LOL., ok we'll agree to disagree I guess. If you see WOW's graphics & art direction even in the same league as the titles I've mentioned it's clear you're a fan thus leaving you unable to see things objectively.
I suppose there are some people who view the mustang a superior automobile to a Lamborghini..
To each his own I guess.
Or perhaps its a simple matter of not understanding what art-direction is.
Art direction is not a matter of how many polygons the world has, how large their textures are, etc. It's a matter of creating originality. WoW has taken the Fantasy MMO and added incredible amounts of originality in everything they've done artistically. The worlds, the characters, the armor, hell-even the icons are crafted with such care for their artistic qualities.
As for the other games you have mentioned, it should be noted that the only games I actually tried were GuildWars and Ryzom. Lineage II I hear had beautiful art direction AND graphics technology - and actually considered getting the game but the game was just not for me. I hated Guild Wars though I remember it having a pleastant art style, but I hated the game itself. Ryzom was a beautiful game- even came close to being as good as WoW in artistic DEPTH (ahh another important point).
Another thing, perhaps I see things different than others too, I have a different appreciation for things because I am an architecture student who specializes in crafting 3D environments.
Some people prefer realistic styles with standard environments seen in games over and over and over. Some can enjoy things beyond that. I have always appreciated games that take a unique artistic approach that have executed it excellently.
LOL., ok we'll agree to disagree I guess. If you see WOW's graphics & art direction even in the same league as the titles I've mentioned it's clear you're a fan thus leaving you unable to see things objectively.
I suppose there are some people who view the mustang a superior automobile to a Lamborghini..
To each his own I guess.
Or perhaps its a simple matter of not understanding what art-direction is.
Art direction is not a matter of how many polygons the world has, how large their textures are, etc. It's a matter of creating originality. WoW has taken the Fantasy MMO and added incredible amounts of originality in everything they've done artistically. The worlds, the characters, the armor, hell-even the icons are crafted with such care for their artistic qualities.
As for the other games you have mentioned, it should be noted that the only games I actually tried were GuildWars and Ryzom. Lineage II I hear had beautiful art direction AND graphics technology - and actually considered getting the game but the game was just not for me. I hated Guild Wars though I remember it having a pleastant art style, but I hated the game itself. Ryzom was a beautiful game- even came close to being as good as WoW in artistic DEPTH (ahh another important point).
Another thing, perhaps I see things different than others too, I have a different appreciation for things because I am an architecture student who specializes in crafting 3D environments.
I'm quite familiar with art direction as I've been in the game for quite some time. Simply put cartoonish locales, textures, character models and armor don't equal great visuals or artistic direction in my book. Since you've tried LOTRO I humbly suggest you try the Lineage II trial and get a taste of artistic style minus oversized limbs and blocky armor that looks like a colorful McDonalds uniform.
Now.....there are plenty of areas where WOW shines brightly. So Instead of carrying on this charade in an area WOW can't compete why not focus on things the game actually does well such as an intuitive UI, ease of startup and character animations.
What was mediocre at launch just doesn't cut it in 2007.
Now.....there are plenty of areas where WOW shines brightly. So Instead of carrying on this charade in an area WOW can't compete why not focus on things the game actually does well such as an intuitive UI, ease of startup and character animations.
I guess what we can agree on that WoW shines at is it's performance and polish is another reason it is so sucessful. Something that is recognized in LOTRO and one of the reasons I enjoy playing in the beta so much.
Vanguard is a graphically superior game. Possibly in the future they will sort out the lag etc. I would keep an eye on it, it may do a AO in a years time and be very good. But don’t get it till then.
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago.
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago. Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
But they haven't even had an open beta yet? Not being a fanboy or anything, but how can you complain about what they've 'not given you' so far.... it's still closed beta?!
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago. Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
But they haven't even had an open beta yet? Not being a fanboy or anything, but how can you complain about what they've 'not given you' so far.... it's still closed beta?!
I played the closed beta, which I can talk about because the NDA has been lifted.
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago. Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
Graphics are subjective That is for sure. I am curious how far into LOTRO did you play ?
Ohh and one thing to note, Vanguard character animations ? Its like circa 1998.
Quality of a game's graphics are purely subjective. Personally, even though I am a fan of Parkinson's work, I find Lotro's graphics to be far superior to those in Vanguard.
