I do wish LotrO Avatars wore nylon stockings like the AoC ones .. /sarcasm off Nice Jaggies btw..
TBH that still looks 100 times better than LOTROs characters. (Just so you know I'm subbed to LOTRO at the moment) I wish LOTRO had that good character models but it hasn't stopped me playing it... yet.
My biggest problem is that all the clothing is skin tight. It's like they have no texture at all. Instead you are just changing the color of your legs, chest and arms. Not to mention the serious lack of options for making your character look different from everyone else. These days a MMO can't get away with a few faces and hair styles. You need sliders for almost everything. My friends used to get frustrated with me because on some games I could easily waste an hour or more just making a character. When I played City of Heroes, if I got bored, I would actually make new characters just to kill a few hours. That is how fun it was.
I am not going to get into what game looks better because that all depends on the person and styles they like. I know several games that I think have great character models for the game world they are in. Are the best and most realistic? No, but they are pleasant to the eye and fit the game world.
I'll also add that I am subscriber too. I am by no means bashing the game, but this is one area they really need to work on improving. I can overlook it until I zoom in on the character but a lot of people can't. The avatar is probably the most important thing in an MMO next to the game play itself. This is because it is so personal for a lot of people. It is also another way to show off accomplishments in a game. It really bugs me when MMO's come out now, that have less options for an avatar than the games that started the MMO revolution years ago. Just my opinion though.
The sliders are back in Vanguard, but Lotro has more hairstyles, mostly because Vanguard's hairstyles are race restricted. I still would like a height and weight slider in Lotro - would helped alot.
And I would like to agree on avatars in AoC looks out of place. Maybe its because of the reasons you mentioned, but I always thought the enviroment in AoC look awful, plain and random.
AoC biggest failure in the models is that they aren't lghted with the world light map, that is why they have that shine, they use a different light source for the models which is not very great game design. Think that LotrO using the the entire world shader to cast lighting is the smart chioce not only for great shadows and texture effects , but for great world and model aesthetic. Yes, if you use Shader 2.0 because your video card cannot handle the game, then you must accept downgraded graphics. As my links have demonstrated above, Shader 3.0 does NOT have the shine and is properly light mapped. Research pays off when you are making false claims. When I tested AoC, the game world shader was completly off from the model shaders, and it sticks out like a sore thumb, it was just to "in my face" and it made the rest of the twisting foliage stick out. LotRO entire game theory in character cohesion to the game world is much more sound then AoC, in my opinion. Again, when you downgrade to Shader 2.0, you deal with this issue. It is just like using Medium textures in LOTRO, taking a screenshot, and saying the game is always like that. Incorrect deductions ensue.
LOTRO ONLY has landscapes to save it visually, yet I feel the cities of AoC are still the most realistic...as demonstrated here...
AoC biggest failure in the models is that they aren't lghted with the world light map, that is why they have that shine, they use a different light source for the models which is not very great game design. Think that LotrO using the the entire world shader to cast lighting is the smart chioce not only for great shadows and texture effects , but for great world and model aesthetic. Yes, if you use Shader 2.0 because your video card cannot handle the game, then you must accept downgraded graphics. As my links have demonstrated above, Shader 3.0 does NOT have the shine and is properly light mapped. Research pays off when you are making false claims. When I tested AoC, the game world shader was completly off from the model shaders, and it sticks out like a sore thumb, it was just to "in my face" and it made the rest of the twisting foliage stick out. LotRO entire game theory in character cohesion to the game world is much more sound then AoC, in my opinion. Again, when you downgrade to Shader 2.0, you deal with this issue. It is just like using Medium textures in LOTRO, taking a screenshot, and saying the game is always like that. Incorrect deductions ensue.
LOTRO ONLY has landscapes to save it visually, yet I feel the cities of AoC are still the most realistic...as demonstrated here...
Meh, I played it on highest setting and the landscapes still looks bland and unconnected with the avatar. The cities look good though. Realistic? hell no. Invisible walls and zoning inside cities killed that. You can bring photogenic graphics from AoC, it doesnt help one bit, the game is still in one the worst MMOs ever launched. And I beta'd both D&L & AoC, and D&L was alot more fun - atleast that felt like an MMO and not an single playergame.
But im sorry for derailing the thread, how about staying on topic?
They're just nasty and they don't move right and it's hard to explain it without showing it to you in person but they just feel very off. I want to play on because I want to see what the player housing has to offer but frigging the character models are stopping me currently.
