The user and all related content has been deleted.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
I like the GW 2 styling. The graphics are acceptable for a 2011 mmo. Would love to see it be able to scale to DX11 and support for gamers with multi GPUS.
From the videos so far, the ground terrain (minus the grassy area's (and inbetween those grassy area's) ) looks low rez. The orignal game suffered from this as well as the sky. So far the sky looks a bit better here, would love to see some bump mapping all over though - more so.
I am rather amazed at how many people say that they don't care what the graphic quality is. I'll agree that without good gameplay the graphics aren't important, but I definately will NOT play some so called "great" games because of the shoddy graphics. And I for one am constantly cranking up the resolution and effects to the maximum my rig will endure, so I think graphics are important. I might even go as far to say that good graphics are vital, second only to gameplay in importance. (yeah, I really don't care that much about lore)
As for the original question, I think that GW2 has a more appealing artistic design then any of the current upcoming MMO's but Tera and Rift are looking pretty good as well.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I like the GW 2 styling. The graphics are acceptable for a 2011 mmo. Would love to see it be able to scale to DX11 and support for gamers with multi GPUS.
From the videos so far, the ground terrain (minus the grassy area's (and inbetween those grassy area's) ) looks low rez. The orignal game suffered from this as well as the sky. So far the sky looks a bit better here, would love to see some bump mapping all over though - more so.
But ANet have specifically said that they want the game to run on as many systems as possible. So if that means supporting DX 9 or 10 and sacrificing some minor details like bump mapping, then so be it. It's better for them to attract as many people as possible, with their artistic design rather than graphical fidelity.
And just so you know... GW2 is using an overhauled version of the GW1 engine, so of course they may share similar graphical nuances.
GW2 may not have the polygon count of other games but then again polygon count doesn't matter. I really like how the game looks from an artistic point of view. People don't play MMOs to look at ridiculously good graphics anyways...I mean, high polygon count is just not that important to the game because of everything else going on. Do you really pay attention to these things while you play?
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
I am rather amazed at how many people say that they don't care what the graphic quality is. I'll agree that without good gameplay the graphics aren't important, but I definately will NOT play some so called "great" games because of the shoddy graphics. And I for one am constantly cranking up the resolution and effects to the maximum my rig will endure, so I think graphics are important. I might even go as far to say that good graphics are vital, second only to gameplay in importance. (yeah, I really don't care that much about lore)
As for the original question, I think that GW2 has a more appealing artistic design then any of the current upcoming MMO's but Tera and Rift are looking pretty good as well.
Graphics matter a lot to me as well (even though I ended up not enjoying the gameplay much, I just could not get into WoW because I did not like the stylization or low quality of the graphics), and I think out of the upcoming lot of MMOs, TERA is head and shoulders above the rest graphically speaking.
That said, I am really impressed with how accessible the ANet team have managed to make both GW and GW2 look with relatively low requirements. I still find myself amazed by some scenery in GW1, and despite the slightly more stylized look of GW2 (which I feared would tilt it toward WoW levels) I still think it looks attractive on most levels. It's an excellent combination of aethetics and performance.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by Master10K
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
I like the GW 2 styling. The graphics are acceptable for a 2011 mmo. Would love to see it be able to scale to DX11 and support for gamers with multi GPUS.
From the videos so far, the ground terrain (minus the grassy area's (and inbetween those grassy area's) ) looks low rez. The orignal game suffered from this as well as the sky. So far the sky looks a bit better here, would love to see some bump mapping all over though - more so.
But ANet have specifically said that they want the game to run on as many systems as possible. So if that means supporting DX 9 or 10 and sacrificing some minor details like bump mapping, then so be it. It's better for them to attract as many people as possible, with their artistic design rather than graphical fidelity.
And just so you know... GW2 is using an overhauled version of the GW1 engine, so of course they may share similar graphical nuances.
There is nothing wrong with having the game run on as many systems as possible, I just think they should allow the game to scale right up to the high end in the settings. They already have built in hardware management in the first game such as if your GPU has its fan at 100% the game tells you. They should scale up and limit the low system specs not to have the ability to scale up, maybe resolution limiting I am not sure.
LOTRO can acknowledge DX9-11 scaling in the setting options. Age of Conan uses an updated engine that was used on Anarchy Online and there are some subtle nuances but some big changes too.