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago. Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
But they haven't even had an open beta yet? Not being a fanboy or anything, but how can you complain about what they've 'not given you' so far.... it's still closed beta?!
I played the closed beta, which I can talk about because the NDA has been lifted.
well duh... of course you did.... so did I. (The hi-res client was released late in the CB, I actually got it off the pre-order CD.)
The point is, how can you complain about them not selling you on such and such because they didn't give you the hi-res client during closed beta? Your point might have some weight after open beta starts ...sure. Need I quote you?
My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me.
It's closed beta man... now when open-beta happens and they don't give you a hi-res client, then sure, fuss at em....
I guess I understand if you are coming from VG that it's easy to forget what a game looks like in closed-beta.... jeeze. I was crashing out of game in VG a week before release... and from what I'm reading, sounds like they are still in closed beta. LOTRO has a way to go, "bugs" to fix, areas to add etc. It's still closed beta, and it will probably be 3 months before VG runs as good as lotro is now. Hey, I dislike turbine as much as the next guy (AC2, DDO, etc), but they've done a kick A job on this title... just doesn't seem viable to complain about not getting sold on a product during CB is all...
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Sorry { Mod Edit } that screenshot just reinforces my point that lotro looks like ass compared to what I'm seeing in vanguard. Those horses are disgusting. The dwarf on the left looks like it came from neverwinter nights, the first one. The only thing that looks decent is the wizard's hat. As long as you stare directly at the hat and don't look at anything else like his hand.
Even if I find it hard to believe myself I sometimes do agree with Jackdog, but not this time around. Come on Jackdog, that screenshot of yours does only show why VG has better graphics. Just look at the horses and the character models, and in your screenshot even the landscape looks poor (which I consider otherwise to be LOTRO graphics strong point).
This is a pointless discussion, LOTRO has pretty bland graphics but great performance. VG has great graphics from a technical viewpoint (as in advanced graphics) but if you like them or not is subjective, and it has a lot worse performance than LOTRO (but as I keep stating, it is now fully playable).
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
Thanks for reminding me how washed out and bland Vanguard looks.Not only that but that guys head riding the horse looks like a punkin with a face painted on it. As far as Thorions HAll area goes it's a freakin snow covered mountain LOL and is really a quite beautiful area in the game, I love it when the snow is falling,oops Vanguard does not have weather ingame yet ( and I doubt if it will ever have) does it...sorry
anyway show me a screen shot of Vanguard which has any area like this
Thanks for reminding me how washed out and bland Vanguard looks.Not only that but that guys head riding the horse looks like a punkin with a face painted on it. As far as Thorions HAll area goes it's a freakin snow covered mountain LOL and is really a quite beautiful area in the game, I love it when the snow is falling,oops Vanguard does not have weather ingame yet ( and I doubt if it will ever have) does it...sorry anyway show me a screen shot of Vanguard which has any area like this
Looks exactly like Bordinar's Cleft
Also Vanguard does have weather in it...not sure where you got the idea it didn't. It rains and snows....just not in Qualia (which makes sense considering it's a desert).
LotRO is a beautiful game. Your first screenshot was poor however and the dwarf in your second one looks somehow deformed...maybe it's the angle of the screenshot.
The first LoTRO shot was taken at lower settings that would probably run on a Geforce 5000 card. I thought I had been clear about the lower settings but seems as if people wanted to act as if that were the higher settings.
I have not played VG since release and even in bweta I found myself having to force myself to log in for more than a half hour or an hour at a shot so it is entirely possible that they could have sneaked it in during beta 3 and I never would have noticed it at all. Have they ever got the anti aliasing working in Vanguard yet?
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
Is this Everquest 2 ?
Woops I dont think it is , Everquest 2 actually looks better ... (is that the exact same stone texture ???)
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
Is this Everquest 2 ?
Woops I dont think it is , Everquest 2 actually looks better ... (is that the exact same stone texture ???)
Grats on missing the point entirely. I could care less what you think Vanguard looks like, my point in posting that picture was how stupid it is to say "The medium settings for LOTRO look better than VG on highest detail hurdedurdedur)" and then posting a screenie that looked godawful. Thanks for playing though, and I agree EQ2 looks great.
