Curse

Redfeather1975 · Mar 13, 2008, 03:32 AM // 03:32

I've played a number of mmorpgs that have instanced areas as well. Only they are instanced because the area is meant to be a specific challenge.
In GW the instancing was meant to allow elements such as NPCs that group with you, puzzle pieces and story telling that could occur at a personal level.
One thing I hated in EQ2 was that there were some instanced areas in which monsters still respawned. I have no idea why they would do that. It's annoying and not taking advantage of the immersive potential of an instanced zone. Pop....raWr. I hate respawns.

Aera Lure · Mar 13, 2008, 03:50 AM // 03:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

That's part and parcel of the "console graphics" style. I think one must have grown up with console games to like it. I certainly don't.

Oh, but I have. My first console was the Atari 2600, and played them all through PS2/GC days, simply deciding not to invest in a Wii or PS3.

I dont like the color set as applied in WoW. The colors aim more towards oversaturation to my eye than they do lean towards console-based colors, which are simply pure and bright, early on lacking very subtle differentiation. The color choice in WoW would better fit another genre, imho, with its purples and greens and odd color choices. Its subjective, like I say. Some (many obviously) love it. I really dislike it. Its not a knock on WoW by any means either - just sharing why I couldnt even get anywhere near it.

I do see your point though. WoW certainly aimed for non-realistic and succeeded, but just chose an odd palette.

Redfeather1975 · Mar 13, 2008, 03:55 AM // 03:55

I wonder how long it'll be before online rpgs have graphics like this. lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b37u4ZIOCsI&feature=user

Chronos the Defiler · Mar 13, 2008, 03:58 AM // 03:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

I wonder how long it'll be before online rpgs have graphics like this. lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b37u4ZIOCsI&feature=user

When everyone and their grandma has a super-computer from space...then my friend, that is when :P

Aera Lure · Mar 13, 2008, 03:58 AM // 03:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

I wonder how long it'll be before online rpgs have graphics like this. lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b37u4ZIOCsI&feature=user

I SAID ping your skills!! *boom*

bhavv · Mar 13, 2008, 03:59 AM // 03:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

Most people dont have uber high end machines. Believe if or not there are still millions of people out there with a Gefore 5200, or even just a Geforce 2. These people might want to play a good game, and pick up WoW because it *is* a good game and it will run on their PC.

By todays standards, the graphics in GW are also amazingly shitty if compared to current modern games. Take LOTRO for example:

So erm, why does anyone still play GW and WoW then if they have *Shitty* graphics in comparison?

Maybe it is largely due to the fact that they are still great games? Just last week I found myself playing through Civilization 1 + 2 and Alpha Centauri again because I love the clasic Sid Meier games. Yes I do have Civ 4 too, but I wanted to go back and play the great older ones.

You know there are still plenty of people out there that also still play Space Invaders and Pong, particularly the people that grew up on those games.

- P.S. I only said the graphics in Guildwars are shitty to exemplify that graphics =/= a good game.

I would rank the current MMO's that I have played as follows:

LOTRO > Maple Story > WoW > GW.

Yes GW comes last. It is hardly anywhere near as fun or enjoyable as the other ones, particularly playing with other people. In LOTRO and WoW, you can literally add anone to your party of the required level and the skills that they have and the enemies will be balanced enough to complete whatever mission you are attempting.

'Noob Pugs and useless henchmen' are only a negative feature associated with GW. Both LOTRO and WoW are far more enjoyable in both solo and party play. And I speak entirely for PVE not PVP.

Quote for chronos since he cant be bothered to look back a few pages.

Aera Lure · Mar 13, 2008, 04:06 AM // 04:06

Some nice lighting effects, but they are subtle. LOTRO doesnt look that much better than Guild Wars to me, at least in those screens presented. Sure I can see the difference, but it isnt game breaking to me. The one thing I do see (at least implied) is the one thing I wanted in GW for ages, and that was weather and time of day effects. Kind of wondering about the actual character and creature models, but I can have a look for myself, as it strays off topic.

Back on topic, GW2 will likely raise the bar graphically to aim for around the level of LOTRO is my guess. Its an issue though, as a good many would need a new system, or at the very least more RAM and a much better video card.

Cacheelma · Mar 13, 2008, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Made In Ascalon

The majority of killing which goes on in WoW is either pointless grind or rewarded with mediocre items which are outlived very quickly.

Are you sure you're talking about WoW here, and not GW?

Mediocre item drops are GW's signature. Plain and simple.

Oh wait, yeah, you're talking about WoW clearly, as WoW's items can be "outlived" after some time while GW's items are mediocre right from the moment they drop.

Redfeather1975 · Mar 13, 2008, 04:11 AM // 04:11

Yeah, there is far less item variety and smaller scaling in GW.
I rarely used any drops I got. Usually bought my gear.

Aera Lure · Mar 13, 2008, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

Yeah, there is far less item variety and smaller scaling in GW.
I rarely used any drops I got. Usually bought my gear.

Its a problem that disappointed me as well, due of course to the low level cap.

Chronos the Defiler · Mar 13, 2008, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aera Lure

Some nice lighting effects, but they are subtle. LOTRO doesnt look that much better than Guild Wars to me, at least in those screens presented. Sure I can see the difference, but it isnt game breaking to me. The one thing I do see (at least implied) is the one thing I wanted in GW for ages, and that was weather and time of day effects. Kind of wondering about the actual character and creature models, but I can have a look for myself, as it strays off topic.

Back on topic, GW2 will likely raise the bar graphically to aim for around the level of LOTRO is my guess. Its an issue though, as a good many would need a new system, or at the very least more RAM and a much better video card.

