I don't see why we'd even be required to make a decision between the two. Computers are more powerful than ever, the internet is faster than every, a game with great gameplay and fantastic graphics is entirely feasible and should be expected.
I somewhat agree
but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
I somewhat agree but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
This is a fun simple question, but I suppose it's more complicated to answer. I'll put this as plainly as I can. I've seen some videos and some screenshots of Darkfall... and in complete honesty I can say that I will not play Darkfall based on what I have seen in those mediums. In reality, it boils down to what I get for my money. As far as I know, it's a premium price ($15 a month), so with that, I expect it to be at least competitive on all fronts. Darkfall looks terrible, and I would never pay a premium price for a game that looks 3-5 years old, unless I had been playing it for that long in the first place. Still... that doesn't mean I'd play a F2P game that looked that old either. And of course, I don't. Look, I don't mind paying premiums. I really don't. I enjoy the benefits that should come with that price too. The minimum I expect is for the game to release with AT LEAST competitive graphics of the games that were released the year prior. I honestly don't beleive that is too much to ask for. Oh, and that includes everything - shaders, texturing, artistic approach, realistic approach, animation (most importantly), and also, scalability. AND! Just to be clear... I don't compare an older game's lack of "sparkly newness" against a newer game with a lot more graphical powerhouse. I'm picky, but I don't have unrealistic tastes. I've played lots of games that were older, and I respected that they were released prior to the modern glitz and glamour of today's games. So, when it comes to this, particular event, I'm usually more focussed on the gameplay, rather than what I'm looking at. If I'm having fun, then I can look past a lot of the lack of graphical polish. But... only so much. It would have to look decent enough before I'd even give it a chance...
If you think Darkfall looks terrible, then you have really high standards.
Keep in mind they can have 10k people on one server, so ofcourse they can't have AoC graphics.
AoC sucks anyway, but hey, we all know that already.
This doesn't look ''terrible'' at all in my opinion. In my opinion it actually looks great. Especially if you take in mind what they promised us, 10k players, all the other features, and they left a huge part for us to discover ingame.
Depending on the game... i still like playing old RPG games that are fully 2D like Final Fantasy 1 ect.... lol but on the new MMORPG games... it does help having better graphics... i have the top of the line computer including graphix. i didnt cheap out this time... so id like too play games that utilizes that. Aion seems too be the most advanced graphic MMORPG in the next while... so i cant wait for that too come out. as for older... i liked Final Fantasy 11 graphics for MMORPG but i dont think id want too play any less.
I somewhat agree but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
Hmmm, about Guildwars & Wow I guess... And if it released today with monthly fees I want even more than that, 2004 graphics was fine 2004 and I can't really blame older games for their age but games today should look better.
I love good graphics so therefor I tend to play games that have it.
Oh, yeah and someone said that he refused to play WAR and AoC because hes computer can't run them... Lol, that is like a poor guy who refuses to own a house in Martinique, you don't have any choice.
It is good that there are games with good graphics and others who don't because our computer differs but most people do want as good GFX as possible. But many people forget how crappy games looked just 10 years ago, try Diablo today and you will see, or Quake 2.
4 years in the world of games is a long time, a very long time. Saying that games with aocs or df () graphics / engine are revolutionary can only be jsutified because the mmos are evolving much slower thant video games used to.
I'm not a no life that sits in front of his computer all day long, I'm an intern that sits in front of his computer all day long.
