eu0tFcZM6w&feature=related and on the BioWare website: http://www.swtor.com/media/trailers/trooper-progression This and dozens of other "actual gameplay" videos endorsed by BioWare that were released prior to the game's launch that showed high-fidelity, quality rendering of the game engine are nowhere to be seen. As a matter of fact, I recall your PR post that said: I'd like to know (now that the NDA and beta are long gone) how I was able to play your game using high-res textures for nearly 5 months in beta along with thousands of others - with zero issues? I have the distinct feeling that the powers that be (not of your doing) are not being forthcoming in telling us what really happened and what the developers are going to do to solve it ASAP? I'm upset because I am not getting what was marketed and what I paid for coming into this release. I would appreciate an answer. Thanks for putting up with so much backlash, I realize it must be a hellish job right about now. We just want real answers and solutions. He already said it caused preformance issues on even higher-end machines when too many characters were rendered on screen at the same time. They removed the textures and went with this approach, after that the U.I was likely supposed to be fixed to show 'low' and 'high' with medium cut-out but it ended up not being so. I remember fairly-well in one of the beta weekends only having the option of low and high. So meh. As for the videos? They can control the amount of avatars on screen at the moment they are recording their P.R videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azzras Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Whilst I can appreciate the fact that you may not have experienced problems. One cannot really just assume that everyone else experienced the same. My point is that perhaps, just perhaps, Bioware wasn't happy with the general level of performance when using hi-rez textures. And hence pulled them because of that. Now, wouldn't it be reasonable to put the pitchforks down for a small time, and at least see what the results are of these new "tweaks" that are coming in? A voice of reason in all the madness? Tarka, you are a brave soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viera Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 So in essence we purchased a faulty product? No. Not having access to something that was removed after the BETA TESTING phase doesn't make it a faulty product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarka Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 (edited) As for the videos? They can control the amount of avatars on screen at the moment they are recording their P.R videos. Very true, the flashpoint video is showing cut-scenes. And Stephen Reid has already said that cut scenes use hi-rez textures for the reasons you stated. Edited January 14, 2012 by Tarka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lectotrans Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Whilst I can appreciate the fact that you may not have experienced problems. One cannot really just assume that everyone else experienced the same level of performance. My point is that perhaps, just perhaps, Bioware wasn't happy with the general level of performance when using hi-rez textures. And hence pulled them because of that. Sure, that means YOU are being stiffed because of problems with others pc's, and yes using hi-rez textures should be done at the players own risk, but wouldn't it be better if hi rez textures weren't causing the issues that Bioware claims they were? Now, wouldn't it be reasonable to put the pitchforks down for a small time, and at least see what the results are of these new "tweaks" that are coming in? because "reasonable" isn't in their vocabulary. they want it NAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoggyMack Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 My god! That game looks awesome! When does it come out? Fourth quarter 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodalus Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Whilst I can appreciate the fact that you may not have experienced problems. One cannot really just assume that everyone else experienced the same. My point is that perhaps, just perhaps, Bioware wasn't happy with the general level of performance when using hi-rez textures. And hence pulled them because of that. Now, wouldn't it be reasonable to put the pitchforks down for a small time, and at least see what the results are of these new "tweaks" that are coming in? It was OPTIONAL. Those who did have problems could change to lower settings. Just like grass and tree detail now. Just like shadows (well, sort of, there blob and zig-zag options). Just like the low and medium texture detail that is there now. Just like the colormatching was optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viera Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Things in THE BETA TEST are not indicative of the final product. When did people forget this, I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodalus Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Things in THE BETA TEST are not indicative of the final product. When did people forget this, I wonder? Really, how silly to think the final product would actually be better than the beta version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barracudastr Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Whilst I can appreciate the fact that you may not have experienced problems. One cannot really just assume that everyone else experienced the same level of performance. My point is that perhaps, just perhaps, Bioware wasn't happy with the general level of performance when using hi-rez textures. And hence pulled them because of that. Sure, that means YOU are being stiffed because of problems with others pc's, and yes using hi-rez textures should be done at the players own