Im not crazy about the first one but the others seem pretty top notch. I would rate them better than WAR and slightly worse (but close) to AoC's, though with the added benefit that you can actually freely navigate through the environment, rather than follow a defined path. So all things considered I think it comes out better.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
Having seen the graphics 1st hand I can say that IMO they are indeed quite nice. Infact the some of the landscapes that I have seen look better than VGSoH. The character animations are a bit stiff, but again I found the VGSoH characters to be really quite bad. WAR? It's a slightly different colour pallette and art style, but I actually prefer Darkfall over WAR in the art department. One thing that did impress me was the mount animation, this game actually makes mounts look believable when they move, the ones I have seen running around atleast. VGSoH's mounts looked good, but were stiff, WAR's weren't too bad, WoW's are pretty good. Lighting is very nice indeed, with some wonderful shadowing.
Just my PERSONAL opinion that I am sharing with you.
Some of the landscapes look better than VG? that's total bullshit and you know it. VG trashes DF graphics in every way. The only things that DF has that VG does not is full loot but it has a ffa server where you loot all there gold. VG does not skill based system,everything else VG has and more.
Im not crazy about the first one but the others seem pretty top notch. I would rate them better than WAR and slightly worse (but close) to AoC's, though with the added benefit that you can actually freely navigate through the environment, rather than follow a defined path. So all things considered I think it comes out better.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
If you rate DF gxf close to AoC graphic you really have no idea what you're talking about.
Im not crazy about the first one but the others seem pretty top notch. I would rate them better than WAR and slightly worse (but close) to AoC's, though with the added benefit that you can actually freely navigate through the environment, rather than follow a defined path. So all things considered I think it comes out better.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
If you rate DF gxf close to AoC graphic you really have no idea what you're talking about.
technically inferior... yes.
Do I enjoy darkfalls graphics more? yes.
Do I feel darkfall is much grittier and dark than AOC? yes...
Hand crafted world? Look at the pictures I am pointing out above, it looks like a generic wasteland with sporatic trees here and there. This is not a hand crafted world, I have made worlds in "World Builder" program that look exactly the same, with random generated trees and rolling hills landscape just like picture #1 and #3 in a few hours, and I had never used the program before!
Next, how do graphics and the world environment not matter? If you are in a giant black block with stick figures, you will pay $50 for the game and $15/mo to play it? To ME, MMOs at their finest are all about immersion, and having a beautiful world with tons of detail make the experience amazingly more fun in my eyes.
UO was able to do that without graphics but the whole time I played that I was really excited for the future of MMOs to be like UO but in 3D, to be much more immersive. That day has not come and Darkfall does not seem what I was looking for. To be honest, I liked I could do whatever I wanted in UO. My favorite characters were my animal tamer/bard and my thief. My PKer (only had 1 char for that) was fun for a few weeks but I stayed playing the game for years because of everything else I could do in the game.
Having seen the graphics 1st hand I can say that IMO they are indeed quite nice. Infact the some of the landscapes that I have seen look better than VGSoH. The character animations are a bit stiff, but again I found the VGSoH characters to be really quite bad. WAR? It's a slightly different colour pallette and art style, but I actually prefer Darkfall over WAR in the art department. One thing that did impress me was the mount animation, this game actually makes mounts look believable when they move, the ones I have seen running around atleast. VGSoH's mounts looked good, but were stiff, WAR's weren't too bad, WoW's are pretty good. Lighting is very nice indeed, with some wonderful shadowing.
Just my PERSONAL opinion that I am sharing with you.
Some of the landscapes look better than VG? that's total bullshit and you know it. VG trashes DF graphics in every way. The only things that DF has that VG does not is full loot but it has a ffa server where you loot all there gold. VG does not skill based system,everything else VG has and more.
The vg world is bigger as well.
1. I made no mention of gameplay features let alone compare them.
2. I can only presume that you are playing darkfall.
3. I have played both.
4.VG's world is fantastic, but it is also plasticy, shiny and rather forced in some places. Please take note of the use of the word SOME.
