Curse

Fril Estelin · Mar 18, 2009, 01:55 PM // 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNova88

From a technical standpoint, they are. However, appearance is opinion, nothing more and nothing less.

There is expressive power and expression (or appearance). It's like the paper&pen vs. the hand that use them.

The former allows you to draw more polygons, add more colors, shape things using curves instead of simple lines, etc. This not subjective, it's technology and maths. GW is superior, even more with the fact it can actually display all this on the low-to-average computer.

The latter is about how you use this expressive power to represent dragons, armors, dwarves, etc. This is very subjective, some people will dislike anything that is fantasy, some people will automatically love the kind of anime-style that some games have. GW's artwork is stunning and was rewarded with numerous awards, so even if you don't like it, all these awards probably mean that the GW artwork team is doing a good job.

Ctb · Mar 18, 2009, 06:37 PM // 18:37

Quote:

but GW graphics are better. That is all.

Again:

Then prove it.

For something that everyone is so incredibly certain of, it sure does seem tough to get anyone to actually prove what they're saying.

Oh, right, because no matter how angry you get about it on the internet, you still can't prove an opinion....

snaek · Mar 18, 2009, 07:15 PM // 19:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctb

Then prove it.

i would....but myself and many others already did on the previous page, and i don't feel like quoting all of it over again.

do you consider all of these graphically equal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Un...Comparison.jpg

Snow Bunny · Mar 18, 2009, 07:18 PM // 19:18

As much as I hate so much about Guild Wars, GW PvP > WoW PvP, so it takes the cake for me.

Ctb · Mar 18, 2009, 07:29 PM // 19:29

Quote:

do you consider all of these graphically equal?

The technical capability of each engine is not the point under discussion. The statement was, and continues to be, that "GW has better graphics".

Prove it.

Phaern Majes · Mar 18, 2009, 07:44 PM // 19:44

What people fail to realize is WoW graphics are that way for a reason... Warcraft 1, 2, and 3.

Personally I have all the settings maxed in WoW and I think it looks damn good. It isn't blocky/polygon like and effects are very well done. If you don't like the cartoon style well that's just a matter of taste; be like me saying GW graphics sucked because they were too realistic...really?

Bryant Again · Mar 18, 2009, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

The technical capability of each engine is not the point under discussion.

Is that not what they meant?

Second-Strike · Mar 18, 2009, 09:41 PM // 21:41

The thing that wins it for me is that GW has some variability in pvp. It isn't where you see a class and follow a memorized routine of action and reaction. GW there is more variation making for intelligent play of analysing the situation before making a commitment despite the more dumbed down pve content. I love the idea being used for GW2, incorperating skill by having people able to fight on an equal level as their friends while maintaining character progression.

Guild Wars can't die because it isn't based on suscriptions. Our characters will always be waiting and Anet looses nothing if all they do is wait. Wow is the opposite.The devs already consider the income from GW to be done, any continuing income is just a bonus. If we consider a game as dead if there is no longer an active team working on it then GW is almost there though the game is still more then playable. WoW will continue so long as there are players.

Really lets drop the grapics issue.

DreamWind · Mar 18, 2009, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

For someone whose has stated that his main purpose on this board is to mock other posters, you sure can dish it out but not take it. So what if he called people blind morons, you consistently do the same thing. I prove below that you have on many different occasions, then you put them on your ignore list after they make valid points(ask martin alvito), disagree with you or are steadfast in their opinions. For you to set yourself up as being offended at a comment or saying a comment is not appropriate like blind morons is laughable. You probably will not see this since you have me on your dreaded ignore list for people you think are not worth your time. Maybe someone can quote me so you will see it before it is deleted.

I just have to say...this post was a complete ownage. +1

snaek · Mar 18, 2009, 11:14 PM // 23:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctb

The technical capability of each engine is not the point under discussion. The statement was, and continues to be, that "GW has better graphics".

Prove it.

Quote:

"GW has better graphics" due to the The technical capability of each engine.

honestly....

