Can you link me some EQ2 screenshots you'd describe as 'good'? Because the screenies I am seeing for EQ2 don't even compare to the above 2 Darkfall random screenshots I pulled.
If you want 2009 graphics do you really think most of the computers will support them? There are lot of games with awesome graphics ( Crysis for i.e) in which ( with my computer, which isn't actually too bad ) can't even put the graphics to medium level..
If you make a game with the best graphics ever seen i'm sure most of the people couldn't play it cause their computers wouldn't support it.
For me its Animation. I dont care how good the gameplay is, if i gona look at my chrac everyday that fight like a block and run like a sissy i will vomit blood....
When my arrow miss i want to see it miss, when my spell is block it must show me its block, run like a real man and swing that sword like a hero!
for me the game play then the content then the graphics
you will always have to compromise with mmog's since they will never have the money to do both well not while people will buy what ever shit the dev monkeys trow at them
the thing with graphics is that you can up date them from time to time with out to many bugs and crap that costs extra money if you try to mess with up grading the game play you will be screwed over with bugs and players getting peeved at you for changing the core part of your game i cant think of 1 game that has survived changing the core game play so its a much better bet to pick game play over graphics
1.)because you wont get pissed with stupid mechanics that bad gameplay seams to crap all over you with
2.) because the graphics can be improver fast and cheaply along with the content upgrades
3.)because i said so and i am a goddess and you must worship me
With a good gameplay, graphics will always become a secondary thing. If you absolutely have to see a nice great graphics when you play, look out the window.
WRONG! You cannot have MMO with massive pvp battles while having "bleeding edge graphics". Sorry it just doesnt work that way. That being said........gameplay all the way.
Even nowadays you cant have a massive game with outstanding graphics... Just think about the connection traffic, the server load with 10k users doing their things + graphical information, you cant put everything to the client side... Not everyone have a 1gb conection... or lives in the country where the server is... or have a megacomputer Hexa core.... All that is also affects gameplay... so you have to sacrifice something... the graphic quality, this way you can lower the traffic Client/Server to get the max people around the world as possible to play the game, at the same time, at the same place of the ingame world... with a good gameplay for everyone...
Or it will just be a lagfest when 500 people interact in a war...
Note: graphics is purely clientside data. The server does not have to relay extra data at all because the client can render more.
Do not believe this humble poster (myself) though. I implore you to download EVE Online. There is a high res client and a low res client. I do believe Runescape works the same way- two different clients.
My point: Game developers techically do not have to sacrifice anything. Technically.
However, gameplay does suffer due to other principles in real life. For instance, client performance may suffer if you let the artists go beserk (Age of Conan for example) so now the client is so burdened it can only render like 40 characters. Once you go over this threshold, the client stutters. That is all purely client side lag though. This is why you usually cut back on character details on MMO so you can render more characters in towns, etc/
In theory, an MMO should never look as good as a single player RPG which has more refined control over what you see unless devs one day get smart and start culling out the extra characters you do not need to see.
Anyway, I'd go for a little less details so the MMO can have more content (Artists have more time to produce more quanitity over superb graphics quality). Blizzard artists understood that principle however EQ2 / AoC / Vanguard broke that golden principle at launch
Let's be pratical here- if you expect an MMO to handle hundreds of players onscreen and deliver Crysis graphics quality then it is no small wonder we see all these horrible launches. Crysis can barely handle what- 32 players in online play as it is.... That is what I'm talking bout here- I'm talking top the line bleeding graphics.
And of course developers can easily control what you experience in a single player RPG more easily then an MMO where it becomes more difficult to control how many actors appear in a scene. for instance, open world PVP anyone? How big do fleet battles get in EVE? I've been in battles they tipped over hundreds of players easy
So you're telling me a single player RPG cannot control how many actors can appear onscreen? Hm....
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=345&topic_id=344003 These are just as good as Darkfall to me......this is almost a 5 year old game.Not saying that graphics make the game but MMO's should have both in todays market...gameplay, content, graphics and sound marinate together to make a world believable for alot of people. There are single player games with online components that do it. Some people dont care much for the graphics (hell Asherons Call and Istaria still have players because of content) and thats fine...there are alot of others who do like the immersion that graphics and sound provide. Bioware I think will pull it off with their mmo and I personally cant wait. Graphics dont just mean poly count and lighting it is art direction as well lets not forget that.
