The jump from 2D to 3D is not neccesarily better. The comparison between Roma Victor and Ultima Online is good for this argument. If you disagree, you can consider this a difference in opinion, but it should be noted that the majority would agree with me on this.
Secondly, realistic does not equal poorly done. I wasn't insulting Roma's style, realistic, as I can appreciate realism and often crave it myself. This was not about RV being realistic, this was about RV's graphics being of low quality. Poorly done. It's not a difference of opinion in style, it's that they simply didn't bother to make their game graphically appealing. If Roma Victor suffers from a low player count (which it will), it will be largely due to so many potential players being driven off because of this. It was simply a poor decision on Bedlam's part.
And calling names just proves how cornered you are. I'm glad that there's someone out there who can appreciate RV's graphics, because the playerbase's size will reflect on just how unique you are. As it stands now, you're just making excuses and calling names. This thread should be locked.
Honestly, I was just annoyed by his condensation towards non realistic style games, and the fact that he was comparing the graphics to UO saying that they are obviously better. I mean, Uo only came out what.. 10 years ago?
I do Acually enjoy realistic style graphics when they're done Well.
Talk is cheap, I can just as easily say that, the majority agrees with me. The majority agrees with me! Have you played Roma Victor, I seriously doubt that you have? If you have then what is your forum name, which is also your account name? Otherwise you are basing your opinion of the graphics of a game only off of old screenshots. That is a very poor judgement. The recent graphics in game are far better than the screenshots anyway.
Also, when is the last time you have logged into Ultima Online? I logged in a couple of days ago and also have first hand experience with that craptacular game. The realism of graphics does play a part in how "good" they are. Ever take a walk in the wilderness? You don't see flashy bright colors very often do you?
Are you saying you like UO's neon green colored swords, pink armor and big red dogs?
UO may have come out 9 years ago, but they are still running those 9 year old graphics; you want to talk about poorly done graphics, UO is the definition. UO graphics should have been updated years ago, its not like they have not made millions off the game; pathetic! Roma Victor has them beat by far and has not earned nor spent millions.
When I played RV in beta it wasn't extremely well done yet. That said, it was 6 months ago and a lot may have improved. I did however notice the game had tons of potential. I'm definitely going to play it if it's polished up.
I've only been playing for the last two months, so that may be true. So far, RV is definately the only MMOG I have any current interest in playing. Its the only virtual world in the sea of unbelieveable fantasy cartoon MMOGs, that I see as worthwhile playing. It also has some innovative design and it will be interestng to see how it all works out.
No offense, I dont think you are reading it right about graphic being set on low quality. You all nayer need to understand that RV graphic being set on low quality for TESTING PURPOSE!!! You must understand that graphic are NOT set on high quality at max setting/all effects are off as well. They were all turn off for testing purpose to fix bugs, add contents, and many others.
You know, its really not that hard for RBL to increase the graphics to max setting with all effect on folks. So, beleive me, when they do turn it all on and all the way to high quality. This will look pretty great realistic 'eye candy' like when they are ready to turn it on. It probably wont be eye candy like some popular games since its a small company but they do the best they can as a small company in Britian they are base in.:)
RBL will be setting the in-game graphic to maximum High Quality/Effects All On when they are ready and I just be patient until they do. There's no reason to trash how ugly RV is since you dont relaize its not turn on due to testing purpose and all set to very low quality. I think when people were in testing. They only seen low quality/all effect were off and all recently screen shot is in low quality due all of effect and qualiity is turned off from in-game for testing purpose.
You will see the different with high quality and all effect on when the time comes. The in-game graphic will always look better then looking at a screenshot. The gameplay will be important then graphic.
I'm not paid, and I only started playing it two months ago; after I did extensive research on the available MMOGs. If you want a virtual world, the clear choice is Roma Victor. If you want a fantasy video game, there are many to choose from.
Roma Victor may be the greatest invention since the wheel.... or it may suck. But if you haven't tried it and know you like it then DONT get suckered into a pre-order.