Even if I find it hard to believe myself I sometimes do agree with Jackdog, but not this time around. Come on Jackdog, that screenshot of yours does only show why VG has better graphics. Just look at the horses and the character models, and in your screenshot even the landscape looks poor (which I consider otherwise to be LOTRO graphics strong point). This is a pointless discussion, LOTRO has pretty bland graphics but great performance. VG has great graphics from a technical viewpoint (as in advanced graphics) but if you like them or not is subjective, and it has a lot worse performance than LOTRO (but as I keep stating, it is now fully playable).
How is LotrO graphics bland , is it because the rocks aren't glissning with a sperm coating ? Or because LotRO water is very reflective ?
Maybe it is LotrO full fields of grass and flowers ? or the seemless night and day change overs of LotrO?
I want to see the comparison of Bland .
We could turn on the AntiAlaising but you would consider that cheatings
Grats on missing the point entirely. I could care less what you think Vanguard looks like, my point in posting that picture was how stupid it is to say "The medium settings for LOTRO look better than VG on highest detail hurdedurdedur)" and then posting a screenie that looked godawful. Thanks for playing though, and I agree EQ2 looks great.
grats on missing my point that graphics are subjective and I do think that Lotro looks better than Vanguard on it's highes settings
[Mod Edit]
watch out for the jaggies there in VG, they will get u. Sounds like Sigil is paying u lol.
I wanted to like Vanguard, really I did. When I heard that Keith Parkinson's art style was going to be the basis of their art direction, I thought - Incredible. This game is going to be a blockbuster. Keith's Site
Then I played the beta. And it was bad. Oh so very bad. Okay, I will refrain as much as I can about the horrible game play. Down to the last day of beta, I was hoping that their live release date would be some sort of hoax. But no. It went live. One of the worst performing games I have ever played in a very long time was now charging players.
Meanwhile.... back in the LOTRO Beta, I was finding myself liking the game. I was begining to really enjoy myself. The performance issues had been immensely improved throughout the various betas. When VSOH went live, LOTRO at the same time could have launched as well and won the performance aspects hands down.
But back to the more important issue of Graphics. Alwways a big selling point for me. I am a graphics snob. While VSOH might be using super advanced graphic technology and boasting the contributions of a fantastic artist, it is an example of a dream gone all wrong. It's the shit character design that did it for me. Little details that add up to me hating the game for more than its unplayability. The hair is frigging laughable. All their animal based races have no tails - WTF? Are they really so hard to model. EQ2 seems to do fine with them.
If Parkinson had anything to do with this, you would be hard pressed to see that in the game itself - the palette is all washed out and detracts from the "realistic" look and feel that they seem to target. Parkinson had a lot to do with lighting, washing out the color palette isn't the same as producing light and tones. Look at the work that is happening on Age of Conan. Frank Frazetta's artwork seems to be jumping out of every part of that game's design. That is a fine exampole of how you can combine an artist's influence into a game.
Back to LOTRO... The color, the architecture, the landscape, weather and lighting are all visually strong. The character modeling? Well, that's a little hit and miss. Over all the character models are adequate. Actually, upon reflection, they are a little disappointing.
Weapon designs are very nice to look at, the spell effects are also great. Where LOTRO has let me down is in the costume department. Especially the humans. More specifically in Helms, hats and armor. The helms look like they were lifted straight out of Asheron's Call 2. I always wondered where those designers ended up. The costume design in D&DO seemed to have been better handled. However, things like these can be upgraed in design as the game progresses and better looking gear can be released as the game matures. Besides the game has so many other positives, it's easy to overlook.
So overall, I would have to say that LOTRO is definetely better in graphics/performance than VSOH.
So I have beneath us two images. As the graphics debate continues between Vanguard and LOTRO, I thought I would play a little game. Which belongs to which? Both are max-setting shots, both have relatively the same context and can be found relatively at the same time into the gaming experience.
Have you figured it out?
It may shock you to learn that the top is... wait for it... wait for it... Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. Yes, those washed out textures, lighting and shading that creates a compelete lack of depth and a rough overall look, and that boring water is what you get. Yes, this is the realistic approach that has so many people enjoying that slide-show like performing Vanguard that has constant environmental object flickering
On the bottom we have Lord of the Rings online. The textures are deep and complimented greatly by the beautiful lighting and shadows that creates a sense of depth. Everything doesn't look like it's being affected by light the exact same way (like Vanguard). The beautiful water and intelligent blurring of distant trees and other objects that don't randomly pop-in and out of your view (like Vanguard). And all of this performing at smooth FPS (IN BETA!) on the same computer that gets less that a 4th of the performance on Vanguard at it's highest settings.