5. I clearly stated it was my personal opinion, and in no way a god given fact.
Next, how do graphics and the world environment not matter? If you are in a giant black block with stick figures, you will pay $50 for the game and $15/mo to play it? To ME, MMOs at their finest are all about immersion, and having a beautiful world with tons of detail make the experience amazingly more fun in my eyes. UO was able to do that without graphics......
The game is not really made to look "awesome" but made to run well on any kind of computers, with high frames (and it does that) for PVP.
But while doing that it also looks good, not sure how people can bitch
I've never had much problem with DarkFall's graphics. They are what they are. You either accept it or you don't. Are they the best available on the MMO market? Nope... but they (meaning the devs) never claimed they were.
One thing that I think they could use some work on is rounding out the harsh edges. The close-up picture of the male human face is a good example. The harshness of the straight edges does detract from the graphics for me.
Not sure if that is some setting that can be adjusted, or if that is as good as it gets... but that is an area that could use some refinement if they wanted the graphics to look better.
One thing a person has to take into account is the overall theme of the MMO. DarkFall wasn't really meant to be a game where you would pose with your character and take breath-taking screenshots to show off on the web.
It was meant to facilitate large-scale PvP battles between Clans fighting over prime (and limited) city-building sites. There have been some recent indications that they are achieving their goal in this regards (to some degree anyway).
So, for that I'll give Aventurine kudos for some degree of success. They have a ways to go in my book, but the graphics aren't the game-breaker for me anyway.
The graphics are actually one of the things I cannot fault in DF, except for the animations. I think they are pretty bad, but the landscapes, and even the charcters, are fine. The draw distances, regardless of what fanboys say, don't appear all that impressive, but the actual look of the world is good.
They are definitely not 1999 graphics, as people say. That was AC1, Rubies of Eventide, Meridian Online, etc. Try to tell me that any of those have graphics comparable to DF.
Believe it or not, I'm actually considering switching to Darkfall mainly for the graphics... Now before you go calling me a rabid fanboi, I'd like to point out that the only game I've found interesting enough to keep playing for any real lenght of time has been UO. Darkfall may not be as pretty as most of the big names released in the last three years or so, but it's far better than UO by a good margin and in beta the game felt more like the good old UO than the latest version of UO does.
I would suggest that you wait a bit. If UO was your game of choice, besides the open FFA PvP, Darkfall doesn't offer much in terms of an RPG.
It's possible that in a few months, when more features are added, the game will become a UO fanboi's dream. However, right now it's pretty much an FPS with terrible animations and some RPG elements.
not sure how far back in UO that gundamace is referring; but um...
UO had/has:
-player housing, which is completely customizable
-many different types of mounts
-pets up to some of the dragons
-not only a huge amount of craftables, but many ways to make various magical items (and enhance them).
-treasure hunting (both land and sea)
-different types of ores, hides, and wood for harvesting (can't remember if the different types of wood made it to the normal UO servers)
-fishing, fishing in boats, fishing which brought up sunken treasure and sea monsters
-growing plants + crossbreeding of said plants, along with rare versions
- order vs chaos and, later on, factions (not sure if any of these are still in play)
darkfall has all of this? ALL that UO needs to regain a number of subs, is to get modern movement (wasd and arrow keys) and a 3d client, and possibly some rollback servers (to different expansions).
Well, in order Darkfall has...
1. Player housing, but only in clan cities and it isn't very customizable at all.
2. Five different types of mounts.
3. No pets (though I sure as hell don't miss them)
4. A very wide assortment of craftables and an enchantment system.
5. Treasure hunting (At least on land. Don't know about at sea yet)
6. Different types of ores at least. I'll have to check on the wood and the hides.
7. Fishing (though not on boats and all I've ever caught are fish)
8. No crossbreeding of plants (Never got into that in UO really. Not my thing)
9. Factional wars (I actually like the factional system in Darkfall a lot. It's one of the areas where this game shines)
Weird right before beta ended I was able to use max settings with Anti aliasing but now it doesn't seem to work. In town at night it looked so nice with everything maxed out but maybe Im just in a wrong spot cuz when I did it i was running at 2Fps but now im running at just 15fps hm :. To bad i saved the screenshot as a jpg. so it reduced quality by alot.