Yeah, posting about art style in a game is basically flame bait on these forums unfortunately, but personally I can agree with you, and I'll explain why.
The art style in LOTRO is actually quite consistant with the art style in various Tolkien related publications from the time in which his work was published, up until around the Rankin/Bass version of "The Hobbit" in 1977 and Ralph Baski version "The Lord of The Rings" in 1978 which shifted the general image of Middle Earth to a combonation of those styles (which where in turn largely inspired by fairy tale illustrations form the 1800's, as opposed to early the early 20th century pulp-fantasy style) until the Peter Jackson trilogy shifted again to a more modern fantasy style.
One of the difficulties Turbine developers discuss while making Lotro was that they where legally obligated to avoid looking like any of the movies, and thus went with the early to mid 20th century pulp-fantasy style that Tolkiens would still be familar with, but avoid looking like any of the films.
So all that makes sence, but personally having been a Tolkien and fantasy in general fan for many years, I always hated that art style, thus didn't really appriciate the artistic direction of Lotro which greatly impaired my enjoyment of the game.
at release LOTRO was like the absolute downgrade from anything that was standard in player customising. I think not even Everquest one had fewer options at release. When players screamed they added your "costume" crap and a few more armor sets.
But LOTRO is far away from what much older games have set as standard.
What LoTRO was like over a year ago is irrelevent. Even if it were, you have no idea what you are talking about.
EQ did not launch with the option to dye gear. LoTRO did. WoW and many other MMOs still have no dye options to this day.
Currently LoTRO also has three separate appearance tabs, with toggles to turn every peice of gear on and off separately for each tab. You can very easilly switch between three entirely diferent outfits. Not even EQ II has so many options (it has one appearance tab, and no dye options). The system is much more flexible than WAR, WoW, EQOA, EQ, EQ II, FFXI, TR, AC, and DAoC ...just off the top of my head. None of those have dye and appearance tabs, most lack both.
Did you men to imply that CoH is now the defacto standard for MMOs? Becuase that's really the only one I can think of off the top of my head that allows you greater flexibility than LoTRO in customizing your gear appearance in game. Sure I'd love it if all MMOs were as flexible as CoH. But that's only one MMO. The fact remains that LoTRO is well above average when it comes to customizing the appearance of your gear.
maybe you meant the lack of sliders on the chracater creation screen. Indeed, LoTRO doesn't have hundreds of sliders on the character creation screen like some MMOs. However that's far from "standard," few MMOs go with that system. And with good reason. If the info for someone's head is two dozen variables (rather than the three or four that you get in most MMOs) it hammers your framerates when lots of players are around. Ironically, unless you are standing right next to someon it adds almost nothing to the game. Two guys with the same hair style, hair and skin color look damn near identical from a distance (or even a few feet away) save for their gear.
That's why Turbine focused on gear customization rather than giving everyone 100 sliders for nostril flare and ear tilt. I actually hate that kind of system personally. The moment you put on a helmet, it's utterly pointless. And even if you aren't wearing one, it's pointless for anyone not within cybering distance. Gear customization is much much more important to me than the number of sliders on the character creation screen.
You might not like how any of the gear looks in LoTRO, but that's a matter of taste. The mechanics that LoTRO has in place are very solid.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
What LoTRO was like over a year ago is irrelevent. Even if it were, you have no idea what you are talking about.
EQ did not launch with the option to dye gear. LoTRO did. WoW and many other MMOs still have no dye options to this day.
But Guild Wars did this before LOTRO, and WAR has as well...nothing unique there.
Currently LoTRO also has three separate appearance tabs, with toggles to turn every peice of gear on and off separately for each tab. You can very easilly switch between three entirely diferent outfits. Not even EQ II has so many options (it has one appearance tab, and no dye options). The system is much more flexible than WAR, WoW, EQOA, EQ, EQ II, FFXI, TR, AC, and DAoC ...just off the top of my head. None of those have dye and appearance tabs, most lack both.
But, this still does not help when almost all outfits look like spandex and painted on...As well, the 2 in. waist for men is still the most ridiculous look for any game...sorry. The addition of the Lego/action figure waist turn of all models is about the most unrealistic visual in any MMO right now. It is like they did not try to do good animations.
But, we all have admitted it is opinion. Some people are easy to please, and others expect more in their graphical representation of their Avatar. This will never change. As long as LOTRO uses the downgraded models, it will always be a complaint for many.
my 8800GT can run 3.0 , thanks for your opinion though.