Sorry, performance and graphics in LOTRO online destroy Vanguard even with all of its technical bells and whistles that really don't help anything.
Comments
Or perhaps its a simple matter of not understanding what art-direction is.
Art direction is not a matter of how many polygons the world has, how large their textures are, etc. It's a matter of creating originality. WoW has taken the Fantasy MMO and added incredible amounts of originality in everything they've done artistically. The worlds, the characters, the armor, hell-even the icons are crafted with such care for their artistic qualities.
As for the other games you have mentioned, it should be noted that the only games I actually tried were GuildWars and Ryzom. Lineage II I hear had beautiful art direction AND graphics technology - and actually considered getting the game but the game was just not for me. I hated Guild Wars though I remember it having a pleastant art style, but I hated the game itself. Ryzom was a beautiful game- even came close to being as good as WoW in artistic DEPTH (ahh another important point).
Another thing, perhaps I see things different than others too, I have a different appreciation for things because I am an architecture student who specializes in crafting 3D environments.
Some people prefer realistic styles with standard environments seen in games over and over and over. Some can enjoy things beyond that. I have always appreciated games that take a unique artistic approach that have executed it excellently.
Or perhaps its a simple matter of not understanding what art-direction is.
Art direction is not a matter of how many polygons the world has, how large their textures are, etc. It's a matter of creating originality. WoW has taken the Fantasy MMO and added incredible amounts of originality in everything they've done artistically. The worlds, the characters, the armor, hell-even the icons are crafted with such care for their artistic qualities.
As for the other games you have mentioned, it should be noted that the only games I actually tried were GuildWars and Ryzom. Lineage II I hear had beautiful art direction AND graphics technology - and actually considered getting the game but the game was just not for me. I hated Guild Wars though I remember it having a pleastant art style, but I hated the game itself. Ryzom was a beautiful game- even came close to being as good as WoW in artistic DEPTH (ahh another important point).
Another thing, perhaps I see things different than others too, I have a different appreciation for things because I am an architecture student who specializes in crafting 3D environments.
I'm quite familiar with art direction as I've been in the game for quite some time. Simply put cartoonish locales, textures, character models and armor don't equal great visuals or artistic direction in my book. Since you've tried LOTRO I humbly suggest you try the Lineage II trial and get a taste of artistic style minus oversized limbs and blocky armor that looks like a colorful McDonalds uniform.
Now.....there are plenty of areas where WOW shines brightly. So Instead of carrying on this charade in an area WOW can't compete why not focus on things the game actually does well such as an intuitive UI, ease of startup and character animations.
What was mediocre at launch just doesn't cut it in 2007.
Dutchess Zarraa Voltayre
Reborn/Zero Sum/Ancient Legacy/Jagged Legion/Feared/Nuke & Pave.
I'm going to have to go with Vanguard on this one. Having played both games at max settings, I have to say that lotro doesn't even hold a candle to VG. On one hand you have a highly detailed world modeled after, and using art from, the styles of great artists like Keith Parkinson (who practically invented the look of Fantasy, R.I.P.) and BROM. While on the other hand you have a rehash of the DDO client with it's weak and lifeless modeling, flaccid graphics, and limited ability to use newer technology. All you have to do is look at the elf starting area in lotro. I know it's cool seeing Elrond skate around without moving his feet, but when you actulaly get into the game world it looks like ass, or atleast it did when I played it on max settings a couple weeks ago.
Now I know the fanboys like jackdog will claim that I don't have the hi-res client, or that the beautiful stuff is all out in the world past the newbie areas. My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me. Also if all the beautiful stuff is out in the world far away from the noob areas, how do they expect me to get hooked on the game? Again the first thing they're showing me is a bunch of poor graphics. If they want me to get hooked on the game, they should be showing me the beautiful stuff right at the start.
I played the closed beta, which I can talk about because the NDA has been lifted.
Graphics are subjective That is for sure. I am curious how far into LOTRO did you play ?
Ohh and one thing to note, Vanguard character animations ? Its like circa 1998.
