I do not feel I should have to choose between the two. I want great graphics and great gameplay. If you cant offer me both, my wallet will find a game that can.
I was coming to add the exact same thing. There should not need to be a choice.
graphics and UI are how you connect with the gameplay. IMO the gameplay is only as good as the quality of the graphics and UI
So I guess small zones, loading screens, lack of content after level 20, and invisible walls, no underwater quest, bad chat system for group play, lag and disconnects, and can't enter over half of the buildings are OK then ?
I have to say when it comes down to what the Team can pull off I will always go for game play. I hate instances and invisible walls in MMO's and love the idea of being able to run around and go where I want.
I think you could have a game with basic graphics and look really low detail, but if you made your game fun and challenging in a way that anyone on the learning curve can enjoy then you are heading in the right direction.
Take Tetris for example, though this is not an MMO it is indeed one of the world's most popular games and continues to hang around for even new gamers. If you look also at Super Mario Bros 3, that really was a very fun game. I don't understand why everything has to come in a 3D package, if you have a great idea for a 2D game then by all means make one!
MMO's of course don't have to be fantasy or scifi only. I would LOVE to see a Mercenaries MMOG come out, but maybe that is just me. I would also LOVE to see a Command and Conquer MMOG come out as well.
It's all how your game ranks on the fun meter. If you are limited at the moment in what you can realitically accomplish then step back and rethink the realistic graphics for now until you either find a way to make it work out in the future, or technology catches up.
Do not try to be a great gamer, just be a gamer. Cause, I don't care how good you are anyway.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
Do not try to be a great gamer, just be a gamer. Cause, I don't care how good you are anyway.
Also it's hard these day's to consider what people feel are great graphics or bad graphics, for example playing Fallen Earth and really enjoy the graphic look of the game, yet see people say the graphics look crap.
<- click to enlarge
Simply don't want to play a game with Great Gameplay and Crappy Graphics nor do I want to play a game with Great Graphics and Crappy Gameplay. As said it's needs to be 50/50 for me. So again sorry can't vote as voting to what was offered wouldn't be my opinion on this subject.
Graphics dont need to be "state of the art" and require super computers to be of high quality and pleasing to the eye. The problem is that there arent enough companies out there developing their own engines. They use whatever is out and usually do a piss poor job with it.
*raises glass to Valve*
;-)
If you stand VERY still, and close your eyes, after a minute you can actually FEEL the universe revolving around PvP.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
the tool are there !microsoft donnybrook costed a lot to be dev.you think ms engineer decided to get unreal tournament
or arena cant recall wich!then ms recompilled the game!recompiled?yes so they could fiddle with it at their leasure
they brainstormed for month .those guys were networkl specialist before they had never touched gaming network
directly and found out quick there were ton of issue that dated back from 2000
int the end they brainstormed a lot polished their idea and donnybrook was born
same for dx11 they worked a lot so that now dx11 would be working on all dx iteration
64 bit its has been avail since 2003 ,some game dev tested it it didnt rise fps .they put it back on the shelf
what can innovator do against an industry that ignore company advice like intel microsoft ,amd,nvidia etc
there is nothing more innovator can do !the tool are there now the ball is in the game maker camp!
the tool are there !microsoft donnybrook costed a lot to be dev.you think ms engineer decided to get unreal tournament or arena cant recall wich!then ms recompilled the game!recompiled?yes so they could fiddle with it at their leasure they brainstormed for month .those guys were networkl specialist before they had never touched gaming network directly and found out quick there were ton of issue that dated back from 2000 int the end they brainstormed a lot polished their idea and donnybrook was born same for dx11 they worked a lot so that now dx11 would be working on all dx iteration 64 bit its has been avail since 2003 ,some game dev tested it it didnt rise fps .they put it back on the shelf what can innovator do against an industry that ignore company advice like intel microsoft ,amd,nvidia etc there is nothing more innovator can do !the tool are there now the ball is in the game maker camp!
You obviously know nothing about graphics technology or the current user market when it comes to PC's. If you did you wouldnt' be screaming for DX11. Developers can't just go Oh look a new DX lets hook it right up! No they have to learn how to use, it learn the changes from the last DX and then design and build an engine around it. Don't expect games to sweepingly all be DX11 for atleast another year or two maybe longer. MMO's even longer than that. Its pretty much proven that a huge portion of the market which are how game developers make money are still using DX9 only compatible machines. While Windows 7 and DX11 aren't complete Sins on the face of the earth like Vista and DX10 it'll take time for them to take hold of the market.