This a perfect example of 2 light sources :
Look how bright the game world is compared to the model. Even if the model has dark skin, the actual "tone and Chroma" are way off. If anyone studied art , they would know what im talking about. Also, look how bright the front of the building is, the light source would be behind the model, yet the model's tone indicates a different light array.
Compared to :
or Even War :
Or Even VG
To me, AoC has the worst over cohesion of character and world. That is my opinion.
Uh
You did note that I said "SHADOWS OFF" for that image...correct? This represents the city itself. But, as well, shows the actual 3.0 shader mapping of the skin tone.
I notice you did NOT use the picture with shadows ON....Interesting.
As to having "Shader 3.0" on, then why did you use an image with Shader 2.0 to poke fun at?
As to Vanguard, I am still trying to see this "lighting" discussion in the VERY dark images. Lets go to daylight as our example
Why are shadows from the characters visible, but shadowing is NOT on the ground or the objects?
Also, you discuss how the "world" and character cohesiveness is exact in LOTRO...yet, for some reason all of the images you use do not show good character representations.
Really, You are arguing LOTRO's Plasticky fake looking characters and trying to find some fault in AoC's realistic characters. The "Normal Mapping" which is used in Shader 3.0 does not have this issue if all lighting techniques are used. LOTRO does NOT use this type of mapping system, and as such will not be able to ever have "Realistic Characters". (It also has been noted that LOTRO's DX10 is not a full implementation. Should be interesting to see how LOTRO and AoC square off when DX10 is enabled. The one major strike against AoC at this time)
Pretty clear winner here for Visuals though...to AoC.
Value or tone is a measure of how light or dark a color is, without any consideration for its hue. Think of it as taking a black-and-white photo of a subject where you clearly see what’s in the photo but everything’s in grayscale. The problem with a color’s value or tone is that how light or dark is seems is also influenced by what’s going on around it. What appears light in one circumstance, can appear darker in another circumstance, for instance when it’s surrounded by even lighter tones. (See Tone is Relative to Other Tones for an illustration of this, and a longer explanation.) What is Chroma?
The chroma or saturation of a color is a measure of how intense it is. Think of it as “pure, bright color”, compared to a color diluted with white, darkened by black or grey, or thinned by being a glaze. Variations in chroma can be achieved by adding different amounts of a neutral gray of the same value as the color you're wanting to alter. But Aren’t Value and Chroma the Same Thing?
Color mixing would be easier if they were, but they’re not. With chroma you’re considering how pure or intense the hue is, whereas with value you’re not considering what the hue is at all, just how light or dark it is. " http://painting.about.com/od/colourtheory/a/huevaluechroma.htm
LotrO Models and world have tonal harmony, AoC doesn't, in my opinion. With AoC it doesn't matter if the shadows are on or not, the games tone and chroma on the modles are not the same to the game worlds. you can have 2 things of the red, but if they are not matched to the chroma and hue, they will look strictly abstract, and that is how AoC looks, in my opinion. LotRO acheived the correct balance of color pallettes. My character looks like he should be standing there.
Seriously, what you are presenting has abso-fkn-lutely nothing to do with the awful LoTRO models. The LoTRO models stick out like a soar thumb... as proved by the picture you just posted. The PCs will NEVER look like those NPCs, and that's unfortunate because the hair on those models actually look like hair and not plastic snap-on molds and the skin looks like real skin not smooth cartoon baby skin.
Also, THE ART DIRECTION AND DESIGN OF THE CHARACTER MODELS AND ARMOR have nothing to do with the light, chroma, value, shadow... or any other art class word you want to toss around. Chroma and value have nothing to do with the 3 inch ballerina waists. Chroma and value are not related to the skin-tight mini skirts and body-painted armor. Chroma and value cannot change the lego characterists of the avatars... chroma and value have NOTHING to do with character model design... Chroma and value have no effect on the full-diaper walk or the stick-up-your-ass walk that the characters portray... and last but not least, chroma and value weren't able to add any halfway decent armor models in MoM.
Seriously, what you are presenting has abso-fkn-lutely nothing to do with the awful LoTRO models. The LoTRO models stick out like a soar thumb... as proved by the picture you just posted. The PCs will NEVER look like those NPCs, and that's unfortunate because the hair on those models actually look like hair and not plastic snap-on molds and the skin looks like real skin not smooth cartoon baby skin.
