Sam & Max graphics

edited May 2010 in Sam & Max
OK, lets face it. The graphics isn't too pretty. But that isn't the main point.

The main point is that the games are so demanding. When i set the graphics on full (on season 3), there is a slight lag, and i can play games like Crysis on medium settings without lag.

Isn't there any update or tricks to making them less demanding? It would be nice to play on my laptop too. And my MacBook.
«13

Comments

  • edited April 2010
    StewG wrote: »
    OK, lets face it. The graphics isn't too pretty.
    Speak for yourself.
  • edited April 2010
    StewG wrote: »
    Isn't there any update or tricks to making them less demanding? It would be nice to play on my laptop too. And my MacBook.

    ...there are options less than full, you do realize?
  • edited April 2010
    Not too pretty? Define 'pretty'.
  • edited April 2010
    StewG wrote: »
    OK, lets face it. The graphics isn't too pretty. But that isn't the main point.

    The main point is that the games are so demanding. When i set the graphics on full (on season 3), there is a slight lag, and i can play games like Crysis on medium settings without lag.

    Isn't there any update or tricks to making them less demanding? It would be nice to play on my laptop too. And my MacBook.

    Four words:

    Get A Better Computer.
  • edited April 2010
    Speak for yourself.

    Seconded. I'm really not seeing where the graphics are bad. They fit, period.
  • edited April 2010
    I think the game looks great. It might not be the most efficient game engine in the world, but you know, they don't get paid as well as the guys over at Crytek do either.
  • edited April 2010
    Pale Man wrote: »
    It might not be the most efficient game engine in the world

    It looks great and it runs on my PC that will not run anything that gets released nowadays.
  • edited April 2010
    I think he's right when he says that the game is too "demanding". That's not saying that Telltale did a poor job, I understand they're not Crytek, and I do think the game looks very neat. However I see where he's coming from.
  • edited April 2010
    I think if your computer can't play it on full settings, its time to upgrade.
    I get that some people don't have the money and stuff, but I don't think complaining about that is going to help any.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited April 2010
    I think if your computer can't play it on full settings, its time to upgrade.
    I get that some people don't have the money and stuff, but I don't think complaining about that is going to help any.

    Firstly, that comment asserts that everyone should have a computer that would handle full settings. Is playing on "5" and a lower resolution "not worth it"? I don't think so!

    Secondly, if anything besides buying expensive hardware helps, it's probably to complain (in a polite manner, of course). Obviously, the Telltale Engine has become a little bulky with all the additions to the original code, and that is what StewG complains about. A slim, well-programmed game engine would deliver the same graphics on a less high-end computer.

    Thirdly, I think the problem was well identified on this forum, and it has been said that a specific shader/special effects addendum immediately causes such lags even on very fast computers. Maybe that's the point where rectification should start.

    It should of course be noted that compared to recent games, Telltale still produces games with relatively low system requirements. For players exclusively into adventure games, however, even these low requirements might cause a problem. They're just not used to having to update their computer! :D
  • edited April 2010
    Ha, sorry, just reread my post, I didn't mean to sound so snarky. :p
    Just sick of all the 'I can't run on 9, TELLTALE SUCK' comments.

    Telltales engine is always in a process of change, so it's probably easier to keep it "bulky" until they can fix it to perfection (which may or may not ever happen).
  • edited April 2010
    Yeah, 5 isn't "less", but if you complain you can't play on 9, there is no point complaining to TTG about it.

    Either suck it up and play on a lower graphics level (which still looks good anyway) or get better hardware.

    It's the "Monkey Island isn't about graphics, so why can't I run it on 9 on my PC? You suck TTG!" thread all over again.
  • edited April 2010
    I think it's valid complaint though, albeit a very minor one. It's true Telltale games are not about proficient graphics, but it's also true that better looking games run great on machines that can't quite handle Sam and Max at full.

    Basicaly my point is if you can't play the game on the highest setting, then it's no big deal, just lower the graphics and enjoy the jokes. But at the same time if Telltale manages to optimize their engine for future games, it will be a great improvement.
  • edited April 2010
    Yeah, but TTG can hardly optimize as much as Crytek, Valve or Epic. After all, the only reason they can have their engine so well made is because they spend A LOT of money on it, mostly gotten back by selling engine licenses to others.

