I look at it the same way I do SWTOR. SWTOR's graphics really looked horrible in the early phases ( they didn't improve *all* that much..but they did get better) but I was still able to enjoy the game for quite a while, and what made me finally give up on it was lack of content updates and the cash-grab, not the graphics.
The gameplay, update frequency, over-usage of a cash-shop will be the deciding factors for me.
Being F2P the cash shop worries me the most. I'd rather it be 15/month and not get nickle and dimed. I think the y said that land cost real money, but will that just come with basic building tools, or do we pay for every "premium" tool, texture, etc. They have to make money off it, so what will they be charging for. They have to have a pricing model/CS list already decided upon with release so close (this winter?), so why haven't they disclosed it?
And for those that say graphics don't matter, it is a building game, so I would think the art style and graphics would matter even more since it isn't a typical fight/quest game. The end look of your creation matters more than running around in a world of dev design that you can ignore as combat is more focus.
Also, not sure using WoW as an example of how cartoony graphics hold up better than realism is a good argument. AoC still looks good, and WoW holds up over time because it started out looking bad to begin with (IMO), so I guess you could say the years have been kind, because it still at same level as when launched (IMO). I do admit it has actually improved some as some work was put into them over the years.
I prefer this style over graphics that try and be realistic but never are.
Exactly, in realistic looking games there's always some low q texture somewhere that looks out of place.
I like the pics, looks a lot like wow
I must say it does look like WoW, and that's possibly the smartest thing SOE has done; there's some sort of immersion with such graphics that's hard to grasp initially, but once you get into the game you don't want to leave, just like Vanilla WoW.
I must say it does look like WoW, and that's possibly the smartest thing SOE has done; there's some sort of immersion with such graphics that's hard to grasp initially, but once you get into the game you don't want to leave, just like Vanilla WoW.
I like how ppl express their opinion like it's fact.
You think everquest even though it looks way worse than Black Desert or Bless right now it will magically look better than those 2 games in 4-5 years?
The longevity of cartoony graphics is just a freaking misconception in childrens minds. You just make something look like cr@p and call it art style different from the others so that any comparison with new game graphics is avoided right from the start.
I'm wondering how they managed to make EQ textures look worst than the default from Voxelfarm engine.
Oh by the way wow had bad graphics at the beginning but now it looks like sh1t. It just that there are so many kids around, both physically and mentally.
Yep. The only games where the graphics really bother me are games like Rift that go for realism but when zoomed out at a normal play zoom they look just awful.
I expect this game to be on the low end graphically since everything can be destroyed and players can build their own structures. They are basically painting by numbers here.
Hey is there another version of RIFT?
Been playing RIFT for several month now but the version I am playing is really far from realism, to me it's more cartoony/stylized.
I have to agree the screenshots do not really excite me,but the premise of what the game want's to deliver does.
I agree. In the discussion it sometimes seems as if there where only two types of graphics, cartoony and hyper-realistic. In reality this is of course a matter of degree. Compared to EQN games like Rift and ESO look more realistic, but they are actually still very stylized. If you compare them to Battlefield 4 or Star Citizen they suddenly look almost cartoony. And even BF4s graphics are not really photo-realistic but stylized to some degree.
I must say it does look like WoW, and that's possibly the smartest thing SOE has done; there's some sort of immersion with such graphics that's hard to grasp initially, but once you get into the game you don't want to leave, just like Vanilla WoW.
I like how ppl express their opinion like it's fact.
You think everquest even though it looks way worse than Black Desert or Bless right now it will magically look better than those 2 games in 4-5 years?
The longevity of cartoony graphics is just a freaking misconception in childrens minds. You just make something look like cr@p and call it art style different from the others so that any comparison with new game graphics is avoided right from the start.
I'm wondering how they managed to make EQ textures look worst than the default from Voxelfarm engine.
Oh by the way wow had bad graphics at the beginning but now it looks like sh1t. It just that there are so many kids around, both physically and mentally.
I cannot take seriously someone who sports Olympiacos' player name as a user name, sorry.
I must say it does look like WoW, and that's possibly the smartest thing SOE has done; there's some sort of immersion with such graphics that's hard to grasp initially, but once you get into the game you don't want to leave, just like Vanilla WoW.
I like how ppl express their opinion like it's fact.
You think everquest even though it looks way worse than Black Desert or Bless right now it will magically look better than those 2 games in 4-5 years?
The longevity of cartoony graphics is just a freaking misconception in childrens minds. You just make something look like cr@p and call it art style different from the others so that any comparison with new game graphics is avoided right from the start.
I'm wondering how they managed to make EQ textures look worst than the default from Voxelfarm engine.
