I think it really depends on what type of games you like to play. For example, the cartoony graphics in WOW fits that particular setting, the more realistic graphics in AOC fits that setting. Could you see AOC having WOW's graphics or vice versa ? That would actually look pretty funny. As long as the graphics fit the world devs are trying to build it works for me.
Games have graphics types? I come from the days of CGA 4 color graphics, and to me all of todays graphics are nothing short of amazing, so I'm satisfied with all of them.
I focus on gameplay vs graphics, and thats the determining factor in my game. I play EVE now, and spend most of my time flying through black space with so many windows open on my screen its more like being in a submarine.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I prefer to feel that there was at some point in the process someone with artistic sensibilties and talent. As oppossed to just some techs that only knew how to work a particular piece of software.
That and "realistic" graphics really don't age very well at all generally.
I prefer to feel that there was at some point in the process someone with artistic sensibilties and talent. As oppossed to just some techs that only knew how to work a particular piece of software.
That and "realistic" graphics really don't age very well at all generally.
Yay! Artistry is really what I notice in a game, you could have the latest most hardcore engine but if your models and textures lack talent it just won't look good no matter how realistic or next gen you're trying to be. Case in point EQ2 and Vanguard. Both created at the edge of technology at the time but ended up not being very impressive all around. IMO Eq2 only became more aesthetically pleasing after the Korean (I think it's in Korea..?) studio was involved, not everyone agrees on that...
As long as you can do graphics well it doesn't really matter to me whether it's cartoony or realistic.
The OP sort of answered his own question,but defies his own words.The OP talks about lower syste mreq's ,this is true because frankly cartoony graphics are cheap and show no quality,i have yet to see one that does.Sure the more real;istic looking styles require more system,but that is because the quality is much higher...usually. There are some games,it does not matter what look they were going for,you knew the end result would be just horrid. I can be fair,WOW is a cartoon looking game,to me it is of lower quality,that is i am not saying they are totally bad,but they lack just about everything that warrants quality,from depth,to hi res texture,to definition,all the way to creating several parts making it look even better. When a game uses a leg/arm/body/head/feet then pastes a low end texture on it and that is all they did to the model,that is cheap and low quality and that goes for both realistic and cartoony.The problem is that as of now cartoony leads the way for cheap. People ALWAYS say graphics do not matter,well here is my take on the whole thing.I believe they matter a lot,because if a game is willing to spend MONEY/TIME and resources to make better quality,the rest of the game has a much better chance.If the developer right from go one,decides on cheap,you can bet the rest of the game is probably going to be just as cheap.I mean it is obvious,games make decisions on how their game will look,before they even start,and i HIGHLY doubt games go for low end based on more users. The reason i doubt this is because the lowest end is also the biggest end and that is consoles.If the game devloper chooses to ignore their easiest asset,then they would be lying if they say they made the game to cater to low end users .WOW is the biggest example of a lie.They not only had the EQ people,witch experienced their EQ on the PS2,but they chose to ignore it and the largest gaming market at the time.FFXI and EQ DID include the low end users. So in the end ,cartoony=a lazy and cheap developer trying for the easy approach. realistic=a more intense developer looking for quality,but does not guarantee the end result of course but neither does cartoony.
Actually, it's the other way around with WoW. They didn't mess up or couldn't do better, they did that on purpose. I remember reading some of the first developer interviews and in one interview I remember them specifically saying that they were designing the graphics to be as low as possible in system requirements, so that as many people as possible could play their game. What a concept lol. I had recently bought a 250.00 graphics card so I could play EQ1 (a 64mb Nvidia Titanium 4400) so I remember quite clearly hat they said a 32 meg card would be well sufficient.
Meanwhile other makers' devs got all crazy about bragging rights on how graphics-heavy their games were at E3 (quote from one dev- "there isn't a PC on the planet that can play our game at full detail".). WoW therefore sold a ton more subs and got a lot of younger people in (because younger people don't generally have high-end systems) who brought in their friends which meant more subs and referrals, etc.
So Blizzard's devs paid attention to their customer's reality, and WoW now rules the market with crappy graphics. While the makers of ultra graphic games (SOE et al) paid attention to their egos at E3 and are now flyspecks on the radar by comparison.
Although I agree that it depends on the game, I haven't found a "cartoony" game that I like. Due to this, I chose "realistic."