Just helpful advice here. A LOT of games have been compared to UO over the years.... not a single one has lived up to the misplaced hype.... only SWG came even remotely close... And that was a big chunk of the original UO dev team.
No offense to the RV Fan who started this thread but it is NOT worth the risk. Ask Mourning Pre-Orders.... ask D&L Pre-Orders... hell.... ask the "The Chronicle" Pre Orders how glad they are that they sank pre-order money into an indie company with no rep and a game that looks sub-par out the gate.
And, directly to the OP: When 6 of 10 comparison points don't match up with UO at all you cannot claim that it's like UO. It has *some* similarities to UO. So do multiple other games. But to say it's "like" UO? Not hardly.
Oh... one more thing: I also agree with everyone else in this forum: RV may have 3D graphics but their QUALITY sucks. UO's graphics may be 2D but they're, imo, better LOOKING than the crap I've seen in EVERY RV screenshot, even recent ones. RV's graphics are sub par... even AO and DAOC have better graphics, and they're 5+ years old. Hell... original EQ had better looking graphics. So did AC.
RV is definitely a title I'm keeping an eye on. Just don't ask me for money before you invite me into beta. That's stupid. Anyone who PAYS to get into a beta before ever even trying the game deserves whatever happens to their money.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
No offense taken, "like" means the same thing as "similar."
RV is like the original UO in that it is a virtual world.
Many fantasy video game fans are used to flashy cartoonish graphics and don't like the graphics because they are realistic, the faces are real, the colors are realistic and the items are realistic looking also.
In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world.
RV takes it one step further, everything in the RV virtual world is based upon reality, including the normal looking natural colors and authentic looking weapons and armor based upon actual history.
Warning about preordering any game is smart, but the rest of your post is not.
RV is like the original UO in that it is a virtual world.
*coughs*... every MMORPG is a virtual world in some form or another. EQ2 is a virtual world... doesn't mean it's "like" UO... WoW is even a 'virtual world'. Now if you mean in that it has crafting, etc and open PVP? Ok so it's got some of the attributes of UO. I'll grant you that. Doesn't make it at all like UO in the gameplay, which is all that counts.
Many fantasy video game fans are used to flashy cartoonish graphics and don't like the graphics because they are realistic, the faces are real, the colors are realistic and the items are realistic looking also.
DAOC's graphics are far from cartoony. EQ1 was far from cartoony. AC was far from cartoony. What part of "Their graphics, despite being 5+ years old, are better than the current graphics in RV" are you not getting? I *love* realism in graphics for video games. That said the robotic and blocky looking graphics in RV turn me off completely. They may be 'realistic' but they are poorly done.
In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world.
Still does I play a couple nights every week. DAOC doesn't either. AC didn't. EQ didn't. EQ2 doesn't (much) and AO doesn't either. All better graphics than RV has. We're not talking about graphical style. We're talking about graphical QUALITY. RV's graphics are sub-par especially considering it's not being released until 2007. I'm sorry I expect more than what they're delivering. Doesn't mean I won't try it. But don't go spouting off about how good the graphics are when anyone with half a brain can see that there wasn't much effort at all put into making the game visually appealing.
RV takes it one step further, everything in the RV virtual world is based upon reality, including the normal looking natural colors and authentic looking weapons and armor based upon actual history.
Warning about preordering any game is smart, but the rest of your post is not.
How is the rest of my post not applicable? My entire post was about why it's a bad idea to pre-order a game sight unseen. I briefly touched on the fact that the graphics are sub-par. The game is asking players to pre-order just to get into beta. Not too many games do that. The ones that have, historically, have turned into nightmares for those who did the pre-order. Every single time. And as for the graphics? Multiple people here have stated that they consider the graphics in RV sub-par.
I *love* realistic graphics. And I'm very glad that RV went with that STYLE. However, their QUALITY sucks. They have decent poly count from what I can see but they are are low resolution and look blurry even in screenshots that were, presumably, tuned to have the best possible look for their website. And poor quality in something that is so easy (comparatively) leads me to be concerned about the quality and attention to detail within the code base itself. I mean... c'mon... I know 16 year olds who can do better 3D Graphics than I've seen in those screenshots.....