Oh by the way wow had bad graphics at the beginning but now it looks like sh1t. It just that there are so many kids around, both physically and mentally.
I agree. If you look at the demonstration videos for the VoxelFarm engine you notice how much better it could look with different wall textures. The engine does in no way demand textures that look like blue Play-Doh, that was SOEs own decision.
While it may be true for you Galadourn, I never felt like this when I was playing WoW. I don't want to say that WoW can't be immersive, but the immersion is certainly not coming from the graphics but from other sources.
If you ask me this was not really a smart move. If people see something that looks like WoW they will assume that it is like WoW and it will be the same old game we where playing for 11 years now.
It's really good that these environments can be destroyed... they need to be. All the anticipation for a release that should appeal to seven year olds with a cheap tablet. It does bring a nice sense of nostalgia - graphics circa 1999 -
Gameplay trumps graphics - I play minecraft and have a blast.
While not a fan of EQN graphically, if the gameplay is there it won't matter.
If WoW had clunky and unresponsive combat, and terrible gameplay it would have failed miserably.
There are a ton of crappy games out there that look almost identically to WoW - so again gameplay is a lot more important.
Yes, no game can be good without good gameplay. For indi-games I can accept it if the costs had to be cut in the graphics department, but not for a AAA-title. (And SOE is not quite an indi-developer.) Of a AAA title I demand not only fun gameplay but also a game that is visually pleasing, polished and immersive. Good gameplay is not an excuse for bad graphics in a game with a multimillion dollar budget.
well, good news for all ya graphics enthusiasts; ESO is coming out in Spring 2014 and is guaranteed to stun all of you with its graphics for at least its entire free month.
After all, what we all want is a game where your toon looks amazing and you just go around the roller-coaster enjoying the content.
Gameplay trumps graphics - I play minecraft and have a blast.
While not a fan of EQN graphically, if the gameplay is there it won't matter.
If WoW had clunky and unresponsive combat, and terrible gameplay it would have failed miserably.
There are a ton of crappy games out there that look almost identically to WoW - so again gameplay is a lot more important.
Yes, no game can be good without good gameplay. For indi-games I can accept it if the costs had to be cut in the graphics department, but not for a AAA-title. (And SOE is not quite an indi-developer.) Of a AAA title I demand not only fun gameplay but also a game that is visually pleasing, polished and immersive. Good gameplay is not an excuse for bad graphics in a game with a multimillion dollar budget.
AAA MMOs today are in the $60,000,000+ range, and SoE doesnt have that budget for EQN anymore, they did 4 years ago, but not now. Why you ask?
Because this its 3rd iteration, they've scrapped the 2 previous games completely and have gone way overbudget on this already, let's not even mention 4 years of wasted Dev time (and look at the Dev team at EQN, none of them are juniors - so all of them are top salaries)
Why do you think they are releasing EQL as a game (with cash shop)? Remember that initially EQL was gonna be a toolset, but now SoE is making into a full blown game - $$$ cha-ching!
To help fund EQN, and to help SoE get player made content - look at the size of the EQN team, its TINY - a major AAA game would have over 200 devs - they are running with a barebone crew, again due to spending so much money on the 2 previous versions they scrapped.
So SoE currently doesn't have the $$ nor dev team to finish EQN, they need EQL to be successful and profitable, as otherwise EQN is in major trouble.
I'm sure there are people at SOE laughing their asses out loud at all the educated posts by business gurus in these fora; SOE out of money for EQN? Are you serious man? This is their flagship and you think they would be short of money? They'll keep pumping as much as it takes till launch. And yes, Sony CAN PUMP AS MUCH AS IT TAKES.
Now if it fails AFTER launch (I doubt it), that's another issue.
it's pretty obvious that SOE will use EQNL as a testbed for a number of technical things (procedural generation, emergent AI and whatnot) but also as a gauge and prequel to the new gameplay experience they are trying to bring to the genre.
Think of EQNL as a marketing (but not only) trick to stir up interest. They are addressing vastly different MMO crowds here. And in order to be successful they have to proceed in steps.
Everything about EQN points to the fact that SOE is willing to throw A LOT of money in order to become a market leader - actually not only become market leader, but CHANGE THE MARKET in the process as well. Be it the soundtrack, the novels they are publishing and whatever else they may come up with, these guys seem determined to do it right. And for a big budget company this means keep pumping money till you get it right.
There is no intermediate success here, you either win it or you lose.
Originally posted by DMKano AAA MMOs today are in the $60,000,000+ range, and SoE doesnt have that budget for EQN anymore, they did 4 years ago, but not now. Why you ask?
