Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Unity Pulls an Adobe! No more permanent licenses and 4x the price

Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Now apparently there's something I don't know. So how about you tell me something that makes UE4 "very very competitive" or even "(better)".

It has been some time since the last "engine wars" thread. Nice! I better get my popcorn now.

giphy.gif
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Use RPG Maker 95, everything else is hipsterism.

I was thinking about this. Since I disagree with you, I must conclude that at least to a certain extent GRAPHIC WHORISM IS JUSTIFIED. Just think about it. If we only cared about game content and sophisticared mechanics, every developer should use RPG Maker or other barebones engine and ignore detailed art, soundtracks and atmosphere. However, we do care about art, soundtracks, and atmosphere. When a developer says that he only invest on art to ensure sales, he is lying trough his teeth, because he could make a cheaper game with less art and have the same profit with less sales. They invest on these things because they matter. We already played decent cRPGs that excel at these things and we know too well that they wouldn’t be half of the games they were without these elements. The first FOs would an empty shell of themselves without the art and the soundtrack, and a mediocre game such as W2 would be much better with better art. Playing cRPGs is not just a matter of pressing buttons or choosing the right tactic, but having an experience. Just look at Battle Brothers. The game wouldn’t be half as good without the awesome art. Tdlr properly, if every game was made with RPG maker and looked like a 32 bits JRPG, I would not play any of them.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
Use RPG Maker 95, everything else is hipsterism.

I was thinking about this. Since I disagree with you, I must conclude that at least to a certain extent GRAPHIC WHORISM IS JUSTIFIED. Just think about it. If we only cared about game content and sophisticared mechanics, every developer should use RPG Maker or other barebones engine and ignore detailed art, soundtracks and atmosphere. However, we do care about art, soundtracks, and atmosphere. When a developer says that he only invest on art to ensure sales, he is lying trough his teeth, because he could make a cheaper game with less art and have the same profit with less sales. They invest on these things because they matter. We already played decent cRPGs that excel at these things and we know too well that they wouldn’t be half of the games they were without these elements. The first FOs would an empty shell of themselves without the art and the soundtrack, and a mediocre game such as W2 would be much better with better art. Playing cRPGs is not just a matter of pressing buttons or choosing the right tactic, but having an experience. Just look at Battle Brothers. The game wouldn’t be half as good without the awesome art. Tdlr properly, if every game was made with RPG maker and looked like a 32 bits JRPG, I would not play any of them.

Would you rather watch "After Earth", or read Ray Bradbury?
 

Perkel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
15,807
Can someone explain me what is going on ?
Free version which most of people use is still free and that didn't change.

Aside from on version with source code access i don't see why anyone should choose not free version.

edit:

also lol about people talking like Unreal will comeback to indies. No one want to write C++, their store is garbage and to create games you have to read shitload of materials to even properly begin working with it unlike Unity which you can start to work with in less than 15 minutes from 0 knowledge.

Sure it is slower than Unreal but no one cares and especially idies which either way won't be pushing much graphics.

Unreal is only good option for bigger projects who have money and tech and NEEED to run game faster to actually use it properly not for poor dudes with lack of tech knowledge on level of veteran.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 20, 2014
Messages
906
Location
Malaysia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Can someone explain me what is going on ?
Free version which most of people use is still free and that didn't change.

Aside from on version with source code access i don't see why anyone should choose not free version.

Codex just sperging out and having fun trolling each other as usual.
Unity just use the standard corporate software package for all their paid tiers.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Would you rather watch "After Earth", or read Ray Bradbury?

That is not a good analogy, because you are comparing two different media. If graphics are irrelevant and the only that matters is crunching numbers to make a better build you could just stay with pen-and-paper and forget about RPGs in videogame format altogether. Of course, nobody really thinks that way, because this is a very reductive point of view. On the other hand, the opposite view that graphics are the only thing that matters is also a reductive (and much more misguided) point of view.
 