This is a fun simple question, but I suppose it's more complicated to answer. I'll put this as plainly as I can. I've seen some videos and some screenshots of Darkfall... and in complete honesty I can say that I will not play Darkfall based on what I have seen in those mediums. In reality, it boils down to what I get for my money. As far as I know, it's a premium price ($15 a month), so with that, I expect it to be at least competitive on all fronts. Darkfall looks terrible, and I would never pay a premium price for a game that looks 3-5 years old, unless I had been playing it for that long in the first place. Still... that doesn't mean I'd play a F2P game that looked that old either. And of course, I don't. Look, I don't mind paying premiums. I really don't. I enjoy the benefits that should come with that price too. The minimum I expect is for the game to release with AT LEAST competitive graphics of the games that were released the year prior. I honestly don't beleive that is too much to ask for. Oh, and that includes everything - shaders, texturing, artistic approach, realistic approach, animation (most importantly), and also, scalability. AND! Just to be clear... I don't compare an older game's lack of "sparkly newness" against a newer game with a lot more graphical powerhouse. I'm picky, but I don't have unrealistic tastes. I've played lots of games that were older, and I respected that they were released prior to the modern glitz and glamour of today's games. So, when it comes to this, particular event, I'm usually more focussed on the gameplay, rather than what I'm looking at. If I'm having fun, then I can look past a lot of the lack of graphical polish. But... only so much. It would have to look decent enough before I'd even give it a chance...
If you think Darkfall looks terrible, then you have really high standards.
Keep in mind they can have 10k people on one server, so ofcourse they can't have AoC graphics.
AoC sucks anyway, but hey, we all know that already.
This doesn't look ''terrible'' at all in my opinion. In my opinion it actually looks great. Especially if you take in mind what they promised us, 10k players, all the other features, and they left a huge part for us to discover ingame.
You know, I was going to comment on your post.
"why bother"
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
If the gameplay is good I really do not care what the graphics look like. Hell I am playing Mount and Blade at the moment which is possibly one of the most ugly games I have ever seen, but the gameplay more than makes up for it.
I think graphics should always take a back seat to gameplay, and should never take away from the gameplay only compliment it. Mount and blade for instance may have terrible graphics but it means I can have 1000s of npcs in a battle with no lag, I would much rather have that than 20 - 30 units in a battle with up to date graphics.
I think one think that has to be right however with low end graphics is the animation, if the game looks sluggish when playing an ugly game it will really take away from the gameplay. WoWs grapics are terrible but they get the animations right, on the other hand Wars graphics are also terrible just like the animations which really brings down the game imo. To bad gamplay sucks in both of those examples.
I think one think that has to be right however with low end graphics is the animation, if the game looks sluggish when playing an ugly game it will really take away from the gameplay. WoWs grapics are terrible but they get the animations right, on the other hand Wars graphics are also terrible just like the animations which really brings down the game imo. To bad gamplay sucks in both of those examples.
I've seen this comment a lot. Some people seem really sensitive to animations. If they are slightly off it seems to wreck the game for me. I don't seem to have this same sensitivity for animation. I'm looking at the artstyle fo the graphics mostly, and if the animations aren't perfect it doesn't really seem to bother me that much.
I liked the WAR graphics ok. I mean they weren't really anything special, but certainly a alot better than WoW graphics. I didn't see a huge problem with the WAR animations. I was disappointed with the game design, and so much instanced PvP in the scenarios, and lack of good PvE and group play, but the animations weren't a major concern.
Darkfall looks like Lineage 2, with WoW shape/geometry style characters. Nothing special, looks somewhat worse than expected from an up and coming MMO.
I somewhat agree but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.
Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?
First, I'm not sure what click to move has to do with graphical quality and this discussion, but L2 also has WASD as an option if it makes that big of a difference to you.
Second, my question was to define huge battles. L2 does have some fairly big ones, but words like big, huge, etc. are all relative. You answered my question with the same question.
I'm not really that bothered about graphics. I honestly think that the interface and controls are much much more important.
To me, UO is a perfect game. Unfortunately, I was perhaps a little young to have appreciated it in its heyday. What really puts me off playing it now are the awkward controls and interface. Even with Kingdom Reborn, the interface is still a little awkward and the movements is just horrendous!
I really don't care about the graphics. The difference between 2D and 3D UO, graphics-wise, is nothing to me.
(What sounds like) 8-bit sound, crappy interface and movements controls, however, are a big problem to me.
However, graphics and interface are often linked. So I would say EQ graphics and interface would be minimum for me.