Believe it or not, I'm actually considering switching to Darkfall mainly for the graphics... Now before you go calling me a rabid fanboi, I'd like to point out that the only game I've found interesting enough to keep playing for any real lenght of time has been UO. Darkfall may not be as pretty as most of the big names released in the last three years or so, but it's far better than UO by a good margin and in beta the game felt more like the good old UO than the latest version of UO does.
I would suggest that you wait a bit. If UO was your game of choice, besides the open FFA PvP, Darkfall doesn't offer much in terms of an RPG.
It's possible that in a few months, when more features are added, the game will become a UO fanboi's dream. However, right now it's pretty much an FPS with terrible animations and some RPG elements.
not sure how far back in UO that gundamace is referring; but um...
UO had/has:
-player housing, which is completely customizable
-many different types of mounts
-pets up to some of the dragons
-not only a huge amount of craftables, but many ways to make various magical items (and enhance them).
-treasure hunting (both land and sea)
-different types of ores, hides, and wood for harvesting (can't remember if the different types of wood made it to the normal UO servers)
-fishing, fishing in boats, fishing which brought up sunken treasure and sea monsters
-growing plants + crossbreeding of said plants, along with rare versions
- order vs chaos and, later on, factions (not sure if any of these are still in play)
darkfall has all of this? ALL that UO needs to regain a number of subs, is to get modern movement (wasd and arrow keys) and a 3d client, and possibly some rollback servers (to different expansions).
Well, in order Darkfall has...
1. Player housing, but only in clan cities and it isn't very customizable at all.
2. Five different types of mounts.
3. No pets (though I sure as hell don't miss them)
4. A very wide assortment of craftables and an enchantment system.
5. Treasure hunting (At least on land. Don't know about at sea yet)
6. Different types of ores at least. I'll have to check on the wood and the hides.
7. Fishing (though not on boats and all I've ever caught are fish)
8. No crossbreeding of plants (Never got into that in UO really. Not my thing)
9. Factional wars (I actually like the factional system in Darkfall a lot. It's one of the areas where this game shines)
so, essentially from what you've seen, it's UO-lite with a 3d client.
is the treasure hunting like UOs?
tamer was a viable profession in UO. don't hate.
i just grabbed a few items off the top of my head, which make UO rather different from other games.
if you recall, uo had both chaos/order AND the factions. so you could mix/match the two, iirc, or at least for a time you could. i don't believe darkfall has that. also, you couldn't do the "hit friendly so my buddies can gank you cuz we're pussies and can't pvp" crap that darkfall has.
seriously, it's like darkfall built-in griefer friendly game mechanics.
on purpose? or just more incompetency?
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
I think the textures in the game world were rushed to complete all the scenery and I bet around a year or NA release they'll be able to redo and reapply textures to area's that they went over quickly.
Im not crazy about the first one but the others seem pretty top notch. I would rate them better than WAR and slightly worse (but close) to AoC's, though with the added benefit that you can actually freely navigate through the environment, rather than follow a defined path. So all things considered I think it comes out better.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
Prove me wrong then, rather than wasting everyones time with your moronic posts that show nothing. AoC is like a movie made entirely with blue screens, with no on site locations. They can put anything they want on the blue screen but its still fake looking. You can always see the difference between a real scene and one with superimposed images surrounding the immediate area. AoC is like that, and so its graphics will never be that great in the grand scheme of things. Distant mountain ranges, dense forests, all just fake 2d images plastered on top of the edge of their small instanced zones to create the illusion that there is actually something there of substance. Fake fake fake. I'd have to take off points for that kind of amauturish work.