Because this its 3rd iteration, they've scrapped the 2 previous games completely and have gone way overbudget on this already, let's not even mention 4 years of wasted Dev time (and look at the Dev team at EQN, none of them are juniors - so all of them are top salaries)
Why do you think they are releasing EQL as a game (with cash shop)? Remember that initially EQL was gonna be a toolset, but now SoE is making into a full blown game - $$$ cha-ching!
To help fund EQN, and to help SoE get player made content - look at the size of the EQN team, its TINY - a major AAA game would have over 200 devs - they are running with a barebone crew, again due to spending so much money on the 2 previous versions they scrapped.
So SoE currently doesn't have the $$ nor dev team to finish EQN, they need EQL to be successful and profitable, as otherwise EQN is in major trouble.
I actually don't know much about EQNs budget and the size of the dev-team and I couldn't find much about it online. How big is the dev team? Where is your information from??
I always assumed that SOE had written of the losses form the earlier attempts and gave EQN a whole new big budget in 2012. Otherwise it would be an almost impossible task to produce a prestigious new game that set off to redefine the whole genre on the left over money from a previous failed project.
...Why aren't they working on EQN solely if they had all this cash, why reassign most devs to EQL? if what you are saying were true, this would not be the case.
Why even have EQL? ...
EQN and EQNL are basically the same game as I see it. EQNL is in some way the beta of EQN. It has most of the game mechanics in place, it only lacks the content. There won't be any features in EQNL that won't also be in EQN. It only has different rules.
Treat all I say as speculation - I can't talk about my sources but you can watch the reveal videos where they showed behind the close doors EQN area (including the art team on another floor)
Pay particular attention to the size of the art team, that says it all.
Ok, then I will do so Mr. Julian Assange.
Do you mean this video? The video was staged and I would assume that there are actually more rooms in the SOE headquarters... And they probably have some things outsourced.
EQL - one crafting class, minecraft gameplay (gather and build)
EQN - multiple classes and races and combat skills, parkour system, monsters and the highly touted next gen AI, armor and weapons, quests, huge dynamic events.
To me EQL and EQN are vastly different, EQL lacks over 90% of game systems that EQN will have. The only thing that the games share are the voxel based engine, the actual gameplay is minecraft vs. adventure MMORPG.
i agree but EQNL will be exploring other features too
Originally posted by shass It's really good that these environments can be destroyed... they need to be. All the anticipation for a release that should appeal to seven year olds with a cheap tablet. It does bring a nice sense of nostalgia - graphics circa 1999 -
Seriously. I haven't seen a single screenshot or video of EQ:N where I felt in awe of the graphics. I mean, it looks functional. But nothing I'd make screenshots because I am so awed by what I see.
For me, TESO and EQ:N represent the opposing extremes, TESO being way TOO realistic with only brown and grey tones like someone sucked out all colours; and EQ:N like WOW 2.o. I am REALLY not one touting into the horn of "WOW clone" usually. But sheesh. Why do so many games try to emulate the WOW cartoony style? Oh and spare me the "but it ages better" crap. top graphics from 2013 are supposed to be good enough to be good at least 5-6 years. Look at Age of Conan. I mean, what good does "ages better" do, when the graphics look 10 years old from the ge go!
The textures are totally bland, I see zero atmosphere in there, total lack of detail. I can even live with the characters. But the landscapes are just horribad. I don't feel whelmed.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Seriously. I haven't seen a single screenshot or video of EQ:N where I felt in awe of the graphics. I mean, it looks functional. But nothing I'd make screenshots because I am so awed by what I see.
For me, TESO and EQ:N represent the opposing extremes, TESO being way TOO realistic with only brown and grey tones like someone sucked out all colours; and EQ:N like WOW 2.o. I am REALLY not one touting into the horn of "WOW clone" usually. But sheesh. Why do so many games try to emulate the WOW cartoony style? Oh and spare me the "but it ages better" crap. top graphics from 2013 are supposed to be good enough to be good at least 5-6 years. Look at Age of Conan. I mean, what good does "ages better" do, when the graphics look 10 years old from the ge go!
The textures are totally bland, I see zero atmosphere in there, total lack of detail. I can even live with the characters. But the landscapes are just horribad. I don't feel whelmed.
I don't see what is wrong with the landscapes. They look great. The VoxelFarm engine can do things that traditional graphics can't do. In other games you always see the same three boulders that repeat everywhere. With the VoxelFarm engine every hillside looks different.
I think the reason why you are not blown away by the landscape jet is because they haven't shown us much jet. The landscapes we have seen so far where all kind of generic and offered no vies that go far into the landscape. You can see this far better in the demonstration videos for the engine.