MMOs played (In order of how much I've liked them): Star Wars Galaxies, World of Warcraft, Vanguard, City of Villains / Heroes, Guild Wars, Warhammer Online, Age of Conan, Tabula Rasa, Anarchy Online, Ryzom, Final Fantasy XI, Matrix Online, RF Online, Rappelz, Hero Online, Roma Victor
I somewhat agree but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.
Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?
Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game.
and L2 is an open PvP game, theres no RvR, theres no rules...you want something in the game, well if other people do, then you'll have to compete over it, so it all depends on the circumstance, and your server/community. There have been some raids that involved hundreds of people, and there have even been castle sieges with 500 or close to a thousand people fighting to win.
crappiest graphics for gameplay? cant say anything about mmos but ...
quake 1? quake 2?
blade of darkness?
diablo 1?
the thing is neither of those games have crappy graphics. the whole style and making is just great. they are just old. crappy graphics are... hmmm most of new cloned mmos actually.
lets say runes of magic? now thats crappy graphics. overkill ammount of effects, but animations that are more than 10 years old. now thats crappy graphics i cant stand at all.
Probably Star Trek Online, if the gameplay turns out better than it sounds. /duck
*Throws a duck at Darwa*
Well I played Runescape off and on for 2 years if that's any indication. 1 year of that was before the graphics upgrade. I also still play games like X-com and Master of Orion just because they are that great to play. I would trade fancy flashy graphics for game play every time.
Bren
This **
I don't need fancy graphics if the gameplay is truely awesome.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
Hmm personally I feel your not getting the best representation since a lot of people that would reply to this kind of thread are the gameplay > graphics type.
Anyways heres my 2C:
While gameplay is very important to me, so is graphics. I liked WoW because of its art style. It had a weak engine, but an excellent art style. I liked AoC's graphics because it was a powerful engine, however the art style was not always consistent. You could clearly see areas where very little effort had been made. But I guess thats evident in all MMOs.
Aion seems to be the win win for me. Good graphics engine, amazing art style.
Overall I'd say having a decent art style is more important than the graphical prowess of an MMO. That being said, I have no problem with a game which has WoW graphics and good gameplay.
Currently waiting for the MMO industry to put out something good.
Nothing from AC (or Runescape) quality down with 3D. With AC I actually have issues seeing different items in the game. It's horribly annoying.
As for 2D, if anyone has heard of a little game called Endless Online, I would not go below that in terms of graphical quality.
I would PREFER those found in City of Heroes and EQII with active physics systems, then again, I'm the kid who bought the The Orange Box just to fling stuff around with the gravity gun... I like my physics
____________________________ Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online --- == RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP == --- Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online --- Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth ____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
EQ1 level would be my lower limit. I didn't finally quit EQ because oif the graphics it was mostly because I'd already explored most of the world and large chunks of it I'd explored hundreds of times over the years.
edit: Actually, having just written that I wonder if an individual's miniumum graphics level is whatever game they first really got into.
Also there's multiple aspects of game "graphics. A lot of the oriental games have incredibly beautiful graphics but the male character faces all look like girls (to me). I can't get my immersion fix when my char looks like that.
"Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game."
If you like the immersion of playing the game in first person view then click to move is no good. It's not about being *like* an FPS game, it's about the immersion of the first person view.
Comments
I somewhat agree
but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag
get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks
EQ2 fan sites
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
If you think Darkfall looks terrible, then you have really high standards.
Keep in mind they can have 10k people on one server, so ofcourse they can't have AoC graphics.
AoC sucks anyway, but hey, we all know that already.
Some screenshots of DF:
Human race.
Orks.
Sunset. ( looks awesome, beta shot, default settings. )
Screenshot from the homepage of darkfall online.
Human with mount.
Ork female
Youtube vid : click
This doesn't look ''terrible'' at all in my opinion. In my opinion it actually looks great. Especially if you take in mind what they promised us, 10k players, all the other features, and they left a huge part for us to discover ingame.