All I am saying is that the game can cater to the lowest denominator and the highest without compromising quality for the level a user can play at. Perfectly feasible.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
So I just read some PAX 2010 stuff:
NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround & Havoc Physics
"Immerse yourself in Guild Wars 2 with full NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround. Developers are embracing NVIDIA’s technologies for the most advanced game play experience possible. While you may question the use of a triple monitor 3D setup for a simple MMORPG, Guild Wars 2 offers some incredibly beautiful and detailed scenery that make the 3D experience eye popping.
Topping it off, Arenanet has employed the used of Physics technology via Havok, allowing for a completely unique environment experience. From running through fields with individual blades of grass moving with the wind, to directed attacks on solid objects that shatter off in different directions, the addition of Physics into the updated Guild Wars engine really helps to enhance the overall immersion into the game and into your character’s story.
Given its minimum systems specs and the buttery smooth playback we viewed on the test systems, both of these eyecandy updates shouldn’t require an unobtainable rig either."
GW2 may not have the polygon count of other games but then again polygon count doesn't matter. I really like how the game looks from an artistic point of view. People don't play MMOs to look at ridiculously good graphics anyways...I mean, high polygon count is just not that important to the game because of everything else going on. Do you really pay attention to these things while you play?
I agree that GW2 looks great. Graphics matter to me quite a bit. I mean it is 2010. If a game is a AAA title it better have good graphics.
I agree: What matters is that it looks great. Not why it looks great. Well, if it looks great because only top end computers can run it then it matters but GW and GW2 are designed so that we never have to worry about that. :-)
now for some controversial thinking...
legitimate question: which game's graphics (polygon count, amount of detail) would you rather have for GW2; FFXIV or GW2? I would rather have GW2 for a number of reasons.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
When you bring in opinions to this, people will say differently.
The graphics can be very realistic (like AoC) but still be terrible (like the armor). They had so many problems with computers and everything to make it look nice. And the game did so well thanks to the graphics being amazing and the rest of the game being rather bland (looool).
I think each persons likes and dislike of art is a big thing when it comes to how it looks. I love the guild wars art. It's not trying t to be realistic, but for what it is shooting for, it looks amazing.
When I say this, I mean, attention to detail. Clothes that actually look like clothes and not another layer of skin. Not armor that clips into the player or other pieces of armor. Seeing cracks on the mob you are hitting in spots you wouldn't think about.
But then again, some people look at a screenshot, and already decide how much they like the art, or some don't even bother to look.
"Immerse yourself in Guild Wars 2 with full NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround. Developers are embracing NVIDIA’s technologies for the most advanced game play experience possible. While you may question the use of a triple monitor 3D setup for a simple MMORPG, Guild Wars 2 offers some incredibly beautiful and detailed scenery that make the 3D experience eye popping.
Topping it off, Arenanet has employed the used of Physics technology via Havok, allowing for a completely unique environment experience. From running through fields with individual blades of grass moving with the wind, to directed attacks on solid objects that shatter off in different directions, the addition of Physics into the updated Guild Wars engine really helps to enhance the overall immersion into the game and into your character’s story.
Given its minimum systems specs and the buttery smooth playback we viewed on the test systems, both of these eyecandy updates shouldn’t require an unobtainable rig either."
Looking promising for this game at this stage of development if there is a profile already
I spent roughly 4-5 hours standing right where that photo was taken. There are 2 problems with the 3D and that is that it gives lots of people headaches and 3D glasses rarely work with glasses. It looks great in 3D but its a PAIN.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by grimm6th
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
So I just read some PAX 2010 stuff:
NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround & Havoc Physics
"Immerse yourself in Guild Wars 2 with full NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround. Developers are embracing NVIDIA’s technologies for the most advanced game play experience possible. While you may question the use of a triple monitor 3D setup for a simple MMORPG, Guild Wars 2 offers some incredibly beautiful and detailed scenery that make the 3D experience eye popping.
Topping it off, Arenanet has employed the used of Physics technology via Havok, allowing for a completely unique environment experience. From running through fields with individual blades of grass moving with the wind, to directed attacks on solid objects that shatter off in different directions, the addition of Physics into the updated Guild Wars engine really helps to enhance the overall immersion into the game and into your character’s story.