Also, THE ART DIRECTION AND DESIGN OF THE CHARACTER MODELS AND ARMOR have nothing to do with the light, chroma, value, shadow... or any other art class word you want to toss around. Chroma and value have nothing to do with the 3 inch ballerina waists. Chroma and value are not related to the skin-tight mini skirts and body-painted armor. Chroma and value cannot change the lego characterists of the avatars... chroma and value have NOTHING to do with character model design... Chroma and value have no effect on the full-diaper walk or the stick-up-your-ass walk that the characters portray... and last but not least, chroma and value weren't able to add any halfway decent armor models in MoM.
Okey, so you dont like them - I get it
But if the avatar doesnt feel connected to the rest of the enviroment, it doesnt matter how good it looks, because the whole picture will then look ..well...wrong (like in AoC) So it does matter to many of us...
Value or tone is a measure of how light or dark a color is, without any consideration for its hue. Think of it as taking a black-and-white photo of a subject where you clearly see what’s in the photo but everything’s in grayscale. The problem with a color’s value or tone is that how light or dark is seems is also influenced by what’s going on around it. What appears light in one circumstance, can appear darker in another circumstance, for instance when it’s surrounded by even lighter tones. (See Tone is Relative to Other Tones for an illustration of this, and a longer explanation.) What is Chroma?
The chroma or saturation of a color is a measure of how intense it is. Think of it as “pure, bright color”, compared to a color diluted with white, darkened by black or grey, or thinned by being a glaze. Variations in chroma can be achieved by adding different amounts of a neutral gray of the same value as the color you're wanting to alter. But Aren’t Value and Chroma the Same Thing?
Color mixing would be easier if they were, but they’re not. With chroma you’re considering how pure or intense the hue is, whereas with value you’re not considering what the hue is at all, just how light or dark it is. " http://painting.about.com/od/colourtheory/a/huevaluechroma.htm
LotrO Models and world have tonal harmony, AoC doesn't, in my opinion. With AoC it doesn't matter if the shadows are on or not, the games tone and chroma on the modles are not the same to the game worlds. you can have 2 things of the red, but if they are not matched to the chroma and hue, they will look strictly abstract, and that is how AoC looks, in my opinion. LotRO acheived the correct balance of color pallettes. My character looks like he should be standing there.
Would you kindly then choose an LOTRO image that is NOT with shadows and NOT DX10 (as the above image) to prove how the colors "work"
"You can have 2 things of red but if they are not matched to the chroma and the hue...."
Basically you are making things up to fit your argument...here is why it fails.
Lets test the "color palette" theory of LOTRO...shall we?
First, lets note how the neck is CUT OFF. This is a fine example of missing shadowing to represent 3 dimensions. i.e: Turbine decided not to use any color balance to display the change. Where is your "Chroma and Hues" here? Shadows missing is the reason we see no variation of HUE on the neck line.
Next, look at the "metal buttons" on the cloak and the outfit. They are little texture addons using your "Chroma and Hue"...i.e: they look painted on, and are not tangible n the 3d world. Shadow would add depth here.
Look at the belt. AGAIN...painted on, not an actual OBJECT. Painted on beards, Painted on gloves, Painted side straps to the pants....there is no DIMENSION. Shadow would fix all of this.
Objects have dimension. The choker (which in AoC, you change your necklace, it changes on the visual btw), or the belt (again, the same...belts can vary in style and shape and thickness even)
But, they all have one thing in common. NONE look painted on, but are real and tangible.
Chroma and Hue matters when the image is one texture painted on as is the case in LOTRO.
The Chroma / Hue argument does not apply when you need to look at 3d images.
You must also add in...
Translucency, Opacity, Opalescence, Iridescence, Fluorescence, and Surface Gloss. These measure how an object interacts with the X, Y and Z axis.
What do all of these extra additions bring into play? SHADOWS.
The worlds of these MMO's are all full of browns, grays and harsh blues and reds with no change or variation of "tonal" qualities. Shadows are the basis of changes to hues for example. A red shirt in the sun will be a different "Hue" to the naked eye compared to red in the shade...why? The eye represents color based on light. Shadows change the colors to make them darker or variations thereof.
This is the reason color is almost non-existent at night without light...
Basically, yes it DOES matter if shadows are on or not.
Would you like to try some more "Artist" terms to help you out?
I think the art design, character animations and models are OK, but uneven, altough generally well done. A bit like Vanguard, there are some really nice items, with lots of detail, and there are occasional really nifty animations, but also a fair amount of junk (LOTRO's animations are better joined-up than VG's by a mile though). The design of the world is overall better than the models and art design of the outfits, armours, architecture, etc. Nature has a lovely, fairy-tale feel in LOTRO.