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
I'm an adult, 23, and I enjoy the anime inspired style. Looking forward to TERA. I think games that try to look photo realistic often look really shitty and too shiney... They just look like shit.
I'll take my anime L2 graphics over some ugly AOC looking crap any day.
Too many developers think "stylized" means cartoony, as most "stylized" graphics look cartoony.
Frankly I don't like either and always prefer realistic.
All of your "Realistic" Graphics are stylized. Realistic, stylized, and cartoon are different things, even you are confused.
Next, you will say Anime are cartoons.
You seem to be the one that is confused. Realistic graphics are realistically stylized, as in they are stylized to look realistic, while cartoony graphics are stylized to look cartoony.
The major problem is developers make crappy looking, cartoony graphics, and then slap the word "Stylized" on it as an excuse. They really should just come out and say "We made these graphics look stupid so that Aunt Sally and her Pentium II Packard Bell can play our game".
As for Anime, they look like cartoons to me. Frankly I don't really care as I find anime to be extremely lame.
Mrbloodworth I was going to tell you the difference but I just got beat to it. I think alot of us normal people understood what the guy meant when he talked about cartoony and realistic. The point of the thread I don't think was to debate the various aspects of cartoons and the break down of the word "Stylized"
And I would also like to say and agree 100 percent with this statement :
"As for Anime, they look like cartoons to me. Frankly I don't really care as I find anime to be extremely lame."
On second thought extremely lame is probably a little too generous.
The OP sort of answered his own question,but defies his own words.The OP talks about lower syste mreq's ,this is true because frankly cartoony graphics are cheap and show no quality,i have yet to see one that does.Sure the more real;istic looking styles require more system,but that is because the quality is much higher...usually. There are some games,it does not matter what look they were going for,you knew the end result would be just horrid. I can be fair,WOW is a cartoon looking game,to me it is of lower quality,that is i am not saying they are totally bad,but they lack just about everything that warrants quality,from depth,to hi res texture,to definition,all the way to creating several parts making it look even better. When a game uses a leg/arm/body/head/feet then pastes a low end texture on it and that is all they did to the model,that is cheap and low quality and that goes for both realistic and cartoony.The problem is that as of now cartoony leads the way for cheap. People ALWAYS say graphics do not matter,well here is my take on the whole thing.I believe they matter a lot,because if a game is willing to spend MONEY/TIME and resources to make better quality,the rest of the game has a much better chance.If the developer right from go one,decides on cheap,you can bet the rest of the game is probably going to be just as cheap.I mean it is obvious,games make decisions on how their game will look,before they even start,and i HIGHLY doubt games go for low end based on more users. The reason i doubt this is because the lowest end is also the biggest end and that is consoles.If the game devloper chooses to ignore their easiest asset,then they would be lying if they say they made the game to cater to low end users .WOW is the biggest example of a lie.They not only had the EQ people,witch experienced their EQ on the PS2,but they chose to ignore it and the largest gaming market at the time.FFXI and EQ DID include the low end users. So in the end ,cartoony=a lazy and cheap developer trying for the easy approach. realistic=a more intense developer looking for quality,but does not guarantee the end result of course but neither does cartoony.
Your posts are just walls of text and you have nothing to say, except from what we already know. Cartoony doesnt mean that the developer is cheap and lazy so please get a grip. Please tell us what is the game you play now, and is it good looking?
Graphics do matter, assuming the game has nothing else to offer. Psuedo-pornography. Otherwise, I'd like to my games and porn mutually exlusive.
That said, I don't really care about graphics. I do not like overly cute graphics, but it's hardly a deal breaker. For FPS I do tend to perfer more realistic graphics, especially if its some sort of survival-based game. Fallout/zombie games, because a big part of the game is "being there". I'm never goingto "be" a night elf morphing into a bear. As for the argument of "cartoony" graphics taking less system specs, that's simply not always true. And regardless, why should system specs be condiered? It's like saying a station wagon is a better car than a lamborgini because some people are too tall to fit in a lamborgini. Too bad for Guliver and friends; I'll be the red blur.
Nobody today likes cartoony stuff unless your at a young age and very immature.
This single sentence was enough impetus for me to dismiss your entire opinion as both juvenile and ridiculous.
Different styles appeal to different people; age and maturity is not a factor in whether one prefers stylized or realistic graphics in games, and generalisations such as yours are nothing short of ignorant and insulting.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
In terms of art I like good design. Graphics is just a part of it and whatever style is adopted, for the most part, doesn't matter so much to me.
