Goblin Squad Member
|
You probably should not show graphics of UO. THe nostalgia runs high with that one, and besides, graphics in isometric view do not age quit as fast imo.
Well, I thought your example still looked dandy! :)
I think showing Everquests pre-alpha graphics ('97) would have been a better choice: umm, wow, that is ugly
Look at the charactermodels from 30 seconds in.
My 1999 Asheron's Call characters were better looking than my PFO character. The buildings in AC were slightly better looking. The mountains in AC were beautiful, although maybe I just haven't found OUR snow-capped peaks, in PFO yet.
I purposely picked 1994 because I started playing MMOs in 1999 and PFO graphics are more primitive than any MMO I have played.
I'm sure many people here were in MMOs at the turn of the century, EQ released in 1999, too, right?
If EQ players (I wasn't one) can honestly say PFO graphics are as good as EQ's, I'm willing to perhaps think that Asheron's Call was simply ahead of its time.
Don't get me wrong, I'm here for crowd-forging, the gameplay and the community, not the graphics. But I know my peers, and the vast majority of them crave state of the art graphics.
Seriously, am I the only person who is embarrassed by the graphics and is waiting until the graphics improve to show the game to their friends?
Ignore the cinematics at the start. these 1999 characters from behind really aren't much different than ours, and if you could see their faces you could see they could actually be pretty.
AC intro trailer....
AC trailer
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A funny thing about those pre-Alpha Everquest graphics: In the real game, full-screen graphics weren't available until quite a while after launch. The actual game view looked like this. That makes the pre-Alpha trailer another idea of What Not To Do: Don't show the audience something that they won't experience when they log in. It just sets them up for disappointment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I've mentioned before, some of PFO's graphics actually look very good. 1999-era Everquest armor didn't have anywhere near the detail and polish that PFO armor has. PFO weapons also look good. PFO character faces, unfortunately, look more like 1999 Everquest faces than, say, 2014 EVE Online faces.
As Pyronous Rath loves to point out, the chunky grass that's currently being used in PFO makes landscapes look worse than they could. Take that away, and PFO landscapes actually look better than 1999 Everquest landscapes.
Edit: I'll post some direct comparisons tonight, when I won't have to do it on a phone keyboard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I disagree, Savage. The imagery is rather good, albeit they don't match even Dragon Age: Origins. They are arguably more realistic than DAoC's. They are better than the current incarnation of Everquest, but EQ II I'd say is better, if a little cartoony. WoW is totally cartoonish.
The visuals in PFO are good enough to play and have fun with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My 1999 Asheron's Call characters were better looking than my PFO character. The buildings in AC were slightly better looking. The mountains in AC were beautiful, although maybe I just haven't found OUR snow-capped peaks, in PFO yet.
I purposely picked 1994 because I started playing MMOs in 1999 and PFO graphics are more primitive than any MMO I have played.
I'm sure many people here were in MMOs at the turn of the century, EQ released in 1999, too, right?
If EQ players (I wasn't one) can honestly say PFO graphics are as good as EQ's, I'm willing to perhaps think that Asheron's Call was simply ahead of its time.
Don't get me wrong, I'm here for crowd-forging, the gameplay and the community, not the graphics. But I know my peers, and the vast majority of them crave state of the art graphics.
Seriously, am I the only person who is embarrassed by the graphics and is waiting until the graphics improve to show the game to their friends?
Depends on what you are measuring.
Technical details of armor and avatars: PFO wins. old fashioned but still nice
Look on face: AC wins(that sour wrinkled look on my PFO character is just meh).
Technical detail of buildings: PFO wins.
Variety of buildings/styles: AC wins.
Landscape: I would have to say AC wins on variety and Sense of Wonder. Mountains are very bad in PFO, for sure. Bald lumps of nothingness. Ground textures are also pretty meh. But off course the detail of trees and the lighting during Dusk and Dawn are better in PFO. But you may consider these to be technical aspects and it looks as if that is not what you really value. I can understand that. Stuff like the glaring Moon during the night is rather ridiculous in PFO.
Do not forget that you are comparing AC at release, which means the game was more fleshed out with more variety.
I agree that PFO has a long way to go in the graphical department, mostly on style, variety and immersion. Probably less on the technical aspects.
Do not forget that you are comparing AC at release, which means the game was more fleshed out with more variety.
Which is why I mentioned I'm waiting for improvements before showing it to friends I want to eventually recruit. First impressions are everything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I purposely picked 1994 because I started playing MMOs in 1999 and PFO graphics are more primitive than any MMO I have played.
