AoD: What do you think of TEH GRAFIKS?

[Vault Dweller]

On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is something drawn with a crayon and 10 is something that's latest and greatest (Oblivion, Half-Life 2, Prey, whatever). Obviously, AoD graphics can't never qualify for 10, so the poll is from 1 to 7.

Judge the graphics based on these 4 screens:
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/images/3a.jpg
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/images/4a.jpg
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/images/5a.jpg
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/images/6a.jpg

If you want to explain your point of view, be my guest. Otherwise, just vote.

 

[ixg]

The graphics aren't the worst shit ever but there not the greatest either. Still, they're fine to me. Some parts are nicer looking than others (the cloth on one screen is meh, but the textures look good).
If you're worried about the marketing value of the screenshots, make renders and say they're in-game screens. Then when everyone finds out the truth, say it's because everyone's PC sucks.

Nah but seriously, the graphics are fine.

 

[Balor]

Hmm! Those screens are actually pretty good!
Perhaps you showed your EVIL BIAS and chose only screens that show greater amount of detail then other areas of the game, but if this screens resresent the real quality of the game, and animations do not suck (well, based on what you showed before, they don't)...
7/10. In fact, I'd give it 8/10. L337 Oblivion's HDR only made things worse.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

I like the graphics. They're more than good enough for me. I think Arcanum's graphics were great.

 

[hiciacit]

Graphics are more than fine to me. Although I have to agree with the OP of the 'lighting' thread (I guess that's what brought this on) that some enhanced lighting could significantly benefit the mood. But they look fine to me nonetheless...

 

[Balor]

"I think Arcanum's graphics were great."
Well, Arcanums' grahics were ok.
Animations sucked colossal cock, though. That, and combat system... but I digress.

 

[Lumpy]

The graphics are preety bad, in that they don't really add anything to the game. But they aren't that bad as to hurt the game, though.
It's not only a tech problem, they don't really have any artistical appeal, either.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Hmm! Those screens are actually pretty good!

Thanks, Balor.

...if this screens resresent the real quality of the game...

They do.

The reason I made this poll is because I've seen plenty of criticism all over the net that goes something like: "wow, the game looks interesting... let's see the screenshots (these 4 screens are at the top of the page)...omg! horrible! my eyes...." or at best "God damn but the game looks ugly. God damn but I'm excited to play it." (new post made yesterday). So, I decided to ask everyone who gives a damn to see what they think, and basically, to see if there is a reason for us to care about the graphics at all and try to improve & tweak.

...they don't really have any artistical appeal...

Can you be more specific here, please? What can we do to fix that, in your opinion?

 

[whatusername]

The graphics aren't bad, but they aren't that good either. But they just work. It's sort of like Geneforge.

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

They're acceptable. I'd prefer 2D IE style, to be honest, but I can see how that wasn't working out. I doubt the game's going to attract the graphics crowd, regardless.

 

[golgotha]

...they don't really have any artistical appeal...

Can you be more specific here, please? What can we do to fix that, in your opinion?

Not to speak for him, but I believe with "artistical appeal" he means more along the lines of designs inside the house and the architecture. They look very plain in that theres nothing really special to stand out inside the houses such as fireplaces or a workshop table maybe and everything is a perfect square angle. Also, from what I've noticed, a lot of the windows only start at the NPC's eyes and the walls seem enormously tall for the size of the people living in them. This would especially be a problem as it looks as if the engine doesn't allow the transparent effect on a wall that would be blocking your view. Taller wall = more view space taken away.

Personally, I could live with them the way they are no problem, but this is a thread strictly about the graphics.

 

[Jaesun]

I think the graphics look fine.

 

[EEVIAC]

The graphics are a lot better than Vogel's games. Besides, I'll be able to shift my point of view and move the camera around and I can play the game in the resolution of my choice. So, thumbs up from me.

 

[obediah]

I gave them a 3 based on the scale of shitty current games = 1, OblivoPrey 2424 = 10. If we were considering all games ever, rather than the current crop, i'd bump it up to 6-7.

I think you should knock some of the votes down one step. From the comments, it's clear some people aren't objectively rating the graphics, but rather the graphics in the context of being good enough for an indy rpg with teh roleplay. I assume if you just wanted to know if they were good enough to keep us from clawing our eyes out while playing the game, you would have asked that.