Real environment gfx > Fake environment gfx
For that reason it really isn't even that much of an accomplishment to say graphics are almost as good as AoC. Not to mention as someone said, some aspects of graphics are entirely subjective. WAR and WoW definitely seem to have more graphics style than AoC, so are better in that regard. Darkfall seems to have a style too but I really need to see it in game and not just screenshots to see if that style is better than AoC.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence. Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
How many people that are slating the graphics have actually played the game for themselves? Videos and screenshots do not do the game justice imo.
^ hit the nail on the head.
the best thing about DF graphics is the *feel* of the world when you are in it. regardless of the crappy animations and mid-range character graphics, the game world *feels* SO much more immersive & realistic than WAR, AoC, WOW etc.
so from an world experience point of view, DF graphics are really great IMO, even if on a purely visual level they fall roughly into the middle of the pack.
How many people that are slating the graphics have actually played the game for themselves? Videos and screenshots do not do the game justice imo.
Actually, it was the other way round for me; seeing all the resized images and videos I thought to myself "these graphics are gonna look great at high definition uncompressed".
Sadly, upon first entering the game I was struck by the mediocrity of the graphics in full force. And I realized that I hadn't been looking at a downgraded 'sneak peek' of the game graphics, but at the actual ingame graphics quality.
To put it simply, Mount & Blade has better quality graphics than DF (both texture-wise and modelling-wise), and that is something I wasn't expecting really...
I dont have crap to do since I dont have an account so i'm fanboying it up on here while I should be playing
Anyway
Hi, a bit off topic i know. but could you either PM me or post what your graphics options are set to nvidia specific settings or ingame settings?
Atm i'm having a pain fiddling with the graphics to make it look gorgeous? (my system can handle it, just too many sliders and numbars for me to deal with)
WoW nerds beware, I come equipped with lazers and anti-QQ missiles. If you mess with me, I will $%£@ you.
How many people that are slating the graphics have actually played the game for themselves? Videos and screenshots do not do the game justice imo.
Actually, it was the other way round for me; seeing all the compressed images and videos I thought to myself "these graphics are gonna look great at high definition uncompressed".
Sadly, upon first entering the game I was struck by the mediocrity of the graphics in full force. And I realized that I hadn't been looking at a downgraded 'sneak peek' of the game graphics, but at the actual ingame graphics quality.
To put it simply, Mount & Blade has better quality graphics than DF (both texture-wise and modelling-wise), and that is something I wasn't expecting really...
Oh, fair enough. What system spec? I was seriously impressed with the graphics. I wasn't expecting much from the screenshots, but seeing the world for myself took me by suprise.
Oh, fair enough. What system spec? I was seriously impressed with the graphics. I wasn't expecting much from the screenshots, but seeing the world for myself took me by suprise.
I run a C2D E8400 3GHz, 2GB DDR-800 and Ati 4850. (XP SP3)
I'm not including the Ati shadow bugs in the overall judgment, since those will be resolved sooner or later.
But widescreen issue is included in the determining factors.
Texture quality is set to 'default' no matter how you tweak it. Antialiasing is not working.
I don't know the reasons, but Aventurine seems to have halfway completed their graphics engine rushing into release.
There are sliders in the Options that don't do anything, for crying out loud.
Most importantly, No bump mapping on textures (they feel 'flat' and jagged where two planes meet)
For example, this looks 10x better in actual size, than a similarly resized DF image:
I wasn't expecting AoC-level graphics in DF. But failing to reach the M&B threshold was disheartening.
Comments
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
Some of the landscapes look better than VG? that's total bullshit and you know it. VG trashes DF graphics in every way. The only things that DF has that VG does not is full loot but it has a ffa server where you loot all there gold. VG does not skill based system,everything else VG has and more.
The vg world is bigger as well.
Jah Rasta For I.
The Wicked Shall Fall..
http://www.ethnic2020.com/images/Ebay/black-jesus.jpg
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
If you rate DF gxf close to AoC graphic you really have no idea what you're talking about.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
how does knowledge??!! of gfx in a game have any bearing on a subjective opinion?