However, there's something a bit too cramped about the overall art design, even for Tolkein. Tolkein can't be too frilly. In fact I think the films got the art design right - gritty and realistic and grand. LOTR to read is ultra-real - nature is well described and comes to life, and a LOTR game should reflect that. Turbine have gone for a slightly more twee look, a bit like one of those old boys' history books, with drawings of Romans and Mediaeval warriors. It works, but it's not as elegant as it could have been.
LOTRO's big plus is its hyper-polish. It very bug-free and satisfyingly detailed.
As a side note: Im not trying to win an agrument (I think Solareus is doing just fine), im just stating my opinion. As I said, I think AoCs avatar looks better, but suffer from not being comparable to the enviroment. This is where lotro does a fine job, and by looking at it as a whole, I think Lotro looks better than AoC.
Thank you SgtFrog As a side note: Im not trying to win an agrument (I think Solareus is doing just fine), im just stating my opinion. As I said, I think AoCs avatar looks better, but suffer from not being comparable to the enviroment. This is where lotro does a fine job, and by looking at it as a whole, I think Lotro looks better than AoC.
Me too,
My last post on the topic.
LotrO models are awesome to me, and I love seeing hobbits running about and acting crazy.
This topic is dead, as it is only here becasue of the launch of MoM, and all the little Conaniacs are scared they will lose subs, Again.
what do you mean again? Conan has been bleeding subs steadily since it's launch. All you have tio do is go to the official forums and look at the where the heck is everyone topics.By Christmas it will be down to AO-Vanguard-SWG levels of population.
In LoTRO the avatars are fine, the armor and cosmetic clothing has a great deal of variety in styles and colors (16 dye colors not enough for ya?) , and the cloaks are amazing in detail.
I really don't understand what's all the fuzz about. The characters looking fine to me?? why are people flaming about this??? It really looks okay!
First of all we are not flaming. I think people are just stating their preference. And though they look fine to you they don't look fine to me. That picture above is just too flamboyant and mishmashed for my taste. There is nothing inspiring about the armor or clothing in this game. Not to say that all of it is bad, just not amazing or "great".
I think I've been spoiled by L2's armor designs... I've yet to find anything that tops them, imo. Maybe you're in the same boat?
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Animations are the main problem. Proportions are fine imo.
Hunter is a perfect example, have you ever had a lesson in archery? - First thing the instructor says is "stand straight, firm and upward" and the second thing is "keep the bow straight up"... Look at a hunter and how he shoots his bow... look at the back... no - way. An Archer stands and shoots like this, pull-hand behind or at the ear, lead-hand through chin and pull-hand form one line:
Turbine will never invest in things like motion capture to bring a true AAA game. They know people will line up to buy the crap they make based purely on the IP they license.
Comments
TBH that still looks 100 times better than LOTROs characters. (Just so you know I'm subbed to LOTRO at the moment) I wish LOTRO had that good character models but it hasn't stopped me playing it... yet.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
My biggest problem is that all the clothing is skin tight. It's like they have no texture at all. Instead you are just changing the color of your legs, chest and arms. Not to mention the serious lack of options for making your character look different from everyone else. These days a MMO can't get away with a few faces and hair styles. You need sliders for almost everything. My friends used to get frustrated with me because on some games I could easily waste an hour or more just making a character. When I played City of Heroes, if I got bored, I would actually make new characters just to kill a few hours. That is how fun it was.
I am not going to get into what game looks better because that all depends on the person and styles they like. I know several games that I think have great character models for the game world they are in. Are the best and most realistic? No, but they are pleasant to the eye and fit the game world.
I'll also add that I am subscriber too. I am by no means bashing the game, but this is one area they really need to work on improving. I can overlook it until I zoom in on the character but a lot of people can't. The avatar is probably the most important thing in an MMO next to the game play itself. This is because it is so personal for a lot of people. It is also another way to show off accomplishments in a game. It really bugs me when MMO's come out now, that have less options for an avatar than the games that started the MMO revolution years ago. Just my opinion though.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
The sliders are back in Vanguard, but Lotro has more hairstyles, mostly because Vanguard's hairstyles are race restricted. I still would like a height and weight slider in Lotro - would helped alot.
And I would like to agree on avatars in AoC looks out of place. Maybe its because of the reasons you mentioned, but I always thought the enviroment in AoC look awful, plain and random.
