Just a side note: The vegetation looks very weird. [Trees etc.] Perhaps more/better textures could help or something.

Anyone else agrees?

Nah, thats the style thier going for. I think they want to "stand out" and this very artistic style is prolly a part of that.

As for which is best, I kinda like the no HDR simply because things are "brighter". I bet a lower scale image (ie 25-50) would be best though, as I think shadows add alot to the game. but I could certainly live with 75, even 100 isn't terrible or anything.

Soft: 75 is the one I like.

Soft 75   is my choice

I say just make it a client option with these options available so we can choose which lighting solution we want to use.  Sometimes I cant stand HDR because a lot of games overdo it, and having options just lets people decide for themselves which one they want.

I honestly couldnt tell that much of a difference between these shots, but I imagine it looks a lot different in real time.

I agree on both accounts. Only no HDR shows much of a difference. I like HDR usually but many games overdo it. I'd vote HDR here but hope they can do something about that blurry stuff, unless it's tied in directly with HDR.

Soft75

If one of three has to be picked, 75. Then no HDR. Best is user config options.

You can see terrain through the fog of war in lots of games .  As long as units and such are hidden, there is no problem.

No HDR for me. It looks the most crips and I like that I can see more of the terrain, whereas in the soft HDR examples terrain isn't as visible (look at the road trailing off on the top of the map as an example).

I might agree with Kitkun that jpeg wasn't the best choice.  Though I don't see any obvious jpeg compression spots, I can't help but feel its there.

Anyway, I think I'd have to ask if there is a point between 75 soft and none?  Like end of days asks?   Its the ground texture in my opinion that makes the call.   While the fog is obviously better in the HDR shots, the ground texture becomes very hard to see, especially in the darker area on the right.

The compression feels really obvious to me on the Fallen terrain.

Soft 75 maybe. I like the three.

Look at the other pics!  I think that that land is 'unexplored', and thus should be completely hidden.

Check the Soft 75 image. You can't really see the bend in the river like the other pics. Looks to me they're using both Shroud and Fog.

No HDR for me.

Soft 75 looks the best, if slightly dark.  Soft 100 looks blurred on the tower details, I think I prfer the ticker fog of war too.  No HDR looks pretty flat although it is the cleaner look.

ah it looks good, need more EVIL screenshots. Teh Fallen must be represented!

Im for 75 it looks great!

No HDR looks best to me by far. The other options are way too fuzzy. No HDR is nice and crisp, especially the tower.

I agree with the suggestion to make HDR an option in the settings. Many games do this.

HDR - I like the definition, the color seems richer.  You can see the lines which make up the main reason for your artistic choice.

       -  What I didn't like about HDR, the particle effects (I think thats what they are (part of the circle beneath the character)) you can see well in the others doesn't show up as well at all.

Soft 100 and soft 75.  What I like about soft 100 is that if you can visualize the trees in the distance seem to blld in better.  It is an effect I think you should consider, but try not to do it so much near the center of the camera.  I think what you have going on here is a very nice distance effect.  Just wondering if you can mix it up to get that real softness far away from the camera view and not the character view (unless that happens to be where the camera is).

R,

nacho

Soft: 75. Although it's difficult to tell without actually running the program. 

As an aside, do you guys ever take time off?

Of the three, I prefer soft 75, is there a soft 50 option?

I do notice the details change between the pictures (taken over different times) and perfectly identical frames would be a better comparison.

I like the feel of these images. From this far out the art style doesn't seem so "nerf" to me as some of the other images. It looks a little more serious and with the fog, kinda foreboding - good.

Regards,

Kul

The ground looks best in soft 75, but all the more complicated models look better with 'No HDR'. Take a look at the city to the right - with the soft lighting pictures, the city appears fuzzy and details are lost. With the No HDR picture it's sharp and crisp. Personally, I'd rather have the objects I'm going to be paying attention to looking nice rather than have a better overall picture when I'm not playing the game, so for that reason my vote is going to the 'No HDR' picture.

No HDR looks best to me in those screenshots.