Quick 0.11.4 Update

"

Bapes wrote:

"

slimdragoon wrote:

Update witch please she is ugly as hell. If I had the tools I'd do it for you. Witches are beautiful and not some old scrawny hag on a broom trying to eat little kids.

Just look at my ugly avatar.

What? You're crazy. I've never been one to care much about character models, but this is one of the first games that I've seen that actually do a really good job with the female characters. The art is very well done imo compared to the generic archetype used everywhere else.

The witch especially is not ugly at all, and perfectly fits the character.

I agree completely. I've really enjoyed the character designs and I wouldn't want to see them changed. They're refreshingly realistic compared to many other games.

Anyway, I'm really looking forward to the update. Forty percent is impressive; I suspect this will help my computer manage the game a bit. :)

Youse guys who thought this was coming out before this Wednesday are so silly. For that to be a reasonable assumption:

* Each daily update would have to not sound like progress was being made on the efficiency front. By definition, you can't release without a couple days of testing. Progress would have to cease before a launch window can be opened.

* They didn't make very clear that they want the asset revamp in this patch to be a one shot deal.

As today's newsletter sounds like significant progress is still being made daily, I wouldn't be surprised if next Monday was launch day. And would be mildly surprised if it landed tomorrow.

"

Cookieee wrote:

As someone who works with png, jpg, bmp, etc files almost everyday of their lives I can 100% see the difference between them.

That would be quite the feat in the case of Png v. Bmp, as it uses lossless compression.

"

AntiAuxBot wrote:

Sweet

Omg I love it. Aux has an anti-him bot! That is pretty hilarious...no more firsts for you Aux!

"

Cookieee wrote:

"

tsmonteiro wrote:

"

Pesegato wrote:

A question that has haunted my dreams since the "size reduction" announcement is:

File size reduction=Graphic quality reduction?

I believe it has more to do with better file compression than just reducing quality. If you want to have an idea, compare a Bitmap iamge to a PNG one. The difference in quality is not very much noticeable, but the filesize is much smaller.

As someone who works with png, jpg, bmp, etc files almost everyday of their lives I can 100% see the difference between them.

Considering png is (or can be) lossless, I will wager your entire PoE stash vs mine that you can't tell the difference vs bmp. PM me if interested in the wager.

"

Chris wrote:

Edit: 40%! 2.5gb removed :D

So that's how big the full 3D auras were ? :)

"

Cookieee wrote:

"

tsmonteiro wrote:

"

Pesegato wrote:

A question that has haunted my dreams since the "size reduction" announcement is:

File size reduction=Graphic quality reduction?

I believe it has more to do with better file compression than just reducing quality. If you want to have an idea, compare a Bitmap iamge to a PNG one. The difference in quality is not very much noticeable, but the filesize is much smaller.

As someone who works with png, jpg, bmp, etc files almost everyday of their lives I can 100% see the difference between them.

jpg and the others? sure. PNG? Wishful thinking.

40% holy shit! What compression were you guys using before then? Don't you just use .TGA textures with the type of compression you see in engines like Unreal 3? That shits efficient as fuck, reducing even massive textures to small filesizes with virtually no loss in quality.

Great news though, can't wait to check the performance increases.

"

slimdragoon wrote:

Update witch please she is ugly as hell. If I had the tools I'd do it for you. Witches are beautiful and not some old scrawny hag on a broom trying to eat little kids.

Just look at my ugly avatar.

The avatar isn't that great, but the in-game witch is I think exactly what she ought to be. Pretty but yes, bony and like there's something physically kind of wrong with her. It's great. :)


-VG-

"

tsmonteiro wrote:

"

Cookieee wrote:

As someone who works with png, jpg, bmp, etc files almost everyday of their lives I can 100% see the difference between them.

jpg and the others? sure. PNG? Wishful thinking.

Indeed.


-VG-

"

QueenTakesKnight wrote:

40% holy shit! What compression were you guys using before then? Don't you just use .TGA textures with the type of compression you see in engines like Unreal 3? That shits efficient as fuck, reducing even massive textures to small filesizes with virtually no loss in quality.

Great news though, can't wait to check the performance increases.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to it as well. Hopefully they've done it right and the things still look good.


-VG-