VeeshanVault

Qu'est-ce que c'est?

1) Low poly character models
2) Butt ugly trees
3) Dull character textures
4) Generic 'world' textures
5) It looks too 'cartoony'


This screenshot does not excite me at all.

Looks good to me, looking forward to this game. All Blizzard games look 'cartoony' .. that's their style. Very comic bookish.

I'm not sure how Blizzard does it but their screenshots alreaedy seem to come out looking really bad and the end product always somehow comes out looking good. At least what I thought when/before Warcraft3 came out.

Lalanae wrote:Qu'est-ce que c'est?

World of Warcraft.

http://www.blizzard.com/wow

OMG Buffy is in that Pic Seekers of Lore are already there

lol I read WoW as wow!

I'm just not excited about the graphics in this game at all.

I think they rank somewhere between AO and EQ.... and the player models are hardly better than EQs.

I kinda meant it as both at the same time =)

Attack of the giant tree dude!

Hmmm...if there were no characters on the screen,
I'd think this was a background for a Warner Bros bugs bunny cartoon.

I like it! That tree is right out of Warcraft 3. Face it... EQ graphics are stale and pitiful. WoW is gonna kick some serious MMOLRPG fanny!

compare that mob to the one at the end of the hedge maze.

if you think the model in EQ is better you got problems.

That looks fantastic. I don't mind the cartoon-ish look.

Voronwë wrote:compare that mob to the one at the end of the hedge maze.

if you think the model in EQ is better you got problems.

Having a few comprehension problems?

I said the player models are hardly better than EQ.

Do I have to dumb it down?

In other words....

WOW player models are only slightly better than EQ's. Which is pretty sad considering the age of the respective games.




Now that looks much cooler to me than any of the WOW screens ive seen.

not to split hairs, but hardly better, and slightly better are not necessarily synonomous.

regardless of the quality of AO graphics, i think the WoW graphics above are clearly better than EQs. which is a lot better than hardly better, or slightly better.

but they should be noticibly better since it is a brand new game.

regardless i give a fuck, cause i won't be playing any of them.

I was talking about the PLAYER models.
The environments are pretty nice, but the PLAYER models are, in some cases, uglier than EQ PLAYER models...
... and in other cases only slightly better than Everquest PLAYER models.

Compare the poly count and texture detail on the player models in WOW to this:

I havta say that Funcom's done an amazing job on the graphics for Shadowlands. That's the first SS I've seen of it.

I tried to get into AO however I just couldn't do it.

Capped out as a lev 55 Fixer

Hehe, I went pretty nutso in AO.
I had like 4 characters ober 150.

AO was pretty fun, but the focus was leaning more towards PvP which gets pretty dull after a while.... mind you, some of my best gaming moments ever, were PvP in AO.
Account is cancelled for now, I'll prolly reactivate when Shadowlands comes out.

AO was a great game and, once they worked the kinks out I still think they have the best graphics engine out there in an online RPG. They way they can just drop objects in and out of the world is fantastic.

Blizzard is going to have to do a lot of work to get their graphics to compare to the next generation of mmorpgs if they want to compete. Although they do have a reputation for coding games around the lowest common denominator type of PCs around so basically everyone can play it.

I personally don't trust them to make a good RPG after the clusterfuck that Diablo 2 still is.

Blizzard products usually don't seem to have the most cutting edge graphics, but their gameplay is usually interesting. Looking forward to WoW.

Anarchy online's graphics were always really good.

I'm just not excited about the graphics in this game at all.

I think they rank somewhere between AO and EQ.... and the player models are hardly better than EQs.

Am I the only one who could careless about the graphics, as long as they're halfway decent? I always used the old models in EQ and liked them. To me it's all about how playable the game is.

Regardless, WoW looks badass. Definently gonna play it.

