Curse

Swingline · Jun 17, 2011, 02:41 PM // 14:41

Recently I ran into someone on another game and we debated on the graphics of Guild Wars. He believes Guild Wars is crap simply because it uses saturation and glow effects to look good but has a low polygon count. To me polygon count doesn't mean squat if the game looks as good as Guild Wars and puts less wear and tear on your video card. Seriously if it looks good and is durable who cares how it's made.

Opinions?

Shadar · Jun 17, 2011, 02:57 PM // 14:57

To make the game look good turn off post process effects. I can't stand that fake bloom/glow look.
GW2 will hopefuly have support for HDR and other modern graphics features. Yes, it's all just eye candy but it's expected from high-budget titles these days.

Nyta · Jun 17, 2011, 03:22 PM // 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadar

To make the game look good turn off post process effects.

That, seriously. I also feel that the game looks better when it's not trying to blind me.

On the first computer I played GW on, my video card didn't meet the minimum reqs for the game and removed a lot of the special graphical effects--more than what was later tied to the post processing effects box. The Jade Sea in particular on that card was beautiful, since it removed that weird smooth wax/plastic-looking layer on the sea, leaving it looking like an actual rough cut of jade. After I got another computer and had a card that met the reqs for the game and saw what the Jade Sea was designed to look like, I was really disappointed. They really overdid it with all the glowing plastic look everywhere. Even turning off post processing effects didn't make it look like it did on my old card. :/

Hobbs · Jun 17, 2011, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nyta

That, seriously. I also feel that the game looks better when it's not trying to blind me.

On the first computer I played GW on, my video card didn't meet the minimum reqs for the game and removed a lot of the special graphical effects--more than what was later tied to the post processing effects box. The Jade Sea in particular on that card was beautiful, since it removed that weird smooth wax/plastic-looking layer on the sea, leaving it looking like an actual rough cut of jade. After I got another computer and had a card that met the reqs for the game and saw what the Jade Sea was designed to look like, I was really disappointed. They really overdid it with all the glowing plastic look everywhere. Even turning off post processing effects didn't make it look like it did on my old card. :/

I had the exact same experience with The Jade Sea after upgrading my GPU. I

The graphics in GW are not bad enough for me to notice or for it to impact on my playing experience, and that's what matters.

Verene · Jun 17, 2011, 03:53 PM // 15:53

Graphics are always a secondary concern for me in a game. Pretty graphics won't make a terrible game good.

GW's graphics are perfectly fine, especially considering how old the game is. No, it doesn't exactly stand up to today's standards, but it's a 6 year old game designed to be able to run on any mid-range computer at that time.

So, with that in mind, I'd say that GW's graphics are actually pretty amazing, since they still look damn good.

Killed u man · Jun 17, 2011, 03:54 PM // 15:54

It's all taste really. The fact that almost every game has blooming and other "cheap" lightning effects goes the show it's either very effective time/efficiency wise or has the better overal customer satisfaction degree.

I, personally, don't mind bloom or other cheesy effects. If the game looks great, it looks great. I also often scratch my head when people start bashing on bloom, but praise other just-as-cheap effects getting used in the same game. (Smears, Image Burns, etc.. All that good stuff that adds "realism")

GW is designed to be a fantasy world, as are most other games. I don't mind having blooming effects everywhere, being unrealistic for our physical world -but realistic for that world nontheless- because it just adds that little bit to completely take you away from reality, for me anyways.

It's all taste, no definite truths. All we can do is hope Anet will give us a large range of abilities towards customizing our graphic settings the way we please, then everyone is happy...

Riot Narita · Jun 17, 2011, 04:05 PM // 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swingline

He believes Guild Wars is crap simply because it uses saturation and glow effects to look good but has a low polygon count

If he really believes high polygon count is what makes a game "good"... then my opinion:

Don't waste your time trying to have a "debate" with him.