Meh, I played it on highest setting and the landscapes still looks bland and unconnected with the avatar. The cities look good though. Realistic? hell no. Invisible walls and zoning inside cities killed that. You can bring photogenic graphics from AoC, it doesnt help one bit, the game is still in one the worst MMOs ever launched. And I beta'd both D&L & AoC, and D&L was alot more fun - atleast that felt like an MMO and not an single playergame.
But im sorry for derailing the thread, how about staying on topic?
Yeah, posting about art style in a game is basically flame bait on these forums unfortunately, but personally I can agree with you, and I'll explain why.
The art style in LOTRO is actually quite consistant with the art style in various Tolkien related publications from the time in which his work was published, up until around the Rankin/Bass version of "The Hobbit" in 1977 and Ralph Baski version "The Lord of The Rings" in 1978 which shifted the general image of Middle Earth to a combonation of those styles (which where in turn largely inspired by fairy tale illustrations form the 1800's, as opposed to early the early 20th century pulp-fantasy style) until the Peter Jackson trilogy shifted again to a more modern fantasy style.
One of the difficulties Turbine developers discuss while making Lotro was that they where legally obligated to avoid looking like any of the movies, and thus went with the early to mid 20th century pulp-fantasy style that Tolkiens would still be familar with, but avoid looking like any of the films.
So all that makes sence, but personally having been a Tolkien and fantasy in general fan for many years, I always hated that art style, thus didn't really appriciate the artistic direction of Lotro which greatly impaired my enjoyment of the game.
Active: WoW
Semi-retired: STO
Fully retired: UO, EQ, AC, SWG, FFXI, DDO:EU, PoTBS, AoC, EvE
Tried: EQ2, Tabula Rasa, Auto-Assault, Isteria, LotRO, Wizard 101
Looking forward to: Star Citizen
at release LOTRO was like the absolute downgrade from anything that was standard in player customising. I think not even Everquest one had fewer options at release. When players screamed they added your "costume" crap and a few more armor sets.
But LOTRO is far away from what much older games have set as standard.
What LoTRO was like over a year ago is irrelevent. Even if it were, you have no idea what you are talking about.
EQ did not launch with the option to dye gear. LoTRO did. WoW and many other MMOs still have no dye options to this day.
Currently LoTRO also has three separate appearance tabs, with toggles to turn every peice of gear on and off separately for each tab. You can very easilly switch between three entirely diferent outfits. Not even EQ II has so many options (it has one appearance tab, and no dye options). The system is much more flexible than WAR, WoW, EQOA, EQ, EQ II, FFXI, TR, AC, and DAoC ...just off the top of my head. None of those have dye and appearance tabs, most lack both.
Did you men to imply that CoH is now the defacto standard for MMOs? Becuase that's really the only one I can think of off the top of my head that allows you greater flexibility than LoTRO in customizing your gear appearance in game. Sure I'd love it if all MMOs were as flexible as CoH. But that's only one MMO. The fact remains that LoTRO is well above average when it comes to customizing the appearance of your gear.
maybe you meant the lack of sliders on the chracater creation screen. Indeed, LoTRO doesn't have hundreds of sliders on the character creation screen like some MMOs. However that's far from "standard," few MMOs go with that system. And with good reason. If the info for someone's head is two dozen variables (rather than the three or four that you get in most MMOs) it hammers your framerates when lots of players are around. Ironically, unless you are standing right next to someon it adds almost nothing to the game. Two guys with the same hair style, hair and skin color look damn near identical from a distance (or even a few feet away) save for their gear.
That's why Turbine focused on gear customization rather than giving everyone 100 sliders for nostril flare and ear tilt. I actually hate that kind of system personally. The moment you put on a helmet, it's utterly pointless. And even if you aren't wearing one, it's pointless for anyone not within cybering distance. Gear customization is much much more important to me than the number of sliders on the character creation screen.
You might not like how any of the gear looks in LoTRO, but that's a matter of taste. The mechanics that LoTRO has in place are very solid.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
What LoTRO was like over a year ago is irrelevent. Even if it were, you have no idea what you are talking about.
EQ did not launch with the option to dye gear. LoTRO did. WoW and many other MMOs still have no dye options to this day.
But Guild Wars did this before LOTRO, and WAR has as well...nothing unique there.
