Definetly GuildWars has the best engine.Runs good on lower configs and loads a map and the game it self in like 10 seconds.Think about it...knights online with it's old graphics is loading about 3-4 minutes for me.
Haven't seen WoW yet but i bought it last day and the european sign up site was simply down...:( Crappy system they have there.
Originally posted by Sosho Definetly GuildWars has the best engine.Runs good on lower configs and loads a map and the game it self in like 10 seconds.Think about it...knights online with it's old graphics is loading about 3-4 minutes for me.Haven't seen WoW yet but i bought it last day and the european sign up site was simply down...:( Crappy system they have there.
I wouldn't way GW has the best engine, but I will give them a ton of credit for coming up with a very light streamline design. They gave everyone a very limited set of heads too choose from so they could cache all textures and player models ahead of time which greatly improves gameplay performce. This game would be outstanding for raiding and such like is done in EQ 1 simply because it could handle the heavy load VERY well. Yes everyone looks the same but the terrain is very visually appealing and the game runs smooth as glass.
For best graphics I have to say EQ 2 still, however for most efficient design I would say GW would be leading the ranks by a long stretch.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Thats the beauty of completly instanced content, it has faster loads, plus the GW engine is very light.
But then again, saying that GW is even remotly a mmorpg is not true, its good at what< it does, fun, fast paced fantasy style action, add some mounts and you have UT2004
Guildwars has a good engine wich loads realy good without and don't have that much hickups. But that is probably also due to the maximum groupsize and the instancing and probably more that then the engine.
World of Warcraft gives me some hickups especialy when I go to overpopulated areas. I don't keep an eye on my networktraffic so can't say it is the engine loading times or the connection.
Best I have seen up to date was the old Eve Online engine. Virtualy no load times, no hick ups. It needed a lot of masses of players for me to get a hickup. And that is more network trafic instead of loading times. Because once out of warp it run smoothly, no matter how much other players there were.
That much for engines I know that have potential, still keeps the graphics now
So her it goes with first again guildwars. The graphics are astunning especialy the enviroment. But you get very quickly bored of the character models. Not much diversity so the graphics are kept simple but still good. They have a detailed enviroment but the models lack of detail.
Now it is WoW's time. I realy like the graphics, they are also pretty detailed even the models are more detailed then in Guild Wars. So I would say WoW surely wins from Guild Wars in terms from details. The style is something very different and some love it and others hate it, no in betweens realy
Now it is Eve-onlines turn. Those graphics where great for a spacesim, but it had a lot of black in it. Yeah what did you expect in outer space The detail is realy nice especial of the ships. And other floating objects. The planets lack a bit detail though.
So for graphics I would say WoW wins here. A little list to show it better. Graphics: 1. WoW 2. Guild Wars 3. Eve-Online
Engine: 1. Eve-Online 2. Guild Wars 3. WoW
PS: never played EQ2 so can't comment realy on graphics and animation. And screenshots only show the nicer things, so I think they are biased
PS2: oh yeah the topic states mmorpg in 2005 not released in 2005, only a little detail. Also Guild Wars isn't realy a mmorpg, but is isn't also a rpg. You have towns where you can meet up with a lot of people, only you can't run into them out in the wilds.
"If all magic fails, rely on three feet of steel and a strong arm"
Style, Fun and Engine Playability: Hands down WoW in my little oppinion.
Graphics wow (not the game!): Guild Wars, just a very pretty game to look at.
Graphics Quality (textures, seeds, all that): Unfortunately EQ2.
While I think the EQ2 engine is solid and the graphics quality probably the best around, it has absolutely no style and they are so boring to look at. I mean seriously, every single dungeon is just a repeat for one they've already textured and the city's (Freeport and Qeynos), tell me you don't want to take a nap every time you get into one of the zones, snore fests !