Depending on the game... i still like playing old RPG games that are fully 2D like Final Fantasy 1 ect.... lol but on the new MMORPG games... it does help having better graphics... i have the top of the line computer including graphix. i didnt cheap out this time... so id like too play games that utilizes that. Aion seems too be the most advanced graphic MMORPG in the next while... so i cant wait for that too come out. as for older... i liked Final Fantasy 11 graphics for MMORPG but i dont think id want too play any less.
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.
Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?
Hmmm, about Guildwars & Wow I guess... And if it released today with monthly fees I want even more than that, 2004 graphics was fine 2004 and I can't really blame older games for their age but games today should look better.
I love good graphics so therefor I tend to play games that have it.
Oh, yeah and someone said that he refused to play WAR and AoC because hes computer can't run them... Lol, that is like a poor guy who refuses to own a house in Martinique, you don't have any choice.
It is good that there are games with good graphics and others who don't because our computer differs but most people do want as good GFX as possible. But many people forget how crappy games looked just 10 years ago, try Diablo today and you will see, or Quake 2.
GW's graphics were the best when it came out.
4 years in the world of games is a long time, a very long time. Saying that games with aocs or df (
) graphics / engine are revolutionary can only be jsutified because the mmos are evolving much slower thant video games used to.
I'm not a no life that sits in front of his computer all day long, I'm an intern that sits in front of his computer all day long.
If you think Darkfall looks terrible, then you have really high standards.
Keep in mind they can have 10k people on one server, so ofcourse they can't have AoC graphics.
AoC sucks anyway, but hey, we all know that already.
Some screenshots of DF:
Human race.
Orks.
Sunset. ( looks awesome, beta shot, default settings. )
Screenshot from the homepage of darkfall online.
Human with mount.
Ork female
Youtube vid : click
This doesn't look ''terrible'' at all in my opinion. In my opinion it actually looks great. Especially if you take in mind what they promised us, 10k players, all the other features, and they left a huge part for us to discover ingame.
You know, I was going to comment on your post.
"why bother"
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
If the gameplay is good I really do not care what the graphics look like. Hell I am playing Mount and Blade at the moment which is possibly one of the most ugly games I have ever seen, but the gameplay more than makes up for it.
I think graphics should always take a back seat to gameplay, and should never take away from the gameplay only compliment it. Mount and blade for instance may have terrible graphics but it means I can have 1000s of npcs in a battle with no lag, I would much rather have that than 20 - 30 units in a battle with up to date graphics.
I think one think that has to be right however with low end graphics is the animation, if the game looks sluggish when playing an ugly game it will really take away from the gameplay. WoWs grapics are terrible but they get the animations right, on the other hand Wars graphics are also terrible just like the animations which really brings down the game imo. To bad gamplay sucks in both of those examples.
people have way to high standards these days
Mount and blade looks fine in my opinion.
I've seen this comment a lot. Some people seem really sensitive to animations. If they are slightly off it seems to wreck the game for me. I don't seem to have this same sensitivity for animation. I'm looking at the artstyle fo the graphics mostly, and if the animations aren't perfect it doesn't really seem to bother me that much.
I liked the WAR graphics ok. I mean they weren't really anything special, but certainly a alot better than WoW graphics. I didn't see a huge problem with the WAR animations. I was disappointed with the game design, and so much instanced PvP in the scenarios, and lack of good PvE and group play, but the animations weren't a major concern.
Darkfall looks like Lineage 2, with WoW shape/geometry style characters. Nothing special, looks somewhat worse than expected from an up and coming MMO.
Fallout 3.
i'd say the current Runescape 3d graphics would be as low as i would go before i seriously consider whether to keep going or not.
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
I think I could handle that. Doesn't look so bad I wouldn't play if it was interesting.
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.
Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?
First, I'm not sure what click to move has to do with graphical quality and this discussion, but L2 also has WASD as an option if it makes that big of a difference to you.
Second, my question was to define huge battles. L2 does have some fairly big ones, but words like big, huge, etc. are all relative. You answered my question with the same question.
I'm not really that bothered about graphics. I honestly think that the interface and controls are much much more important.
