Rate COH2's Graphics

Hi. This is just a fun poll to gauge everyone's opinion on COH2's graphics

i realize this is somewhat subjective. I play with everything on low, but i still think the game looks very good.

Its a great looking game.

Not sure about your poll choices though. Especially the last one is just there to attract trolls or people who want to bash the game.

I voted 4. I think the game looks pretty decent and it does look better than Coh1. I am lucky that I can run the game at max ish settings (1440p, Textures and stuff at max, AA on medium) with decent frame rates. I imagine if you are forced to lower settings it doesnt look that great but its not quite the same as most games. For example BF4 looks great on my PC and runs very well but its a different type of game.

On max settings, the game looks better than any other RTS out there. Problem is, it is very hard to run the game at a constant 60 fps on many systems, and lowering the settings doesn't seem to have much of an effect on the frame rate.

I voted they're not good nor bad, it's hard to decide without proper context. If we're comparing it to an FPS, then of course they're worse, because you're generally about 20 times further away than the surface you're looking at. But if we are to compare them to another RTS, they seem about the same, maybe a bit better.

They're also not consistent, for example the model and texture used on the Sturmpioneer StG could be passed off as something from an FPS. Meanwhile the model used for the Panzergrenadier is very basic and the texture is broken. > clicky <

They're good, but not as good for their time as VCoH's graphics were.

I play on max everything.

The game looks stunning.

I think the game looks amazing for an RTS, but pretty average compared to other genres. So I voted for the top choice given the context, since I think all RTS games should strive to look at least as good.

The graphics are great and I have no problem with the actual quality. The optimisation however is atrocious and the game engine for CoH2 can be considered one of the worst in video game history. CoH1's graphic engine was well optimised and I personally never ran into any errors playing CoH1. I'v ran into a lot of errors with CoH2 however because the game engine isn't optimised one bit.

The poll is lacking one option like: shit performance, I can't check on full detalis.

I can rate high-ultra Skyrim, High Dark Souls 2, High Diablo 3 but all I can say about CoH2 would be based on almost the lowest

The question is not 'Performance', it's how it looks

It looks great imo.

The question is not 'Performance', it's how it looks

It looks great imo.

Yea, but I can't say how it looks on full because of performance

The graphics are great and I have no problem with the actual quality. The optimisation however is atrocious and the game engine for CoH2 can be considered one of the worst in video game history. CoH1's graphic engine was well optimised and I personally never ran into any errors playing CoH1. I'v ran into a lot of errors with CoH2 however because the game engine isn't optimised one bit.

COH1 graphic engine was all but well optimized, at least during the first year and half since it came out (not to mention "Nat Error" :'((((((((( ). Plenty of patches were required to obtain a decently optimized (especially the Opposing Fronts expansion) game but more than that the increased strenght of PC components that came out after a few years of the game release.

There's no doubt tho that compared to when COH1 came out this time there are PC components that should be able to handle COH2 WAY WAY better than how they are actually doing, given how other games with even better graphics perform. I hope something could be done on that side.

That said, I think COH2 graphics are awesome at max details but there is something that I don't like that much which is that the game tends to favour enviroment realism and accuracy rather than enviroment clarity: for casters and viewers that watch the games at a relatively slow pace that's very very good because they can appreciate the ton of details on the screen but for players it's hard to always follow the action due all the distraction represented by the amount of details on the screen.

The game looks great, the problem is that there is really no other game to compare... Not enough new rts games out there.

The poll is lacking one option like: shit performance, I can't check on full detalis.

I can rate high-ultra Skyrim, High Dark Souls 2, High Diablo 3 but all I can say about CoH2 would be based on almost the lowest

I know that there is common belief that the graphics in Skyrim is good but without mods it really sucks, I mean I couldn't play the game without taking myself into "old classic game" mode before. Nowadays every computer can run Skyrim at max...

In diablo 3 the amount of models on the field is much, much smaller than in coh2. Also most of the effects are 2 dimentional texture effects (no fog or smoke, snow and so on), and btw textures themself are in pretty low resolution.

As for dark souls 2 I haven't played the game but after watching some screens I can tell that the resolution of textures is terribly low (those look like more than 5 years old) and models are pretty simple too. But maybe the guy who took the shots were playing low graphics as it looks like designed for tesselation but after turning it off.

Yea, its good looking for a RTS game but pretty average when compared to other genres.

Too bad the performance is beyond bad. Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelic

I think COH2 looks great, it's just a shame that it's running poorly for so many people. That said, COH1 still looks great and it required specs that were through the roof at the time of its release. I treasure the visual bugs from both.

Show Spoiler