WoW is an absolutely beautifully designed game. The zones are rich with visual interest. The space is very well used. Just about anywhere I've stood in the game I could snap a screenshot and have something worth showing to someone else. Compared to SWG, which had little design in the game world where most of it seems to have been spit out of a random generator. SWG had a lot of nice graphics for the time, but very little design. There were a few spots in the game that weren't just completely random where a developer actually spent time and thought to the layout and those areas were done very well. Some of the randomized parts were more picturesque than others but it always felt that was more of a happy accident than a conscious effort.
American gamers seem to be satisfied by game graphics if they have to buy a new graphic card just to run it. I guess that trend is evident by our choice of cars as well. But I'm a bit more picky. If its a well designed game that is visually interesting to me I don't care if my grandma's computer can run it, I will probably like it. The free Asian grinders, while being pretty much the same game right down to the engine, despite their flaws are often well designed artistically with flashy animation.
All that being said, I prefer the communities of cartoony games. They seem more laid back and are more likely to have dynamic personalities. MMO's are social games, after all.
I'd go for stylized graphics all day. Realistic graphics may be good and all that but it's expensive to do and that means developers are less likely to take risks, and that in the end means more WoW-like game and less creativeness. Of course it depends on the game, but I could see most games with stylized graphics although with different themed ones of course. And I'd rather have clean and nice stylized graphics than pixelated realistic graphics: I'd rather see WAR had WoWs graphic than the other way round. Additionally the major part of the game is the gameplay which is what the focus should be on, not making realistic graphics; I could play a game with bad graphics and good gameplay, but not one with good graphics and bad gameplay.
Realistic all the way! AoC for example has amazing graphics that I can really get into and feel emersed in the game. I could never feel that way in WoW or any other MMO with cartoony graphics. I realize not all people feel this way, just my opinion.
Heres my problem with realistic (Aka. WAX people) graphics. These games Age rather quickly. After six months of EQ2 the character models are ugly mean while I can enjoy WoWs stylized graphics for years. Edit: I am only talking about graphics here not gameplay, features or mmo genre.
I completely disagree; I found - and still find - WoW's graphics to look too simplistic for me, but EQ2 and Vanguard were built with future in mind. When I first bought the game, I could barely turn on most of the eye candy. But after an upgrade or two, the game continues to look better. WoW, on the other hand, continues to look the same to me.
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Realistic hands-down. Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot, Age of Conan, Lord of the Rings Online...All of these had very nice graphics when they came out, especially Age of Conan. Lord of the Rings Online with DX10 is simply brillant. Hopefully Age of Conan's DX10 will hit the live servers soon too.
I never did like cartoony graphics, like WoW. It's hard to roleplay when you look totally fake.
Heres my problem with realistic (Aka. WAX people) graphics. These games Age rather quickly. After six months of EQ2 the character models are ugly mean while I can enjoy WoWs stylized graphics for years. Edit: I am only talking about graphics here not gameplay, features or mmo genre.
I completely disagree; I found - and still find - WoW's graphics to look too simplistic for me, but EQ2 and Vanguard were built with future in mind. When I first bought the game, I could barely turn on most of the eye candy. But after an upgrade or two, the game continues to look better. WoW, on the other hand, continues to look the same to me.
These topics are silly really, how am I suppost to argue a subjective topic lol.
But in good fun i will try.
I personally don't play WoW but I do visit my old characters using ressurection scrolls every 3+ months.
Every time I log in Blizzard has bumped textures, improved world detail and increased shadows.
The game looks really good, sure I have my problems with WoW but graphics are not one of them since they work perfectly within the game.
EQ2,Lotro, AoC and Vaguard Do look dated imo. Sure these games require better systems to run but does that really mean they are built for the future? or just not talented enough to get sweet graphics on old hardware?
Why do you think long time WoW players try those games and instantly uninstall? do you really think the game is too hard for them? its the graphics!!! EQ2 looks like a much older game then WoW and so does Vanguard.
I promise you WoW will still be around ten years from now and noone will complain about their graphics at that time EQ and Vanguard will probably need sequals because those games will look terribly dated.
Lets look at consoles for a second, remember old Ps1 games like MGS and Siphon Filter? those games aged terribly while people can still play games like FF tactics, Castlevania :SotN and the Rachet and Clank series.
Stylized graphics have staying power. Cartoons never get old.