Given its minimum systems specs and the buttery smooth playback we viewed on the test systems, both of these eyecandy updates shouldn’t require an unobtainable rig either."
Looking promising for this game at this stage of development if there is a profile already
I spent roughly 4-5 hours standing right where that photo was taken. There are 2 problems with the 3D and that is that it gives lots of people headaches and 3D glasses rarely work with glasses. It looks great in 3D but its a PAIN.
I am sure it is , I have a 3D HDTV but have no interest in GW2 in 3D on PC at this point in time just that this would mean that there would have to be official SLI support for the game which I am happy about
Well, your first impression of GW2 is that it's a graphical monster then you see screenshots like this:
Overall, I don't believe GW2 will be the most technically impressive MMO on the market, but it will employ numerous tricks to provide players with a lush and beautiful world without sacrificing performance. To be honest, I wish more MMORPGs would follow this method.
I'm still one for gameplay > graphics; obviously the graphics -10yrs ago might be my limit, but see this concept art posted in another thread and even if half this gets into the game... I'm not concerned about graphics specifications as much as these aesthetics recognizably being in the game:
The game is meant to run similarly to Guild Wars, which ran fine even on lower end systems during the times of its initial release. In fact, they're using the same engine if I remember correctly, just a much more upgraded one. The graphics are lovely, but they are not going to be the best. You can see that from the existing videos alone.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
Just joined to tell that you guys are a bit off with graphics ideas. Youre comparing everything to crysis-like graphics whiel there is an MMO with crysis graphics: Planet Calypso aka. entropia universe. Too bad the content lacks of anything and the host has become greedy over the years.
I dunno what to say to all the people who think graphics are important. I don't want to offend anyone... but do you people even have imaginations? Do you only watch Hollywood blockbuster movies with big explosions... Can you even read books and novels (with NO pictures in them! gasp!)?
If you CAN read books (...using your imaginations to fill in the visual details), then I don't see why you can't do that with MMORPGs -- a genre of game that relies heavily on gameplay and story, but not so much on graphics. MMORPGs require a bit of imagination and "filling in the details". And because of the design of these games, that sort of thing happens naturally anyways.
I have vivid memories of games such as Zelda, or King's Quest, etc, and that has nothing to do with their graphics (they were garbage by today's standards). My imagination filled in the blanks. Their stories and gameplay were captivating. On the other end of the spectrum, one reason AOC failed (among many) was that it had too good graphics, and people couldn't play it. After that debacle, no one again will make an MMO to serve only a small portion of the target market... I mean it is an MMO... so you want to throw the net as wide as possible (eg WOW).
Of all the genres of gaming, MMORPGs are the LEAST reliant on good graphics to provide a positive gaming experience. I understand people want to fully use their $2000 Alienware computer for something... but realistically, it won't be an MMORPG.
I dunno what to say to all the people who think graphics are important. I don't want to offend anyone... but do you people even have imaginations? Do you only watch Hollywood blockbuster movies with big explosions... Can you even read books and novels (with NO pictures in them! gasp!)?
If you CAN read books (...using your imaginations to fill in the visual details), then I don't see why you can't do that with MMORPGs -- a genre of game that relies heavily on gameplay and story, but not so much on graphics. MMORPGs require a bit of imagination and "filling in the details". And because of the design of these games, that sort of thing happens naturally anyways.
I have vivid memories of games such as Zelda, or King's Quest, etc, and that has nothing to do with their graphics (they were garbage by today's standards). My imagination filled in the blanks. Their stories and gameplay were captivating. On the other end of the spectrum, one reason AOC failed (among many) was that it had too good graphics, and people couldn't play it. After that debacle, no one again will make an MMO to serve only a small portion of the target market... I mean it is an MMO... so you want to throw the net as wide as possible (eg WOW).
Of all the genres of gaming, MMORPGs are the LEAST reliant on good graphics to provide a positive gaming experience. I understand people want to fully use their $2000 Alienware computer for something... but realistically, it won't be an MMORPG.