You're right that graphics don't matter because as you've just shown, some people can't even tell the difference between 2008 graphics and games from 5 years ago.
Darkfall has more gameplay than any other MMO anywhere, the only question now is, is it fun?
Yep, I obviously choose gameplay as well no question. I want to have nice graphics sure; but I do not want to sacrifice great gameplay for it. As long as the graphics looks fairly nice I will play.
Originally posted by PatchDay However, gameplay does suffer due to other principles in real life. For instance, client performance may suffer if you let the artists go beserk (Age of Conan for example) so now the client is so burdened it can only render like 40 characters. Once you go over this threshold, the client stutters. That is all purely client side lag though. This is why you usually cut back on character details on MMO so you can render more characters in towns, etc/
This is the key. It really only works if you do it like AoC did, and instance everything so as to keep the player count low ... and then of course people complain about instancing, because load screens everywhere also detract from immersion. At this point given the machines that most people have, even high end ones, you're going to get client performance issues to beat the band if you try to have AoC style graphics without instancing to control player count.
I think a lot of people are just waiting for better technology so that they can (in theory) have the hogwild detail of something like AoC without instancing and without it really messing up client performance. Until then, it seems we do have a choice between graphics and instancing, on the one hand, or lower level of detail and relatively little instancing, on the other.
Originally posted by PatchDay However, gameplay does suffer due to other principles in real life. For instance, client performance may suffer if you let the artists go beserk (Age of Conan for example) so now the client is so burdened it can only render like 40 characters. Once you go over this threshold, the client stutters. That is all purely client side lag though. This is why you usually cut back on character details on MMO so you can render more characters in towns, etc/
This is the key. It really only works if you do it like AoC did, and instance everything so as to keep the player count low ... and then of course people complain about instancing, because load screens everywhere also detract from immersion. At this point given the machines that most people have, even high end ones, you're going to get client performance issues to beat the band if you try to have AoC style graphics without instancing to control player count.
I think a lot of people are just waiting for better technology so that they can (in theory) have the hogwild detail of something like AoC without instancing and without it really messing up client performance. Until then, it seems we do have a choice between graphics and instancing, on the one hand, or lower level of detail and relatively little instancing, on the other.
Well Darkfall was designed specifically for high player counts, so decide for yourself whether the loss in character detail you see in those screenshots is worth having a seamless world with no zoning or instancing and the ability to fight 200+ character battles at playable frame-rates.
I disagree...Vanguard has plenty of gameplay....that, of course, doesnt mean it is gameplay that you like but plenty of gameplay options is there to be had. I do agree with the plastic look of the games though. Vanguard, EQ2, AOC and yes sorry Darkfall have plastic looking graphics for their respective toons. I prefer the stylized look of Ryzom or Spellborn....and the plastic-like look would much more prefer Hero's Journey (which is,also, the engine that Bioware is using) and I do know the difference between 5 year old game graphics and Darkfall's. I played EQ2 on extreme quality except for raids and it looked comparable from the screens and videos of Darkfall I have seen, sorry. Just opinion though...To me Darkfall, plastic graphics or not, looks to be great. That is if it ever comes out lol.
Vanguard is OK that is if you enjoy broken quests and graphic hitches and glitches.
Ever tried the quest where u gotta jump across the rooftops? You have to time the hitches so you dont fall.. yea thats a blast.
Oh yea I almost forgot, my 8800 GTS is 'the card' the only one with problems right? I don't buy it. E8500 1333 FSB 3.25G DDR2 1066 and an 8800 GTS, with every single graphic option at the extreme lowest setting, I still had hitches and pauses, walking heads and crashes.. give me a break. I aint buying a "vanguard video card" not for a PVE thanks.
Within the 1st week of playing I had found 3 broken quests, I was doing diplomacy and crafting too so its not as if I was looking for broken quests. One of them stranded me on a cliff with no way down. yea thats fun.
"oh yea a patch is gonna fix" ok so I've been paying $14.95 for a beta then? No patience for crap that doesnt work thanks.