RedDog91 · Jun 17, 2011, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verene

Pretty graphics won't make a terrible game good.

+1
its a shame so many MMOs are focusing on over-hauling their visuals and leaving their gameplay to rot.

Anaraky · Jun 17, 2011, 04:13 PM // 16:13

Great detailed artwork > cranking the hell out of the polygon-count.

GW looks great.

Swingline · Jun 17, 2011, 04:15 PM // 16:15

The bloom/glow effects do not bother me one bit. I actually like the waxy look of the jade sea but thats me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot Narita

If he really believes high polygon count is what makes a game "good"... then my opinion:

Don't waste your time trying to have a "debate" with him.

It was a silly 1 minute debate :P

Just wanted to see what GW player thought.

Spiritz · Jun 17, 2011, 04:19 PM // 16:19

A good game to me has nice graffics but over the top graffics.
99% of the time i use lowest settings altho i have a 512mb card which can handle everything on full - but when im fighting i dont have time to sit and think how gd that grass looks or how the stream looks.
Most of the time im focused on what im doing - ask a driver if he can tell you what plants/adverts/buildings he passed as he drives along and usually they say they cant really - its all the same as we are focused on what we are doing rather than surroundings.
Tho ive never played WoW and gameplay isnt the issue but graffics wise - give me gw anyday as chrs look gd rather than poor cartoony things that a 9yr draws.

On a side note - graffics isnt everything as many of us may remember 2 great classic games from ages gone - Doom and Duke Nukem series , now they wasnt super duper graffic games but they actually got you hooked on the game regardless of its looks and most players always went bk for more and revenge :P

VikingHaag · Jun 17, 2011, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Cool graphics are nice, but the game is what counts, far cry 2 has great graphics, but the game isn't that nice.

Enchanted Krystal · Jun 17, 2011, 04:34 PM // 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nyta

That, seriously. I also feel that the game looks better when it's not trying to blind me....

I did not believe you, so I tried it & wow yup heaps better with the post processing option off. Now with the added high rez in towns & outposts, it's not needed, IMO.

Iuris · Jun 17, 2011, 04:56 PM // 16:56

Guild wars 1 graphics are a magnificent example of how to achieve impressive results on a low end machine by using artwork and a few strategically placed effects rather than making a complex and demanding engine that generates those effects "naturally".

Since GW1 has to run on low end machines, I fully support the direction it has taken.

Lest121 · Jun 17, 2011, 05:00 PM // 17:00

GW graphics is great for an old game....

asb · Jun 17, 2011, 05:09 PM // 17:09

You don't need a high poly count and hyperrealism for game visuals to look good.

Tom Swift · Jun 17, 2011, 05:09 PM // 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iuris

Guild wars 1 graphics are a magnificent example of how to achieve impressive results on a low end machine by using artwork and a few strategically placed effects rather than making a complex and demanding engine that generates those effects "naturally".

Since GW1 has to run on low end machines, I fully support the direction it has taken.

This - no GW does not take advantage of the more powerful systems most have today. But it did an amazing job of using the resources most players had available more than half a decade ago. "Good" doesn't mean using most system clogging advantages of the high end user. It means making sure the largest number of people can enjoy a a nice looking and playable game. This GW did par excellence.

shoesbags · Jun 17, 2011, 05:21 PM // 17:21

I just want to link this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...-vs-Aesthetics

Guild Wars has dated graphics, but beautiful aesthetics. I still think Guild Wars is one of the best looking games on the market, and it's what...a little over 6 years old now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by asb

You don't need a high poly count and hyperrealism for game visuals to look good.

argh ;]

makosi · Jun 17, 2011, 05:46 PM // 17:46

It has always surprised me as to how GW can look so good with a distinctly mediocre graphics card. It makes other games a visual disappointment if you switch over.

thedarkmarine · Jun 17, 2011, 06:04 PM // 18:04

half-life 2 is laughing at the pathetic standards in this thread