-Allegria
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
I played the closed beta, which I can talk about because the NDA has been lifted.
well duh... of course you did.... so did I. (The hi-res client was released late in the CB, I actually got it off the pre-order CD.)
The point is, how can you complain about them not selling you on such and such because they didn't give you the hi-res client during closed beta? Your point might have some weight after open beta starts ...sure. Need I quote you?
My argument to that would be that if they arent giving me the hi-res client then they don't want me to see all this beautiful stuff that is suposedly there. So instead I am unimpressed by the "piss poor" client they gave me.
It's closed beta man... now when open-beta happens and they don't give you a hi-res client, then sure, fuss at em....
I guess I understand if you are coming from VG that it's easy to forget what a game looks like in closed-beta.... jeeze. I was crashing out of game in VG a week before release... and from what I'm reading, sounds like they are still in closed beta. LOTRO has a way to go, "bugs" to fix, areas to add etc. It's still closed beta, and it will probably be 3 months before VG runs as good as lotro is now. Hey, I dislike turbine as much as the next guy (AC2, DDO, etc), but they've done a kick A job on this title... just doesn't seem viable to complain about not getting sold on a product during CB is all...
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
I miss DAoC
Even if I find it hard to believe myself I sometimes do agree with Jackdog, but not this time around. Come on Jackdog, that screenshot of yours does only show why VG has better graphics. Just look at the horses and the character models, and in your screenshot even the landscape looks poor (which I consider otherwise to be LOTRO graphics strong point).
This is a pointless discussion, LOTRO has pretty bland graphics but great performance. VG has great graphics from a technical viewpoint (as in advanced graphics) but if you like them or not is subjective, and it has a lot worse performance than LOTRO (but as I keep stating, it is now fully playable).
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
Thanks for reminding me how washed out and bland Vanguard looks.Not only that but that guys head riding the horse looks like a punkin with a face painted on it. As far as Thorions HAll area goes it's a freakin snow covered mountain LOL and is really a quite beautiful area in the game, I love it when the snow is falling,oops Vanguard does not have weather ingame yet ( and I doubt if it will ever have) does it...sorry
anyway show me a screen shot of Vanguard which has any area like this
I miss DAoC
Looks exactly like Bordinar's Cleft
Also Vanguard does have weather in it...not sure where you got the idea it didn't. It rains and snows....just not in Qualia (which makes sense considering it's a desert).
LotRO is a beautiful game. Your first screenshot was poor however and the dwarf in your second one looks somehow deformed...maybe it's the angle of the screenshot.
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
The first LoTRO shot was taken at lower settings that would probably run on a Geforce 5000 card. I thought I had been clear about the lower settings but seems as if people wanted to act as if that were the higher settings.
I have not played VG since release and even in bweta I found myself having to force myself to log in for more than a half hour or an hour at a shot so it is entirely possible that they could have sneaked it in during beta 3 and I never would have noticed it at all. Have they ever got the anti aliasing working in Vanguard yet?
I miss DAoC
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
Woops I dont think it is , Everquest 2 actually looks better ... (is that the exact same stone texture ???)
I like pie !
Default medium graphics settings( there are 2 default settings that are lower and 3 that are higher), anti alias and anti stropic filtering turned off a level 1 character in the starting instance almost 70 FPS and it still lokks better than Vanguard looks set at it's highest settings LOL
Maybe if I could see it in motion I would think differently (WoW is beautiful in motion)...but that screeny looks quite awful. Maybe you should pick a more "vibrant" scene if you're trying to prove that the game looks better than Vanguard on its lowest settings against Vanguard's highest.
Woops I dont think it is , Everquest 2 actually looks better ... (is that the exact same stone texture ???)
Grats on missing the point entirely. I could care less what you think Vanguard looks like, my point in posting that picture was how stupid it is to say "The medium settings for LOTRO look better than VG on highest detail hurdedurdedur)" and then posting a screenie that looked godawful. Thanks for playing though, and I agree EQ2 looks great.
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
Here are some of my screens from LOTR check em out. They are at bag end looking over the shire. Also some near the bridge near Buckland.
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/josephene11/lotroclient2007-03-1721-07-14-75.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/josephene11/lotroclient2007-03-1720-59-49-18.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/josephene11/lotroclient2007-03-1721-02-49-20.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/josephene11/lotroclient2007-03-1721-07-53-54.jpg
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s267/josephene11/lotroclient2007-03-1721-03-26-76.jpg
looks pretty good to me.