To me, UO is a perfect game. Unfortunately, I was perhaps a little young to have appreciated it in its heyday. What really puts me off playing it now are the awkward controls and interface. Even with Kingdom Reborn, the interface is still a little awkward and the movements is just horrendous!
I really don't care about the graphics. The difference between 2D and 3D UO, graphics-wise, is nothing to me.
(What sounds like) 8-bit sound, crappy interface and movements controls, however, are a big problem to me.
However, graphics and interface are often linked. So I would say EQ graphics and interface would be minimum for me.
MMOs played (In order of how much I've liked them): Star Wars Galaxies, World of Warcraft, Vanguard, City of Villains / Heroes, Guild Wars, Warhammer Online, Age of Conan, Tabula Rasa, Anarchy Online, Ryzom, Final Fantasy XI, Matrix Online, RF Online, Rappelz, Hero Online, Roma Victor
Define mass amounts. You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay. In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.
L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.
Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?
Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game.
and L2 is an open PvP game, theres no RvR, theres no rules...you want something in the game, well if other people do, then you'll have to compete over it, so it all depends on the circumstance, and your server/community. There have been some raids that involved hundreds of people, and there have even been castle sieges with 500 or close to a thousand people fighting to win.
Needs to be 3D and not look cartoony or like an anime. Anything there I can handle :]
Drackarre-A new medieval fantasy sandbox mmorpg in development by Bungaboo.
Dots like pong style. But for that gameplay would have to be pretty amazing.
Else I still like UO 2d and if gameplay supports it I can live with that graphics.
Problem with most 3d engines is that they don't allow you to put things on the ground ...which is annoying.
crappiest graphics for gameplay? cant say anything about mmos but ...
quake 1? quake 2?
blade of darkness?
diablo 1?
the thing is neither of those games have crappy graphics. the whole style and making is just great. they are just old. crappy graphics are... hmmm most of new cloned mmos actually.
lets say runes of magic? now thats crappy graphics. overkill ammount of effects, but animations that are more than 10 years old. now thats crappy graphics i cant stand at all.
*Throws a duck at Darwa*
Well I played Runescape off and on for 2 years if that's any indication. 1 year of that was before the graphics upgrade.
I also still play games like X-com and Master of Orion just because they are that great to play. I would trade fancy flashy graphics for game play every time.
Bren
This **
I don't need fancy graphics if the gameplay is truely awesome.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
Hmm personally I feel your not getting the best representation since a lot of people that would reply to this kind of thread are the gameplay > graphics type.
Anyways heres my 2C:
While gameplay is very important to me, so is graphics. I liked WoW because of its art style. It had a weak engine, but an excellent art style. I liked AoC's graphics because it was a powerful engine, however the art style was not always consistent. You could clearly see areas where very little effort had been made. But I guess thats evident in all MMOs.
Aion seems to be the win win for me. Good graphics engine, amazing art style.
Overall I'd say having a decent art style is more important than the graphical prowess of an MMO. That being said, I have no problem with a game which has WoW graphics and good gameplay.
Nothing from AC (or Runescape) quality down with 3D. With AC I actually have issues seeing different items in the game. It's horribly annoying.
As for 2D, if anyone has heard of a little game called Endless Online, I would not go below that in terms of graphical quality.
I would PREFER those found in City of Heroes and EQII with active physics systems, then again, I'm the kid who bought the The Orange Box just to fling stuff around with the gravity gun... I like my physics
____________________________
Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online
---
== RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP ==
---
Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online
---
Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth
____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
EQ1 level would be my lower limit. I didn't finally quit EQ because oif the graphics it was mostly because I'd already explored most of the world and large chunks of it I'd explored hundreds of times over the years.
edit: Actually, having just written that I wonder if an individual's miniumum graphics level is whatever game they first really got into.
Also there's multiple aspects of game "graphics. A lot of the oriental games have incredibly beautiful graphics but the male character faces all look like girls (to me). I can't get my immersion fix when my char looks like that.
"Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game."
If you like the immersion of playing the game in first person view then click to move is no good. It's not about being *like* an FPS game, it's about the immersion of the first person view.