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by sempiternal No offense taken, "like" means the same thing as "similar." RV is like the original UO in that it is a virtual world. Many fantasy video game fans are used to flashy cartoonish graphics and don't like the graphics because they are realistic, the faces are real, the colors are realistic and the items are realistic looking also. In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world. RV takes it one step further, everything in the RV virtual world is based upon reality, including the normal looking natural colors and authentic looking weapons and armor based upon actual history. Warning about preordering any game is smart, but the rest of your post is not.
Actually did have green armor in the beginning. Hmm, what was that mineral, agapite I beleive? Had clue as well, hell it even had solid gold armor. OH and you could buy the stuff from the NPC's in rose color even.
Perhaps you should try again at your point because you really are fixating on WoW and not really helping your arguement at all.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Originally posted by sempiternal Talk is cheap, I can just as easily say that, the majority agrees with me. The majority agrees with me! Have you played Roma Victor, I seriously doubt that you have? If you have then what is your forum name, which is also your account name? Otherwise you are basing your opinion of the graphics of a game only off of old screenshots. That is a very poor judgement. The recent graphics in game are far better than the screenshots anyway. Also, when is the last time you have logged into Ultima Online? I logged in a couple of days ago and also have first hand experience with that craptacular game. The realism of graphics does play a part in how "good" they are. Ever take a walk in the wilderness? You don't see flashy bright colors very often do you? Are you saying you like UO's neon green colored swords, pink armor and big red dogs? UO may have come out 9 years ago, but they are still running those 9 year old graphics; you want to talk about poorly done graphics, UO is the definition. UO graphics should have been updated years ago, its not like they have not made millions off the game; pathetic! Roma Victor has them beat by far and has not earned nor spent millions.
UO's graphics were redone. They redid the game completey in 3d but kept it within keeping of the game. They did a horrible job on the paperdolls and the character models but it was a very significant improvement for the mobs, mounts, and some other aspects.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
No offense, I dont think you are reading it right about graphic being set on low quality. You all nayer need to understand that RV graphic being set on low quality for TESTING PURPOSE!!! You must understand that graphic are NOT set on high quality at max setting/all effects are off as well. They were all turn off for testing purpose to fix bugs, add contents, and many others.
You know, its really not that hard for RBL to increase the graphics to max setting with all effect on folks. So, beleive me, when they do turn it all on and all the way to high quality. This will look pretty great realistic 'eye candy' like when they are ready to turn it on. It probably wont be eye candy like some popular games since its a small company but they do the best they can as a small company in Britian they are base in.:)
RBL will be setting the in-game graphic to maximum High Quality/Effects All On when they are ready and I just be patient until they do. There's no reason to trash how ugly RV is since you dont relaize its not turn on due to testing purpose and all set to very low quality. I think when people were in testing. They only seen low quality/all effect were off and all recently screen shot is in low quality due all of effect and qualiity is turned off from in-game for testing purpose.
You will see the different with high quality and all effect on when the time comes. The in-game graphic will always look better then looking at a screenshot. The gameplay will be important then graphic.
Sounds like the same arguements I saw from IRTH supporters back when that was in beta. Guess what: The graphics in Irth are still pretty bad at release.