    I don't really see TTG pushing out the Telltale Tool. Not really enough adventure developers for that I think, so they need to recoup TellTale Engine costs from the games alone...
  • edited April 2010
    Plus, Crysis is getting a bit old by now. If you can only run it on medium, your computer is getting slow, relatively. So expecting you can run SnM season 3 on 9 is maybe hoping for too much.
  • edited April 2010
    Ok. The point was that it was demanding. The graphic is charming in it's own way, and not ugly! I am well aware that my computer sucks, and that I can turn the settings down. I just don't want to miss any of the magic.
    I love both Telltale and Sam & Max, and was just implying that the game could have been a little less demanding. But I wouldn't want it to look any different!

    I managed to stop the lag by the way. Way too much stuff in the background ;P
  • edited April 2010
    StewG wrote:
    I just don't want to miss any of the magic.

    Then get a better computer. I can't believe that the internet's gotten to the point where people complain that things should be uglified.
  • edited April 2010
    Certainly not a dig at Telltale, but I do hope they do get a chance to streamline it a bit more. I can play Arkham Asylum and Crysis pretty far up, yet Devil's Playhouse only 5th graphic setting. Would be nice to have the depth of field and fancy lighting business like I can in other games. :D

    Still looks nice though.
  • edited April 2010
    Kroms wrote: »
    Then get a better computer. I can't believe that the internet's gotten to the point where people complain that things should be uglified.

    No need. I fixed the lag! :)
    I also wrote that I didn't want the graphics to change. It is possible to make things less demanding without making it uglier!
  • BenBen Former Telltale Staff
    edited April 2010
    Sam and Max 3 is our most demanding game yet, and it's been released on 3 new platforms (PS3, iPad, Mac). Things have been a little crazy around here in engine land.

    We do care about stability and performance, and we are constantly trying to improve both. I enjoy optimizing and cleaning up code whenever I have the time. You guys are right in that we don't have the engine budget of companies like Epic or Crytek. We also focus our efforts on making tools that allow our artists to work efficiently without having to concern themselves with performance (as much as possible). When you're trying to hit monthly release dates, you need to be making art, not optimizing geometry or whatever.

    So basically, Telltale games are probably never going to look/run as nicely as the AAA graphics engines (although I can dream). But we will continue to make things better.
  • edited April 2010
    Ben wrote: »
    So basically, Telltale games are probably never going to look/run as nicely as the AAA graphics engines (although I can dream).

    Pshaw! Season 3 looks exactly how I'd expect a big-budget Sam & Max to look. Really, it's amazing what bump mapping and shadows can do for a game's graphics.

    It may not be the most optimized engine of all time, but I've seen plenty of AAA titles do worse with less.

    Seriously. You guys did a damn good job, and I can't wait to see the rest of the season.
  • edited April 2010
    ShaggE wrote: »
    Pshaw! Season 3 looks exactly how I'd expect a big-budget Sam & Max to look.

    No, it doesn't have enough Christopher Lee.

    Anyway, I run it on level 4 graphics, which is the most I can without having too much lag, and I thought it was still awesome. Why would anyone think this has bad graphics, anyway?

    Though sometimes, Skun'kape's animation can look unnatural. Just saying.
  • edited April 2010
    Ben wrote: »
    Sam and Max 3 is our most demanding game yet, and it's been released on 3 new platforms (PS3, iPad, Mac). Things have been a little crazy around here in engine land.

    We do care about stability and performance, and we are constantly trying to improve both. I enjoy optimizing and cleaning up code whenever I have the time. You guys are right in that we don't have the engine budget of companies like Epic or Crytek. We also focus our efforts on making tools that allow our artists to work efficiently without having to concern themselves with performance (as much as possible). When you're trying to hit monthly release dates, you need to be making art, not optimizing geometry or whatever.

    So basically, Telltale games are probably never going to look/run as nicely as the AAA graphics engines (although I can dream). But we will continue to make things better.

    I understand. Pretty hard to develop a game for four platforms monthly, and at the same time try to fix small things like this. Should have tought about that. Now I fell stupid :(

    Have to say tough, great job on Season 3! BEST EPISODE EVER! :D
  • edited April 2010
    StewG wrote: »
    No need. I fixed the lag! :)
    I also wrote that I didn't want the graphics to change. It is possible to make things less demanding without making it uglier!