It's as if a games flow and smoothness are just not even being looked at. WoW is probably the smoothest MMO I've seen, but I dont like it for other reasons. One thing about blizzard is their games ALWAYS WORK. I can hardly beleive VG was released with all these problems, someone had to look at it and someone had to say "OK, It's ready."
Anyone who thinks graphics are more important than gameplay is going to leave an MMO as soon as they've taken in the sights. Since MMOs are based on subscription plans, if you want a longterm successful MMO you'll work on the gameplay far more than the graphics.
That being said, the gameplay and graphics are not unrelated. Graphics that allow for stealth and reconnaissance, visual reactions, and first/third person views can give a game a lot of additional subtleties of play.
But I'd still prefer a good 2D overhead with intriguing, immersive play than some of the 3D tourist attractions they want to call MMORPGs nowadays.
Comments
Can you link me some EQ2 screenshots you'd describe as 'good'? Because the screenies I am seeing for EQ2 don't even compare to the above 2 Darkfall random screenshots I pulled.
eg:
This is nowhere near Darkfall's quality, sorry.
If you want 2009 graphics do you really think most of the computers will support them? There are lot of games with awesome graphics ( Crysis for i.e) in which ( with my computer, which isn't actually too bad ) can't even put the graphics to medium level..
If you make a game with the best graphics ever seen i'm sure most of the people couldn't play it cause their computers wouldn't support it.
(Sorry for my bad english)
there's something out there...
They all fail in gameplay because they have instancing.
For me its Animation. I dont care how good the gameplay is, if i gona look at my chrac everyday that fight like a block and run like a sissy i will vomit blood....
When my arrow miss i want to see it miss, when my spell is block it must show me its block, run like a real man and swing that sword like a hero!
RIP Orc Choppa
for me the game play then the content then the graphics
you will always have to compromise with mmog's since they will never have the money to do both well not while people will buy what ever shit the dev monkeys trow at them
the thing with graphics is that you can up date them from time to time with out to many bugs and crap that costs extra money if you try to mess with up grading the game play you will be screwed over with bugs and players getting peeved at you for changing the core part of your game i cant think of 1 game that has survived changing the core game play so its a much better bet to pick game play over graphics
1.)because you wont get pissed with stupid mechanics that bad gameplay seams to crap all over you with
2.) because the graphics can be improver fast and cheaply along with the content upgrades
3.)because i said so and i am a goddess and you must worship me
They all fail in gameplay because they have instancing.
agree. let's all pray to the MMO gods that Darkfall delivers in-game the quality of gameplay they showed in their last video.
With a good gameplay, graphics will always become a secondary thing. If you absolutely have to see a nice great graphics when you play, look out the window.
WRONG! You cannot have MMO with massive pvp battles while having "bleeding edge graphics". Sorry it just doesnt work that way. That being said........gameplay all the way.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
This is a dumb question - both are important. Neither one is more important than the other. It depends on the game though doesnt it.
Next question.
Note: graphics is purely clientside data. The server does not have to relay extra data at all because the client can render more.
Do not believe this humble poster (myself) though. I implore you to download EVE Online. There is a high res client and a low res client. I do believe Runescape works the same way- two different clients.
My point: Game developers techically do not have to sacrifice anything. Technically.
However, gameplay does suffer due to other principles in real life. For instance, client performance may suffer if you let the artists go beserk (Age of Conan for example) so now the client is so burdened it can only render like 40 characters. Once you go over this threshold, the client stutters. That is all purely client side lag though. This is why you usually cut back on character details on MMO so you can render more characters in towns, etc/
In theory, an MMO should never look as good as a single player RPG which has more refined control over what you see unless devs one day get smart and start culling out the extra characters you do not need to see.
Anyway, I'd go for a little less details so the MMO can have more content (Artists have more time to produce more quanitity over superb graphics quality). Blizzard artists understood that principle however EQ2 / AoC / Vanguard broke that golden principle at launch
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Let's be pratical here- if you expect an MMO to handle hundreds of players onscreen and deliver Crysis graphics quality then it is no small wonder we see all these horrible launches. Crysis can barely handle what- 32 players in online play as it is.... That is what I'm talking bout here- I'm talking top the line bleeding graphics.