Sorry, you do NOT "tone down the graphics for beta testing".. A true beta test tests ALL the limits. Turning down the graphics for testing will only skew the results of testing. When you test you should test in an environment as close as possible to real-world conditions. I don't buy the 'graphics are turned down for testing' one darn bit. It makes no sense. I've been beta testing software since the 80's and that's the most ass-backwards arguement I've ever seen. If one of the engineers on my project tried to use that line on me he'd be looking for a new job the same day.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by Elnator Originally posted by RyanPatton No offense, I dont think you are reading it right about graphic being set on low quality. You all nayer need to understand that RV graphic being set on low quality for TESTING PURPOSE!!! You must understand that graphic are NOT set on high quality at max setting/all effects are off as well. They were all turn off for testing purpose to fix bugs, add contents, and many others. You know, its really not that hard for RBL to increase the graphics to max setting with all effect on folks. So, beleive me, when they do turn it all on and all the way to high quality. This will look pretty great realistic 'eye candy' like when they are ready to turn it on. It probably wont be eye candy like some popular games since its a small company but they do the best they can as a small company in Britian they are base in.:) RBL will be setting the in-game graphic to maximum High Quality/Effects All On when they are ready and I just be patient until they do. There's no reason to trash how ugly RV is since you dont relaize its not turn on due to testing purpose and all set to very low quality. I think when people were in testing. They only seen low quality/all effect were off and all recently screen shot is in low quality due all of effect and qualiity is turned off from in-game for testing purpose. You will see the different with high quality and all effect on when the time comes. The in-game graphic will always look better then looking at a screenshot. The gameplay will be important then graphic. Sounds like the same arguements I saw from IRTH supporters back when that was in beta.Guess what: The graphics in Irth are still pretty bad at release.Sorry, you do NOT "tone down the graphics for beta testing".. A true beta test tests ALL the limits. Turning down the graphics for testing will only skew the results of testing. When you test you should test in an environment as close as possible to real-world conditions. I don't buy the 'graphics are turned down for testing' one darn bit. It makes no sense. I've been beta testing software since the 80's and that's the most ass-backwards arguement I've ever seen. If one of the engineers on my project tried to use that line on me he'd be looking for a new job the same day.
I brought up the same points during WISH and IRTH. The whole toning down graphics for beta testing is BS. You can't test properly if you aren't using ALL the variabled that are going to be on the live servers. And the whole "all the graphics you see are on the low settings" arguement doesn't hold water to me either. Their own website shows those same aweful images for their presentation of the game to the public so as far as I am concerned that IS how it will look until proven otherwise.
And if this game launches with those same low budget graphics after hearing all the beta testing excuses and it is going to be 100 fold better at release I am not touching it period.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Originally posted by Elnator In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world.
Still does I play a couple nights every week.
*laughing out loud*
Elnator, you still play UO a couple of nights every week? You like the neon, transparent, comic-book colors, ninjas, robots and still think the game has a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme?
*laughing out loud*
You still play UO a couple of nights every week?! That explains everything.
[The rest of your post has been ignored and your future posts will be ignored. You have no credibility]
Actually did have green armor in the beginning. Hmm, what was that mineral, agapite I beleive? Had clue as well, hell it even had solid gold armor. OH and you could buy the stuff from the NPC's in rose color even. Perhaps you should try again at your point because you really are fixating on WoW and not really helping your arguement at all.
Wrong! If you are refering to the METALLIC colors from colored ore, they came YEARS after the "beginning." In the beginning all armor and weapons were a metalic steel or silver color. You're just as ignorant as the other guy. That's beside the point though, metallic colors are believeable, frost white armor and florecent glowing green, orange and purple are not and that is what UO has become.
UO's graphics were redone. They redid the game completey in 3d but kept it within keeping of the game. They did a horrible job on the paperdolls and the character models but it was a very significant improvement for the mobs, mounts, and some other aspects.
The 3d graphics were worse than the 2d graphics, so they may have been "redone" but it was not an improvement!
You're on my ignore list too. You simply cannot be taken seriously. You seem to have very little knowledge of Ultima Online. No more time wasted on you.
Proof, once again, in both cases of Elnator and Fadeus, that post counts mean very little...
There is no game how close they may come that will be what UO once was. Many has tried and failed. They had something that no-one else has managed to create. The whole thing about UO was the depth of it. You could do almost anything. Many games today has freedom but non-like it was and becous it was first with that freedom we all get sentimental when we speak about it and non can compeate with all the memories we have about that game. I gave up UO becous they destroyd it. I've to my shame been on loads of free servers but there is something missing there.. Perhaps it's just the simple thing that it isn't EA's servers I don't know.