Viata

Arcane
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
9,885
Location
Water Play Catarinense
I think you are misunderstanding "graphics matters" to "great graphics matters". Also, Interactive Fiction is a genre that has great games yet the only graphics there is the text, which clearly proves that 'graphics matters', but not that 'great graphics matters'.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
That is not a good analogy, because you are comparing two different media.

Not where it matters. I'm making an parallel between non-interactive media and interactive media for storytelling. Both are capable of relaying the experience via merely text, or rich visuals. And both are capable of creating or destroying immersion via either.

If graphics are irrelevant and the only that matters is crunching numbers to make a better build you could just stay with pen-and-paper and forget about RPGs in videogame format altogether.

Most of what makes a CRPG complex, is not the graphics. It can present a well-built world, character development, combat system, almost any mechanic your heart desires, and it can do it just as well through minimalistic visuals or text. Coincidentally THESE are the aspects at which most big-name CRPGs fail, because they are the most difficult to get right.

I would find it a lot easier to immerse in a vibrant RPG world created with ASCII visuals, properly executed, with world aliveness and cool procedural elements going on under the surface, character development, meaningful dialogue, cohesive world, etc, to a lifeless husk with infodump NPCs like Skyrim or Mass Effect.

Either it ignites my imagination and makes me care, or it does not. It's that simple.

Of course, nobody really thinks that way, because this is a very reductive point of view.

It is indeed reductive to the point of being nonsensical. Computers offer a HUGE potential advantage over PnP in a wide variety of aspects. The most important parts of it have nothing to do with graphics, but with maintaining a complex set of gameplay mechanics in an interactive world.

Have you ever actually tried PnP? It makes me fucking fall asleep. Everything takes 3 hours to happen. I get an existential crisis just by sitting down in the chair. Fuck PnP. That's why games like Fallout made a big leap in offloading the worst of PnP-like gameplay to the computer.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
I think you are misunderstanding "graphics matters" to "great graphics matters". Also, Interactive Fiction is a genre that has great games yet the only graphics there is the text, which clearly proves that 'graphics matters', but not that 'great graphics matters'.

What I’m saying is that whether a game has shitty graphics or not matters. You know that matters, despite assertions to the contrary, because these things done right in a real cRPG adds a lot to the experience. Battle Brothers would be a considerable worse game if had worse graphics, worse soundtrack, etc. Classic games that are pure text, even in digital format, are a case apart, because the immersion is purposed to be done via text. When the aims to offer something more, these elements affect the way you perceive the game because they are supposed to immerse you in it. When the graphics are horrible, we ignore the graphics and focus on other elements to immerse ourselves.

Not where it matters. I'm making an parallel between non-interactive media and interactive media for storytelling. Both are capable of relaying the experience via merely text, or rich visuals. And both are capable of creating or destroying immersion via either.

My point is that an interactive media that aims more than the use of text and relies in visual elements, aims to provide a different experience. Just imagine a movie with great script and good authors, but shitty cinematography and amateurish production values. The result is not the same.

Most of what makes a CRPG complex is not the graphics. It can present a well-built world, character development, combat system, almost any mechanic your heart desires

Agreed.

and it can do it just as well through minimalistic visuals or text

Nope. You can’t expect to have the same experience playing with pure text or visuals. VtMB would be a different, and worse game, played only via text. And maybe “Dwarf Fortress” would be even better with more visuals.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
I just realized that your argument is a non-argument, it was just a complicated way of stating an axiom.

"All other factors being equal, better graphics are better than worse graphics."

Well... uh... I agree.

Good talk.
 

Mustawd

Guest
Can someone explain me what is going on ?
Free version which most of people use is still free and that didn't change.

Aside from on version with source code access i don't see why anyone should choose not free version.

edit:

also lol about people talking like Unreal will comeback to indies. No one want to write C++, their store is garbage and to create games you have to read shitload of materials to even properly begin working with it unlike Unity which you can start to work with in less than 15 minutes from 0 knowledge.

Sure it is slower than Unreal but no one cares and especially idies which either way won't be pushing much graphics.