Originally posted by shae hmm well here's my 2 cents. Style, Fun and Engine Playability: Hands down WoW in my little oppinion. Graphics wow (not the game!): Guild Wars, just a very pretty game to look at. Graphics Quality (textures, seeds, all that): Unfortunately EQ2. While I think the EQ2 engine is solid and the graphics quality probably the best around, it has absolutely no style and they are so boring to look at. I mean seriously, every single dungeon is just a repeat for one they've already textured and the city's (Freeport and Qeynos), tell me you don't want to take a nap every time you get into one of the zones, snore fests !
Have to agree with the assessment of the dungeons in EQ2... I was very dissapointed. Especially coming from the same company (but not the same dev team) that did EQ1.... EQ1's dungeons are so varied and so unique they were a pleasure to go to. Anytime you went to a dungeon you KNEW it would be special and unique.
I agree though. EQ2 has a truely awesome engine... the artists really haven't done it justice.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Wow, I must be easily amused then since I find the landscapes and dungeons of EQ 2 breathtaking every time I hit one. I think the artists did a phenomenal job and I hope they continue on the trend they are on. I myself got tired of every zone in EQ 1 being its own little peice of artwork that never matched anywhere else. How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water? I love the uniformness, it adds to the immersion for me and breaks it out of the EQ1 / WoW cartoon trend and tries to push the game into a more beleivable and immersive style.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Guild Wars is very impressive in terms of detail and the overall smoothness of the game. Remarkably little stutter or hiccuping, even in a crowded town. Sure, it's as a result of limited character models and such, but the streamlined design, the smoothness and the prettiness of the art ... very, very impressive as a graphical experience.
EQ2 probably still has the best overall graphics engine at the moment. Very impressive overall, but could have used better artwork in some areas, more creativity. But the graphics engine itself is very impressive indeed.
WoW has underrated graphics, in my opinion, mostly because the artwork for the character models leaves much to be desired when compared with other games. The graphics engine works very smoothly and renders very well, and the artwork for scenery and locations is mostly well done (but of course of a very different "style" than the more photorealistic approaches). Sometimes things *do* get stuttery when there are a lot of people on the screen at the same time.
Lineage II has some of the finest artwork out there, honestly, and the graphics engine is fine (it's not on a par with EQ2 in terms of the graphics engine, but the artwork is, in my opinion, superior). Some people disagree because they don't like anime, but I like anime so I find the character models are really very impressive from the artwork perspective.
EVE has great graphics as well, but the way the game is designed does not present the same degree of graphicsl challenges that a 3d land-based game does, so I don't think it's really fair to compare it.
Originally posted by Fadeus Wow, I must be easily amused then since I find the landscapes and dungeons of EQ 2 breathtaking every time I hit one. I think the artists did a phenomenal job and I hope they continue on the trend they are on. I myself got tired of every zone in EQ 1 being its own little peice of artwork that never matched anywhere else. How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water? I love the uniformness, it adds to the immersion for me and breaks it out of the EQ1 / WoW cartoon trend and tries to push the game into a more beleivable and immersive style.
Nah Fad, dont take it personally I don't think it has anything to being easily amused, just a matter of what one person likes and what one person doesn't. Your absolutely right, EQ2's graphics certainly add a more viseral experience that adds to immersion, much the opposite of WoW and EQ1 (as you pointed out) which give out a much more Arcade feeling. Which in the end, I suppose thats exactly what the EQ2 team was trying to do, seperate themselves from their own past and the competition.
Personally I still feel they could still have at least a little fun, take your example for instance "How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water?", great point but my answer would be, as many ways as the imagination allows. How about a dungeon that's laced with Silver, or a cave who's entrance isn't just "go down and turn left or right", change it up now and then for something along the lines of having to swim under jagged rocks to get to flat land, as your swimming through the watter the color changes to bring green because of it's rich ore content. Stuff like that. I mean, if you really pay attention, there's hardly any difference between the Fallen Gate Caves, to the Wailing Caves, to even the news Splitpaw Cavern.
Originally posted by shae Originally posted by Fadeus Wow, I must be easily amused then since I find the landscapes and dungeons of EQ 2 breathtaking every time I hit one. I think the artists did a phenomenal job and I hope they continue on the trend they are on. I myself got tired of every zone in EQ 1 being its own little peice of artwork that never matched anywhere else. How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water? I love the uniformness, it adds to the immersion for me and breaks it out of the EQ1 / WoW cartoon trend and tries to push the game into a more beleivable and immersive style. Nah Fad, dont take it personally I don't think it has anything to being easily amused, just a matter of what one person likes and what one person doesn't. Your absolutely right, EQ2's graphics certainly add a more viseral experience that adds to immersion, much the opposite of WoW and EQ1 (as you pointed out) which give out a much more Arcade feeling. Which in the end, I suppose thats exactly what the EQ2 team was trying to do, seperate themselves from their own past and the competition. Personally I still feel they could still have at least a little fun, take your example for instance "How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water?", great point but my answer would be, as many ways as the imagination allows. How about a dungeon that's laced with Silver, or a cave who's entrance isn't just "go down and turn left or right", change it up now and then for something along the lines of having to swim under jagged rocks to get to flat land, as your swimming through the watter the color changes to bring green because of it's rich ore content. Stuff like that. I mean, if you really pay attention, there's hardly any difference between the Fallen Gate Caves, to the Wailing Caves, to even the news Splitpaw Cavern. That's all I was saying
That's what I meant as well. EQ2 is great at being an immersive game... from the gradual changes in landscape (rather than abrupt a-la EQ1) to the characters who holler at you as you go by. It's a very REAL experience (though I HATE the plastic hair look they went with). I like EQ2 fine but, like Shae I find the fact that every dungeon seems to be a clone of the others a little bizarre...
Yeah, the dungeons were a little cartoony in EQ1 but they were different, which was my point. I'm not saying make the dungeons all cartoony or bright colors or whatever but make them *different*.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by hipstreak Originally posted by Copeland Hands down the winner will be Irth Online (if it makes it out by the end of the year).. Let me just add that unfortunately its gonna take a top of the line video card to be able to play it though For those of you saying WoW you need to get a reality check. The game is nothing but standard in any area. Pure crap. Get over it. EQ2 has excellent graphics. If we were rating games purely on graphics EQ2 would be tops on every poll. GW is nothing. The gameplay sucks the graphics are adequate but nothing spectacular. Boy, what you talking about? irth aint shit it got about teh wurst graphiscs in the hole world. that peace of shit aint got no chance in teh games world. you trying to tell me that you thinks that irth is more better than teh other graphics and games. you so full of shit you dont know games so keep quiet alrite?
Err you can't judge a game's graphics when it's still in alpha, hip. (Same goes to Copeland though, Irith can't be judged yet because we have no idea what the graphics are going to look like).
And please learn to type in legible english.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by Copeland Hands down the winner will be Irth Online (if it makes it out by the end of the year).. Let me just add that unfortunately its gonna take a top of the line video card to be able to play it though For those of you saying WoW you need to get a reality check. The game is nothing but standard in any area. Pure crap. Get over it. EQ2 has excellent graphics. If we were rating games purely on graphics EQ2 would be tops on every poll. GW is nothing. The gameplay sucks the graphics are adequate but nothing spectacular.
Thanks for that unbiased review. My unbiased review is that Irth Online has the worst graphics engine, hands down.
Originally posted by Fadeus Originally posted by Sosho Definetly GuildWars has the best engine.Runs good on lower configs and loads a map and the game it self in like 10 seconds.Think about it...knights online with it's old graphics is loading about 3-4 minutes for me.Haven't seen WoW yet but i bought it last day and the european sign up site was simply down...:( Crappy system they have there.
I wouldn't way GW has the best engine, but I will give them a ton of credit for coming up with a very light streamline design. They gave everyone a very limited set of heads too choose from so they could cache all textures and player models ahead of time which greatly improves gameplay performce. This game would be outstanding for raiding and such like is done in EQ 1 simply because it could handle the heavy load VERY well. Yes everyone looks the same but the terrain is very visually appealing and the game runs smooth as glass.
For best graphics I have to say EQ 2 still, however for most efficient design I would say GW would be leading the ranks by a long stretch.
Yep GW is efficient.. Unfortunaely when you make something so efficient you can only build a game of crap.
Originally posted by Jpedro Well, i´m one of the people that are waiting with some excitement for vanguard, the engine looks like its shaping up nicely, tho im somewhat afraid of the net code for it, considering that there will be little to no instancing and the potential size of the player base, will make for some complicated situations, but thats all congesture.
Anyways, this year, D&DO looks nice in terms of GFX, the game engine look very robust, the integration of the D&D 3.5 rule set is going nicely, and the EXP for doing quests instead of killing mobs is potentaly one of the largest steps ever in a mmorpg in terms of game design, just wish more games would take the same aproach.
Lag wasnt the reason for instancing :P
Instancing came into fashion as a way to foil campers/farmers.
You are correct. In addition to foil kill stealing. An example is in EQ (also other games) in which a high level player would come into a dungeon and kill all the NPCs in 1-4 hits and all NPC re-spawns. This forces the other lower level players to log off, or leave the area - aka makes it impossible for other players to have fun playing.
In the early days of EQ you'd have lists for camps. SOE decided they didnt like that and created instancing as a way to give more casual players access to the same material.
Not quite. The revolutionary MMORPG Anarchy Online was the first to experiment with instancing. It was a success. SWG then copied it, and built on it. EQ and other mmorpgs then copied it from the originator..... AO.
Instancing is an admission of failure.
No. What else is there? Games that have zero instancing have higher turnover rates. Do you honestly think players enjoy waiting on line to camp a re-spawn site? Or to camp a re-spawning boss? In EQ there is an uber-guild called "Crusaders of Pleto". The would litterally come into a zone and PM everyone to leave. Then take over the entire zone, killing, farming, killing every NPC, re-spawn, etc... Other players would be forced to leave and/or log off. EQ had no copetition for years. After new games came out WITH personal instancing.... the players forced to log off EQ would say "Why should I waste my time and money on EQ and be forced to log off, or wait on line for days, weeks, months, for a boss? I will instead play AO or a game like it, where I can have fun all the time. And there are NO waiting on a line for re-spawns, and bosses!".
Instancing, in practice, is a revolutionary feature. I think you are thinking about games that have tooo much instancing. Like GW. Anything good can be overdone.
One of Vanguards biggest selling points is its lack of instancing. I like the fact that Brad McQuaid realizes that instancing was a bad direction. I'm a little concerned about PvP in Vanguard though .
The MIGHTY Vanguard has not come out yet. Based on history, nothing means anything until the game actually comes out. And even more, until the game actually survives past its 1 year annaversary.
IMHO the topic of this thread is moot. ALL MMORPGs will have their graphics and game engines outdated. Graphics < game features. Graphics < game engine. IMHO game engine is a whole different thing than graphics. It encompaces graphics, along with a ton of other things like data storage, being bug free, number of players on the server allowed, the behind the scenes calculations, and more.
But I can understand that many new thread starters are really just bored and are passing the time. So as long as it is ok with MMORPG.com, hey..... let the ultimatly moot threads and topics keep being made heheheh.
Last item, SWG and EQ have the most superior graphics and game engines in MMORPG history. Only 1 poster in this thread commented on the reason why. Here it is again - SWG and EQ2 were made "open ended". That is... the graphics and game engone are sooo upscaleable that there currently is no computer available to the public that would play SWG and EQ2 at highest settings. (I can definatly say SWG, since it was the SWG game DEVs theirselves who announced this on the old SWG forums. I do not know if the EQ2 game DEVs also stated this. BUT the EQ2 game engine is obviously influenced by the SWG game engine.)
A hint, and idea, of what SWG graphics are like at higher settings for current computers:
This picture was originally a screenshot. It has sence been made in into wallpaper format by SONY. When it was on the screenshot page, even SWG fans were posting wondering if it was doctored, or a fake - because it looked far too good, too realistic. SOE had to come out and make a new, complete, seperate, statement saying yes indeed, it was a screenshot taken from the game. They also posted that it was from a super-high end, in house, computer.
And trying to say "only in/for 2005" is even more moot, since all MMORPGs compete with each other, directly and indirectly - no matter what year they were made in. A game with superior graphics and game engine..... means absolutly nothing. Research AC2. It is unofficially dead! Runescape has more players than AC2! LOL! UO thrashed, and is still thrashing...... EQ, DAoC, AC, AC2, and even WoW, and EQ2. UO is far, far, older, but it is keeping 200k - 300k players away from those other games.
Yep GW is efficient.. Unfortunaely when you make something so efficient you can only build a game of crap.
In contrast, your highly touted Irth Online engine is very inefficient. And still, the game is crap. Just about everyone who's seen the Beta has said so.
Comments
Definetly GuildWars has the best engine.Runs good on lower configs and loads a map and the game it self in like 10 seconds.Think about it...knights online with it's old graphics is loading about 3-4 minutes for me.
Haven't seen WoW yet but i bought it last day and the european sign up site was simply down...:(
Crappy system they have there.
Mooooo
I wouldn't way GW has the best engine, but I will give them a ton of credit for coming up with a very light streamline design. They gave everyone a very limited set of heads too choose from so they could cache all textures and player models ahead of time which greatly improves gameplay performce. This game would be outstanding for raiding and such like is done in EQ 1 simply because it could handle the heavy load VERY well. Yes everyone looks the same but the terrain is very visually appealing and the game runs smooth as glass.
For best graphics I have to say EQ 2 still, however for most efficient design I would say GW would be leading the ranks by a long stretch.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Thats the beauty of completly instanced content, it has faster loads, plus the GW engine is very light.
But then again, saying that GW is even remotly a mmorpg is not true, its good at what< it does, fun, fast paced fantasy style action, add some mounts and you have UT2004
Guildwars has a good engine wich loads realy good without and don't have that much hickups. But that is probably also due to the maximum groupsize and the instancing and probably more that then the engine.
World of Warcraft gives me some hickups especialy when I go to overpopulated areas. I don't keep an eye on my networktraffic so can't say it is the engine loading times or the connection.
Best I have seen up to date was the old Eve Online engine. Virtualy no load times, no hick ups. It needed a lot of masses of players for me to get a hickup. And that is more network trafic instead of loading times. Because once out of warp it run smoothly, no matter how much other players there were.
That much for engines I know that have potential, still keeps the graphics now
So her it goes with first again guildwars. The graphics are astunning especialy the enviroment. But you get very quickly bored of the character models. Not much diversity so the graphics are kept simple but still good. They have a detailed enviroment but the models lack of detail.
Now it is WoW's time. I realy like the graphics, they are also pretty detailed even the models are more detailed then in Guild Wars. So I would say WoW surely wins from Guild Wars in terms from details. The style is something very different and some love it and others hate it, no in betweens realy
Now it is Eve-onlines turn. Those graphics where great for a spacesim, but it had a lot of black in it. Yeah what did you expect in outer space
The detail is realy nice especial of the ships. And other floating objects. The planets lack a bit detail though.
So for graphics I would say WoW wins here. A little list to show it better.
Graphics:
1. WoW
2. Guild Wars
3. Eve-Online
Engine:
1. Eve-Online
2. Guild Wars
3. WoW
PS: never played EQ2 so can't comment realy on graphics and animation. And screenshots only show the nicer things, so I think they are biased
PS2: oh yeah the topic states mmorpg in 2005 not released in 2005, only a little detail. Also Guild Wars isn't realy a mmorpg, but is isn't also a rpg. You have towns where you can meet up with a lot of people, only you can't run into them out in the wilds.
"If all magic fails, rely on three feet of steel and a strong arm"
My vote goes to GW's for best engine WoW for best art.
hmm well here's my 2 cents.
Style, Fun and Engine Playability: Hands down WoW in my little oppinion.
Graphics wow (not the game!): Guild Wars, just a very pretty game to look at.
Graphics Quality (textures, seeds, all that): Unfortunately EQ2.
While I think the EQ2 engine is solid and the graphics quality probably the best around, it has absolutely no style and they are so boring to look at. I mean seriously, every single dungeon is just a repeat for one they've already textured and the city's (Freeport and Qeynos), tell me you don't want to take a nap every time you get into one of the zones, snore fests !
Important Information regarding Posting and You
Have to agree with the assessment of the dungeons in EQ2... I was very dissapointed. Especially coming from the same company (but not the same dev team) that did EQ1.... EQ1's dungeons are so varied and so unique they were a pleasure to go to. Anytime you went to a dungeon you KNEW it would be special and unique.
I agree though. EQ2 has a truely awesome engine... the artists really haven't done it justice.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Wow, I must be easily amused then since I find the landscapes and dungeons of EQ 2 breathtaking every time I hit one. I think the artists did a phenomenal job and I hope they continue on the trend they are on. I myself got tired of every zone in EQ 1 being its own little peice of artwork that never matched anywhere else. How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water? I love the uniformness, it adds to the immersion for me and breaks it out of the EQ1 / WoW cartoon trend and tries to push the game into a more beleivable and immersive style.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Guild Wars is very impressive in terms of detail and the overall smoothness of the game. Remarkably little stutter or hiccuping, even in a crowded town. Sure, it's as a result of limited character models and such, but the streamlined design, the smoothness and the prettiness of the art ... very, very impressive as a graphical experience.
EQ2 probably still has the best overall graphics engine at the moment. Very impressive overall, but could have used better artwork in some areas, more creativity. But the graphics engine itself is very impressive indeed.
WoW has underrated graphics, in my opinion, mostly because the artwork for the character models leaves much to be desired when compared with other games. The graphics engine works very smoothly and renders very well, and the artwork for scenery and locations is mostly well done (but of course of a very different "style" than the more photorealistic approaches). Sometimes things *do* get stuttery when there are a lot of people on the screen at the same time.
Lineage II has some of the finest artwork out there, honestly, and the graphics engine is fine (it's not on a par with EQ2 in terms of the graphics engine, but the artwork is, in my opinion, superior). Some people disagree because they don't like anime, but I like anime so I find the character models are really very impressive from the artwork perspective.
EVE has great graphics as well, but the way the game is designed does not present the same degree of graphicsl challenges that a 3d land-based game does, so I don't think it's really fair to compare it.
Nah Fad, dont take it personally
I don't think it has anything to being easily amused, just a matter of what one person likes and what one person doesn't. Your absolutely right, EQ2's graphics certainly add a more viseral experience that adds to immersion, much the opposite of WoW and EQ1 (as you pointed out) which give out a much more Arcade feeling. Which in the end, I suppose thats exactly what the EQ2 team was trying to do, seperate themselves from their own past and the competition.
Personally I still feel they could still have at least a little fun, take your example for instance "How many different ways can you show water but yet its the same kinda water?", great point but my answer would be, as many ways as the imagination allows. How about a dungeon that's laced with Silver, or a cave who's entrance isn't just "go down and turn left or right", change it up now and then for something along the lines of having to swim under jagged rocks to get to flat land, as your swimming through the watter the color changes to bring green because of it's rich ore content. Stuff like that. I mean, if you really pay attention, there's hardly any difference between the Fallen Gate Caves, to the Wailing Caves, to even the news Splitpaw Cavern.
That's all I was saying
Important Information regarding Posting and You
That's what I meant as well. EQ2 is great at being an immersive game... from the gradual changes in landscape (rather than abrupt a-la EQ1) to the characters who holler at you as you go by. It's a very REAL experience (though I HATE the plastic hair look they went with). I like EQ2 fine but, like Shae I find the fact that every dungeon seems to be a clone of the others a little bizarre...
Yeah, the dungeons were a little cartoony in EQ1 but they were different, which was my point. I'm not saying make the dungeons all cartoony or bright colors or whatever but make them *different*.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Err you can't judge a game's graphics when it's still in alpha, hip. (Same goes to Copeland though, Irith can't be judged yet because we have no idea what the graphics are going to look like).
And please learn to type in legible english.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Bleh... double post, sorry
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Referenced post deleted. This post has no point.
Out of the games I've played, WoW.
Total time played: 9125 Days, 21 Hours, 29 Minutes, 27 Seconds
Time played this level: 39 Days, 1 Hour, 24 Minutes, 5 Seconds
With the current released MMORPGs...
EQ2, easily. No released competitor is even on the same scale. Now if you want to judge the ''artwork'', wrong person to give an ''art opinion''.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I wouldn't way GW has the best engine, but I will give them a ton of credit for coming up with a very light streamline design. They gave everyone a very limited set of heads too choose from so they could cache all textures and player models ahead of time which greatly improves gameplay performce. This game would be outstanding for raiding and such like is done in EQ 1 simply because it could handle the heavy load VERY well. Yes everyone looks the same but the terrain is very visually appealing and the game runs smooth as glass.
For best graphics I have to say EQ 2 still, however for most efficient design I would say GW would be leading the ranks by a long stretch.
Yep GW is efficient.. Unfortunaely when you make something so efficient you can only build a game of crap.
Make a difference!
-Personal Website (A Work still in progress):
http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html
-AC, AC2, AO, EQ, Freelancer, SWG:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor
-More SWG:
http://community.webshots.com/user/captain_sica_xol
-More EQ, Dungeon Siege, *UXO*, Diablo II:Lords of Destruction:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01
-EverQuest II, Horizons:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_eq2archives01
-EVE Online !!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01
-DAoC
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives02
-Coming sooner or later... CoH, WoW, MXO, UO, GW, As3, RS
IMHO the topic of this thread is moot. ALL MMORPGs will have their graphics and game engines outdated. Graphics < game features. Graphics < game engine. IMHO game engine is a whole different thing than graphics. It encompaces graphics, along with a ton of other things like data storage, being bug free, number of players on the server allowed, the behind the scenes calculations, and more.
But I can understand that many new thread starters are really just bored and are passing the time. So as long as it is ok with MMORPG.com, hey..... let the ultimatly moot threads and topics keep being made heheheh.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Last item, SWG and EQ have the most superior graphics and game engines in MMORPG history. Only 1 poster in this thread commented on the reason why. Here it is again - SWG and EQ2 were made "open ended". That is... the graphics and game engone are sooo upscaleable that there currently is no computer available to the public that would play SWG and EQ2 at highest settings. (I can definatly say SWG, since it was the SWG game DEVs theirselves who announced this on the old SWG forums. I do not know if the EQ2 game DEVs also stated this. BUT the EQ2 game engine is obviously influenced by the SWG game engine.)
A hint, and idea, of what SWG graphics are like at higher settings for current computers:
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/featured/20010501012.jpg
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20010901001.jpg
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20021101005.jpg
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20020601020.jpg
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20020201003.jpg
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20010801008.jpg
In the next one, notice how the avatar's shadow is on the ground, but is also interupted by the vehicle behind him.
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/screenshots/20010801002.jpg
This picture was originally a screenshot. It has sence been made in into wallpaper format by SONY. When it was on the screenshot page, even SWG fans were posting wondering if it was doctored, or a fake - because it looked far too good, too realistic. SOE had to come out and make a new, complete, seperate, statement saying yes indeed, it was a screenshot taken from the game. They also posted that it was from a super-high end, in house, computer.
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/images/downloads/swgwallpaper_fett_800.jpg
More.............. for those who are really, really, bored with too much free time LOL!.....
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/screenshots_archive.jsp?start=80
And trying to say "only in/for 2005" is even more moot, since all MMORPGs compete with each other, directly and indirectly - no matter what year they were made in. A game with superior graphics and game engine..... means absolutly nothing. Research AC2. It is unofficially dead! Runescape has more players than AC2! LOL! UO thrashed, and is still thrashing...... EQ, DAoC, AC, AC2, and even WoW, and EQ2. UO is far, far, older, but it is keeping 200k - 300k players away from those other games.
maple story has the best graphics by FAR!
...oops wrong genre.