But I agree with those who don't like it when they use old UO to get players. They should get players becous of the game and not becous of an classic game, and game that thousands upon thousands of people has spent unknown many hours on. The game itself should be ebough to gather an big crowd of people. I want to use examples here like blizzard and such but I don't have the strength. I think you know what I mean. :P
I think I'll give it a look and then go back to dream sweet dreams about classic UO.
"Computer games dont affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected us as kids, wed all run around in darkened rooms munching pills and listening to repetitive music." - Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989
Originally posted by sempiternal Originally posted by Fadeus UO's graphics were redone. They redid the game completey in 3d but kept it within keeping of the game. They did a horrible job on the paperdolls and the character models but it was a very significant improvement for the mobs, mounts, and some other aspects. The 3d graphics were worse than the 2d graphics, so they may have been "redone" but it was not an improvement! You're on my ignore list too. You simply cannot be taken seriously. You seem to have very little knowledge of Ultima Online. No more time wasted on you. Proof, once again, in both cases of Elnator and Fadeus, that post counts mean very little...
Does this guy think anyone is going to take him seriously? You really need to get a clue buddy. And I am rather thankful I am on your "ignore" list.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Originally posted by sempiternal Originally posted by Elnator In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world.
Still does I play a couple nights every week.
*laughing out loud*
Elnator, you still play UO a couple of nights every week? You like the neon, transparent, comic-book colors, ninjas, robots and still think the game has a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme?
*laughing out loud*
You still play UO a couple of nights every week?! That explains everything.
[The rest of your post has been ignored and your future posts will be ignored. You have no credibility]
I still Play UO a couple nights a week I did not say I played it on EA's servers. Might want to think before flaming
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by sempiternal Originally posted by Fadeus
UO's graphics were redone. They redid the game completey in 3d but kept it within keeping of the game. They did a horrible job on the paperdolls and the character models but it was a very significant improvement for the mobs, mounts, and some other aspects.
The 3d graphics were worse than the 2d graphics, so they may have been "redone" but it was not an improvement!
You're on my ignore list too. You simply cannot be taken seriously. You seem to have very little knowledge of Ultima Online. No more time wasted on you.
Proof, once again, in both cases of Elnator and Fadeus, that post counts mean very little...
Dude I played UO for the first 3-4 years it was out on the official servers. After that I moved to the ahh... less official servers. (Though I tend to agree with you the 3D graphics engine they threw on it was pretty bad... Some liked it. Personaly I tried it for a month or so then went back to the old graphics... bleh)... Been playing on UOGamers for a while now. Can't remember when I moved over to it but it was shortly after it originally opened. Haven't played on a EA server since.
It's ok though, I know you're desperate for some way of dismissing what people say. Suffice to say I haven't stopped playing UO since it came out. I don't play on the official servers anymore because EA has ruined the game. I play classic UO. Which is still the best MMO on the market (graphics are weak, but the gameplay is superb) However, I expect the graphics to be weak in a game that went into production 13 years ago. I expect much more from a game that started production 2 years ago. And Roma Victor, I'm sorry, just doesn't impress at all, graphically. With the tools available today there is no excuse for poor graphics in a modern MMO. All it does is scream "Lazy Dev Team" to me.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
As things stands with RV i would not recommend the game to anyone .Maybe it gets better but its certainly has loads of problems and issues and its offically live now so no more beta excuses.
Yes i pre ordered RV and yes i am bitterly dissapointed but i want to give the game a chance.
Comments
Pfft, ok kid, go back to playing your video games. This post is not for you.
The jump from 2D to 3D is not neccesarily better. The comparison between Roma Victor and Ultima Online is good for this argument. If you disagree, you can consider this a difference in opinion, but it should be noted that the majority would agree with me on this.
Secondly, realistic does not equal poorly done. I wasn't insulting Roma's style, realistic, as I can appreciate realism and often crave it myself. This was not about RV being realistic, this was about RV's graphics being of low quality. Poorly done. It's not a difference of opinion in style, it's that they simply didn't bother to make their game graphically appealing. If Roma Victor suffers from a low player count (which it will), it will be largely due to so many potential players being driven off because of this. It was simply a poor decision on Bedlam's part.
