Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
How does graphics for MO compare to AoC?
Ozivois
Member UncommonPosts: 598
Can someone answer this question for me please? AoC has stunning graphics, wouldn't want to take a large step down to try this one.
Comments
Yea, MO's graphics are subpar compaerd to AOC.
Even at the highest resolution (which nobody can play with, apparently) they aren't as good as AOC. That's a strictly opinionated matter though.
To be honest I think MO's graphics are a tad better than AoC. I ran AoC with dx10 and everything enabled and compared to MO on high it didn't look as good. I don't know, it is all opinion though.
i'v only played the MO beta 2 months ago and at the time it was not up to par with AoC in dx10. the problme with MO was that some parts were well done ( like cities and player's characters), but most of the rest was very very unfinished and bland. blocks of green land, horribly rendered trees, no grass or anything moving in the wind with the very random animal sliding accross the empty land. wile walking arround you'd be looking at an endless green carpet sliding under you and most of the land mass was blocky with no details. wile i can see that that is not the intended finished look that's were the game was at last time i played it. i haven't herd of major graphics changes since.
when finished this game has the potential of coming close to AoC in graphics but it's a long way from being finished.
AoC is incredibly more polished game compared to MO in all aspects. if AoC is a 10/10 for graphics i'd give MO 6/10.
They are not as good as AoC, but they are still very good in my opinion. I think a lot of the videos out there have a lot turned down. When I logged in without adjusting default settings, it looked better than the stuff I've seen online.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
As soon as you start seeing the MO animations, you're going to cry about how bad they are compared to AOC.
AOC > MO - Hands down. MO's graphics are decent and better than some other MMO's but AOC has MO beat.
IF your primary basis of picking a game is graphics then this is not the game for you.
The graphics to me are fine, but I put sand box, game immersion what I can do in a game way above graphics.
Textures in MO are better then AoCs imho, however majority of the models are not.
I'd say it's a matter of taste. MO looks very realistic and i like it a lot. But you know, some people say WoW graphics are the best, so... as i said, a matter of taste. But MO looks really great.
Apparently, for reasons unexplained (or are they? Anyone know why?), some of the visual features and settings in MO are disabled. Probably to prevent crashing.
That said, I still think the graphics in MO are a let down, even when baring this fact in mind. The technology behind it is good and offers some nice visuals and effects, it is the UT3 engine after all, but the actual art itself is all over the place in terms of quality. Unfortunately, bad textures, effects and models are always bad, no matter how much phong shading, bloom and bump mapping you stick on it.
Then again, AoC was a mixed bag in terms of art assets as well, though I'm going to give it the nod ahead of MO simply because, in my opinion, it's more consistent.
You cant compare a game like AoC (instanced) with a seamless world like the one MO have.
MO graphic is good but not as good as AoC as i see it. With new trees (speedtree 5.1) it will get very close though.
I agree that it is a matter of taste. . people are always on about AOCs graphics and they are good but I am not that into them myself. I found MOs art good enough to let me immerse myself in the world. This is more a world design thing but having pretty graphics and zones ruins immersion. If you want eye candy. . there are some amazing views etc in MO. . but overall people will still say AoC is better pixel to pixel. . overall though I would go with MO. W
Wait for the high res textures and speed tree as well. . even if they launch in 2 hours.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
Well, that is true. MO should be compared with Vanguard and upcoming Guildwars 2 instead. It is very close to VG actually but from what I seen from GW2 it will look better (and it is supposed to have dx 11 support, either at launch or patched in later).
But you can compare the art, and I prefer AoCs over MO there myself but that is a personal thing.
I wouldn't worry about MOs graphics, it is not bad. Bugs and mechanics are another thing. But if you must have something that actually looks better than AoCs you will have to wait for CCPs World of darkness online, at least the Avatars (which is the only thing that has leaked out right now as far as I know) looks stunning.
Well, GW2 with dx 11 might also look better.