    And can you share what you did to fix the 'lag'?
    This game, as good as it is, suffers from very poor performance, no matter how much fans want to defend it...
  • edited April 2010
    My trick is to Minimize-Maximize when you switch scenes, especially when you leave very textured areas like Straight and Narrow. I guess this frees up graphics memories taken up by textures.
  • edited April 2010
    I think the 3D engine is quite OK by 2010 standards. It doesn't have lighting and post-processing all over the place, but the game looks good nevertheless, and using 1920x1080 resolution and level 9 gfx, my GTS250 runs it at fix 60fps in most scenes (and above 50 even in the street, too). Given how extremely resource consuming the AAA engines have become lately, I think The Penal Zone strikes a healthy balance between looks and performance.
  • edited April 2010
    I just upgraded my computer with a GeForce 9800 GT, and The Penal Zone runs well on the highest settings, and looks great. :cool: On my laptop however, the game is mostly playable, but the framerate is probably a bit less than 20 FPS in the large environments. And that's on the lowest settings and resolution. I guess that's to be expected with an ATI Radeon x1200. :D
  • edited April 2010
    splash1 wrote: »
    Four words:

    Get A Better Computer.
    Kroms wrote: »
    Then get a better computer.

    You die! You die now! Both of you!

    I can't stand people that are all "Hey, if you can't run the game, get a better computer!" Sometimes... okay, scratch that, MOST OF THE TIME that isn't as helpful as actually adressing the problem in details.

    Do we know hardware specs? No. For all we know the Mac in question actually exceeds the demands of the game. So why would you then recommend to get a new computer if the current model already exceeds the demands!?! Huh?! Answer that!
  • edited April 2010
    Zeek wrote: »
    You die! You die now! Both of you!

    I can't stand people that are all "Hey, if you can't run the game, get a better computer!" Sometimes... okay, scratch that, MOST OF THE TIME that isn't as helpful as actually adressing the problem in details.

    Do we know hardware specs? No. For all we know the Mac in question actually exceeds the demands of the game. So why would you then recommend to get a new computer if the current model already exceeds the demands!?! Huh?! Answer that!

    Because most of the time it is because the hardware doesn't sit par with the game. If you're going to give us nothing to go off, of course we're going to assume your computer isn't "good enough" to run it. On the other hand, if specs were given, and were exceeding the demands of the game, I'm sure we'd be a more helpful bunch.
  • edited April 2010
    ShaggE wrote: »
    Pshaw! Season 3 looks exactly how I'd expect a big-budget Sam & Max to look. Really, it's amazing what bump mapping and shadows can do for a game's graphics.

    It may not be the most optimized engine of all time, but I've seen plenty of AAA titles do worse with less.

    Seriously. You guys did a damn good job, and I can't wait to see the rest of the season.

    I have to agree the new engine might as well be a well polished grafx engine from one of the big companies.

    The lipsync is gorgeous in Season three and I agree the shadowing just makes it feel like the pre-rendered scenes of the Lucas arts Sam n Max 2 trailer that never saw light of day. I can't find a fault in the grafx this time round it just feels like everything is perfect and only has noticible flaws if you REALLY nitpick.

    Oh and the Animation this time round im SSOOOOOO pleased it really feels like they went the extra mile which got rid of that canned animation feeling. I thoroughly enjoy the facial animations during dialogue as it is very very dymanic now.

    Tell tale you knocked this one out of the park ;) I see my season pre-order was more than well worth it.
  • edited April 2010
    Zeek wrote: »
    You die! You die now! Both of you!
    [And more stuff]
    Don't complain at us. Complain at the graphic whores who need more! more! more!
    Seriously, I could do without real-time lightning and stuff, but that's "hot".

    But if you want all that, you need a more robust PC. Nowhere NEAR state-of-the-art though, as can be seen by my 4+ year old PC running it on 1440x900 on level 9.

    Sam&Max do look pretty snazzy now though, I have to admit...
  • edited April 2010
    I typically find that the same people who complain so vigorously that they shouldn't ever have to update their PC are the same type of people that buy a new PC with an onboard Intel card that can't run anything more demanding than solitaire.