And of course developers can easily control what you experience in a single player RPG more easily then an MMO where it becomes more difficult to control how many actors appear in a scene. for instance, open world PVP anyone? How big do fleet battles get in EVE? I've been in battles they tipped over hundreds of players easy
So you're telling me a single player RPG cannot control how many actors can appear onscreen? Hm....
Sorry but no way, do those screenshots compare to current Darkfall screenies. Not even close.
You're right that graphics don't matter because as you've just shown, some people can't even tell the difference between 2008 graphics and games from 5 years ago.
Darkfall has more gameplay than any other MMO anywhere, the only question now is, is it fun?
Well since almost every game released since 2000 has good to great graphics but horrible gameplay, I'm gonna say.. Gameplay
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
Yep, I obviously choose gameplay as well no question. I want to have nice graphics sure; but I do not want to sacrifice great gameplay for it. As long as the graphics looks fairly nice I will play.
To be fair, Team Fortress 2 has both. If we're talking MMOs then yeah I agree.
This is the key. It really only works if you do it like AoC did, and instance everything so as to keep the player count low ... and then of course people complain about instancing, because load screens everywhere also detract from immersion. At this point given the machines that most people have, even high end ones, you're going to get client performance issues to beat the band if you try to have AoC style graphics without instancing to control player count.
I think a lot of people are just waiting for better technology so that they can (in theory) have the hogwild detail of something like AoC without instancing and without it really messing up client performance. Until then, it seems we do have a choice between graphics and instancing, on the one hand, or lower level of detail and relatively little instancing, on the other.
This is the key. It really only works if you do it like AoC did, and instance everything so as to keep the player count low ... and then of course people complain about instancing, because load screens everywhere also detract from immersion. At this point given the machines that most people have, even high end ones, you're going to get client performance issues to beat the band if you try to have AoC style graphics without instancing to control player count.
I think a lot of people are just waiting for better technology so that they can (in theory) have the hogwild detail of something like AoC without instancing and without it really messing up client performance. Until then, it seems we do have a choice between graphics and instancing, on the one hand, or lower level of detail and relatively little instancing, on the other.
Well Darkfall was designed specifically for high player counts, so decide for yourself whether the loss in character detail you see in those screenshots is worth having a seamless world with no zoning or instancing and the ability to fight 200+ character battles at playable frame-rates.
Gameplay.
Look at Age of Conan and Vanguard, to much focus on graphics and no gameplay.
Plastic barbiedolls with plastified hair DO NOT WANT!
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Vanguard is OK that is if you enjoy broken quests and graphic hitches and glitches.
Ever tried the quest where u gotta jump across the rooftops? You have to time the hitches so you dont fall.. yea thats a blast.
Oh yea I almost forgot, my 8800 GTS is 'the card' the only one with problems right? I don't buy it. E8500 1333 FSB 3.25G DDR2 1066 and an 8800 GTS, with every single graphic option at the extreme lowest setting, I still had hitches and pauses, walking heads and crashes.. give me a break. I aint buying a "vanguard video card" not for a PVE thanks.
Within the 1st week of playing I had found 3 broken quests, I was doing diplomacy and crafting too so its not as if I was looking for broken quests. One of them stranded me on a cliff with no way down. yea thats fun.
"oh yea a patch is gonna fix" ok so I've been paying $14.95 for a beta then? No patience for crap that doesnt work thanks.
It's as if a games flow and smoothness are just not even being looked at. WoW is probably the smoothest MMO I've seen, but I dont like it for other reasons. One thing about blizzard is their games ALWAYS WORK. I can hardly beleive VG was released with all these problems, someone had to look at it and someone had to say "OK, It's ready."
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Anyone who thinks graphics are more important than gameplay is going to leave an MMO as soon as they've taken in the sights. Since MMOs are based on subscription plans, if you want a longterm successful MMO you'll work on the gameplay far more than the graphics.
That being said, the gameplay and graphics are not unrelated. Graphics that allow for stealth and reconnaissance, visual reactions, and first/third person views can give a game a lot of additional subtleties of play.
But I'd still prefer a good 2D overhead with intriguing, immersive play than some of the 3D tourist attractions they want to call MMORPGs nowadays.
1. Gameplay
2. Gameplay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10. Graphics