Well doesn't Guild Wars use its own engine? Right now even max settings in GW can be run on moderately old systems fine. It is well built for a large demographic of PC owners...not as much as WoW because it basically can be ran off of an integrated graphics card.

If Anet continues the trend and improves the engine, they can squeeze out better performance with much better looking graphics.

Redfeather1975 · Mar 13, 2008, 04:14 AM // 04:14

In games where there was a ton of variety and scaling it was no fun either.
I'd feel like my new gear was junk after a few levels.
I'd break my back trying to get some good gear and after a few levels see common stuff with better stats.
Eventually I decided it wasn't worth trying to get quality gear until I reached the endgame.
I think a game needs to find the sweet spot!

Redfeather1975 · Mar 13, 2008, 04:18 AM // 04:18

I would like it if GW2 had a weather system. Even if just for screenshots. XD

Inde · Mar 13, 2008, 04:41 AM // 04:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

No, it does not use typical PC-style graphics, it uses typical console-style graphics, as seen in pretty much every console game except for the most recent generation of games for the PS3 and XBox360, and for the same reason: until the most recent generation consoles had extremely weak hardware, and made a virtue out of their inability to pull off semi-realistic graphics.
The cheery color scheme, complete lack of detail, small texture size, low polygon count, and omnidirectional lighting, are not due to a stylistic statement, they're due to technological constraints.

Numa, I was referring specificially and only to MMO's right here. And as Jetdoc pointed out I liked it because it was different, period. I'm just sticking to one genre when I speak of the graphics. I remember very vigorous debates on how WoW wouldn't compete because of the graphic style and because of the outrageous colors they were using in a cartoonish setting in the beginning. I thought the fact that an MMO was "going against the grain" in this regard to looks was what was intriguing. I'm sure with their large amount of staff and well... it's blizzard, they very well could have made an engine capable of realistic graphics. They have the money and the resources.

You either like it, or you don't like the look I've found. We all play games for different reasons and for different purposes. Same debate can be made for those who play for rewards, exploration, highest levels, fastest times... etc. Some of the most addictive games I play have terrible graphics, but if you're like others and want to be "immersed" then certainly gravitate towards games that appear realistic.

Made In Ascalon · Mar 13, 2008, 05:00 AM // 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheelma

Are you sure you're talking about WoW here, and not GW?

Mediocre item drops are GW's signature. Plain and simple.

Oh wait, yeah, you're talking about WoW clearly, as WoW's items can be "outlived" after some time while GW's items are mediocre right from the moment they drop.

uh... I'm well aware that mediocre items drop all the time in GW too. What you are unaware of is that I was responding to someone's assumption that GW is worse because of mediocre drops when they're both equally mediocre. At least mediocre items in Guild Wars can be put to some use on heroes.

Cacheelma · Mar 13, 2008, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Made In Ascalon

uh... I'm well aware that mediocre items drop all the time in GW too. What you are unaware of is that I was responding to someone's assumption that GW is worse because of mediocre drops when they're both equally mediocre. At least mediocre items in Guild Wars can be put to some use on heroes.

And mediocre drops in WoW (namely grey weapons/armors) can be sold to vendor for a hefty amount of gold. Whenever you get it.

Your point being?

How many heroes do you have? Is it enough to substitute for the pointless drops you always get (and can't really be sold for much gold) in GW?

Made In Ascalon · Mar 13, 2008, 05:11 AM // 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheelma

And mediocre drops in WoW (namely grey weapons/armors) can be sold to vendor for a hefty amount of gold. Whenever you get it.

Your point being?

How many heroes do you have? Is it enough to substitute for the pointless drops you always get (and can't really be sold for much gold) in GW?

Stop fvcking talking about it, jesus christ. you're taking my statement out of context; I wasn't addressing you, and I don't even disagree with you, so what the hell is your point?

Bryant Again · Mar 13, 2008, 05:19 AM // 05:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

Yes, really. And that's an in-game screenshot, not a concept rendering, and the image hasn't been downscaled (which increases perceived detail). Note the fur trimmings, the rivets, and the patterning on the leather of the rangers armor. And that the cloth has texture.

What sucks is you'll only see that high-level detail when you're in an instance. The textures get really numbed down and nasty in outposts, which is where you see people the most.

To sum it up, all we're doing is picking out the best/worst armor bits and pieces. You could point terrible pieces of armor in each game (seen Dwarven armor in GW?) and still just end up at a standstill. Both games have awesome and detailed sets of armor, let's end it at that.

And nitpick all you want about the graphics, it ain't gonna be stopping WoW anytime soon. The less graphics intense it becomes, the more accessible it gets, which has always been a vital selling point in Blizzard's games.

Cacheelma · Mar 13, 2008, 05:25 AM // 05:25

I agree. Bashing WoW's graphic only proves that for AT LEAST 10 millions of people, graphic doesn't really matter.

Numa Pompilius · Mar 13, 2008, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

What sucks is you'll only see that high-level detail when you're in an instance.

By default, yes. It's a bit of a mystery to me why ANet doesn't supply that as an in-game switch; enabling full detail in-town doesn't seem to put much strain on the computer or graphics card.

Quote:

Both games have awesome and detailed sets of armor, let's end it at that.

I've yet to see any armor sets from WoW as detailed as the worst GW armors (e.g. prophecies Ranger armors).

Quote:

The less graphics intense it becomes, the more accessible it gets, which has always been a vital selling point in Blizzard's games.

And that is my point. WoW's shitty graphics is by design, because the game is intended to run on basically anything sold the last ten years. The weak graphics of WoW are due to it being designed for the lowest common denominator.

EDIT: Cacheelma, you just made a "10 million flies can't be wrong" argument. Just wanted to point that out.