I disagree. You are attacking peoples literacy because they prefer good graphics over bad? Imaginations have nothing to do with it. Aion uses the Cryengine. AOC did not fail. FF14 looks great. (gameplay aside) Zelda looked amazing when it came out. I remember when I bought Ocarina....that games 3D graphics and sound really helped pull me in and created a visual and audio immersion I had not seen on a console for the day. It blew people away. Gameplay for sure is a more important factor in a game being good but graphics, art, sound and writing are key points to creating a world people want to spend time in. All things that go into making a game are required to come together in a cohesive way to sell the experience. Graphics are part of the ART that all games need.
Not attacking people's literacy, but imagination. I was jokingly suggesting that anyone who DEMANDS cutting-edge graphics from an MMORPG probably has no imagination (needing the fancy graphics to make up for it).
AOC's "launch" and first few months failed to meet their expectations... partially due to the fact that lots of people (eg myself and 50% of my friends) couldn't even get the game working properly due to graphics issues. AOC turned into a great game, and I've played it recently since upgrading my computer... but some of my friends still can't play it.
You can say that WOW's low-quality graphics turn some people off of playing the game... but that number most certainly pales in copmarison to the truckloads of people who CAN play the game precisely because of it's low graphical-requirements.
I agree that "graphics" ARE a part of the whole "game package"... but a minimal one. I think ART is a huge factor, but fancy DX11 graphics are less so. The graphical quality of GW1 is extremely basic and primitive, YET, the game still looks breathtaking even to this day.
I dunno what to say to all the people who think graphics are important. I don't want to offend anyone... but do you people even have imaginations? Do you only watch Hollywood blockbuster movies with big explosions... Can you even read books and novels (with NO pictures in them! gasp!)?
If you CAN read books (...using your imaginations to fill in the visual details), then I don't see why you can't do that with MMORPGs -- a genre of game that relies heavily on gameplay and story, but not so much on graphics. MMORPGs require a bit of imagination and "filling in the details". And because of the design of these games, that sort of thing happens naturally anyways.
I have vivid memories of games such as Zelda, or King's Quest, etc, and that has nothing to do with their graphics (they were garbage by today's standards). My imagination filled in the blanks. Their stories and gameplay were captivating. On the other end of the spectrum, one reason AOC failed (among many) was that it had too good graphics, and people couldn't play it. After that debacle, no one again will make an MMO to serve only a small portion of the target market... I mean it is an MMO... so you want to throw the net as wide as possible (eg WOW).
Of all the genres of gaming, MMORPGs are the LEAST reliant on good graphics to provide a positive gaming experience. I understand people want to fully use their $2000 Alienware computer for something... but realistically, it won't be an MMORPG.
I completely agree with this. I love the old story based games. These days games are more about the graphics than anything else, including how interesting the actual gameplay is (for example, pretty much all FPSs play the same way, why should I care about one over the other?), and thats really why I don't play console games (except for Rock Band...).
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
You know you can enjoy high budget movies with flashy lights and still not be an idiot. There is no correlation between enjoying pretty things and intellect. While I might read a book and enjoy it and use my imagination that does not mean that I will not want better graphics in the games I play.
I have liked movies that none of my erudite friends would even deign to watch. I enjoy high budget movies for really all that they project. I also watch deep movies and foreign movies with subtitles. My preferences have no impact on my intellect I would like to think and I would hope that people have moved past such superficial classification of ones likes and dislikes and be so crass as to dub me an idiot for liking Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Veronica Mars. Yes I am that person
I want both good game play and good graphics . Why settle when you can have both.
Comments
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
I like the GW 2 styling. The graphics are acceptable for a 2011 mmo. Would love to see it be able to scale to DX11 and support for gamers with multi GPUS.
From the videos so far, the ground terrain (minus the grassy area's (and inbetween those grassy area's) ) looks low rez. The orignal game suffered from this as well as the sky. So far the sky looks a bit better here, would love to see some bump mapping all over though - more so.
I am rather amazed at how many people say that they don't care what the graphic quality is. I'll agree that without good gameplay the graphics aren't important, but I definately will NOT play some so called "great" games because of the shoddy graphics. And I for one am constantly cranking up the resolution and effects to the maximum my rig will endure, so I think graphics are important. I might even go as far to say that good graphics are vital, second only to gameplay in importance. (yeah, I really don't care that much about lore)
As for the original question, I think that GW2 has a more appealing artistic design then any of the current upcoming MMO's but Tera and Rift are looking pretty good as well.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
But ANet have specifically said that they want the game to run on as many systems as possible. So if that means supporting DX 9 or 10 and sacrificing some minor details like bump mapping, then so be it. It's better for them to attract as many people as possible, with their artistic design rather than graphical fidelity.