I'm all for good graphics and fantastic gameplay. A game can be pretty as hell (age of conan) but if the rest is crap then I could really careless. A game could be fantastically awsome gameplay (everquest1) but the graphics so terrible that my eyes bleed or atleast my head hurts after playing it that I would never touch it again. For MMO's it has to be a good medium on Graphics and then the rest all on Gameplay.
Anyone pushing for the newest of the new on MMOs will have to be satisfied with being completely unhappy for the rest of their lives. Graphics Engines are not plug and play you know.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
i was replying to this guy saying industry needed new innovation in programming and networking !its there lol !
If you judge a game just on graphics alone, you are not a true gamer. Sure graphics are a plus to have and I welcome games with good graphics. The only time I would complain about graphics is if a new game is 10 years behind the times.
i was replying to this guy saying industry needed new innovation in programming and networking !its there lol ! as i sayid in my las post!
Innovation with games tends not to involve graphics. You keep spouting about DX11 that'll save us yay! Thats about all I can make out of your post no offense to your english since you most likely aren't a native english speaker but your not clear in the least. Regardless what I said stands you dont know anything about development or programming. You can't push to the newest technology unless you wish to have the small community possible playing your games so the millions you just spent on development get the flush when you can't pay the bills.
Currently, there's only 1 practical way to theorize the "High-Graphics/High-Gameplay" MMO and not make the games system requirements dictate purchase of substantial new hardware:
High-End Cloud Networking.
If you can create a server farm powerful enough to not only handled the backend nuts/bolts of the game, but also handle rendering/client-side video output and UI input, its possible. That's a lot of if's though.
Basically, take the OnLive service and juice it up with cyber-steroids to establish the network. Game needs three render-output modes, for a low-stream feed, medium bandwidth feed, and high bandwidth feed, scale visuals inside those, but kept uniform between all players.
Ideally, you'd be looking at a 2-500mb client that connects to the regional uber-server. Also help against hacks/exploits/etc because the client can only send input, they never would have the chance to try a model edit, data-mine the patch, or use packet manipulation to detect how the server "thinks" as easily.
Beyond this, the reason you get more DX9-Baseline games becomes simpler and simpler: More people own a compotent DX9 computer than DX10 or 11, and most games developed with their hardware requirements aimed at the Enthusiast-Grade level (Crysis, EQ2, etc) all have rocky starts and sales because the game is limiting who can play it before you even install.
Lets Push Things Forward
I knew I would live to design games at age 7, issue 5 of Nintendo Power.
Support games with subs when you believe in their potential, even in spite of their flaws.
i was replying to this guy saying industry needed new innovation in programming and networking !its there lol ! as i sayid in my las post!
Innovation with games tends not to involve graphics. You keep spouting about DX11 that'll save us yay! Thats about all I can make out of your post no offense to your english since you most likely aren't a native english speaker but your not clear in the least. Regardless what I said stands you dont know anything about development or programming. You can't push to the newest technology unless you wish to have the small community possible playing your games so the millions you just spent on development get the flush when you can't pay the bills.
ok lets put dx11 aside then because yes it would be limiting for those that dont have it!but the rest like ms donnybrook and 64 bit
ms dk has been around since 2007 ,64 bit 2003.and aside from the need to be applied by game maker doesnt change anything on the player side.
These days games need both, not many people would play a game with poor graphics just like there wouldn't be many that would play one with poor gameplay. People and companies need to stop trying to separate games into elements of importance. All elements of every game is just as important as any other.
Owner/Admin of GodlessGamer.com - Gaming news and reviews for the godless.
Comments
I was coming to add the exact same thing. There should not need to be a choice.
Agreed.
yep guys i agree!probably the reason we still search !
graphics and UI are how you connect with the gameplay. IMO the gameplay is only as good as the quality of the graphics and UI
So I guess small zones, loading screens, lack of content after level 20, and invisible walls, no underwater quest, bad chat system for group play, lag and disconnects, and can't enter over half of the buildings are OK then ?
Well at least my Barbarian looks cool !
NM the post isnt worth responding to.
Is it too much to ask for both?
If you stand VERY still, and close your eyes, after a minute you can actually FEEL the universe revolving around PvP.