Agreed there are a lot of games out there that if they were released a year or 2 ago would have been awesome competition for EQ because their graphics were better. But post Luclin graphics blows away even the graphics of such games as Horizons. The world graphics are better, but the player models are gross and lacking in both polygon detail and texture quality. Personally I would rather ritch characters and a mediochre quality world than a high quality world that's laggy with weak ass character models. World of Warcraft, has it's own style, for the warcraft universe, I think the graphics are good for what the player base is used to. The thing that is going to make or break W.O.W. is the game engine and it's timing with the release of EQ2. Whomever comes out first is gonna get the initial hit of players and probably will last longer. Unfortunately I think W.O.W. is going to suffer initially because it will come out second and be pushed back a million times like all Blizzard games, but I think it will do well. I think it will suck up a lot of the DAoC and other MMORPG players and some EQ'ers. I think EQ2 on the other hand is going to be a slow start because the migration from EQ1 to EQ2 will be slow at first.

Brotha wrote:

I'm just not excited about the graphics in this game at all.

I think they rank somewhere between AO and EQ.... and the player models are hardly better than EQs.

Am I the only one who could careless about the graphics, as long as they're halfway decent? I always used the old models in EQ and liked them. To me it's all about how playable the game is.

Regardless, WoW looks badass. Definently gonna play it.

Holy fuck I agree with Brotha.

I completely agree with you about the graphics, Brotha. As long as the gameplay and story are good I'd play it

Yep. Gameplay first, graphics a close second.

Graphics quality usually has to be reduced anyways, for slower computers/lag/raids.


...the tree looks really goofy, tho.

WoW is the game I'm holding my breath for. I love how they've gone with the Warcraft style right down to the artwork, the cartoony look totally works for them. I'm sure walking through the environments will be much different than looking at pictures of them. Also, I have a feeling they'll be retooling textures... if you look at the newer PC model shots on the website, the texture quality is much better than the earlier ones.

kurzweil wrote:Yep. Gameplay first, graphics a close second.

Graphics quality usually has to be reduced anyways, for slower computers/lag/raids.


...the tree looks really goofy, tho.

Blah. Goofy != cartoony. It looks cartoony, not goofy. And even better, it's animated beautifully, if you've seen the clips. That's one thing you can be sure of, WoW will have animation that makes EQ curl up into the fetal position and suck it's thumb while crying for mommy.

Neat trailer downloads decent (~300k/sec) from here:

http://voodoofiles.com/getit.asp?id=462 ... =919434688

It's a game, I couldn't give a monkeys bum about realism, the graphics look sharp IMO

WoW looks good to me.

with blizzard's track record, I think i'll be playing WoW rather than any new game VI puts out. everyone I know is talking about SWG, but I've always liked fantasy more than sci-fi, so can't get myself too interested.

One thing is for sure though. All of us planning on playing should get on the same server ;p

Brotha wrote:

I'm just not excited about the graphics in this game at all.

I think they rank somewhere between AO and EQ.... and the player models are hardly better than EQs.

Am I the only one who could careless about the graphics, as long as they're halfway decent? I always used the old models in EQ and liked them. To me it's all about how playable the game is.

Regardless, WoW looks badass. Definently gonna play it.

/agree. A good storyline with some "decent" graphics is all I need. I also never used Luclin models. I always had a shit computer so running the least amount of accelerater slaying graphics was in my best interest. Ask those who used to play with me, I was unbeatable in zone times! Then again DSL and living only a few hundred miles from San Diego helps

~Jor

KEKEKEKE
WRODL OF WARCRFTA

Lol whoever says those are sucky textures is insane.

xaerm si sucky textrue

Warcraft has always been very stylized to their artists and graphics designers. Ive always liked it and thought the gamepay and environments were amazing. They arent trying to be realistic like some games, they have their own style and look awesome.

WoW looks pretty fuckin bad ass to me, I'm definatly gunna be checkin it out. But as long as my guild stays in EQ I will be staying in EQ hehe ^^

Say what you like about poly counts and textures but I bet the WoW models won't perform a set of unrelated spastic jerks and try to pass them off as "animation" nor will they stand like they've shat themselves.

Looks pretty nifty.

vn_Tanc wrote:Say what you like about poly counts and textures but I bet the WoW models won't perform a set of unrelated spastic jerks and try to pass them off as "animation" nor will they stand like they've shat themselves.

Well since only a "screenshot" was posted, it's pretty hard to comment on animations.


The poly counts are low and the textures are ass.... look at the ground and trees... textures circa 1995.

Im happy with Quake 1 graphics as long as the game mechanics kick ass.