They also have to get rid of the cell-shading-effect the graphics in EQN have for some reason. Maybe this shall make it fit better with the cartoony characters. The engine doesn't suggest a cartoony style at all. The whole cartoon thing is EQNs idea.
The castle was just build kind of sloppy and the wall texture is odd. Again the buildings in the videos for the engine took far better. I guess Dave Georgeson just wanted to show that everyone could build something like that with no afford.
The video features a flight over a mountain landscape. Please tell me how you can think that Tony the Tiger looks ok but this doesn't.
Seriously. I haven't seen a single screenshot or video of EQ:N where I felt in awe of the graphics. I mean, it looks functional. But nothing I'd make screenshots because I am so awed by what I see.
This simply isn't important to me. Games with graphics that 'awe' me stop doing it after about 5 hours of gameplay. At that point I don't really pay attention to the graphics anymore because the gameplay is a million times more important. I'm also not going to judge a game by some random screenshots in the pre-alpha stage while they are still building the basic parts of the graphic engine.
Comments
Being F2P the cash shop worries me the most. I'd rather it be 15/month and not get nickle and dimed. I think the y said that land cost real money, but will that just come with basic building tools, or do we pay for every "premium" tool, texture, etc. They have to make money off it, so what will they be charging for. They have to have a pricing model/CS list already decided upon with release so close (this winter?), so why haven't they disclosed it?
And for those that say graphics don't matter, it is a building game, so I would think the art style and graphics would matter even more since it isn't a typical fight/quest game. The end look of your creation matters more than running around in a world of dev design that you can ignore as combat is more focus.
Also, not sure using WoW as an example of how cartoony graphics hold up better than realism is a good argument. AoC still looks good, and WoW holds up over time because it started out looking bad to begin with (IMO), so I guess you could say the years have been kind, because it still at same level as when launched (IMO). I do admit it has actually improved some as some work was put into them over the years.
Exactly, in realistic looking games there's always some low q texture somewhere that looks out of place.
I like the pics, looks a lot like wow
I must say it does look like WoW, and that's possibly the smartest thing SOE has done; there's some sort of immersion with such graphics that's hard to grasp initially, but once you get into the game you don't want to leave, just like Vanilla WoW.
I like how ppl express their opinion like it's fact.
You think everquest even though it looks way worse than Black Desert or Bless right now it will magically look better than those 2 games in 4-5 years?
The longevity of cartoony graphics is just a freaking misconception in childrens minds. You just make something look like cr@p and call it art style different from the others so that any comparison with new game graphics is avoided right from the start.
I'm wondering how they managed to make EQ textures look worst than the default from Voxelfarm engine.
Oh by the way wow had bad graphics at the beginning but now it looks like sh1t. It just that there are so many kids around, both physically and mentally.
I agree. In the discussion it sometimes seems as if there where only two types of graphics, cartoony and hyper-realistic. In reality this is of course a matter of degree. Compared to EQN games like Rift and ESO look more realistic, but they are actually still very stylized. If you compare them to Battlefield 4 or Star Citizen they suddenly look almost cartoony. And even BF4s graphics are not really photo-realistic but stylized to some degree.
I cannot take seriously someone who sports Olympiacos' player name as a user name, sorry.
I agree. If you look at the demonstration videos for the VoxelFarm engine you notice how much better it could look with different wall textures. The engine does in no way demand textures that look like blue Play-Doh, that was SOEs own decision.
While it may be true for you Galadourn, I never felt like this when I was playing WoW. I don't want to say that WoW can't be immersive, but the immersion is certainly not coming from the graphics but from other sources.
If you ask me this was not really a smart move. If people see something that looks like WoW they will assume that it is like WoW and it will be the same old game we where playing for 11 years now.
Yes, no game can be good without good gameplay. For indi-games I can accept it if the costs had to be cut in the graphics department, but not for a AAA-title. (And SOE is not quite an indi-developer.) Of a AAA title I demand not only fun gameplay but also a game that is visually pleasing, polished and immersive. Good gameplay is not an excuse for bad graphics in a game with a multimillion dollar budget.
well, good news for all ya graphics enthusiasts; ESO is coming out in Spring 2014 and is guaranteed to stun all of you with its graphics for at least its entire free month.
After all, what we all want is a game where your toon looks amazing and you just go around the roller-coaster enjoying the content.
I'm sure there are people at SOE laughing their asses out loud at all the educated posts by business gurus in these fora; SOE out of money for EQN? Are you serious man? This is their flagship and you think they would be short of money? They'll keep pumping as much as it takes till launch. And yes, Sony CAN PUMP AS MUCH AS IT TAKES.