I have to say when it comes down to what the Team can pull off I will always go for game play. I hate instances and invisible walls in MMO's and love the idea of being able to run around and go where I want.
I think you could have a game with basic graphics and look really low detail, but if you made your game fun and challenging in a way that anyone on the learning curve can enjoy then you are heading in the right direction.
Take Tetris for example, though this is not an MMO it is indeed one of the world's most popular games and continues to hang around for even new gamers. If you look also at Super Mario Bros 3, that really was a very fun game. I don't understand why everything has to come in a 3D package, if you have a great idea for a 2D game then by all means make one!
MMO's of course don't have to be fantasy or scifi only. I would LOVE to see a Mercenaries MMOG come out, but maybe that is just me. I would also LOVE to see a Command and Conquer MMOG come out as well.
It's all how your game ranks on the fun meter. If you are limited at the moment in what you can realitically accomplish then step back and rethink the realistic graphics for now until you either find a way to make it work out in the future, or technology catches up.
Do not try to be a great gamer, just be a gamer. Cause, I don't care how good you are anyway.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
Do not try to be a great gamer, just be a gamer. Cause, I don't care how good you are anyway.
from the average mmo maker!im sorry to say yes its too much to ask!
Awful graphics would kill your sales but average ones with good game play is the way to go. So voted game play.
For example all Blizzard AAA games always had lower graphics than any other games, from Warcraft (RTS) to WoW.
On the opposite take AoC which has one of the best graphics and one of the worst UI = fail. Because UI == gameplay.
Sorry but for me it's both that count 50/50
Also it's hard these day's to consider what people feel are great graphics or bad graphics, for example playing Fallen Earth and really enjoy the graphic look of the game, yet see people say the graphics look crap.
Simply don't want to play a game with Great Gameplay and Crappy Graphics nor do I want to play a game with Great Graphics and Crappy Gameplay. As said it's needs to be 50/50 for me. So again sorry can't vote as voting to what was offered wouldn't be my opinion on this subject.
Graphics dont need to be "state of the art" and require super computers to be of high quality and pleasing to the eye. The problem is that there arent enough companies out there developing their own engines. They use whatever is out and usually do a piss poor job with it.
*raises glass to Valve*
;-)
If you stand VERY still, and close your eyes, after a minute you can actually FEEL the universe revolving around PvP.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
the tool are there !microsoft donnybrook costed a lot to be dev.you think ms engineer decided to get unreal tournament
or arena cant recall wich!then ms recompilled the game!recompiled?yes so they could fiddle with it at their leasure
they brainstormed for month .those guys were networkl specialist before they had never touched gaming network
directly and found out quick there were ton of issue that dated back from 2000
int the end they brainstormed a lot polished their idea and donnybrook was born
same for dx11 they worked a lot so that now dx11 would be working on all dx iteration
64 bit its has been avail since 2003 ,some game dev tested it it didnt rise fps .they put it back on the shelf
what can innovator do against an industry that ignore company advice like intel microsoft ,amd,nvidia etc
there is nothing more innovator can do !the tool are there now the ball is in the game maker camp!
You obviously know nothing about graphics technology or the current user market when it comes to PC's. If you did you wouldnt' be screaming for DX11. Developers can't just go Oh look a new DX lets hook it right up! No they have to learn how to use, it learn the changes from the last DX and then design and build an engine around it. Don't expect games to sweepingly all be DX11 for atleast another year or two maybe longer. MMO's even longer than that. Its pretty much proven that a huge portion of the market which are how game developers make money are still using DX9 only compatible machines. While Windows 7 and DX11 aren't complete Sins on the face of the earth like Vista and DX10 it'll take time for them to take hold of the market.
I'm all for good graphics and fantastic gameplay. A game can be pretty as hell (age of conan) but if the rest is crap then I could really careless. A game could be fantastically awsome gameplay (everquest1) but the graphics so terrible that my eyes bleed or atleast my head hurts after playing it that I would never touch it again. For MMO's it has to be a good medium on Graphics and then the rest all on Gameplay.
Anyone pushing for the newest of the new on MMOs will have to be satisfied with being completely unhappy for the rest of their lives. Graphics Engines are not plug and play you know.