And calling names just proves how cornered you are. I'm glad that there's someone out there who can appreciate RV's graphics, because the playerbase's size will reflect on just how unique you are. As it stands now, you're just making excuses and calling names. This thread should be locked.
Honestly, I was just annoyed by his condensation towards non realistic style games, and the fact that he was comparing the graphics to UO saying that they are obviously better. I mean, Uo only came out what.. 10 years ago?
I do Acually enjoy realistic style graphics when they're done Well.
Talk is cheap, I can just as easily say that, the majority agrees with me. The majority agrees with me! Have you played Roma Victor, I seriously doubt that you have? If you have then what is your forum name, which is also your account name? Otherwise you are basing your opinion of the graphics of a game only off of old screenshots. That is a very poor judgement. The recent graphics in game are far better than the screenshots anyway.
Also, when is the last time you have logged into Ultima Online? I logged in a couple of days ago and also have first hand experience with that craptacular game. The realism of graphics does play a part in how "good" they are. Ever take a walk in the wilderness? You don't see flashy bright colors very often do you?
Are you saying you like UO's neon green colored swords, pink armor and big red dogs?
UO may have come out 9 years ago, but they are still running those 9 year old graphics; you want to talk about poorly done graphics, UO is the definition. UO graphics should have been updated years ago, its not like they have not made millions off the game; pathetic! Roma Victor has them beat by far and has not earned nor spent millions.
No offense, I dont think you are reading it right about graphic being set on low quality. You all nayer need to understand that RV graphic being set on low quality for TESTING PURPOSE!!! You must understand that graphic are NOT set on high quality at max setting/all effects are off as well. They were all turn off for testing purpose to fix bugs, add contents, and many others.
You know, its really not that hard for RBL to increase the graphics to max setting with all effect on folks. So, beleive me, when they do turn it all on and all the way to high quality. This will look pretty great realistic 'eye candy' like when they are ready to turn it on. It probably wont be eye candy like some popular games since its a small company but they do the best they can as a small company in Britian they are base in.:)
RBL will be setting the in-game graphic to maximum High Quality/Effects All On when they are ready and I just be patient until they do. There's no reason to trash how ugly RV is since you dont relaize its not turn on due to testing purpose and all set to very low quality. I think when people were in testing. They only seen low quality/all effect were off and all recently screen shot is in low quality due all of effect and qualiity is turned off from in-game for testing purpose.
You will see the different with high quality and all effect on when the time comes. The in-game graphic will always look better then looking at a screenshot. The gameplay will be important then graphic.
Caesar, eat your heart out.
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/thread/83292
I seriously doubt Roma Victor is that good, might check it out for a bit, but right now I got my heart set on.
( Insert shameless plug to my most anticipated MMORPG )
Heh, now if you really wanted my opinion you can PM me and ask.
NPOBT, people.... NPOBT
Translation:
Never
Pre
Order
Before
Trying
Roma Victor may be the greatest invention since the wheel.... or it may suck. But if you haven't tried it and know you like it then DONT get suckered into a pre-order.
Just helpful advice here. A LOT of games have been compared to UO over the years.... not a single one has lived up to the misplaced hype.... only SWG came even remotely close... And that was a big chunk of the original UO dev team.
No offense to the RV Fan who started this thread but it is NOT worth the risk. Ask Mourning Pre-Orders.... ask D&L Pre-Orders... hell.... ask the "The Chronicle" Pre Orders how glad they are that they sank pre-order money into an indie company with no rep and a game that looks sub-par out the gate.
And, directly to the OP: When 6 of 10 comparison points don't match up with UO at all you cannot claim that it's like UO. It has *some* similarities to UO. So do multiple other games. But to say it's "like" UO? Not hardly.
Oh... one more thing: I also agree with everyone else in this forum: RV may have 3D graphics but their QUALITY sucks. UO's graphics may be 2D but they're, imo, better LOOKING than the crap I've seen in EVERY RV screenshot, even recent ones. RV's graphics are sub par... even AO and DAOC have better graphics, and they're 5+ years old. Hell... original EQ had better looking graphics. So did AC.