Currently LoTRO also has three separate appearance tabs, with toggles to turn every peice of gear on and off separately for each tab. You can very easilly switch between three entirely diferent outfits. Not even EQ II has so many options (it has one appearance tab, and no dye options). The system is much more flexible than WAR, WoW, EQOA, EQ, EQ II, FFXI, TR, AC, and DAoC ...just off the top of my head. None of those have dye and appearance tabs, most lack both.
But, this still does not help when almost all outfits look like spandex and painted on...As well, the 2 in. waist for men is still the most ridiculous look for any game...sorry. The addition of the Lego/action figure waist turn of all models is about the most unrealistic visual in any MMO right now. It is like they did not try to do good animations."Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
my 8800GT can run 3.0 , thanks for your opinion though.
This a perfect example of 2 light sources :
Look how bright the game world is compared to the model. Even if the model has dark skin, the actual "tone and Chroma" are way off. If anyone studied art , they would know what im talking about. Also, look how bright the front of the building is, the light source would be behind the model, yet the model's tone indicates a different light array.
Compared to :
or Even War :
Or Even VG
To me, AoC has the worst over cohesion of character and world. That is my opinion.
Uh
You did note that I said "SHADOWS OFF" for that image...correct? This represents the city itself. But, as well, shows the actual 3.0 shader mapping of the skin tone.
I notice you did NOT use the picture with shadows ON....Interesting.
As to having "Shader 3.0" on, then why did you use an image with Shader 2.0 to poke fun at?
As to Vanguard, I am still trying to see this "lighting" discussion in the VERY dark images. Lets go to daylight as our example
HERE
Why are shadows from the characters visible, but shadowing is NOT on the ground or the objects?
Also, you discuss how the "world" and character cohesiveness is exact in LOTRO...yet, for some reason all of the images you use do not show good character representations.
Everything cranked...shadows from character...but not objects (like Vanguard...)
Same here...shadows from characters, not from objects
Now, of course, these are DX9. DX10 seems to want to cover EVERYTHING in shadow from objects...
Like this...all object shadows, no character shadows
Can they make up their mind?
Now, as to AoC
Realtime shadows from objects AND characters/mobs
Example of sunlight bearing down from the upper right toward characters..Note lighting on character in the fronts hair, and the shine on the chest and forehead of the character in the back. Notice how the inner thigh is darker than the outer thigh as well...
Really, You are arguing LOTRO's Plasticky fake looking characters and trying to find some fault in AoC's realistic characters. The "Normal Mapping" which is used in Shader 3.0 does not have this issue if all lighting techniques are used. LOTRO does NOT use this type of mapping system, and as such will not be able to ever have "Realistic Characters". (It also has been noted that LOTRO's DX10 is not a full implementation. Should be interesting to see how LOTRO and AoC square off when DX10 is enabled. The one major strike against AoC at this time)
Pretty clear winner here for Visuals though...to AoC.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Seriously, what you are presenting has abso-fkn-lutely nothing to do with the awful LoTRO models. The LoTRO models stick out like a soar thumb... as proved by the picture you just posted. The PCs will NEVER look like those NPCs, and that's unfortunate because the hair on those models actually look like hair and not plastic snap-on molds and the skin looks like real skin not smooth cartoon baby skin.
Also, THE ART DIRECTION AND DESIGN OF THE CHARACTER MODELS AND ARMOR have nothing to do with the light, chroma, value, shadow... or any other art class word you want to toss around. Chroma and value have nothing to do with the 3 inch ballerina waists. Chroma and value are not related to the skin-tight mini skirts and body-painted armor. Chroma and value cannot change the lego characterists of the avatars... chroma and value have NOTHING to do with character model design... Chroma and value have no effect on the full-diaper walk or the stick-up-your-ass walk that the characters portray... and last but not least, chroma and value weren't able to add any halfway decent armor models in MoM.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Okey, so you dont like them - I get it
But if the avatar doesnt feel connected to the rest of the enviroment, it doesnt matter how good it looks, because the whole picture will then look ..well...wrong (like in AoC) So it does matter to many of us...
I actually like the character models in LoTRO. I even love how the Dwarves look (and I HATE dorfs!!!).
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
Would you kindly then choose an LOTRO image that is NOT with shadows and NOT DX10 (as the above image) to prove how the colors "work"
"You can have 2 things of red but if they are not matched to the chroma and the hue...."
Basically you are making things up to fit your argument...here is why it fails.
Lets test the "color palette" theory of LOTRO...shall we?