I think the point people are trying to make is that your memories of the game you played in 1999 are filtered through 14 years of nostalgia. You may have perfect memories of a game that had better graphics than PFO, but the rest of us can't trust them. There's plenty of fact-based evidence that we (humans) create false memories all the time and edit existing memories to make them more palatable.
If you can find a video showing that the games you played a decade ago had significantly better graphics, we'd have no choice but to beleive it, but even then, we will continue to call attention to thefact that high-end graphics are not mvp, and are not what PFO is about. Ryan has said that one day the system will have excellent graphics. Staff member Ezekial has said that there are lots of really cool graphics related things in the pipe that he can't discuss right now.
In addition, Pathfinder is deliberately attempting to emulate an art style that is on the verge of "cartoonish." That's how the Pathfinder look-and-feel is.
Graphics will change. For now, they are mvp.
edit: I want to emphasize this. You really should make sure you read this post: there are lots of really cool graphics related things in the pipe that he can't discuss right now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
or better, renderize some our playerbase and pretend they are all happy trolls rolling in the grass.I'd put players on the trailers. Even the worst looking of us look better than our characters. ;-)
I like all the concepts the players are suggesting you show, but the graphics at this point are soooo primitive and 1994 looking I'm afraid you'll scare people away.
IT"S ALLLIVVVEE ....GRASS!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I've mentioned before, some of PFO's graphics actually look very good. 1999-era Everquest armor didn't have anywhere near the detail and polish that PFO armor has. PFO weapons also look good. PFO character faces, unfortunately, look more like 1999 Everquest faces than, say, 2014 EVE Online faces.
As Pyronous Rath loves to point out, the chunky grass that's currently being used in PFO makes landscapes look worse than they could. Take that away, and PFO landscapes actually look better than 1999 Everquest landscapes.
Edit: I'll post some direct comparisons tonight, when I won't have to do it on a phone keyboard.
MUHAHAHAHAAH you seee it tooo youu SEEE THE GRAASSSS
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do I see it? Sure.
The grass doesn't look as good as the rest of the game. It might be a factor in so many people complaining about dated graphics. (Character faces are definitely in that category too, though.)
Can I live with ugly grass for now? Yes.
I'm confident that it will get better.
If you can find a video showing that the games you played a decade ago had significantly better graphics, we'd have no choice but to beleive it, but even then, we will continue to call attention to thefact that high-end graphics are not mvp, and are not what PFO is about. Ryan has said that one day the system will have excellent graphics. Staff member Ezekial has said that there are lots of really cool graphics related things in the pipe that he can't discuss right now.
I'm very very glad to hear that. I only joined the alpha a few weeks ago and hadn't heard that, yet. Most of my friends would never consider playing this game as it looks now, and many in my gaming guild still say they've played better looking alphas (though I should have pinned them down on whether those games were ANY GOOD). :-)
Still, I'd be hesitant to show these graphics in a trailer if I was trying to attract more players, without some sort of voice-over that the graphics shown are only this rough while players and developers are testing the gameplay systems.
btw... I posted a link to the A.C. intro trailer at the end of my longish post above, so you needn't rely on my rose colored memory.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
btw... I posted a link to the A.C. intro trailer at the end of my longish post above, so you needn't rely on my rose colored memory.
But there is nothing (that I can see) about those graphics that is better than (or even nearly as good as) PFO today, so I assumed there was something else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
btw... I posted a link to the A.C. intro trailer at the end of my longish post above, so you needn't rely on my rose colored memory.But there is nothing (that I can see) about those graphics that is better than (or even nearly as good as) PFO today, so I assumed there was something else.
I agree. The graphics are blocky and chunky.
In no way, shape, or form do I see anything there that even compares to PFO.
Sorry...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
. PFO character faces, unfortunately, look more like 1999 Everquest faces than, say, 2014 EVE Online faces.
To be fair, EVE gave up on WIS years ago. Those awesome avatars you can create are just avatars, you never get to walk around your ship or meet other players in a bar to trade in EVE its just your ingame chat avatar.
In the ideal world we would have photorealistic graphics that run at 60 fps on your mums old laptop from work and look like a scene from a movie but that is not going to happen. To be honest I like the direction the graphics are going. There is a certain sort of popular MMO graphics that has become the standard for "awesome" graphics amongst younger players that to me just looks cartoon like (WoW for example)and it kills all immersion, I feel like I am in a manga cartoon.
Of course the way a lot of games get around this is construct cut scenes for the trailers that have no relationship to the real game - but that usually backfires.
I suggest lots of scenic pans and zooming in on the more interesting settlement buildings like the cleric trainers :D That and give lots of players tankards and stand them around in taverns.