If you rate DF gxf close to AoC graphic you really have no idea what you're talking about.
technically inferior... yes.
Do I enjoy darkfalls graphics more? yes.
Do I feel darkfall is much grittier and dark than AOC? yes...
does my opinion really matter? No.
I don't know what everyone else is seeing, but these screenshots look amazing to me. Especially the second.
Maybe someday I'll be able to give this game a try. I'll probably be disappointed, but man is it beautiful.
Picture #1, #3, #5, and #6
Hand crafted world? Look at the pictures I am pointing out above, it looks like a generic wasteland with sporatic trees here and there. This is not a hand crafted world, I have made worlds in "World Builder" program that look exactly the same, with random generated trees and rolling hills landscape just like picture #1 and #3 in a few hours, and I had never used the program before!
Next, how do graphics and the world environment not matter? If you are in a giant black block with stick figures, you will pay $50 for the game and $15/mo to play it? To ME, MMOs at their finest are all about immersion, and having a beautiful world with tons of detail make the experience amazingly more fun in my eyes.
UO was able to do that without graphics but the whole time I played that I was really excited for the future of MMOs to be like UO but in 3D, to be much more immersive. That day has not come and Darkfall does not seem what I was looking for. To be honest, I liked I could do whatever I wanted in UO. My favorite characters were my animal tamer/bard and my thief. My PKer (only had 1 char for that) was fun for a few weeks but I stayed playing the game for years because of everything else I could do in the game.
Some of the landscapes look better than VG? that's total bullshit and you know it. VG trashes DF graphics in every way. The only things that DF has that VG does not is full loot but it has a ffa server where you loot all there gold. VG does not skill based system,everything else VG has and more.
The vg world is bigger as well.
1. I made no mention of gameplay features let alone compare them.
2. I can only presume that you are playing darkfall.
3. I have played both.
4.VG's world is fantastic, but it is also plasticy, shiny and rather forced in some places. Please take note of the use of the word SOME.
5. I clearly stated it was my personal opinion, and in no way a god given fact.
I see what you did there.
I've never had much problem with DarkFall's graphics. They are what they are. You either accept it or you don't. Are they the best available on the MMO market? Nope... but they (meaning the devs) never claimed they were.
One thing that I think they could use some work on is rounding out the harsh edges. The close-up picture of the male human face is a good example. The harshness of the straight edges does detract from the graphics for me.
Not sure if that is some setting that can be adjusted, or if that is as good as it gets... but that is an area that could use some refinement if they wanted the graphics to look better.
One thing a person has to take into account is the overall theme of the MMO. DarkFall wasn't really meant to be a game where you would pose with your character and take breath-taking screenshots to show off on the web.
It was meant to facilitate large-scale PvP battles between Clans fighting over prime (and limited) city-building sites. There have been some recent indications that they are achieving their goal in this regards (to some degree anyway).
So, for that I'll give Aventurine kudos for some degree of success. They have a ways to go in my book, but the graphics aren't the game-breaker for me anyway.
"waahhh, why does no one post screenshots anymore or videos, seems fishy to me"
And you guys wonder why
The graphics are actually one of the things I cannot fault in DF, except for the animations. I think they are pretty bad, but the landscapes, and even the charcters, are fine. The draw distances, regardless of what fanboys say, don't appear all that impressive, but the actual look of the world is good.
They are definitely not 1999 graphics, as people say. That was AC1, Rubies of Eventide, Meridian Online, etc. Try to tell me that any of those have graphics comparable to DF.
I would suggest that you wait a bit. If UO was your game of choice, besides the open FFA PvP, Darkfall doesn't offer much in terms of an RPG.
It's possible that in a few months, when more features are added, the game will become a UO fanboi's dream. However, right now it's pretty much an FPS with terrible animations and some RPG elements.
not sure how far back in UO that gundamace is referring; but um...
UO had/has:
-player housing, which is completely customizable
-many different types of mounts
-pets up to some of the dragons
-not only a huge amount of craftables, but many ways to make various magical items (and enhance them).