Master Fuhon · Mar 18, 2009, 11:30 PM // 23:30

Don't challenge people while failing to back up the minimum criteria of defending your own arguments; saying everything can be subjective is a waste of time to read or respond to. The burden of proof is equally on the WoW supporters side as it is on any GW supporter. Neglecting graphics engine capabilities while having an argument about graphics just appears to be absurd; quality has a direct relation to the ability of someone or something to meet any of it's full potential. When something fails to meet potential, it is below standard; not better than something.

There’s probably someone else somewhere who can combine objective criteria for both functional design and art to settle arguments on what constitutes better graphics. We aren’t talking about someone’s significant other here, unless maybe we are. I’m going to ignore what texmod or player-made additions can add to a game.

Some of the artwork sketches I’ve seen of Warcraft characters look respectable, but the in-game content of WoW falls far short of presenting anything graphically equivalent. It reeks of fulfilling bare minimum computer requirements and reskinning/recycling too much work to meet time deadlines. The way I think of graphics is by thinking of a pictograph; it will be some part text and some part art. WoW is text; Guild Wars is art. Text is clear in communicating. Art is everything else and beyond, part informative and part entertaining (that’s why writing gets considered as a form of art). In Guild Wars evil characters and opposing factions are designed to stand out. In Warcraft good and evil are reskins, and opposing factions wear the same items.

What I do think the Warcraft fanatics are completely wrong about is how they think game graphics can be better just by being unique (attempting to compare like you would a famous painter’s work). To me branding shouldn’t be emphasized by an inexperienced critic, as trademark flaws in Warcraft can be distorted as an example of branding (i.e. not making proportioned shoulders). Warcraft makes no effort to be realistic, giving them a technical edge in branding themselves differently. Any game that puts in the effort to make a realistic game has to do something completely different to brand that game. WoW takes the easy way out by doing something distinct with their artwork. Guild Wars has to brand itself entirely separately by doing something graphically different from other games.

To elaborate on the only advantages Warcraft has graphics-wise: Warcraft graphics are exactly as informative as text, but equally plain. They also have a functional purpose advantage based on simplified game design. Glowing hands to indicate spell school is good function; although casting animations are recycled among the races to provide poor class distinction. Fancy looking armor to indicate the character is more powerful is also functional. Bigger character indicates a boss. Guild Wars skill icons and animations lose informative value because there are so many of them. However, spell school icons appear over a characters head; while informative, these blend into backgrounds or casting animations too well in some cases. Also there isn’t really a solid graphical indication that some characters are continuing to be amplified with a powerful effect outside of the initial activation of a skill; although bosses are distinguishable. What I mean is that in WoW, you continue to see a shield bubble on something, while in Guild Wars things like that are less obvious.

Zinger314 · Mar 19, 2009, 02:42 AM // 02:42

ITT: Semantics.

Say what you want about the graphics, but GW animations give me a headache.

Bryant Again · Mar 19, 2009, 03:29 AM // 03:29

I can say the same of WoW's. The only exceptions have been Draenei, BE's and male Orcs. The rest are meh.

Ctb · Mar 19, 2009, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Quote:

be like me saying GW graphics sucked because they were too realistic...really

Actually, I know a few people who don't like attempts at realism in gaming. They all claim the same reason for it too: it's close, but it's still far enough away that the difference is distracting. I suppose it's sort of an example of the "uncanny valley" effect.

Quote:

Is that not what they meant?

I've already been over this. The post in question consists of a gripe about the size of shoulders, the look of animations for weapon enchantments, and the general stylization of the weapons. Does that sound to you like it's a post about his personal preferences regarding graphical styles, or a critique of the technical capabilities of the graphics engine?

Quote:

honestly....

That's not a quote, you made it up. If you want to discuss the technical merits of the graphics, go nuts. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, so I don't know why you keep trying to get involved with me.

Quote:

ITT: Semantics.

Call me crazy, but when you (generally, not you personally) start calling other people morons, semantics become pretty important.

Tullzinski · Mar 19, 2009, 05:56 PM // 17:56

Just can't resist........

Arguing with an Software Engineer
Arguing with a software engineer is a lot like wrestling in the mud with a pig. After a few hours, you realize that he likes it.

OT Guild Wars beats WoW just because I said so!!!!