This image for example
First, lets note how the neck is CUT OFF. This is a fine example of missing shadowing to represent 3 dimensions. i.e: Turbine decided not to use any color balance to display the change. Where is your "Chroma and Hues" here? Shadows missing is the reason we see no variation of HUE on the neck line.
Next, look at the "metal buttons" on the cloak and the outfit. They are little texture addons using your "Chroma and Hue"...i.e: they look painted on, and are not tangible n the 3d world. Shadow would add depth here.
This image example
Look at the belt. AGAIN...painted on, not an actual OBJECT. Painted on beards, Painted on gloves, Painted side straps to the pants....there is no DIMENSION. Shadow would fix all of this.
Now this AoC image
Objects have dimension. The choker (which in AoC, you change your necklace, it changes on the visual btw), or the belt (again, the same...belts can vary in style and shape and thickness even)
But, they all have one thing in common. NONE look painted on, but are real and tangible.
Chroma and Hue matters when the image is one texture painted on as is the case in LOTRO.
The Chroma / Hue argument does not apply when you need to look at 3d images.
You must also add in...
Translucency, Opacity, Opalescence, Iridescence, Fluorescence, and Surface Gloss. These measure how an object interacts with the X, Y and Z axis.
What do all of these extra additions bring into play? SHADOWS.
The worlds of these MMO's are all full of browns, grays and harsh blues and reds with no change or variation of "tonal" qualities. Shadows are the basis of changes to hues for example. A red shirt in the sun will be a different "Hue" to the naked eye compared to red in the shade...why? The eye represents color based on light. Shadows change the colors to make them darker or variations thereof.
This is the reason color is almost non-existent at night without light...
Basically, yes it DOES matter if shadows are on or not.
Would you like to try some more "Artist" terms to help you out?
I think the art design, character animations and models are OK, but uneven, altough generally well done. A bit like Vanguard, there are some really nice items, with lots of detail, and there are occasional really nifty animations, but also a fair amount of junk (LOTRO's animations are better joined-up than VG's by a mile though). The design of the world is overall better than the models and art design of the outfits, armours, architecture, etc. Nature has a lovely, fairy-tale feel in LOTRO.
However, there's something a bit too cramped about the overall art design, even for Tolkein. Tolkein can't be too frilly. In fact I think the films got the art design right - gritty and realistic and grand. LOTR to read is ultra-real - nature is well described and comes to life, and a LOTR game should reflect that. Turbine have gone for a slightly more twee look, a bit like one of those old boys' history books, with drawings of Romans and Mediaeval warriors. It works, but it's not as elegant as it could have been.
LOTRO's big plus is its hyper-polish. It very bug-free and satisfyingly detailed.
Thank you SgtFrog
As a side note: Im not trying to win an agrument (I think Solareus is doing just fine), im just stating my opinion. As I said, I think AoCs avatar looks better, but suffer from not being comparable to the enviroment. This is where lotro does a fine job, and by looking at it as a whole, I think Lotro looks better than AoC.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Me too,
My last post on the topic.
LotrO models are awesome to me, and I love seeing hobbits running about and acting crazy.
This topic is dead, as it is only here becasue of the launch of MoM, and all the little Conaniacs are scared they will lose subs, Again.
what do you mean again? Conan has been bleeding subs steadily since it's launch. All you have tio do is go to the official forums and look at the where the heck is everyone topics.By Christmas it will be down to AO-Vanguard-SWG levels of population.
In LoTRO the avatars are fine, the armor and cosmetic clothing has a great deal of variety in styles and colors (16 dye colors not enough for ya?) , and the cloaks are amazing in detail.
I miss DAoC
First of all we are not flaming. I think people are just stating their preference. And though they look fine to you they don't look fine to me. That picture above is just too flamboyant and mishmashed for my taste. There is nothing inspiring about the armor or clothing in this game. Not to say that all of it is bad, just not amazing or "great".
I think I've been spoiled by L2's armor designs... I've yet to find anything that tops them, imo. Maybe you're in the same boat?
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Animations are the main problem. Proportions are fine imo.
Hunter is a perfect example, have you ever had a lesson in archery? - First thing the instructor says is "stand straight, firm and upward" and the second thing is "keep the bow straight up"... Look at a hunter and how he shoots his bow... look at the back... no - way. An Archer stands and shoots like this, pull-hand behind or at the ear, lead-hand through chin and pull-hand form one line:
M
Comparison
Turbine will never invest in things like motion capture to bring a true AAA game. They know people will line up to buy the crap they make based purely on the IP they license.