RV is definitely a title I'm keeping an eye on. Just don't ask me for money before you invite me into beta. That's stupid. Anyone who PAYS to get into a beta before ever even trying the game deserves whatever happens to their money.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
No offense taken, "like" means the same thing as "similar."
RV is like the original UO in that it is a virtual world.
Many fantasy video game fans are used to flashy cartoonish graphics and don't like the graphics because they are realistic, the faces are real, the colors are realistic and the items are realistic looking also.
In the beginning, UO was very similar, it had a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme, no neon colors, no transparent mounts, no pink or green armor - just natrual colors and items you would expect to find in such a virtual world.
RV takes it one step further, everything in the RV virtual world is based upon reality, including the normal looking natural colors and authentic looking weapons and armor based upon actual history.
Warning about preordering any game is smart, but the rest of your post is not.
*coughs*... every MMORPG is a virtual world in some form or another. EQ2 is a virtual world... doesn't mean it's "like" UO... WoW is even a 'virtual world'. Now if you mean in that it has crafting, etc and open PVP? Ok so it's got some of the attributes of UO. I'll grant you that. Doesn't make it at all like UO in the gameplay, which is all that counts.
DAOC's graphics are far from cartoony. EQ1 was far from cartoony. AC was far from cartoony. What part of "Their graphics, despite being 5+ years old, are better than the current graphics in RV" are you not getting? I *love* realism in graphics for video games. That said the robotic and blocky looking graphics in RV turn me off completely. They may be 'realistic' but they are poorly done.
Still does
I play a couple nights every week. DAOC doesn't either. AC didn't. EQ didn't. EQ2 doesn't (much) and AO doesn't either. All better graphics than RV has. We're not talking about graphical style. We're talking about graphical QUALITY. RV's graphics are sub-par especially considering it's not being released until 2007. I'm sorry I expect more than what they're delivering. Doesn't mean I won't try it. But don't go spouting off about how good the graphics are when anyone with half a brain can see that there wasn't much effort at all put into making the game visually appealing.
How is the rest of my post not applicable? My entire post was about why it's a bad idea to pre-order a game sight unseen. I briefly touched on the fact that the graphics are sub-par. The game is asking players to pre-order just to get into beta. Not too many games do that. The ones that have, historically, have turned into nightmares for those who did the pre-order. Every single time. And as for the graphics? Multiple people here have stated that they consider the graphics in RV sub-par.
I *love* realistic graphics. And I'm very glad that RV went with that STYLE. However, their QUALITY sucks. They have decent poly count from what I can see but they are are low resolution and look blurry even in screenshots that were, presumably, tuned to have the best possible look for their website. And poor quality in something that is so easy (comparatively) leads me to be concerned about the quality and attention to detail within the code base itself. I mean... c'mon... I know 16 year olds who can do better 3D Graphics than I've seen in those screenshots.....
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Actually did have green armor in the beginning. Hmm, what was that mineral, agapite I beleive? Had clue as well, hell it even had solid gold armor. OH and you could buy the stuff from the NPC's in rose color even.
Perhaps you should try again at your point because you really are fixating on WoW and not really helping your arguement at all.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
UO's graphics were redone. They redid the game completey in 3d but kept it within keeping of the game. They did a horrible job on the paperdolls and the character models but it was a very significant improvement for the mobs, mounts, and some other aspects.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Guess what: The graphics in Irth are still pretty bad at release.
Sorry, you do NOT "tone down the graphics for beta testing".. A true beta test tests ALL the limits. Turning down the graphics for testing will only skew the results of testing. When you test you should test in an environment as close as possible to real-world conditions. I don't buy the 'graphics are turned down for testing' one darn bit. It makes no sense. I've been beta testing software since the 80's and that's the most ass-backwards arguement I've ever seen. If one of the engineers on my project tried to use that line on me he'd be looking for a new job the same day.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
I brought up the same points during WISH and IRTH. The whole toning down graphics for beta testing is BS. You can't test properly if you aren't using ALL the variabled that are going to be on the live servers. And the whole "all the graphics you see are on the low settings" arguement doesn't hold water to me either. Their own website shows those same aweful images for their presentation of the game to the public so as far as I am concerned that IS how it will look until proven otherwise.