Speaking of cartoons remember all those Cyber 3d shows like Beastwars and REboot right now they look like ass, but people still watch cartoons like loneytoons.
Stylized graphics just don't age as fast if i was wrong people would still be playing EQ, AO and AC1.
As long as it fits the game, ROSE online, to me that was cartoon, worked well for the game. Perfect World, to me that is realistic and that worked great for that game. I think to me that is has to do with game and as long as it fits.
Games have graphics types? I come from the days of CGA 4 color graphics, and to me all of todays graphics are nothing short of amazing, so I'm satisfied with all of them. I focus on gameplay vs graphics, and thats the determining factor in my game. I play EVE now, and spend most of my time flying through black space with so many windows open on my screen its more like being in a submarine.
Lol, ok yeah I too recall days of the Commodore 64. Now when I think of games, say like Ultima V & VI, somewhere 1985 (?), I have felt for these two games considerably more than ANYTHING today. Now the big question I am still unsure about is: did I change, and it was youthful enthusiasm or did the games loose their magic? Or, as one of my friends said, have the graphics become TOO detailled and with less there was more of it in our head?
I cant say. I know I recall the beginning and end of Ultima V in every detail and still feel warm in my tummy over it, while many games, even great ones of the last years, dont evoke such things.
I wonder why.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
It depends on the game.Only game i have ever disagree on the character models is War i think they did diservice to the fan base making look way it did.War is suppose to be this brutal world and it doesn't reflect that.One look at warhammer opening demo and you know they went the wrong way.
Comments
I think it really depends on what type of games you like to play. For example, the cartoony graphics in WOW fits that particular setting, the more realistic graphics in AOC fits that setting. Could you see AOC having WOW's graphics or vice versa ? That would actually look pretty funny. As long as the graphics fit the world devs are trying to build it works for me.
Games have graphics types? I come from the days of CGA 4 color graphics, and to me all of todays graphics are nothing short of amazing, so I'm satisfied with all of them.
I focus on gameplay vs graphics, and thats the determining factor in my game. I play EVE now, and spend most of my time flying through black space with so many windows open on my screen its more like being in a submarine.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I prefer to feel that there was at some point in the process someone with artistic sensibilties and talent. As oppossed to just some techs that only knew how to work a particular piece of software.
That and "realistic" graphics really don't age very well at all generally.
Yay! Artistry is really what I notice in a game, you could have the latest most hardcore engine but if your models and textures lack talent it just won't look good no matter how realistic or next gen you're trying to be. Case in point EQ2 and Vanguard. Both created at the edge of technology at the time but ended up not being very impressive all around. IMO Eq2 only became more aesthetically pleasing after the Korean (I think it's in Korea..?) studio was involved, not everyone agrees on that...
As long as you can do graphics well it doesn't really matter to me whether it's cartoony or realistic.
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
Actually, it's the other way around with WoW. They didn't mess up or couldn't do better, they did that on purpose. I remember reading some of the first developer interviews and in one interview I remember them specifically saying that they were designing the graphics to be as low as possible in system requirements, so that as many people as possible could play their game. What a concept lol. I had recently bought a 250.00 graphics card so I could play EQ1 (a 64mb Nvidia Titanium 4400) so I remember quite clearly hat they said a 32 meg card would be well sufficient.
Meanwhile other makers' devs got all crazy about bragging rights on how graphics-heavy their games were at E3 (quote from one dev- "there isn't a PC on the planet that can play our game at full detail".). WoW therefore sold a ton more subs and got a lot of younger people in (because younger people don't generally have high-end systems) who brought in their friends which meant more subs and referrals, etc.
So Blizzard's devs paid attention to their customer's reality, and WoW now rules the market with crappy graphics. While the makers of ultra graphic games (SOE et al) paid attention to their egos at E3 and are now flyspecks on the radar by comparison.
Cartoony, stylized, or realistic? It doesn't matter to me as long as it is done well.
And I agree with all who have said "Gameplay >>> Graphics."
Playing | GW2
Wanting | Pantheon
Watching | Crowfall
Retired | WAR, Cabal, MO, CO, SHK, WoW, FFXIV: ARR
Although I agree that it depends on the game, I haven't found a "cartoony" game that I like. Due to this, I chose "realistic."
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Lineage 2 graphics ftw...