risk, but wouldn't it be better if hi rez textures weren't causing the issues that Bioware claims they were? Now, wouldn't it be reasonable to put the pitchforks down for a small time, and at least see what the results are of these new "tweaks" that are coming in? It would have been reasonable if they would have announced it publicly and not tried to cover it up by ninja'ing in a UI switch lol. But they tried to play the underhanded deception card. The only reason we got a response is because there was nearly 200 pages of pissed off customers over the weekend saying *** is going on. But when you say nothing and launch without high res textures even though every single piece of media you use to promote the game has them enabled and running smoothly then just take them out without so much as a word or time frame as to when its fixed then yes its perfectly reasonable for paying customers to say ***. Its like ferrai advertising their new V12 engine and giving you a test drive. You buy the car and when its delievered you realize you got downgraded to the V8 model. You cant just bait and switch like that. Oh look look shiney apple shiney apple it looks good right? 60 bucks please.... okay heres your molded apple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kserberus Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 He already said it caused preformance issues on even higher-end machines when too many characters were rendered on screen at the same time. hmmm.. can´t help me but isnt this one of the problems that this game has actually even with low res textures? So why can´t they just let high rez in game.. same result then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarka Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 It was OPTIONAL. Those who did have problems could change to lower settings. Just like grass and tree detail now. Just like shadows (well, sort of, there blob and zig-zag options). Just like the low and medium texture detail that is there now. Just like the colormatching was optional. Sigh. I think you are missing my point. This is all about "perception" about this product. Yes, it sucks the hi-rez option was removed, but they did so for a reason. They made a business decision to pull it, apparently for performance reasons. And if high quality settings are in general causing major issues, then that can have a negative backlash to the perception of the product. They HAVE said that they are looking into ways to improve the visual quality for higher end machines. And yes, I too would LOVE to see the fruits of that labour right this minute, but come on. At least be a little reasonable and see what 1.1 and 1.2 brings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_giordino Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Word among my inner circle is EA was planning to release a $10 high texture pack as a micro transaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proto Posted January 14, 2012 Author Share Posted January 14, 2012 Really, how silly to think the final product would actually be better than the beta version. Exactly. How could we!? =\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunwindIon Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 bioware where are the high res textures? fix your game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faxxon Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Cancelled my sub moments ago, see you if you even have any money left to fix this scrap heap BW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viera Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Really, how silly to think the final product would actually be better than the beta version. Really, how silly to cry over features that were removed after testing. You would be the same people that would cry if it caused your system to bog down. Damned if you, damned if you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodalus Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Sigh. I think you are missing my point. This is all about "perception" about this product. Yes, it sucks the hi-rez option was removed, but they did so for a reason. They made a business decision to pull it, apparently for performance reasons. And if high quality settings are in general causing major issues, then that can have a negative backlash to the perception of the product. They HAVE said that they are looking into ways to improve the visual quality for higher end machines. And yes, I too would LOVE to see the fruits of that labour right this minute, but come on. At least be a little reasonable and see what 1.1 and 1.2 brings. Yeah, this decision has worked so well for their reputation. Instead of having an optional feature have a chance to cause performance issues, they try to be sneaky, get caught, try ignoring the outcry for weeks, then acknowledge it and take 2 days to write a P.C. spin post about it. Yup, their reputation is grrrrrreat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarka Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 It would have been reasonable if they would have announced it publicly and not tried to cover it up by ninja'ing in a UI switch lol. But they tried to play the underhanded deception card. The only reason we got a response is because there was nearly 200 pages of pissed off customers over the weekend saying *** is going on. But when you say nothing and launch without high res textures even though every single piece of media you use to promote the game has them enabled and running smoothly then just take them out without so much as a word or time frame as to when its fixed then yes its perfectly reasonable for paying customers to say ***. Its like ferrai advertising their new V12 engine and giving you a test drive. You buy the car and when its delievered you realize you got downgraded to the V8 model. You cant just bait and switch like that. Oh look look shiney apple shiney apple it looks good right? 60 bucks please.... okay heres your molded apple. I'm certainly not going to defend Bioware's every decision or how they've handled certain things. I agree that (to me at least) they do indeed try to make up VERY questionable reasons for their actions *cough* day/night cycles *cough* lack of swimming *cough* space combat *cough* However, the bottom line IS that they are willing to look into it further. Which at the very least is better than just being completely stubborn and pig headed, denying that the game ever had those settings, and pretending that it's all a "non-issue". Wouldn't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbmmmlll Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 He already said it caused preformance issues on even higher-end machines when too many characters were rendered on screen at the same time. They removed the textures and went with this approach, after that the U.I was likely supposed to be fixed to show 'low' and 'high' with medium cut-out but it ended up not being so. I remember fairly-well in one of the beta weekends only having the option of low and high. So meh. As for the videos? They can control the amount of avatars on screen at the moment they are recording their P.R videos. And medium textures cause issues in low end machines so let's take them out too? High shadows seem to kill everyone's performance so they need to go as well. If you play at high resolution with a low end video card it could be a problem so let's only support 800x600. The justification doesn't make sense. If the textures are already in the client and people used them in beta without any issues then let the players decide if they want to take the risk of impacting their performance. Call it the 'ultra crazy high textures' option and put in a warning. Seems pretty simple. My best conspiracy theory guess is that it's not a customer PC performance issue, but rather a game render has bugs related to large textures issue. It's one thing if large textures cause low FPS and another if the client starts crashing or locking up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarka Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Yeah, this decision has worked so well for their reputation. Instead of having an optional feature have a chance to cause performance issues, they try to be sneaky, get caught, try ignoring the outcry for weeks, then acknowledge it and take 2 days to write a P.C. spin post about it. Yup, their reputation is grrrrrreat! Don't misunderstand me, as I just implied earlier, I think Bioware have made some VERY questionable decisions and come out with some VERY questionable justifications. However, pullling hi rez textures because of a general lack of good performance is not beyond the realms of possibility. I will agree, I think they DO indeed "spin" things yes. But at least in this instance they are willing to spend some time improving the situation. Lets see the results before we declare all out civil war eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodalus Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Really, how silly to cry over features that were removed after testing. You would be the same people that would cry if it caused your system to bog down. Damned if you, damned if you don't. Defend BW all you want. But please, don't tell me what I would or wouldn't do. You are not me, you don't know me. You disagree with me in this thread and feel that the only way to defend the honor of BW is to attack me. That doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azzras Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Word among my inner circle is EA was planning to release a $10 high texture pack as a micro transaction. this is false and spoken like a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunryu Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Sigh. I think you are missing my point. This is all about "perception" about this product. Yes, it sucks the hi-rez option was removed, but they did so for a reason. They made a business decision to pull it, apparently for performance reasons. And if high quality settings are in general causing major issues, then that can have a negative backlash to the perception of the product. They HAVE said that they are looking into ways to improve the visual quality for higher end machines. And yes, I too would LOVE to see the fruits of that labour right this minute, but come on. At least be a little reasonable and see what 1.1 and 1.2 brings. Don't you think they should have fixed the issues before releasing the product and calling it a finished product then? Obviously if you can't have high res options which were in beta because of an issue or a bug then it's not a finished product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viera Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Yeah, this decision has worked so well for their reputation. Instead of having an optional feature have a chance to cause performance issues, they try to be sneaky, get caught, try ignoring the outcry for weeks, then acknowledge it and take 2 days to write a P.C. spin post about it. Yup, their reputation is grrrrrreat! You were never once promised these features would be in game. As I mentioned before, there being a Low, medium, and high option in the launch UI -is- a bug. During the beta weekend there was only LOW and HIGH. They didn't try to sneak anything by, they removed the textures after it showed they preformed poorly. You're blowing it out of proportion with the "OH MY GOD THEY ARE SNEAKING THINGS OUT OF THE GAME DOOM AND GLOOM!" B.S. Seriously, get over it. The textures ARE in the game, during cinematic cutscenes. As I said before, if they left them in and people turned them on they would end up with people crying that they did not have OMGWTF SUPER PWN performance with them on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts