CURRENT NEWS | ARCHIVE NEWS | TOPICS | SUBMIT NEWS | RSS FEED

Voodoo Extreme » News » Hellgate London DX10 Shader Comparison

Hellgate London DX10 Shader Comparison

Oct 05, 2007 at 11:59 PM - -

61 Comments

One of the DirectX 10 games that hasn't gotten much love thus far from the graphics mongers is Hellgate London. Sure, everyone knows about DX10 titles like Crysis, but believe it or not, Hellgate London's visuals really aren't that shabby. In fact, they're quite attractive. While the DX9 and DX10 clients generally look the same, DX10 does offer a few bells and whistles that DX9 does not.

Most notable are DX10 smoke and lighting effects, plus two higher levels of version 4.0 shaders: very high and extreme. Very high shaders retain the original artistic look of the game, while extreme adds some serious field of depth effects (causing objects to blur). Which looks better? That depends on your taste, but here are a few sets of comparison images which should give you an idea of what I'm talking about.

Make sure to examine the full-sized 1680x1050 nudies, as the mid-sized shots don't do them justice.

(Row 1: Extreme Shaders on Left / Very High Shaders on Right)
(Row 2: Comparison and merged views)
(Click the Thumbs Below for a Better Look!)

[FPS view]

[Side view]

[Front view]

[Back view]

Which do you prefer?

Topics: Games: Action / Roleplaying
Related Games: Hellgate: London (PC)

vasot

Oct 8 2007, 11:25 AM

Not impressed at all with these screenshots

Are they supposed to be with DX10 ??
Is that what DX10 only can do ?

I have seen games with better graphics from that and with just using DX9

I guess i am not missing anything significant for not having Vista

I will still use XP for this game

And by the way...
Just bring DX10 to Windows XP Micro$oft
Vista is garbage

Vangphase replied to vasot's post

Oct 9 2007, 5:11 AM

Vista is garbage. I installed it on my tablet laptop just for shits and giggles and because a friend had an extra OEM license, and.... I hate it! Aero, well, is kinda neat, but who cares?! I may just wind up putting XP back on. What a pain...

J!MM!

Oct 7 2007, 9:23 PM

**** i hate DX10.... I want to keep using XP. These effects have been available on dx9 since SM3.0 came out.... I have a directX10 capable card on XP - why not support it? D3D10 is 100% possible on xp and its probably already done and sitting on a CD on the shelf. And how did the discussion go?

"well, if we let XP have dx10 - why would they buy my new OS?" end of discussion. ****ing BS, ms.

zendragonfx

Oct 7 2007, 8:01 PM

Looks like quincux+myopia+hypertrophy ftl.
Lame, thumbs down, performance up.

hordakx

Oct 7 2007, 5:57 AM

I've long since stopped expecting something 'new and amazing' from DX10. While DX10 has the capability to blow DX9 out of the water, it'll be a good long while before the actual cards have the capacity to do so. Until that happens we'll just continue to see the same old DX9 effects in greater numbers.

I know a lot of people think Crysis will deliver some great big jump in image quality over the DX9 version in the beta but I think they're just clinging on to hope.

Vangphase

Oct 7 2007, 5:41 AM

I'd really have to play it in full motion to decide whether I preferred so much DOF blurring in an FPS. Frankly, not having played it, I'm really not sure if I'd like it because it appears to be blurring things right in front of you. If I want that I'll just take off my glasses.

Ivan-IGN

Oct 6 2007, 7:34 PM

Just wanted to point out that depth of field and motion blur are only really effective in motion. They tend to look shitty in stills. But yes, both effects are a matter of taste.

CodyVE3D

Oct 6 2007, 6:22 PM

They should make a DX10 option that just takes advantages of the 'efficiency' of DX10 (it's the claim after all) and make the game run BETTER with the SAME graphics.

That would be nice. You see two screenshots, they look the same, but one is running at 40fsp, the other at 60.

That would impress me MS... Not a DX10 screenshot that looks SLIGHTLY SLIGHTLY better but runs like ass.

Cody

Robert "Apache" Howarth replied to CodyVE3D's post

Oct 6 2007, 6:23 PM

you can do that now

Mageman

Oct 6 2007, 4:50 PM

Hellgate's graphics aren't so impressive to be honest.

liQuidNinJa

Oct 6 2007, 4:42 PM

I like depth of field. There should be an option to turn it off the player though. For weeks I've been wondering why my toons get blurred up when I zoom in past a certain point, lol. Turns out I've got my settings up too high. ;)

I like how it's handled in crysis too... when you're looking through your iron sights you're not going to be able to see what's under/beside your gun because your player just isn't ****ing looking there.
The killer motion blur on turning is probably a bit over the top, but I can dig it. It's only the kids that can't afford real hardware that complain about it, 'cause they can't run it without a per-fwoar-mance hit. :P

wanker0b replied to liQuidNinJa's post

Oct 6 2007, 8:10 PM

Nice thought. I agree, I don't remember what game I was playing, but I remember using Binoculars on something and everything out of the center area was blurred out. Also, when looknig at something close, then changing to something far away, it took a second to focus in on that far away subject, which added to the realism and coolness factor. This would be great, but done in this way looks horrible. I cannot imagnie wanting to have everything blurred out that is right next to me, not to mention this one point: How does the game know what I am looking at? Same as above.

What if I am looking down at my weapon and it's all blurry, WTF? So it is creating a more linear experience, forceing not only where you have to go, but now what you have to look at!? No thanks. Would be cool when turning on some special vision mode, or when using targeting reticles, noculars or something, but regular in game like this looks like a HORRILBE idea.

-Mithan-

Oct 6 2007, 4:40 PM

I prefer the non-blurry version ;)