Yes, it is. State of the art graphics requires a lot of objects on screen at any one time. If your computer is up to date, it will have no problem rendering all that. The problem is that in an MMO, what you see has to be synchronized with what everyone else sees, or it impacts gameplay. The server has to keep track of all objects with a state that can change, and keep all players within range updated. If you think about it, that means that while the strain on your computer hardware increases linearly with number of objects on screen, the strain on servers and networks increases exponentially with the number of players in your vicinity. The simpler objects in the game world, and interaction between objects are, the more you can have in an area at the same time.
So, having state of the arts graphics in an MMO means one, or several of: removing collision detection, making environmental effects client side, or reducing the number of players allowed in the same area at the same time (i.e. instancing). All of those have a negative impact on game play, so yes, to a certain extent, it's too much to ask for both.
And this is what I mean when I say new 'innovations' are needed in programming or in networking, heck maybe even both. I am sure someone is goign to stumble unintentionally on the answer here, or maybe they will even intentionally find it.
i was replying to this guy saying industry needed new innovation in programming and networking !its there lol !
as i sayid in my las post!
Gameplay.
If you judge a game just on graphics alone, you are not a true gamer. Sure graphics are a plus to have and I welcome games with good graphics. The only time I would complain about graphics is if a new game is 10 years behind the times.
Innovation with games tends not to involve graphics. You keep spouting about DX11 that'll save us yay! Thats about all I can make out of your post no offense to your english since you most likely aren't a native english speaker but your not clear in the least. Regardless what I said stands you dont know anything about development or programming. You can't push to the newest technology unless you wish to have the small community possible playing your games so the millions you just spent on development get the flush when you can't pay the bills.
Currently, there's only 1 practical way to theorize the "High-Graphics/High-Gameplay" MMO and not make the games system requirements dictate purchase of substantial new hardware:
High-End Cloud Networking.
If you can create a server farm powerful enough to not only handled the backend nuts/bolts of the game, but also handle rendering/client-side video output and UI input, its possible. That's a lot of if's though.
Basically, take the OnLive service and juice it up with cyber-steroids to establish the network. Game needs three render-output modes, for a low-stream feed, medium bandwidth feed, and high bandwidth feed, scale visuals inside those, but kept uniform between all players.
Ideally, you'd be looking at a 2-500mb client that connects to the regional uber-server. Also help against hacks/exploits/etc because the client can only send input, they never would have the chance to try a model edit, data-mine the patch, or use packet manipulation to detect how the server "thinks" as easily.
Beyond this, the reason you get more DX9-Baseline games becomes simpler and simpler: More people own a compotent DX9 computer than DX10 or 11, and most games developed with their hardware requirements aimed at the Enthusiast-Grade level (Crysis, EQ2, etc) all have rocky starts and sales because the game is limiting who can play it before you even install.
Lets Push Things Forward
I knew I would live to design games at age 7, issue 5 of Nintendo Power.
Support games with subs when you believe in their potential, even in spite of their flaws.
gameplay trumps graphics anyday -- i still HAPPILY play games pc games with ega (16 color) graphics from the late 80s.
Innovation with games tends not to involve graphics. You keep spouting about DX11 that'll save us yay! Thats about all I can make out of your post no offense to your english since you most likely aren't a native english speaker but your not clear in the least. Regardless what I said stands you dont know anything about development or programming. You can't push to the newest technology unless you wish to have the small community possible playing your games so the millions you just spent on development get the flush when you can't pay the bills.
ok lets put dx11 aside then because yes it would be limiting for those that dont have it!but the rest like ms donnybrook and 64 bit
ms dk has been around since 2007 ,64 bit 2003.and aside from the need to be applied by game maker doesnt change anything on the player side.
These days games need both, not many people would play a game with poor graphics just like there wouldn't be many that would play one with poor gameplay. People and companies need to stop trying to separate games into elements of importance. All elements of every game is just as important as any other.
Owner/Admin of GodlessGamer.com - Gaming news and reviews for the godless.
Both. It's time MMO companies actually release quality.
poster 46 :the drawback with cloud computing way like ONLIVE and countless other streaming idea
are pushed by cable industry.but how much you think it will cost you a month 500 $ 1000$ (cable bill)
stream is a nice idea but onlive assume you have unlimited bandwith.im limited!dont know about others!
if internet was unlimited i would say hell yes in a heartbeat but its not !
Why can't we have both? yes i prefer both. For example Anarchy Online is my all time favorite MMO but i refuse to play it because of ugly graphics.