Unreal is only good option for bigger projects who have money and tech and NEEED to run game faster to actually use it properly not for poor dudes with lack of tech knowledge on level of veteran.



Soo....anyone actually figure out what the big deal was?
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
It is indeed reductive to the point of being nonsensical. Computers offer a HUGE potential advantage over PnP in a wide variety of aspects. The most important parts of it have nothing to do with graphics, but with maintaining a complex set of gameplay mechanics in an interactive world.

Have you ever actually tried PnP? It makes me fucking fall asleep. Everything takes 3 hours to happen. I get an existential crisis just by sitting down in the chair. Fuck PnP. That's why games like Fallout made a big leap in offloading the worst of PnP-like gameplay to the computer.

Completely disagree. I'm not a great fan of PnP roleplaying but it offers completely different experiences than CRPGs do, despite early CRPGs being based on said games. To get the most out of PnP roleplaying you should NOT play them as mechanistic dungeon crawlers - this reduces them to bad wargames with too many players.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
Completely disagree. I'm not a great fan of PnP roleplaying but it offers completely different experiences than CRPGs do, despite early CRPGs being based on said games. To get the most out of PnP roleplaying you should NOT play them as mechanistic dungeon crawlers - this reduces them to bad wargames with too many players.

Oh I perfectly understand the advantages of PnP. And mechanistic dungeon crawlers are the antithesis of an RPG that would interest me. The problem with PnP is, however, that, REGARDLESS of the game's nature, there are a lot of mechanical, repetitive actions, on which most of the time is wasted.

The computer has trouble with improv and imagination and spontaneous world-building. Human DM has trouble with keeping track of gameplay mechanics, calculations, and C&C.

The ideal version of PnP would involve a system where the DM is free to use his strengths, while offloading his weaknesses onto a computer.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
The ideal version of PnP would involve a system where the DM is free to use his strengths, while offloading his weaknesses onto a computer.

All other factors being equal, better graphics are better than worse graphics.

You still don’t get it, do you? You can’t replicate a P&P experience in videogame format, because they don’t provide the same experiences at all. If a cRPG attempts to provide a story with characters to interact with, choices to make and mechanics that govern these choices in a virtual world, you are already assuming that verisimilitude, art and other supposed “minor” things are fundamental to the experience. Otherwise, you could just stick with pure texts games, instead of wasting players’ time with shitty art.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
shihonage What I’m saying is that if a developer decides to use a character model to give you the illusion that you can run from point A to point B, and design a world around it, he better have good art, a.k.a, graphics, to foment player’s immersion. Otherwise, he should stick with pure text and invest heavily in game content, mechanics, etc., thus letting the player immerse himself with his own imagination. Wasting time with bad art that will not help immersion at all is a waste of resources. It's counter-productive.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
shihonage What I’m saying is that if a developer decides to use a character model to give you the illusion that you can run from point A to point B, and design a world around it, he better have good art, a.k.a, graphics, to foment player’s immersion. Otherwise, he should stick with pure text and invest heavily in game content, mechanics, etc., thus letting the player immerse himself with his own imagination. Wasting time with bad art that will not help immersion at all is a waste of resources. It's counter-productive.

I agree. If you don't have good visual presentation, instead of replacing it with bad visuals, you better abstract it entirely, and let the player's imagination fill in the blanks. It will do a better job than shitty art.

An example I keep using is when you enter Shady Sands in "Fallout", it says "You see Katrina. She has a pretty smile." This bypasses your "perception filter", because she's a tiny isometric figure and you naturally can't see her smile. You just accept it.

Then you run Fallout 3 and talk to some woman who's supposed to be a likeable character, and there it is, her face in all of its horrid glory, staring right at you like some reject from a mannequin factory, and yet IT SPEAKS. Her internal description at Bethesda may have been "plain village peasant", but what you're looking at is some deformed "The Hills Have Eyes" type character, and you're supposed to force yourself to accept what she's MEANT to be like.

It breaks the 4th wall instantly... among everything else.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom