That and the fact that 5 million friggen people play it That probably had influence on the fact that it's in the list
5 million people _HAVE tried_ it... They're not all still playing it.
Thats the misleading part of whenever Blizzard announces its numbers, its not how many current subscribers, just how many have tried playing it. Not that that has anything to do with this topic, I just wanted to chime in about Blizzards 5 million.
Originally posted by sleepyguyftlSo if most people agree that WoW's graphics aren't deserving to be in the finalist of the Best Graphics catagory, WHY WAS IT PUT IN THERE?
WoW graphics are cute and nice nonetheless. They are by no mean of a similar quality, but they are nice and they have their style. Comparing WoW graphics to EQ2 is like comparing Picasso to a Sony Digital camera photos...Picasso may sell for more, but it doesn't mean it has better graphics.
That and the fact that 5 million friggen people play it That probably had influence on the fact that it's in the list
Hehehe... nah I'm sure that's got nothing to do with it !!!
Besides the 5 million of course, I think what WoW has and what it does for alot of players is what Ryzom did for me when I played it, as I mentioned in my earlier post.
It gives you an emotional reaction to your surroundings and an attachment to certain locations, certainly it does not have this affect on everyone, WoW is just one of those games, you either hate the graphics or you absolutely love them.
I think this is compounded by the fact that many of the locations were based in lore and past games, players can see, interact and play in a location they've seen very differently in past games. This again gives people a feeling of attachment and for MMO's thats a really really good thing...
Originally posted by kimmar I was kind of impressed with the WoW graphics when I first started playing, but the more I play the less impressive they become. I don't know how to describe it, but it seems they just take a drawing and blur it a lot. I'm sure there is some technical name for what they do, but I don't know it.
In contrast to WoW's blurring technique, games like EQ2 and DAoC don't look blurry when you get up close to objects. You can actually see textures and even shading when you're right up on something. Oh, and in EQ2 when it rains it's awesome. The objects in the game actually look wet and reflective.
Everything in Wow is handmade. Hence the lower resolution textures. Most of the textures in the game are 512x512 or around that size. Wow is one of the few games out there that really shows the talent of their artists. This is real quality work, no shortcuts taken. The Wow engine doesn't have so much shading effects like other engines. But it got a couple of pixel shading effects, like the bloom effect, the underwater distortion, model smoothing, and specular lightning on the terrain. It has one very technically advanced feature and that is the seamless landscapes.
Most other mmo's use photosourcing. That is why they don't look blurry. The artist go out and take alot of very high resolution pictures of rocks, trees, grass, ground and so on. Thing you find out there in our world, clearly they aren't taking pictures of dragonskin (One of the reasons that Daoc character textures look quite bad compared to the world. They have to be handmade.) Then they are made "light neutral" (My expression), they remove any shadows and lightning. The they put it on the models. With this photosourcing they can get base textures that are 4000x4000 and around that. That is why they don't look as blurry as handmade textures.
That's so not true. Do you honestly think that WoW is the only game with artists? EVERY MMO starts out with concept art. Then they take that concept art and build a 3d world from it. I encourage you to play the Saga of Ryzom. That game clearly shows artistic talent.
The fact is that the catagory is best graphics. Graphics includes all aspects. It's not just art, it's not just technical. It's the best graphics. So if something has a lot of artistic look to it, but technically doesn't cut it, it should not be there. Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period.
Originally posted by sleepyguyftl Originally posted by PhoenixsOriginally posted by kimmarI was kind of impressed with the WoW graphics when I first started playing, but the more I play the less impressive they become. I don't know how to describe it, but it seems they just take a drawing and blur it a lot. I'm sure there is some technical name for what they do, but I don't know it. In contrast to WoW's blurring technique, games like EQ2 and DAoC don't look blurry when you get up close to objects. You can actually see textures and even shading when you're right up on something. Oh, and in EQ2 when it rains it's awesome. The objects in the game actually look wet and reflective. Everything in Wow is handmade. Hence the lower resolution textures. Most of the textures in the game are 512x512 or around that size. Wow is one of the few games out there that really shows the talent of their artists. This is real quality work, no shortcuts taken. The Wow engine doesn't have so much shading effects like other engines. But it got a couple of pixel shading effects, like the bloom effect, the underwater distortion, model smoothing, and specular lightning on the terrain. It has one very technically advanced feature and that is the seamless landscapes. Most other mmo's use photosourcing. That is why they don't look blurry. The artist go out and take alot of very high resolution pictures of rocks, trees, grass, ground and so on. Thing you find out there in our world, clearly they aren't taking pictures of dragonskin (One of the reasons that Daoc character textures look quite bad compared to the world. They have to be handmade.) Then they are made "light neutral" (My expression), they remove any shadows and lightning. The they put it on the models. With this photosourcing they can get base textures that are 4000x4000 and around that. That is why they don't look as blurry as handmade textures. That's so not true. Do you honestly think that WoW is the only game with artists? EVERY MMO starts out with concept art. Then they take that concept art and build a 3d world from it. I encourage you to play the Saga of Ryzom. That game clearly shows artistic talent. The fact is that the catagory is best graphics. Graphics includes all aspects. It's not just art, it's not just technical. It's the best graphics. So if something has a lot of artistic look to it, but technically doesn't cut it, it should not be there. Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period.
Did you read my post? Did I write that Wow was the only game with artists? No. I said that all the artwork in wow is handmade. While many other games use photosourcing. Everyone knows that SOR is one of the few games out there together with Wow that uses handmade artwork.
Like Elnator said. Tech + Art / 2 = Graphical score.
Wow.
Tech: 8 Seamless terrain makes it score big here. Lacks abit of the really sexy tech features like shader model 3, bump/normal mapping, realtime shadows.
Art: 9,5 It's awesome. Handmade, looks cool, exellent recreation of the Warcraft world.
Score: 8.75 clearly belongs amongst the games with best graphics. Like you said "Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period" Art counts for 90% of that. Everyone can make a world that has 10x the poly count of EQ2, 6x the amount of normal maps, paralex mapping, bump mapping, DX 10 features. That doesn't make it good.
Technical features provide a foundation for the artist to make the game look great.
I Think DAoC also...the updates make it look really cool if you have a nice computer. For all people that said WoW...I liked the graphics style on that game..but its easy to make the overall style good when you spend absolutly no time on c/c imo.
Originally posted by kimmarI was kind of impressed with the WoW graphics when I first started playing, but the more I play the less impressive they become. I don't know how to describe it, but it seems they just take a drawing and blur it a lot. I'm sure there is some technical name for what they do, but I don't know it. In contrast to WoW's blurring technique, games like EQ2 and DAoC don't look blurry when you get up close to objects. You can actually see textures and even shading when you're right up on something. Oh, and in EQ2 when it rains it's awesome. The objects in the game actually look wet and reflective.
Everything in Wow is handmade. Hence the lower resolution textures. Most of the textures in the game are 512x512 or around that size. Wow is one of the few games out there that really shows the talent of their artists. This is real quality work, no shortcuts taken. The Wow engine doesn't have so much shading effects like other engines. But it got a couple of pixel shading effects, like the bloom effect, the underwater distortion, model smoothing, and specular lightning on the terrain. It has one very technically advanced feature and that is the seamless landscapes. Most other mmo's use photosourcing. That is why they don't look blurry. The artist go out and take alot of very high resolution pictures of rocks, trees, grass, ground and so on. Thing you find out there in our world, clearly they aren't taking pictures of dragonskin (One of the reasons that Daoc character textures look quite bad compared to the world. They have to be handmade.) Then they are made "light neutral" (My expression), they remove any shadows and lightning. The they put it on the models. With this photosourcing they can get base textures that are 4000x4000 and around that. That is why they don't look as blurry as handmade textures.
That's so not true. Do you honestly think that WoW is the only game with artists? EVERY MMO starts out with concept art. Then they take that concept art and build a 3d world from it. I encourage you to play the Saga of Ryzom. That game clearly shows artistic talent. The fact is that the catagory is best graphics. Graphics includes all aspects. It's not just art, it's not just technical. It's the best graphics. So if something has a lot of artistic look to it, but technically doesn't cut it, it should not be there. Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period.
Did you read my post? Did I write that Wow was the only game with artists? No. I said that all the artwork in wow is handmade. While many other games use photosourcing. Everyone knows that SOR is one of the few games out there together with Wow that uses handmade artwork.
Like Elnator said. Tech + Art / 2 = Graphical score.
Wow.
Tech: 8 Seamless terrain makes it score big here. Lacks abit of the really sexy tech features like shader model 3, bump/normal mapping, realtime shadows.
Art: 9,5 It's awesome. Handmade, looks cool, exellent recreation of the Warcraft world.
Score: 8.75 clearly belongs amongst the games with best graphics. Like you said "Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period" Art counts for 90% of that. Everyone can make a world that has 10x the poly count of EQ2, 6x the amount of normal maps, paralex mapping, bump mapping, DX 10 features. That doesn't make it good.
Technical features provide a foundation for the artist to make the game look great.
When I went and bought my graphics card I looked for one that had all the new awesome graphical effects. Because those are what make graphics in a game look awesome to me. Whether the game is going for photorealism or a toon look doesn't matter to me. I just want cool looking modern graphics. WoW doesn't take advantage of nearly as many of the features I bought my graphics card for (or at least they don't appear to).
I find that a lot of the time when I'm playing WoW I look at a city or environment from far off and think it looks pretty good, but then when I get up close to it that's when the effect is gone. Everything isn't as sharp and crisp as other games. Even the character models are pretty messed up when you look at them up close. You are probably right about them doing hand work on it, but when I draw I don't end up with a bunch of blurry lines. They're crisp and precise. WoW up close looks like I need my glasses on. There's no textures or shadowing. It's just a square block with some drawing on top of it. That's where they stopped. They should've kept going and taken advantage of the features that are on my card like EQ2 does.
So I wouldn't have given it as high a score as you did on the art. It looks like they used colored smudge pencils. The other games had to consider the art and the tech effects laying on top of them. So that to me puts them at a more professional level. I wouldn't expect a cartoonist to know much about techy graphics. But the artists in the other games had to know the stuff a cartoon artist knows and the graphical tech stuff.
Wow uses alot of the features, like most other games. Since they all use Direct X functions. Wow requires DX9 and the same does EQ2. But Wow doesn't use all those shiny and bumpy effects, mostly because they wanted the comic style and low system requirements.
Wow's graphics aren't that sharp because of them being handmade. It's easier to draw the texture for armor when it's low res than when it's higher res. Atleast that is my experience. And they wanted low system requirements. Sharp textures = alot of memory in your videocard. Every artist in big companies knows about all art styles, it's a part of their education and the requirement to work in companies like Blizzard and SOE.
My opinion is that the technological effects are very nice, when done by good artists. Effects like bump/normal maps still require a artist to make the maps. No bump map will look nice if it's drawn really shitty. Just try to put a bump map from a mountain side into the face of a character. Not a pretty sight.
The bottom line is that to me: WOW looks blocky and unfinished especially up close. From a distance it's gorgeous and looks really good. But once you get up close to just about anything, like others have said it gets blurry and crappy looking whereas Ryzom, EQ2, DAOC and even SWG do not. (And both DAOC and SWG are years older than WOW).
Like I said, nothing against the artwork, it just didn't go far enough.
As to the 'seamless world' affecting the artwork? Nah, that's just a different method of handling zone loading. WoW does it gradually, EQ2 loads an entire zone at once. Not sure why SOE went that way but they did. WoW used gradual loads. Has nothing to do at all with the GRAPHICS of the game. AC1 had a seamless world as well, as do countless other games. Doesn't make their graphics good, that's GAMEPLAY.
Technically I'd rank WoW at about a 4 or 5 Artistically I'd rank WoW at about a 7 or 8. Specifically because they didn't use high rez textures or bump mapping, per pixel lighting etc so when you get up close things look crappy. So *my* average score for WoW is, on the generous side, is: (8+5)/2=6.5
Did you read my post? Did I write that Wow was the only game with artists? No. I said that all the artwork in wow is handmade. While many other games use photosourcing. Everyone knows that SOR is one of the few games out there together with Wow that uses handmade artwork. Like Elnator said. Tech + Art / 2 = Graphical score. Wow. Tech: 8 Seamless terrain makes it score big here. Lacks abit of the really sexy tech features like shader model 3, bump/normal mapping, realtime shadows. Art: 9,5 It's awesome. Handmade, looks cool, exellent recreation of the Warcraft world. Score: 8.75 clearly belongs amongst the games with best graphics. Like you said "Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period" Art counts for 90% of that. Everyone can make a world that has 10x the poly count of EQ2, 6x the amount of normal maps, paralex mapping, bump mapping, DX 10 features. That doesn't make it good. Technical features provide a foundation for the artist to make the game look great.
Ok ill pick this quote Phoenixs, not to argue directly with you but, just to give my opinion in general.
However i will say that there are plenty of games that use handmade textures or at least a large part handmade. Now i have to say that i think there is a lot of focus on just textures with almost no mention of the actual modeling (although i haven't read the whole thread so im not sure). Now, it is said that the textures are what make or break a model BUT i think, from experience, that without the base, which is the model, textures cant help beyond a certain extent. What im saying is that most people can probably make a decent looking cartoony dwarf face out of modeling clay; just some big blocky cheeks, an oversized brow and a great big beard. guaranteed that with even a little artistic talent it'll turn out lookin pretty niffty. Now try modeling a realistic face out of clay and if you don't have considerable skill and artistic vision, it'll not turn out looking like a human face at all, or at least not a very compelling one. anyway, then you slap on some paint to make them look nice but the ugly model will never look right no matter how realistic a photo you paint on it.
Im not saying that the WOW artists don't have skill im just saying that in my opinion the graphics have more "style" then "artistic skill". Im also saying that the more realistic games involve a lot of artistic skill in combination with the tech to make it look right.
And yes the reason the really realistic games don't use handpainted textures for everything(although alot is still done by hand) is because it would be like painting a full sized painting for every single texture to get that sort of resolution and quality which is just not feasible. For WOW, the texture quality isn't too high so its like painting a little 14 block of paper for each texture. Ever look at wood textures in WOW, you cant see any grain at all just a few general lines to show that its wood, whereas in more realistic games the resolution is high enough to show grain and much more detail but to paint that by hand would not only be a waste of time but also not as realistic as the actual thing anyway.
And yes bump mapping and alot of specularity controls do add to an artists... "bag of tricks" lets say, but without talent or a knowledge of how to create a realistic image and how to use light to convey what you want it to convey, you cant make a good looking game. You still need alot of talent to use the tech to its full capacity. Its just like if a noob oil painter has great equipment (fan brushes, round brushes, flat brushes, angle brushes etc etc and has 100 high quality colors) he's still not gonna be as good as the great painter who only owns a set of 10 colors and has 1 cheap brush. although give the good painter the good equipment and he will really shine.
Can that be applied to WOW? no i don't think so. It would be more like an oil painter vs. a manga artist IMHO. and i always looked at manga and comics(the real "artistic" type) as way more stylish then talented.
So which one is better? well they are both completely different. Someone who goes and looks at paintings my not even consider manga art. Then someone who likes manga may not give a sh1t about paintings. IMO painting is much harder to become good at but also is alot deeper and meaningful, or at least can be(completely my opinion again).
Ok so the above is not meant to bash or belittle WOW graphics, they do have a consistent style and show considerable imagination, they are not, however what i look for in graphics in an MMO. I think a mmorpg is meant to bring people into a fantasy world and emerse them in a "realistic" environment. Realistic in that it is believable and you have the sense of actually being there, inside this living breathing place of monsters and adventure. And it is also my opinion, that to be most effective in this a game needs to have graphics that people can relate to. That means graphical realism, not a cartoon, because we don't live in a cartoon. Im not saying that it needs to be "boring" or "bland" like everyday life, but that even features that aren't in every day life (swords, magic staves, monsters, magical landscapes etc) are more believable and alive if they look like what we would imagine them to look like in real life if they were real. I mean if i was a proud paladin or warrior or a smart mage or wizard, i never would imagine myself fighting a DRAWING or cartoon monster. Thats something they put in children's books.
Ok here is a "graphic" example: what i imagine a horrid undead to look like if it was truly "horrid" is a gory lump of crimson flesh, with dried, crusty, blood crumbling from the sides of its cracking dry lips, dark, dirty like blood appearing at the cracks when it smiles at you, and rotting flesh oozing puss out of blue and black infected, diseased gashes. Discolored skin peeling in some places and glistening with blood or other bodily fluid in other places, maybe dark, yellow-green, sticky flem spraying and trickling from its torn nostrils as it lets out hideous sounds as it attacks you. probably wearing rough rags soaked with a mixture or blood, urine, and dirt. Its splintering, rough, wooden shield has crooked, rusty nails driven through at awkward angles and bears the remnants of unlucky victims in the form of decomposing chunks of flesh. Its disfigured face showing no fear, only hate and death so complete that it would make grown men sob...
.......
do i need to go on? In short i want to experience a "real" fantasy world, not a childrens storybook world.
WoW is a fun game but it is not a "real" fantasy experience to me.
As to the seamless terrain, i think that is more "planning" out the world in a seamless fashion and then enough money to support servers with no zones. But if this is a big feature for you, check out Vanguard, it'll have no zones/loading OR unpassable mountains/ landmass, the whole world is not only seamless but follows the design philosophy of, if you can see it you can reach it. Unlike in wow where mountains or walls or waters make unrealistic barriers.
Ok i want to say again that im not trying to bash WOW(it may seem like it but this is my opinion just on its graphics): i do play the game (just started playing again)and it is fun enough to pass my time but i would say that the graphics for me are a big negative rather then a positive, just my tastes but again i addressed that above.
In the end, it will all be about preferance. EQ2 surely has one of if not the best graphics engine. But I could never attach myself to the world. Maybe it was to realistic.
Now on the other hand Im a huge Anime graphics junkie, so Lineage 2 blew me away, and its only running on the Unreal 2 engine. But its gorgeous. To bad thats all it is. One of he worst grinds in history. But If there would have been great gameplay in it, I definatly would have stayed.
Played WoW near a year, been on a few months break,. I think its a very nice looking game as well. The graphics fit with the Warcraft series.
And then you have City of Heroes. Very nice. Another game I enjoyed at first, but lost interest in it fast.
But if I had to pick the #1 graphics game, It would be Lineage 2. But I would not recommend that POS to anyone :P
I like GW, SOR and EVE graphics. GW got great engine, it looks beatiful and it's not that heavy. In SOR the day and night are beatiful and the environment changes like snow, sandstorms and rain are gorgeous EVEs space is like u are really in space and i love it.
WOW got nice graphics but the engine is poor.. How cartoon graphics can eat so much out from ur pc.. U are in raid and if u don't have latest hardware it's a slideshow.. thats not good optimize for mmo gameengine
Originally posted by dunadurium Ok ill pick this quote Phoenixs, not to argue directly with you but, just to give my opinion in general. However i will say that there are plenty of games that use handmade textures or at least a large part handmade. Now i have to say that i think there is a lot of focus on just textures with almost no mention of the actual modeling (although i haven't read the whole thread so im not sure). Now, it is said that the textures are what make or break a model BUT i think, from experience, that without the base, which is the model, textures cant help beyond a certain extent. What im saying is that most people can probably make a decent looking cartoony dwarf face out of modeling clay; just some big blocky cheeks, an oversized brow and a great big beard. guaranteed that with even a little artistic talent it'll turn out lookin pretty niffty. Now try modeling a realistic face out of clay and if you don't have considerable skill and artistic vision, it'll not turn out looking like a human face at all, or at least not a very compelling one. anyway, then you slap on some paint to make them look nice but the ugly model will never look right no matter how realistic a photo you paint on it. Im not saying that the WOW artists don't have skill im just saying that in my opinion the graphics have more "style" then "artistic skill". Im also saying that the more realistic games involve a lot of artistic skill in combination with the tech to make it look right. And yes the reason the really realistic games don't use handpainted textures for everything(although alot is still done by hand) is because it would be like painting a full sized painting for every single texture to get that sort of resolution and quality which is just not feasible. For WOW, the texture quality isn't too high so its like painting a little 14 block of paper for each texture. Ever look at wood textures in WOW, you cant see any grain at all just a few general lines to show that its wood, whereas in more realistic games the resolution is high enough to show grain and much more detail but to paint that by hand would not only be a waste of time but also not as realistic as the actual thing anyway. And yes bump mapping and alot of specularity controls do add to an artists... "bag of tricks" lets say, but without talent or a knowledge of how to create a realistic image and how to use light to convey what you want it to convey, you cant make a good looking game. You still need alot of talent to use the tech to its full capacity. Its just like if a noob oil painter has great equipment (fan brushes, round brushes, flat brushes, angle brushes etc etc and has 100 high quality colors) he's still not gonna be as good as the great painter who only owns a set of 10 colors and has 1 cheap brush. although give the good painter the good equipment and he will really shine. Can that be applied to WOW? no i don't think so. It would be more like an oil painter vs. a manga artist IMHO. and i always looked at manga and comics(the real "artistic" type) as way more stylish then talented. So which one is better? well they are both completely different. Someone who goes and looks at paintings my not even consider manga art. Then someone who likes manga may not give a sh1t about paintings. IMO painting is much harder to become good at but also is alot deeper and meaningful, or at least can be(completely my opinion again). Ok so the above is not meant to bash or belittle WOW graphics, they do have a consistent style and show considerable imagination, they are not, however what i look for in graphics in an MMO. I think a mmorpg is meant to bring people into a fantasy world and emerse them in a "realistic" environment. Realistic in that it is believable and you have the sense of actually being there, inside this living breathing place of monsters and adventure. And it is also my opinion, that to be most effective in this a game needs to have graphics that people can relate to. That means graphical realism, not a cartoon, because we don't live in a cartoon. Im not saying that it needs to be "boring" or "bland" like everyday life, but that even features that aren't in every day life (swords, magic staves, monsters, magical landscapes etc) are more believable and alive if they look like what we would imagine them to look like in real life if they were real. I mean if i was a proud paladin or warrior or a smart mage or wizard, i never would imagine myself fighting a DRAWING or cartoon monster. Thats something they put in children's books. Ok here is a "graphic" example: what i imagine a horrid undead to look like if it was truly "horrid" is a gory lump of crimson flesh, with dried, crusty, blood crumbling from the sides of its cracking dry lips, dark, dirty like blood appearing at the cracks when it smiles at you, and rotting flesh oozing puss out of blue and black infected, diseased gashes. Discolored skin peeling in some places and glistening with blood or other bodily fluid in other places, maybe dark, yellow-green, sticky flem spraying and trickling from its torn nostrils as it lets out hideous sounds as it attacks you. probably wearing rough rags soaked with a mixture or blood, urine, and dirt. Its splintering, rough, wooden shield has crooked, rusty nails driven through at awkward angles and bears the remnants of unlucky victims in the form of decomposing chunks of flesh. Its disfigured face showing no fear, only hate and death so complete that it would make grown men sob... ....... do i need to go on? In short i want to experience a "real" fantasy world, not a childrens storybook world. WoW is a fun game but it is not a "real" fantasy experience to me. As to the seamless terrain, i think that is more "planning" out the world in a seamless fashion and then enough money to support servers with no zones. But if this is a big feature for you, check out Vanguard, it'll have no zones/loading OR unpassable mountains/ landmass, the whole world is not only seamless but follows the design philosophy of, if you can see it you can reach it. Unlike in wow where mountains or walls or waters make unrealistic barriers. Ok i want to say again that im not trying to bash WOW(it may seem like it but this is my opinion just on its graphics): i do play the game (just started playing again)and it is fun enough to pass my time but i would say that the graphics for me are a big negative rather then a positive, just my tastes but again i addressed that above. -Dunadurium
This was just such an awesome post I had to quote it for emphasis. Hats off to you Dunadurium, and I can't wait for VANGUARD!!!!!!!!!!!!
IMO Best graphics ingame at present... EQ2... eve... lineage2... CoH.... these are the games I have played...
best I have ever played... and yes I know it`s not running anymore... the original poster asked for opinions... Earth and Beyond... not all of it but most of the gfx was fantastic...
GW: Not even close the the best graphics and sorry to say but if you think they are you obviously havent tried very many games within the last couple years... or even seen screenshots. Its not that the graphics are BAD, they're actually quite good. Just that there are definately better ones out there.
EVE: Stunning, absolutely stunning... but then again how hard is it to make space look nice? No space game should ever be considered best graphically designed no matter how nice it looks. Its just so easy to do!
EQ2: Very nicely done. I have few complaints on this one, but then again I never really played it long either so its hard to say.
L2: A little too much anime style for me, not a big fan of anime. Still VERY nice though and if your into that style its a winner.
WoW: Not my favourite graphics but not bad either. Very nicely done as far as amount of effort put into 'em and seems to suit the game quite well. Can't bring myself to picture realistic graphics in a game based on the warcraft series... just doesnt fit.
SOR: Didn't play this one long either, but from what I did play I really liked the graphics. Character customization is without a doubt one of the higher points of the game, and I'm always a fan of not seeing a dozen of the same person in a town like you'll see a lot in games.
So theres my little input to the topic, and ya I know most of this has already been stated but everyone should have the priviledge of knowing what I think... I'm just that cool...
As far as best goes, thats a matter of opinion and your never gonna get a definitive answer because everyone thinks differently... Oh and before anybody freaks out I HAVE played or DO play these games and its just MY opinion... you're welcome to have your own if it makes you happy.
Oh by the way, these are based on the graphics being about mid range of what they could be for most of the games... my computer is pretty crappy.
"Its good to question authority... just not mine."
SWG does have the best graphics going in my opinion BUT the gameplay now sucks so if graphics is all u care about by all means its a great game. Daoc looks amazing to and u have to give it more credit because its a fairly old game that keeps on improving.
Originally posted by ReLyT GW: Not even close the the best graphics and sorry to say but if you think they are you obviously havent tried very many games within the last couple years... or even seen screenshots. Its not that the graphics are BAD, they're actually quite good. Just that there are definately better ones out there.
Yes i have played many many many games past few years. And ur right it's not the best graphics but it fits for the game and makes GW a GW. I couldn't imagine GW with WOW graphics =P
That and the fact that 5 million friggen people play it That probably had influence on the fact that it's in the list
5 million people _HAVE tried_ it... They're not all still playing it.
Thats the misleading part of whenever Blizzard announces its numbers, its not how many current subscribers, just how many have tried playing it. Not that that has anything to do with this topic, I just wanted to chime in about Blizzards 5 million.
Sorry bud but you're wrong. WoW has 5 million CUSTOMERS. They define a customer as...
World of Warcraft's Customer Definition World of Warcraft customers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or purchased a prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the installation box bundled with one free month access. Internet Game Room players that have accessed the game over the last seven days are also counted as customers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired pre-paid cards. Customers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules.
I can't possible see how you can say that GW's graphics are the best. They are bland and boring. Firstly the enviroments looks terrible. If there is one thing the unreal engine does bad it's mountains. Enviroments are ugly (The mountains), and empty, just a few trees here and there. Animations are stocky and unsmooth. Characters are nice enought, but lean abit much to the manga style for my taste. And GW is probably the game that shows best "how not to use the bloom effect".
Comments
5 million people _HAVE tried_ it... They're not all still playing it.
Thats the misleading part of whenever Blizzard announces its numbers, its not how many current subscribers, just how many have tried playing it. Not that that has anything to do with this topic, I just wanted to chime in about Blizzards 5 million.
That and the fact that 5 million friggen people play it
That probably had influence on the fact that it's in the list 
Besides the 5 million of course, I think what WoW has and what it does for alot of players is what Ryzom did for me when I played it, as I mentioned in my earlier post.
It gives you an emotional reaction to your surroundings and an attachment to certain locations, certainly it does not have this affect on everyone, WoW is just one of those games, you either hate the graphics or you absolutely love them.
I think this is compounded by the fact that many of the locations were based in lore and past games, players can see, interact and play in a location they've seen very differently in past games. This again gives people a feeling of attachment and for MMO's thats a really really good thing...
Even when it comes to graphics.
Important Information regarding Posting and You
Everything in Wow is handmade. Hence the lower resolution textures. Most of the textures in the game are 512x512 or around that size. Wow is one of the few games out there that really shows the talent of their artists. This is real quality work, no shortcuts taken. The Wow engine doesn't have so much shading effects like other engines. But it got a couple of pixel shading effects, like the bloom effect, the underwater distortion, model smoothing, and specular lightning on the terrain. It has one very technically advanced feature and that is the seamless landscapes.
Most other mmo's use photosourcing. That is why they don't look blurry. The artist go out and take alot of very high resolution pictures of rocks, trees, grass, ground and so on. Thing you find out there in our world, clearly they aren't taking pictures of dragonskin
(One of the reasons that Daoc character textures look quite bad compared to the world. They have to be handmade.) Then they are made "light neutral" (My expression), they remove any shadows and lightning. The they put it on the models. With this photosourcing they can get base textures that are 4000x4000 and around that. That is why they don't look as blurry as handmade textures.
That's so not true. Do you honestly think that WoW is the only game with artists? EVERY MMO starts out with concept art. Then they take that concept art and build a 3d world from it. I encourage you to play the Saga of Ryzom. That game clearly shows artistic talent.
The fact is that the catagory is best graphics. Graphics includes all aspects. It's not just art, it's not just technical. It's the best graphics. So if something has a lot of artistic look to it, but technically doesn't cut it, it should not be there. Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period.
So EQ2 wins YAY
The new EQ2, better than ever befor !
don't click this link...
Did you read my post? Did I write that Wow was the only game with artists? No. I said that all the artwork in wow is handmade. While many other games use photosourcing. Everyone knows that SOR is one of the few games out there together with Wow that uses handmade artwork.
Like Elnator said. Tech + Art / 2 = Graphical score.
Wow.
Tech: 8 Seamless terrain makes it score big here. Lacks abit of the really sexy tech features like shader model 3, bump/normal mapping, realtime shadows.
Art: 9,5 It's awesome. Handmade, looks cool, exellent recreation of the Warcraft world.
Score: 8.75 clearly belongs amongst the games with best graphics. Like you said "Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period" Art counts for 90% of that. Everyone can make a world that has 10x the poly count of EQ2, 6x the amount of normal maps, paralex mapping, bump mapping, DX 10 features. That doesn't make it good.
Technical features provide a foundation for the artist to make the game look great.
I Think DAoC also...the updates make it look really cool if you have a nice computer. For all people that said WoW...I liked the graphics style on that game..but its easy to make the overall style good when you spend absolutly no time on c/c imo.
Did you read my post? Did I write that Wow was the only game with artists? No. I said that all the artwork in wow is handmade. While many other games use photosourcing. Everyone knows that SOR is one of the few games out there together with Wow that uses handmade artwork.
Like Elnator said. Tech + Art / 2 = Graphical score.
Wow.
Tech: 8 Seamless terrain makes it score big here. Lacks abit of the really sexy tech features like shader model 3, bump/normal mapping, realtime shadows.
Art: 9,5 It's awesome. Handmade, looks cool, exellent recreation of the Warcraft world.
Score: 8.75 clearly belongs amongst the games with best graphics. Like you said "Best graphics should be what games looks the best, period" Art counts for 90% of that. Everyone can make a world that has 10x the poly count of EQ2, 6x the amount of normal maps, paralex mapping, bump mapping, DX 10 features. That doesn't make it good.
Technical features provide a foundation for the artist to make the game look great.
When I went and bought my graphics card I looked for one that had all the new awesome graphical effects. Because those are what make graphics in a game look awesome to me. Whether the game is going for photorealism or a toon look doesn't matter to me. I just want cool looking modern graphics. WoW doesn't take advantage of nearly as many of the features I bought my graphics card for (or at least they don't appear to).
I find that a lot of the time when I'm playing WoW I look at a city or environment from far off and think it looks pretty good, but then when I get up close to it that's when the effect is gone. Everything isn't as sharp and crisp as other games. Even the character models are pretty messed up when you look at them up close. You are probably right about them doing hand work on it, but when I draw I don't end up with a bunch of blurry lines. They're crisp and precise. WoW up close looks like I need my glasses on. There's no textures or shadowing. It's just a square block with some drawing on top of it. That's where they stopped. They should've kept going and taken advantage of the features that are on my card like EQ2 does.
So I wouldn't have given it as high a score as you did on the art. It looks like they used colored smudge pencils. The other games had to consider the art and the tech effects laying on top of them. So that to me puts them at a more professional level. I wouldn't expect a cartoonist to know much about techy graphics. But the artists in the other games had to know the stuff a cartoon artist knows and the graphical tech stuff.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Wow uses alot of the features, like most other games. Since they all use Direct X functions. Wow requires DX9 and the same does EQ2. But Wow doesn't use all those shiny and bumpy effects, mostly because they wanted the comic style and low system requirements.
Wow's graphics aren't that sharp because of them being handmade. It's easier to draw the texture for armor when it's low res than when it's higher res. Atleast that is my experience. And they wanted low system requirements. Sharp textures = alot of memory in your videocard. Every artist in big companies knows about all art styles, it's a part of their education and the requirement to work in companies like Blizzard and SOE.
My opinion is that the technological effects are very nice, when done by good artists. Effects like bump/normal maps still require a artist to make the maps. No bump map will look nice if it's drawn really shitty. Just try to put a bump map from a mountain side into the face of a character. Not a pretty sight.
The bottom line is that to me:
WOW looks blocky and unfinished especially up close. From a distance it's gorgeous and looks really good.
But once you get up close to just about anything, like others have said it gets blurry and crappy looking whereas Ryzom, EQ2, DAOC and even SWG do not. (And both DAOC and SWG are years older than WOW).
Like I said, nothing against the artwork, it just didn't go far enough.
As to the 'seamless world' affecting the artwork? Nah, that's just a different method of handling zone loading. WoW does it gradually, EQ2 loads an entire zone at once. Not sure why SOE went that way but they did. WoW used gradual loads. Has nothing to do at all with the GRAPHICS of the game. AC1 had a seamless world as well, as do countless other games. Doesn't make their graphics good, that's GAMEPLAY.
Technically I'd rank WoW at about a 4 or 5
Artistically I'd rank WoW at about a 7 or 8. Specifically because they didn't use high rez textures or bump mapping, per pixel lighting etc so when you get up close things look crappy. So *my* average score for WoW is, on the generous side, is: (8+5)/2=6.5
Ryzom I'd rate at:
Technically: 9
Artistically: 9
Average: 9
And I gotta say, as far as sexy ladies go, Ryzom has it hands down every day including Sunday
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
grap[hic wise ffix ryzom, daoc
take what you can but not what isn't yours. "fight to the end and never give your enemy the satisfaction of victory"
guild wars by far!
guild wars by far!"
Maybee the Pre-renderd box-art but we mean IN-game......
The new EQ2, better than ever befor !
don't click this link...
Ok ill pick this quote Phoenixs, not to argue directly with you but, just to give my opinion in general.
However i will say that there are plenty of games that use handmade textures or at least a large part handmade. Now i have to say that i think there is a lot of focus on just textures with almost no mention of the actual modeling (although i haven't read the whole thread so im not sure). Now, it is said that the textures are what make or break a model BUT i think, from experience, that without the base, which is the model, textures cant help beyond a certain extent. What im saying is that most people can probably make a decent looking cartoony dwarf face out of modeling clay; just some big blocky cheeks, an oversized brow and a great big beard. guaranteed that with even a little artistic talent it'll turn out lookin pretty niffty. Now try modeling a realistic face out of clay and if you don't have considerable skill and artistic vision, it'll not turn out looking like a human face at all, or at least not a very compelling one. anyway, then you slap on some paint to make them look nice but the ugly model will never look right no matter how realistic a photo you paint on it.
Im not saying that the WOW artists don't have skill im just saying that in my opinion the graphics have more "style" then "artistic skill". Im also saying that the more realistic games involve a lot of artistic skill in combination with the tech to make it look right.
And yes the reason the really realistic games don't use handpainted textures for everything(although alot is still done by hand) is because it would be like painting a full sized painting for every single texture to get that sort of resolution and quality which is just not feasible. For WOW, the texture quality isn't too high so its like painting a little 14 block of paper for each texture. Ever look at wood textures in WOW, you cant see any grain at all just a few general lines to show that its wood, whereas in more realistic games the resolution is high enough to show grain and much more detail but to paint that by hand would not only be a waste of time but also not as realistic as the actual thing anyway.
And yes bump mapping and alot of specularity controls do add to an artists... "bag of tricks" lets say, but without talent or a knowledge of how to create a realistic image and how to use light to convey what you want it to convey, you cant make a good looking game. You still need alot of talent to use the tech to its full capacity. Its just like if a noob oil painter has great equipment (fan brushes, round brushes, flat brushes, angle brushes etc etc and has 100 high quality colors) he's still not gonna be as good as the great painter who only owns a set of 10 colors and has 1 cheap brush. although give the good painter the good equipment and he will really shine.
Can that be applied to WOW? no i don't think so. It would be more like an oil painter vs. a manga artist IMHO. and i always looked at manga and comics(the real "artistic" type) as way more stylish then talented.
So which one is better? well they are both completely different. Someone who goes and looks at paintings my not even consider manga art. Then someone who likes manga may not give a sh1t about paintings. IMO painting is much harder to become good at but also is alot deeper and meaningful, or at least can be(completely my opinion again).
Ok so the above is not meant to bash or belittle WOW graphics, they do have a consistent style and show considerable imagination, they are not, however what i look for in graphics in an MMO. I think a mmorpg is meant to bring people into a fantasy world and emerse them in a "realistic" environment. Realistic in that it is believable and you have the sense of actually being there, inside this living breathing place of monsters and adventure. And it is also my opinion, that to be most effective in this a game needs to have graphics that people can relate to. That means graphical realism, not a cartoon, because we don't live in a cartoon. Im not saying that it needs to be "boring" or "bland" like everyday life, but that even features that aren't in every day life (swords, magic staves, monsters, magical landscapes etc) are more believable and alive if they look like what we would imagine them to look like in real life if they were real. I mean if i was a proud paladin or warrior or a smart mage or wizard, i never would imagine myself fighting a DRAWING or cartoon monster. Thats something they put in children's books.
Ok here is a "graphic" example: what i imagine a horrid undead to look like if it was truly "horrid" is a gory lump of crimson flesh, with dried, crusty, blood crumbling from the sides of its cracking dry lips, dark, dirty like blood appearing at the cracks when it smiles at you, and rotting flesh oozing puss out of blue and black infected, diseased gashes. Discolored skin peeling in some places and glistening with blood or other bodily fluid in other places, maybe dark, yellow-green, sticky flem spraying and trickling from its torn nostrils as it lets out hideous sounds as it attacks you. probably wearing rough rags soaked with a mixture or blood, urine, and dirt. Its splintering, rough, wooden shield has crooked, rusty nails driven through at awkward angles and bears the remnants of unlucky victims in the form of decomposing chunks of flesh. Its disfigured face showing no fear, only hate and death so complete that it would make grown men sob...