-treasure hunting (both land and sea)
-different types of ores, hides, and wood for harvesting (can't remember if the different types of wood made it to the normal UO servers)
-fishing, fishing in boats, fishing which brought up sunken treasure and sea monsters
-growing plants + crossbreeding of said plants, along with rare versions
- order vs chaos and, later on, factions (not sure if any of these are still in play)
darkfall has all of this? ALL that UO needs to regain a number of subs, is to get modern movement (wasd and arrow keys) and a 3d client, and possibly some rollback servers (to different expansions).
Well, in order Darkfall has...
1. Player housing, but only in clan cities and it isn't very customizable at all.
2. Five different types of mounts.
3. No pets (though I sure as hell don't miss them)
4. A very wide assortment of craftables and an enchantment system.
5. Treasure hunting (At least on land. Don't know about at sea yet)
6. Different types of ores at least. I'll have to check on the wood and the hides.
7. Fishing (though not on boats and all I've ever caught are fish)
8. No crossbreeding of plants (Never got into that in UO really. Not my thing)
9. Factional wars (I actually like the factional system in Darkfall a lot. It's one of the areas where this game shines)
Weird right before beta ended I was able to use max settings with Anti aliasing but now it doesn't seem to work. In town at night it looked so nice with everything maxed out but maybe Im just in a wrong spot cuz when I did it i was running at 2Fps but now im running at just 15fps hm :. To bad i saved the screenshot as a jpg. so it reduced quality by alot.
I would suggest that you wait a bit. If UO was your game of choice, besides the open FFA PvP, Darkfall doesn't offer much in terms of an RPG.
It's possible that in a few months, when more features are added, the game will become a UO fanboi's dream. However, right now it's pretty much an FPS with terrible animations and some RPG elements.
not sure how far back in UO that gundamace is referring; but um...
UO had/has:
-player housing, which is completely customizable
-many different types of mounts
-pets up to some of the dragons
-not only a huge amount of craftables, but many ways to make various magical items (and enhance them).
-treasure hunting (both land and sea)
-different types of ores, hides, and wood for harvesting (can't remember if the different types of wood made it to the normal UO servers)
-fishing, fishing in boats, fishing which brought up sunken treasure and sea monsters
-growing plants + crossbreeding of said plants, along with rare versions
- order vs chaos and, later on, factions (not sure if any of these are still in play)
darkfall has all of this? ALL that UO needs to regain a number of subs, is to get modern movement (wasd and arrow keys) and a 3d client, and possibly some rollback servers (to different expansions).
Well, in order Darkfall has...
1. Player housing, but only in clan cities and it isn't very customizable at all.
2. Five different types of mounts.
3. No pets (though I sure as hell don't miss them)
4. A very wide assortment of craftables and an enchantment system.
5. Treasure hunting (At least on land. Don't know about at sea yet)
6. Different types of ores at least. I'll have to check on the wood and the hides.
7. Fishing (though not on boats and all I've ever caught are fish)
8. No crossbreeding of plants (Never got into that in UO really. Not my thing)
9. Factional wars (I actually like the factional system in Darkfall a lot. It's one of the areas where this game shines)
so, essentially from what you've seen, it's UO-lite with a 3d client.
is the treasure hunting like UOs?
tamer was a viable profession in UO. don't hate.
i just grabbed a few items off the top of my head, which make UO rather different from other games.
if you recall, uo had both chaos/order AND the factions. so you could mix/match the two, iirc, or at least for a time you could. i don't believe darkfall has that. also, you couldn't do the "hit friendly so my buddies can gank you cuz we're pussies and can't pvp" crap that darkfall has.
seriously, it's like darkfall built-in griefer friendly game mechanics.
on purpose? or just more incompetency?
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
I think the textures in the game world were rushed to complete all the scenery and I bet around a year or NA release they'll be able to redo and reapply textures to area's that they went over quickly.
Looks A LOT like TESIII: Morrowind. Great game, but bad graphics.