I'm an adult, 23, and I enjoy the anime inspired style. Looking forward to TERA. I think games that try to look photo realistic often look really shitty and too shiney... They just look like shit.
I'll take my anime L2 graphics over some ugly AOC looking crap any day.
Too many developers think "stylized" means cartoony, as most "stylized" graphics look cartoony.
Frankly I don't like either and always prefer realistic.
All of your "Realistic" Graphics are stylized. Realistic, stylized, and cartoon are different things, even you are confused.
Next, you will say Anime are cartoons.
You seem to be the one that is confused. Realistic graphics are realistically stylized, as in they are stylized to look realistic, while cartoony graphics are stylized to look cartoony.
The major problem is developers make crappy looking, cartoony graphics, and then slap the word "Stylized" on it as an excuse. They really should just come out and say "We made these graphics look stupid so that Aunt Sally and her Pentium II Packard Bell can play our game".
As for Anime, they look like cartoons to me. Frankly I don't really care as I find anime to be extremely lame.
Mrbloodworth I was going to tell you the difference but I just got beat to it. I think alot of us normal people understood what the guy meant when he talked about cartoony and realistic. The point of the thread I don't think was to debate the various aspects of cartoons and the break down of the word "Stylized"
And I would also like to say and agree 100 percent with this statement :
"As for Anime, they look like cartoons to me. Frankly I don't really care as I find anime to be extremely lame."
On second thought extremely lame is probably a little too generous.
Your posts are just walls of text and you have nothing to say, except from what we already know. Cartoony doesnt mean that the developer is cheap and lazy so please get a grip. Please tell us what is the game you play now, and is it good looking?
Graphics do matter, assuming the game has nothing else to offer. Psuedo-pornography. Otherwise, I'd like to my games and porn mutually exlusive.
That said, I don't really care about graphics. I do not like overly cute graphics, but it's hardly a deal breaker. For FPS I do tend to perfer more realistic graphics, especially if its some sort of survival-based game. Fallout/zombie games, because a big part of the game is "being there". I'm never goingto "be" a night elf morphing into a bear. As for the argument of "cartoony" graphics taking less system specs, that's simply not always true. And regardless, why should system specs be condiered? It's like saying a station wagon is a better car than a lamborgini because some people are too tall to fit in a lamborgini. Too bad for Guliver and friends; I'll be the red blur.
This single sentence was enough impetus for me to dismiss your entire opinion as both juvenile and ridiculous.
Different styles appeal to different people; age and maturity is not a factor in whether one prefers stylized or realistic graphics in games, and generalisations such as yours are nothing short of ignorant and insulting.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
What a load of bs. Stopped reading there.
Same here. I didn't even bother reading the rest of the thread, and won't click on it anymore either
In terms of art I like good design. Graphics is just a part of it and whatever style is adopted, for the most part, doesn't matter so much to me.
WoW is an absolutely beautifully designed game. The zones are rich with visual interest. The space is very well used. Just about anywhere I've stood in the game I could snap a screenshot and have something worth showing to someone else. Compared to SWG, which had little design in the game world where most of it seems to have been spit out of a random generator. SWG had a lot of nice graphics for the time, but very little design. There were a few spots in the game that weren't just completely random where a developer actually spent time and thought to the layout and those areas were done very well. Some of the randomized parts were more picturesque than others but it always felt that was more of a happy accident than a conscious effort.
American gamers seem to be satisfied by game graphics if they have to buy a new graphic card just to run it. I guess that trend is evident by our choice of cars as well. But I'm a bit more picky. If its a well designed game that is visually interesting to me I don't care if my grandma's computer can run it, I will probably like it. The free Asian grinders, while being pretty much the same game right down to the engine, despite their flaws are often well designed artistically with flashy animation.
All that being said, I prefer the communities of cartoony games. They seem more laid back and are more likely to have dynamic personalities. MMO's are social games, after all.
http://mmo-hell.blogspot.com/
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/rejad
I'd go for stylized graphics all day. Realistic graphics may be good and all that but it's expensive to do and that means developers are less likely to take risks, and that in the end means more WoW-like game and less creativeness. Of course it depends on the game, but I could see most games with stylized graphics although with different themed ones of course. And I'd rather have clean and nice stylized graphics than pixelated realistic graphics: I'd rather see WAR had WoWs graphic than the other way round. Additionally the major part of the game is the gameplay which is what the focus should be on, not making realistic graphics; I could play a game with bad graphics and good gameplay, but not one with good graphics and bad gameplay.