@ Dream: TY

Bryant Again · Mar 20, 2009, 06:04 AM // 06:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

I've already been over this. The post in question consists of a gripe about the size of shoulders, the look of animations for weapon enchantments, and the general stylization of the weapons. Does that sound to you like it's a post about his personal preferences regarding graphical styles, or a critique of the technical capabilities of the graphics engine?

It depends on who we're talking about. If in reply to Snaek, he brought up the technical progression of UT. If in reply to Fenix, I'm not sure since you attacked him before he specified if he was talking about the aesthetic or technical appeal. I don't think you and others are on the same page. But anyways:

Aesthetically, w/e
Technically, Guild Wars

The only technically "on par" portions of your character are going to be the helmets, weapons and shoulders. Everything else is low res and only with a one or two varying models.

Aside from that, WoW looks "graphically impressive" with view distance turned all the way up, and that's only speaking for the distant land. But the monsters in Wrath can look pretty cool.

Speaking for myself there's only so much of it I can take. My warrior is stuck with two of these, ungh (and no, that's not my war, just a pic of the weapons.)

Lourens · Mar 20, 2009, 07:56 AM // 07:56

GW and WoW are games with complete different gameplay and graphics as been said before personal taste theres no way you can compare those two games.
Whats the point of this thread? I mean its not like they are in a war they even got different communities ...

SS Necro · Mar 20, 2009, 08:06 AM // 08:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Strain

Don't believe you are making WoW 2.0 with a quarter of WoW's budget

Many recent MMOs failed because they were rushed to market, had less content, or were not as polished as established games. It's no secret that WoW has been a big success, and there is a reason for that success. While it may not be the most innovative product on the market, WoW offers a tremendous amount of content and is an exceptionally polished game. Everyone wants to duplicate that success, but I'm not sure that everyone is realistic about what that means. WoW was in development for five years, was built on an established and very popular game universe, and probably cost more than $40 million to create. Don't believe that there is some magic design element that you will add to your MMO that will allow you to steal all of WoW's subscription customers. If you find yourself saying, "It's like WoW, but...," you're in trouble. To reiterate an earlier point – go do your own thing, and let them do theirs.

Developing a new MMO requires a lot of money and a lot of time. If you are starting today and don't have at least three years and $30 million dollars, consider developing in another genre. Also be prepared to attract and manage a large development team. We have 140 full-time developers working on Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 at ArenaNet, and that number will probably have to grow throughout the Guild Wars 2 development cycle. It is much easier and less risky to make exciting, innovative games in other genres. Unfortunately, some of us just can't make that decision – we're intoxicated by the thought of building the ultimate MMO, and we feel compelled to dedicate our lives to that pursuit. If that describes you, then by all means jump in and let's keep pushing the boundaries of possibility together. But bring cash – lot's of it – and make sure that you are working with people on the business side who are willing to let you make the best game you can make, because there are no successful B-titles in the MMO industry.

I'll end by paraphrasing the famous Japanese game designer, Masaya Matsuura: Go forth, and do weird and difficult things! Thank you.

http://www.guildwars.com/events/trad...7/gcspeech.php

I can't add to this..

Ctb · Mar 20, 2009, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

If in reply to Snaek .. If in reply to Fenix

I'm talking about Alleji's post on page 9. If those two want to discuss the technical merits of each engine, I couldn't care less. I'm taking exception to the person who called everyone else who disagreed with him/her "blind morons" after making three clear statements of opinion about the design of the artwork in a video game.

I don't see why this is such a controversial thing. If I went out on the street and saw someone eating skittles, and I told them M&M's were better, and they disagreed and I called them stupid for it, I'd get punched in the face. Rightly so. You don't go around calling people morons or stupid or idiots because they disagree with your subjectively derived opinions. Pretty basic stuff.

Well, you do on the internet where you can cower behind your keyboard and get away with it, but you still shouldn't.

Red Sonya · Mar 20, 2009, 06:46 PM // 18:46

Graphics smafics WOW has 11 million SUBSCRIBERS, GW sold 6 million total copies of four parts, thus WOW rules is the best game out there for this type of play and makes more money every MONTH than GW did selling 6 million copies over 4 years. lol Which proves graphics are hardly the selling point of these games.