And if this game launches with those same low budget graphics after hearing all the beta testing excuses and it is going to be 100 fold better at release I am not touching it period.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Still does
I play a couple nights every week.
*laughing out loud*
Elnator, you still play UO a couple of nights every week? You like the neon, transparent, comic-book colors, ninjas, robots and still think the game has a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme?
*laughing out loud*
You still play UO a couple of nights every week?! That explains everything.
[The rest of your post has been ignored and your future posts will be ignored. You have no credibility]
The 3d graphics were worse than the 2d graphics, so they may have been "redone" but it was not an improvement!
You're on my ignore list too. You simply cannot be taken seriously. You seem to have very little knowledge of Ultima Online. No more time wasted on you.
Proof, once again, in both cases of Elnator and Fadeus, that post counts mean very little...
There is no game how close they may come that will be what UO once was. Many has tried and failed.
They had something that no-one else has managed to create. The whole thing about UO was the depth of it. You could do almost anything. Many games today has freedom but non-like it was and becous it was first with that freedom we all get sentimental when we speak about it and non can compeate with all the memories we have about that game. I gave up UO becous they destroyd it. I've to my shame been on loads of free servers but there is something missing there.. Perhaps it's just the simple thing that it isn't EA's servers I don't know.
But I agree with those who don't like it when they use old UO to get players. They should get players becous of the game and not becous of an classic game, and game that thousands upon thousands of people has spent unknown many hours on. The game itself should be ebough to gather an big crowd of people. I want to use examples here like blizzard and such but I don't have the strength. I think you know what I mean. :P
I think I'll give it a look and then go back to dream sweet dreams about classic UO.
"Computer games dont affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected us as kids, wed all run around in darkened rooms munching pills and listening to repetitive music." - Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989
Does this guy think anyone is going to take him seriously? You really need to get a clue buddy. And I am rather thankful I am on your "ignore" list.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
Still does
I play a couple nights every week.
*laughing out loud*
Elnator, you still play UO a couple of nights every week? You like the neon, transparent, comic-book colors, ninjas, robots and still think the game has a solid realistic fantasy medieval theme?
*laughing out loud*
You still play UO a couple of nights every week?! That explains everything.
[The rest of your post has been ignored and your future posts will be ignored. You have no credibility]
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
The 3d graphics were worse than the 2d graphics, so they may have been "redone" but it was not an improvement!
You're on my ignore list too. You simply cannot be taken seriously. You seem to have very little knowledge of Ultima Online. No more time wasted on you.
Proof, once again, in both cases of Elnator and Fadeus, that post counts mean very little...
Dude I played UO for the first 3-4 years it was out on the official servers. After that I moved to the ahh... less official servers. (Though I tend to agree with you the 3D graphics engine they threw on it was pretty bad... Some liked it. Personaly I tried it for a month or so then went back to the old graphics... bleh)... Been playing on UOGamers for a while now. Can't remember when I moved over to it but it was shortly after it originally opened. Haven't played on a EA server since.
It's ok though, I know you're desperate for some way of dismissing what people say. Suffice to say I haven't stopped playing UO since it came out. I don't play on the official servers anymore because EA has ruined the game. I play classic UO. Which is still the best MMO on the market (graphics are weak, but the gameplay is superb) However, I expect the graphics to be weak in a game that went into production 13 years ago. I expect much more from a game that started production 2 years ago. And Roma Victor, I'm sorry, just doesn't impress at all, graphically. With the tools available today there is no excuse for poor graphics in a modern MMO. All it does is scream "Lazy Dev Team" to me.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
As things stands with RV i would not recommend the game to anyone .Maybe it gets better but its certainly has loads of problems and issues and its offically live now so no more beta excuses.
Yes i pre ordered RV and yes i am bitterly dissapointed but i want to give the game a chance.