.......
do i need to go on? In short i want to experience a "real" fantasy world, not a childrens storybook world.
WoW is a fun game but it is not a "real" fantasy experience to me.
As to the seamless terrain, i think that is more "planning" out the world in a seamless fashion and then enough money to support servers with no zones. But if this is a big feature for you, check out Vanguard, it'll have no zones/loading OR unpassable mountains/ landmass, the whole world is not only seamless but follows the design philosophy of, if you can see it you can reach it. Unlike in wow where mountains or walls or waters make unrealistic barriers.
Ok i want to say again that im not trying to bash WOW(it may seem like it but this is my opinion just on its graphics): i do play the game (just started playing again)and it is fun enough to pass my time but i would say that the graphics for me are a big negative rather then a positive, just my tastes but again i addressed that above.
-Dunadurium
"Silly rabbit, WoW's for kids"
************************
Oh and just to stay on topic, the game with best graphics is:
Vanguard:SOH of course
-Dunadurium
"Silly rabbit, WoW's for kids"
************************
In the end, it will all be about preferance. EQ2 surely has one of if not the best graphics engine. But I could never attach myself to the world. Maybe it was to realistic.
Now on the other hand Im a huge Anime graphics junkie, so Lineage 2 blew me away, and its only running on the Unreal 2 engine. But its gorgeous. To bad thats all it is. One of he worst grinds in history. But If there would have been great gameplay in it, I definatly would have stayed.
Played WoW near a year, been on a few months break,. I think its a very nice looking game as well. The graphics fit with the Warcraft series.
And then you have City of Heroes. Very nice. Another game I enjoyed at first, but lost interest in it fast.
But if I had to pick the #1 graphics game, It would be Lineage 2. But I would not recommend that POS to anyone :P
I like GW, SOR and EVE graphics.
GW got great engine, it looks beatiful and it's not that heavy.
In SOR the day and night are beatiful and the environment changes like snow, sandstorms and rain are gorgeous
EVEs space is like u are really in space and i love it.
WOW got nice graphics but the engine is poor.. How cartoon graphics can eat so much out from ur pc.. U are in raid and if u don't have latest hardware it's a slideshow.. thats not good optimize for mmo gameengine
IMO
Best graphics ingame at present...
EQ2...
eve...
lineage2...
CoH....
these are the games I have played...
best I have ever played...
and yes I know it`s not running anymore...
the original poster asked for opinions...
Earth and Beyond...
not all of it but most of the gfx was fantastic...
..........IMO...........
i like CoH. its not too cartoonish, but not extremely realistic looking either. and also technically, it is fairly good looking =.
GW: Not even close the the best graphics and sorry to say but if you think they are you obviously havent tried very many games within the last couple years... or even seen screenshots. Its not that the graphics are BAD, they're actually quite good. Just that there are definately better ones out there.
EVE: Stunning, absolutely stunning... but then again how hard is it to make space look nice? No space game should ever be considered best graphically designed no matter how nice it looks. Its just so easy to do!
EQ2: Very nicely done. I have few complaints on this one, but then again I never really played it long either so its hard to say.
L2: A little too much anime style for me, not a big fan of anime. Still VERY nice though and if your into that style its a winner.
WoW: Not my favourite graphics but not bad either. Very nicely done as far as amount of effort put into 'em and seems to suit the game quite well. Can't bring myself to picture realistic graphics in a game based on the warcraft series... just doesnt fit.
SOR: Didn't play this one long either, but from what I did play I really liked the graphics. Character customization is without a doubt one of the higher points of the game, and I'm always a fan of not seeing a dozen of the same person in a town like you'll see a lot in games.
So theres my little input to the topic, and ya I know most of this has already been stated but everyone should have the priviledge of knowing what I think... I'm just that cool...
As far as best goes, thats a matter of opinion and your never gonna get a definitive answer because everyone thinks differently... Oh and before anybody freaks out I HAVE played or DO play these games and its just MY opinion... you're welcome to have your own if it makes you happy.
Oh by the way, these are based on the graphics being about mid range of what they could be for most of the games... my computer is pretty crappy.
"Its good to question authority... just not mine."
{(RIP)} SWG
Yes i have played many many many games past few years. And ur right it's not the best graphics but it fits for the game and makes GW a GW. I couldn't imagine GW with WOW graphics =P
5 million people _HAVE tried_ it... They're not all still playing it.
Thats the misleading part of whenever Blizzard announces its numbers, its not how many current subscribers, just how many have tried playing it. Not that that has anything to do with this topic, I just wanted to chime in about Blizzards 5 million.
Sorry bud but you're wrong. WoW has 5 million CUSTOMERS. They define a customer as...
World of Warcraft's Customer Definition
World of Warcraft customers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or purchased a prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the installation box bundled with one free month access. Internet Game Room players that have accessed the game over the last seven days are also counted as customers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired pre-paid cards. Customers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules.
http://www.blizzard.com/press/051219.shtml
I can't possible see how you can say that GW's graphics are the best. They are bland and boring. Firstly the enviroments looks terrible. If there is one thing the unreal engine does bad it's mountains. Enviroments are ugly (The mountains), and empty, just a few trees here and there. Animations are stocky and unsmooth. Characters are nice enought, but lean abit much to the manga style for my taste. And GW is probably the game that shows best "how not to use the bloom effect".