And just so you know... GW2 is using an overhauled version of the GW1 engine, so of course they may share similar graphical nuances.
GW2 may not have the polygon count of other games but then again polygon count doesn't matter. I really like how the game looks from an artistic point of view. People don't play MMOs to look at ridiculously good graphics anyways...I mean, high polygon count is just not that important to the game because of everything else going on. Do you really pay attention to these things while you play?
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
Graphics matter a lot to me as well (even though I ended up not enjoying the gameplay much, I just could not get into WoW because I did not like the stylization or low quality of the graphics), and I think out of the upcoming lot of MMOs, TERA is head and shoulders above the rest graphically speaking.
That said, I am really impressed with how accessible the ANet team have managed to make both GW and GW2 look with relatively low requirements. I still find myself amazed by some scenery in GW1, and despite the slightly more stylized look of GW2 (which I feared would tilt it toward WoW levels) I still think it looks attractive on most levels. It's an excellent combination of aethetics and performance.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
There is nothing wrong with having the game run on as many systems as possible, I just think they should allow the game to scale right up to the high end in the settings. They already have built in hardware management in the first game such as if your GPU has its fan at 100% the game tells you. They should scale up and limit the low system specs not to have the ability to scale up, maybe resolution limiting I am not sure.
LOTRO can acknowledge DX9-11 scaling in the setting options. Age of Conan uses an updated engine that was used on Anarchy Online and there are some subtle nuances but some big changes too.
All I am saying is that the game can cater to the lowest denominator and the highest without compromising quality for the level a user can play at. Perfectly feasible.
So I just read some PAX 2010 stuff:
NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround & Havoc Physics
"Immerse yourself in Guild Wars 2 with full NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround. Developers are embracing NVIDIA’s technologies for the most advanced game play experience possible. While you may question the use of a triple monitor 3D setup for a simple MMORPG, Guild Wars 2 offers some incredibly beautiful and detailed scenery that make the 3D experience eye popping.
Topping it off, Arenanet has employed the used of Physics technology via Havok, allowing for a completely unique environment experience. From running through fields with individual blades of grass moving with the wind, to directed attacks on solid objects that shatter off in different directions, the addition of Physics into the updated Guild Wars engine really helps to enhance the overall immersion into the game and into your character’s story.
Given its minimum systems specs and the buttery smooth playback we viewed on the test systems, both of these eyecandy updates shouldn’t require an unobtainable rig either."
2 way SLI ! thank you very much! The latest drivers also support Guild Wars 2 3D profile too
Looking promising for this game at this stage of development if there is a profile already
I agree: What matters is that it looks great. Not why it looks great. Well, if it looks great because only top end computers can run it then it matters but GW and GW2 are designed so that we never have to worry about that. :-)
now for some controversial thinking...
legitimate question: which game's graphics (polygon count, amount of detail) would you rather have for GW2; FFXIV or GW2? I would rather have GW2 for a number of reasons.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
When you bring in opinions to this, people will say differently.
The graphics can be very realistic (like AoC) but still be terrible (like the armor). They had so many problems with computers and everything to make it look nice. And the game did so well thanks to the graphics being amazing and the rest of the game being rather bland (looool).
I think each persons likes and dislike of art is a big thing when it comes to how it looks. I love the guild wars art. It's not trying t to be realistic, but for what it is shooting for, it looks amazing.
When I say this, I mean, attention to detail. Clothes that actually look like clothes and not another layer of skin. Not armor that clips into the player or other pieces of armor. Seeing cracks on the mob you are hitting in spots you wouldn't think about.
But then again, some people look at a screenshot, and already decide how much they like the art, or some don't even bother to look.