-Allegria
Ohh I am curious, what are all those jaggy edges in the Vanguard pics ?
got AA ? ( ohh forgot, not in game yet )
-Allegria
Maybe it is LotrO full fields of grass and flowers ? or the seemless night and day change overs of LotrO?
I want to see the comparison of Bland .
We could turn on the AntiAlaising but you would consider that cheatings
hahahahahahahahaha
hhahaahahhahahahahaha
hahahahhahahahahahahahhhahahhaha
ahhahahahahahahhahaaha
hahahahahaahahaha
I like pie !
[Mod Edit]
watch out for the jaggies there in VG, they will get u. Sounds like Sigil is paying u lol.
-Allegria
I wanted to like Vanguard, really I did. When I heard that Keith Parkinson's art style was going to be the basis of their art direction, I thought - Incredible. This game is going to be a blockbuster. Keith's Site
Then I played the beta. And it was bad. Oh so very bad. Okay, I will refrain as much as I can about the horrible game play. Down to the last day of beta, I was hoping that their live release date would be some sort of hoax. But no. It went live. One of the worst performing games I have ever played in a very long time was now charging players.
Meanwhile.... back in the LOTRO Beta, I was finding myself liking the game. I was begining to really enjoy myself. The performance issues had been immensely improved throughout the various betas. When VSOH went live, LOTRO at the same time could have launched as well and won the performance aspects hands down.
But back to the more important issue of Graphics. Alwways a big selling point for me. I am a graphics snob. While VSOH might be using super advanced graphic technology and boasting the contributions of a fantastic artist, it is an example of a dream gone all wrong. It's the shit character design that did it for me. Little details that add up to me hating the game for more than its unplayability. The hair is frigging laughable. All their animal based races have no tails - WTF? Are they really so hard to model. EQ2 seems to do fine with them.
If Parkinson had anything to do with this, you would be hard pressed to see that in the game itself - the palette is all washed out and detracts from the "realistic" look and feel that they seem to target. Parkinson had a lot to do with lighting, washing out the color palette isn't the same as producing light and tones. Look at the work that is happening on Age of Conan. Frank Frazetta's artwork seems to be jumping out of every part of that game's design. That is a fine exampole of how you can combine an artist's influence into a game.
Back to LOTRO... The color, the architecture, the landscape, weather and lighting are all visually strong. The character modeling? Well, that's a little hit and miss. Over all the character models are adequate. Actually, upon reflection, they are a little disappointing.
Weapon designs are very nice to look at, the spell effects are also great. Where LOTRO has let me down is in the costume department. Especially the humans. More specifically in Helms, hats and armor. The helms look like they were lifted straight out of Asheron's Call 2. I always wondered where those designers ended up. The costume design in D&DO seemed to have been better handled. However, things like these can be upgraed in design as the game progresses and better looking gear can be released as the game matures. Besides the game has so many other positives, it's easy to overlook.
So overall, I would have to say that LOTRO is definetely better in graphics/performance than VSOH.
Evidence...
So I have beneath us two images. As the graphics debate continues between Vanguard and LOTRO, I thought I would play a little game. Which belongs to which? Both are max-setting shots, both have relatively the same context and can be found relatively at the same time into the gaming experience.
Have you figured it out?
It may shock you to learn that the top is... wait for it... wait for it... Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. Yes, those washed out textures, lighting and shading that creates a compelete lack of depth and a rough overall look, and that boring water is what you get. Yes, this is the realistic approach that has so many people enjoying that slide-show like performing Vanguard that has constant environmental object flickering
On the bottom we have Lord of the Rings online. The textures are deep and complimented greatly by the beautiful lighting and shadows that creates a sense of depth. Everything doesn't look like it's being affected by light the exact same way (like Vanguard). The beautiful water and intelligent blurring of distant trees and other objects that don't randomly pop-in and out of your view (like Vanguard). And all of this performing at smooth FPS (IN BETA!) on the same computer that gets less that a 4th of the performance on Vanguard at it's highest settings.
Sorry, performance and graphics in LOTRO online destroy Vanguard even with all of its technical bells and whistles that really don't help anything.