    It's akin to buying a PS2 and then being angry that it can't run PS3 games because you didn't want to pay more for the hardware.
  • edited April 2010
    Pale Man wrote: »
    I typically find that the same people who complain so vigorously that they shouldn't ever have to update their PC are the same type of people that buy a new PC with an onboard Intel card that can't run anything more demanding than solitaire.
    Hey!! I've been making an effort to upgrade my PC. The sad part is every graphics card that I have found that is within my budget either doesn't fit the available slot in my motherboard or saps the power supply dead. And unless I've actually retained my memory on how to build a computer from my media pirating days, I'm not messing with the power supply.

    At this point, I'm just happy I can run the game. Oh, sure I get ugly self-shadowing glitches and the animation shutters, but again, at least I can run the game.

    I've tried playing this game all "prettified" on my MacBook Pro, but apparently the following hardware on that laptop isn't as powerful as I thought. (Which is odd, because I do a hell of alot of video editing and digital work on it.)
    Model Name: MacBook Pro
    Model Identifier: MacBookPro4,1
    Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
    Processor Speed: 2.4 GHz
    Memory: 4 GB DDR2 SDRAM

    Chipset Model: GeForce 8600M GT
    VRAM (Total): 256 MB

    So, yeah, I should be able to run The Devil's Playhouse on my MacBook just fine, right? I mean, while the processor and RAM are the same, the graphics card is significantly better than the POS GeForce 6100 I currently have on my PC.

    Well, guess what? My Mac can't run it at ANY quality. And I'm not the only one, judging from the Tech Support forum.
  • edited April 2010
    Zeek wrote: »
    Hey!! I've been making an effort to upgrade my PC. The sad part is every graphics card that I have found that is within my budget either doesn't fit the available slot in my motherboard or saps the power supply dead. And unless I've actually retained my memory on how to build a computer from my media pirating days, I'm not messing with the power supply.

    Actually, replacing a power supply is pretty easy, provided you remember where all the plugs go. I mean, I'm no computer technician, but I replaced mine easily when I needed to. For the most part, you just unplug the cables, unscrew it, take it out, slide the new one in, and reconnect the cables. As long as you make a note of where/how many cables you have to plug in, it is quite simple.

    (Also, I have never owned a Mac before so I have no idea what to tell you about that :o)
  • TorTor
    edited April 2010
    Yep, upgrading a power supply is not an insurmountable task, it's just a whole lot of cables to keep track of. The graphics card is probably the most power-hungry component in a PC with good gaming performance, possibly drawing 200 watts, so a good power supply is key.

    It looks like your MacBook should be able to run the game quite well. If it's not working at all it's most likely a technical issue or a compatibility issue, not a performance issue.
  • edited April 2010
    Yeah, easy power-replacement here too.

    And your PC does good editing and stuff because that requires CPU power, which it has... GPU power however, on which games depend, is a lot less.

    However if it doesn't work at all that's probably more a Mac Issue, the engine agreeably doesn't work as well as it should on Macs yet.
  • edited May 2010
    is there any way to turn off the film grain?
    and why exactly does telltale not let you specify graphic options and effects, instead just one number is given... almost every other game does..

    i can understand if you're trying to reach a casual gamer and not overload them, but i really wish i could get advanced with the settings when i want to
    the game runs so slow it definately needs tweaking
  • edited May 2010
    Telltale games aren't pretty. TOMI was alright once you got used to it, as it had a decent style. So far, The Devils Playhouse (like every other game out) was just grimy, and if you compare it to other grimy games it's meh.

    But I had lag in the opening cutscenes, and I can run crysis (and pretty much every other game).
  • edited May 2010
    I just can't see how someone can see the new Sam & Max season as ugly(ish). To me Penal Zone looked gorgeous! :o Lipsyncing, shadows and lightning.. everything was pretty much perfect!

    Maybe I'm still playing games with outdated graphics so I can't see the difference. I dunno. But I still think this was a huge improvement. :D

    But I agree the engine could use some little tweaking still. My laptop should be able to handle new games quite well, yet it couldn't run Penal Zone with its highest settings all that smoothly.
  • edited May 2010
    What is especially sad is that you actually miss out some sight gags if your graphics setting is not high enough :(
Sign in to comment in this discussion.