Now if it fails AFTER launch (I doubt it), that's another issue.
when has any SOE mmo had 200 devs?
you claiming that SOE has never made a AAA mmo?
EQ2 fan sites
EQ2 had tons of voice actors but I will check it out
EQ2 launch credits -- most the credits are voice acting
http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/everquest-ii/credits
i do stand corrected thats alot of staff
EQ2 fan sites
it's pretty obvious that SOE will use EQNL as a testbed for a number of technical things (procedural generation, emergent AI and whatnot) but also as a gauge and prequel to the new gameplay experience they are trying to bring to the genre.
Think of EQNL as a marketing (but not only) trick to stir up interest. They are addressing vastly different MMO crowds here. And in order to be successful they have to proceed in steps.
Everything about EQN points to the fact that SOE is willing to throw A LOT of money in order to become a market leader - actually not only become market leader, but CHANGE THE MARKET in the process as well. Be it the soundtrack, the novels they are publishing and whatever else they may come up with, these guys seem determined to do it right. And for a big budget company this means keep pumping money till you get it right.
There is no intermediate success here, you either win it or you lose.
I actually don't know much about EQNs budget and the size of the dev-team and I couldn't find much about it online. How big is the dev team? Where is your information from??
I always assumed that SOE had written of the losses form the earlier attempts and gave EQN a whole new big budget in 2012. Otherwise it would be an almost impossible task to produce a prestigious new game that set off to redefine the whole genre on the left over money from a previous failed project.
There where some rumours about EQN being in trouble in 2011, but that was before the reboot of the project, and it is hard so tell how valid they are.
Too much awesomeness for you to handle? Maybe in the future if you try really hard..
EQN and EQNL are basically the same game as I see it. EQNL is in some way the beta of EQN. It has most of the game mechanics in place, it only lacks the content. There won't be any features in EQNL that won't also be in EQN. It only has different rules.
Ok, then I will do so Mr. Julian Assange.
Do you mean this video? The video was staged and I would assume that there are actually more rooms in the SOE headquarters... And they probably have some things outsourced.
i agree but EQNL will be exploring other features too
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/398070/Landmark-summary-at-EQN-Junkies.html
Landmark Future
Systems from EQN will migrate to Landmark Example of Combat and PvP being developed in EQN and migrating to EQNL
Movement System
Same Parkour system as EQN
Mounts will be available.
Mounts will use the Parkour/Heroic movement system as well.
EQ2 fan sites
Seriously. I haven't seen a single screenshot or video of EQ:N where I felt in awe of the graphics. I mean, it looks functional. But nothing I'd make screenshots because I am so awed by what I see.
For me, TESO and EQ:N represent the opposing extremes, TESO being way TOO realistic with only brown and grey tones like someone sucked out all colours; and EQ:N like WOW 2.o. I am REALLY not one touting into the horn of "WOW clone" usually. But sheesh. Why do so many games try to emulate the WOW cartoony style? Oh and spare me the "but it ages better" crap. top graphics from 2013 are supposed to be good enough to be good at least 5-6 years. Look at Age of Conan. I mean, what good does "ages better" do, when the graphics look 10 years old from the ge go!
The textures are totally bland, I see zero atmosphere in there, total lack of detail. I can even live with the characters. But the landscapes are just horribad. I don't feel whelmed.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I don't see what is wrong with the landscapes. They look great. The VoxelFarm engine can do things that traditional graphics can't do. In other games you always see the same three boulders that repeat everywhere. With the VoxelFarm engine every hillside looks different.
I think the reason why you are not blown away by the landscape jet is because they haven't shown us much jet. The landscapes we have seen so far where all kind of generic and offered no vies that go far into the landscape. You can see this far better in the demonstration videos for the engine.
They also have to get rid of the cell-shading-effect the graphics in EQN have for some reason. Maybe this shall make it fit better with the cartoony characters. The engine doesn't suggest a cartoony style at all. The whole cartoon thing is EQNs idea.
The castle was just build kind of sloppy and the wall texture is odd. Again the buildings in the videos for the engine took far better. I guess Dave Georgeson just wanted to show that everyone could build something like that with no afford.
The video features a flight over a mountain landscape. Please tell me how you can think that Tony the Tiger looks ok but this doesn't.
This simply isn't important to me. Games with graphics that 'awe' me stop doing it after about 5 hours of gameplay. At that point I don't really pay attention to the graphics anymore because the gameplay is a million times more important. I'm also not going to judge a game by some random screenshots in the pre-alpha stage while they are still building the basic parts of the graphic engine.