Can't say much about DF gameplay yet. But I doubt I'll be playing it.
How many people that are slating the graphics have actually played the game for themselves? Videos and screenshots do not do the game justice imo.
Thanks for pointing out your complete lack of knowledge regarding gfx in a game.
Prove me wrong then, rather than wasting everyones time with your moronic posts that show nothing. AoC is like a movie made entirely with blue screens, with no on site locations. They can put anything they want on the blue screen but its still fake looking. You can always see the difference between a real scene and one with superimposed images surrounding the immediate area. AoC is like that, and so its graphics will never be that great in the grand scheme of things. Distant mountain ranges, dense forests, all just fake 2d images plastered on top of the edge of their small instanced zones to create the illusion that there is actually something there of substance. Fake fake fake. I'd have to take off points for that kind of amauturish work.
Real environment gfx > Fake environment gfx
For that reason it really isn't even that much of an accomplishment to say graphics are almost as good as AoC. Not to mention as someone said, some aspects of graphics are entirely subjective. WAR and WoW definitely seem to have more graphics style than AoC, so are better in that regard. Darkfall seems to have a style too but I really need to see it in game and not just screenshots to see if that style is better than AoC.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence.
Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
^ hit the nail on the head.
the best thing about DF graphics is the *feel* of the world when you are in it. regardless of the crappy animations and mid-range character graphics, the game world *feels* SO much more immersive & realistic than WAR, AoC, WOW etc.
so from an world experience point of view, DF graphics are really great IMO, even if on a purely visual level they fall roughly into the middle of the pack.
High Quality ?
Those screens looks the same as It did in beta, I see no inprovement at all..
character graphics are DAOC-ish, though DF has detail specular highlighting that DAOC didn't have.
but it's in the world/enviro graphics whee DF excels.
Actually, it was the other way round for me; seeing all the resized images and videos I thought to myself "these graphics are gonna look great at high definition uncompressed".
Sadly, upon first entering the game I was struck by the mediocrity of the graphics in full force. And I realized that I hadn't been looking at a downgraded 'sneak peek' of the game graphics, but at the actual ingame graphics quality.
To put it simply, Mount & Blade has better quality graphics than DF (both texture-wise and modelling-wise), and that is something I wasn't expecting really...
Hi, a bit off topic i know. but could you either PM me or post what your graphics options are set to nvidia specific settings or ingame settings?
Atm i'm having a pain fiddling with the graphics to make it look gorgeous? (my system can handle it, just too many sliders and numbars for me to deal with)
WoW nerds beware, I come equipped with lazers and anti-QQ missiles. If you mess with me, I will $%£@ you.
Actually, it was the other way round for me; seeing all the compressed images and videos I thought to myself "these graphics are gonna look great at high definition uncompressed".
Sadly, upon first entering the game I was struck by the mediocrity of the graphics in full force. And I realized that I hadn't been looking at a downgraded 'sneak peek' of the game graphics, but at the actual ingame graphics quality.
To put it simply, Mount & Blade has better quality graphics than DF (both texture-wise and modelling-wise), and that is something I wasn't expecting really...
Oh, fair enough. What system spec? I was seriously impressed with the graphics. I wasn't expecting much from the screenshots, but seeing the world for myself took me by suprise.
I run a C2D E8400 3GHz, 2GB DDR-800 and Ati 4850. (XP SP3)
I'm not including the Ati shadow bugs in the overall judgment, since those will be resolved sooner or later.
But widescreen issue is included in the determining factors.
Texture quality is set to 'default' no matter how you tweak it. Antialiasing is not working.
I don't know the reasons, but Aventurine seems to have halfway completed their graphics engine rushing into release.
There are sliders in the Options that don't do anything, for crying out loud.
Most importantly, No bump mapping on textures (they feel 'flat' and jagged where two planes meet)
For example, this looks 10x better in actual size, than a similarly resized DF image:
I wasn't expecting AoC-level graphics in DF. But failing to reach the M&B threshold was disheartening.