I spent roughly 4-5 hours standing right where that photo was taken. There are 2 problems with the 3D and that is that it gives lots of people headaches and 3D glasses rarely work with glasses. It looks great in 3D but its a PAIN.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
I am sure it is
, I have a 3D HDTV but have no interest in GW2 in 3D on PC at this point in time just that this would mean that there would have to be official SLI support for the game which I am happy about 
Well, your first impression of GW2 is that it's a graphical monster then you see screenshots like this:
Overall, I don't believe GW2 will be the most technically impressive MMO on the market, but it will employ numerous tricks to provide players with a lush and beautiful world without sacrificing performance. To be honest, I wish more MMORPGs would follow this method.
I'm still one for gameplay > graphics; obviously the graphics -10yrs ago might be my limit, but see this concept art posted in another thread and even if half this gets into the game... I'm not concerned about graphics specifications as much as these aesthetics recognizably being in the game:
NYC ComicCon 2010 - Concept Sequence - YouTube Edition.mov
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
No.
The game is meant to run similarly to Guild Wars, which ran fine even on lower end systems during the times of its initial release. In fact, they're using the same engine if I remember correctly, just a much more upgraded one. The graphics are lovely, but they are not going to be the best. You can see that from the existing videos alone.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
Hi,
Just joined to tell that you guys are a bit off with graphics ideas. Youre comparing everything to crysis-like graphics whiel there is an MMO with crysis graphics: Planet Calypso aka. entropia universe. Too bad the content lacks of anything and the host has become greedy over the years.
Cheers
I have seen videos of all the upcomming mmos and Tera looks the best by far.
I dunno what to say to all the people who think graphics are important. I don't want to offend anyone... but do you people even have imaginations? Do you only watch Hollywood blockbuster movies with big explosions... Can you even read books and novels (with NO pictures in them! gasp!)?
If you CAN read books (...using your imaginations to fill in the visual details), then I don't see why you can't do that with MMORPGs -- a genre of game that relies heavily on gameplay and story, but not so much on graphics. MMORPGs require a bit of imagination and "filling in the details". And because of the design of these games, that sort of thing happens naturally anyways.
I have vivid memories of games such as Zelda, or King's Quest, etc, and that has nothing to do with their graphics (they were garbage by today's standards). My imagination filled in the blanks. Their stories and gameplay were captivating. On the other end of the spectrum, one reason AOC failed (among many) was that it had too good graphics, and people couldn't play it. After that debacle, no one again will make an MMO to serve only a small portion of the target market... I mean it is an MMO... so you want to throw the net as wide as possible (eg WOW).
Of all the genres of gaming, MMORPGs are the LEAST reliant on good graphics to provide a positive gaming experience. I understand people want to fully use their $2000 Alienware computer for something... but realistically, it won't be an MMORPG.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Not attacking people's literacy, but imagination. I was jokingly suggesting that anyone who DEMANDS cutting-edge graphics from an MMORPG probably has no imagination (needing the fancy graphics to make up for it).
AOC's "launch" and first few months failed to meet their expectations... partially due to the fact that lots of people (eg myself and 50% of my friends) couldn't even get the game working properly due to graphics issues. AOC turned into a great game, and I've played it recently since upgrading my computer... but some of my friends still can't play it.
You can say that WOW's low-quality graphics turn some people off of playing the game... but that number most certainly pales in copmarison to the truckloads of people who CAN play the game precisely because of it's low graphical-requirements.
I agree that "graphics" ARE a part of the whole "game package"... but a minimal one. I think ART is a huge factor, but fancy DX11 graphics are less so. The graphical quality of GW1 is extremely basic and primitive, YET, the game still looks breathtaking even to this day.
I completely agree with this. I love the old story based games. These days games are more about the graphics than anything else, including how interesting the actual gameplay is (for example, pretty much all FPSs play the same way, why should I care about one over the other?), and thats really why I don't play console games (except for Rock Band...).
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
You know you can enjoy high budget movies with flashy lights and still not be an idiot. There is no correlation between enjoying pretty things and intellect. While I might read a book and enjoy it and use my imagination that does not mean that I will not want better graphics in the games I play.
I have liked movies that none of my erudite friends would even deign to watch. I enjoy high budget movies for really all that they project. I also watch deep movies and foreign movies with subtitles. My preferences have no impact on my intellect I would like to think and I would hope that people have moved past such superficial classification of ones likes and dislikes and be so crass as to dub me an idiot for liking Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Veronica Mars. Yes I am that person
I want both good game play and good graphics . Why settle when you can have both.