Heres my problem with realistic (Aka. WAX people) graphics.
These games Age rather quickly.
After six months of EQ2 the character models are ugly mean while I can enjoy WoWs stylized graphics for years.
Look at Vanguard and Lotro sure the world looks nice but the character models are terrible.
Even AoC with its Wax people models look like hell.
I prefer sylized graphics like Wow, WAR, Ryzom and TCoS.
Right now we have four choices to choose from.
Wax, Stylized, 2d and Anime
Only one has longevity imo.
Edit: I am only talking about graphics here not gameplay, features or mmo genre.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
Realistic all the way! AoC for example has amazing graphics that I can really get into and feel emersed in the game. I could never feel that way in WoW or any other MMO with cartoony graphics. I realize not all people feel this way, just my opinion.
I completely disagree; I found - and still find - WoW's graphics to look too simplistic for me, but EQ2 and Vanguard were built with future in mind. When I first bought the game, I could barely turn on most of the eye candy. But after an upgrade or two, the game continues to look better. WoW, on the other hand, continues to look the same to me.
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Realistic hands-down. Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot, Age of Conan, Lord of the Rings Online...All of these had very nice graphics when they came out, especially Age of Conan. Lord of the Rings Online with DX10 is simply brillant. Hopefully Age of Conan's DX10 will hit the live servers soon too.
I never did like cartoony graphics, like WoW. It's hard to roleplay when you look totally fake.
I completely disagree; I found - and still find - WoW's graphics to look too simplistic for me, but EQ2 and Vanguard were built with future in mind. When I first bought the game, I could barely turn on most of the eye candy. But after an upgrade or two, the game continues to look better. WoW, on the other hand, continues to look the same to me.
These topics are silly really, how am I suppost to argue a subjective topic lol.
But in good fun i will try.
I personally don't play WoW but I do visit my old characters using ressurection scrolls every 3+ months.
Every time I log in Blizzard has bumped textures, improved world detail and increased shadows.
The game looks really good, sure I have my problems with WoW but graphics are not one of them since they work perfectly within the game.
EQ2,Lotro, AoC and Vaguard Do look dated imo. Sure these games require better systems to run but does that really mean they are built for the future? or just not talented enough to get sweet graphics on old hardware?
Why do you think long time WoW players try those games and instantly uninstall? do you really think the game is too hard for them? its the graphics!!! EQ2 looks like a much older game then WoW and so does Vanguard.
I promise you WoW will still be around ten years from now and noone will complain about their graphics at that time EQ and Vanguard will probably need sequals because those games will look terribly dated.
Lets look at consoles for a second, remember old Ps1 games like MGS and Siphon Filter? those games aged terribly while people can still play games like FF tactics, Castlevania :SotN and the Rachet and Clank series.
Stylized graphics have staying power. Cartoons never get old.
Speaking of cartoons remember all those Cyber 3d shows like Beastwars and REboot right now they look like ass, but people still watch cartoons like loneytoons.
Stylized graphics just don't age as fast if i was wrong people would still be playing EQ, AO and AC1.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
As long as it fits the game, ROSE online, to me that was cartoon, worked well for the game. Perfect World, to me that is realistic and that worked great for that game. I think to me that is has to do with game and as long as it fits.
forgot to add. I do prefer realistic.
Lol, ok yeah I too recall days of the Commodore 64. Now when I think of games, say like Ultima V & VI, somewhere 1985 (?), I have felt for these two games considerably more than ANYTHING today. Now the big question I am still unsure about is: did I change, and it was youthful enthusiasm or did the games loose their magic? Or, as one of my friends said, have the graphics become TOO detailled and with less there was more of it in our head?
I cant say. I know I recall the beginning and end of Ultima V in every detail and still feel warm in my tummy over it, while many games, even great ones of the last years, dont evoke such things.
I wonder why.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I don't like cartoony games.
Each art style has it's place depending on your game concept and target audience.
It is like trying to compare chalk and cheese.
DarkSpace Developer - Play DarkSpace - Play For Free!
Medusa Engine SDK - Free MMO Game Engine
Hampton Roads/East Coast Video Gamers Association
It depends on the game.Only game i have ever disagree on the character models is War i think they did diservice to the fan base making look way it did.War is suppose to be this brutal world and it doesn't reflect that.One look at warhammer opening demo and you know they went the wrong way.