 

[Lumpy]

I don't know exactly.
But, for example, Fallout's graphics were quite enjoyable due to their artistic style (old, decaying buildings, lots of junk, complex gizmos in technological areas, etc. - but I guess you already know about that), encouraging exploration of the game world, and not only of the dialogue. By contrast, I can't see anyone exploring AoD's world for other reasons than seeing how the story unfolds and talking to more NPCs.
On the other hand, I don't think you really need to improve in that aspect, because anyone who would put graphics over gameplay would probably not care about that aspect of graphics anyway.

 

[suibhne]

I'd love to see the graphics improved - whether that means lighting, textures, whatever. Will it make much of a difference to me, tho? No. I'll be buying the game either way, as soon as it's available.

The other thing to keep in mind is the quality of animation. We haven't seen any movies of the game in action, and smooth animation can greatly make up for otherwise clunky graphics. Games always look their worst in screenshots (as long as the shots are truly representative), because that's the only time in your interaction with the game when you're focusing solely on graphics.

 

[Ladonna]

As you probably know Vince, I don't give a fuck about the graphics as long as their serviceable. However, I will add my inexperienced observations of what may make things a little easier on the eyes...

Pic 1: The people look fine. The walls all look the same, can any scarring/different coloured or shaded bricks be added? Perhaps some heraldry? I was going to say Ivy but its a deserty area so that idea is idiotic . Just something to break up the monotony.

The ground all looks the same. Rocks, maybe a little trash. A path? I think you get the drift. A great house looks shite with nothing in it. A shite house looks great when its dolled up. DON'T take that the wrong way please.

Pic2:The sail. Colour it in a weathered dingy brown or something. Perhaps instead of having it flaky add a roll to it at the end? Perhaps a fabric like texture (like when you look at a woolen jumper...if that makes sense ). Again, ground additions. Paths? rocks? etc? A cactus?

Pic3: Wall hangings? Pictures's? Its not really that bad. The shadows would make a difference here for those who care. As stated however the engine and size limit may knock this idea out. Just more knicknacks would make a difference.

Pic4: Not much to add to this one. Again perhaps some ground differences. Rocks, a shrub.

To me they are fine as is. These are just suggestions for you to make the game more playable for the babies, if you give a shit.

I take it you have the gameplay downpat then?

 

[serch]

They are good enough, better than other independent cRPG series rather successful. I think the way to go with a game like yours, if you pretend to use some time improving it, is adding factions, quests, characters or locations. Don't waste your time with graphics, they are ok and your niche of market prefers gameplay value.

 

[Atrokkus]

I don't really car how they look as long as I can see what's going on and as long as the visual handicap is wholly compensated by verbose discriptions of the surroundings and characters (in the journal, for instane), so i could have a clear image in my mind's eye.

However, if youre aiming to imporve the visuals, I'd love to advice you this: change the asssassin concept. NOt only it looks trite, but it's actually rather, well, unrealistic -- he wont make a good assassin if his outfit is practically SCREAMING "HAY IM ASSASSIN PHEAR ME". Make him wear plain clothes - something that would conceal his face and at the same time woulnd't look too suspicious -- maybe a scarf, or a kerchief. Or nothing at all if face concealment is not that important. Clothes should be plain -- also dark , but not jet-black stylish ninja-like -- just hte ordinary mix of dark clothes, preferrably in a rather unstylish manner. If you've seen real thieves and bandits, you know what im talkin about.

SO, it's on conceptual level, not the technical which is why it's rather critical.

 

[spacemoose]

I would recommend making the environment busier: add barrels, paintings, trash, cracks in the stone here and there, stuff that has no effect on the mechanics at all, but just makes the map look more lively.

The BG artists were really good at that.

 

[Atrokkus]

The BG artists were really good at that.

Yes, BG has some of the best environment art I've ver seen in my life, but it's one helluva effort and takes a lot of dev hours and staff.

 

[Jim Kata]

I think the graphics are good. The models look really good to me, for instance.

What I dislike is the user interface. It is just, well, not good. I mean the way that it looks. I just don't like that style very much, though since there seems to be a sort of egyptiany theme it makes sense. I also dislike how flat it seems. It should seem like it is not just a flat image, even if it is. If I were playing the game, then it might be ok.

They are certainly far better than the graphics for any spiderweb games, and hopefully that level would be sufficient to get enough sales to at least make some sort of money.

 

[Hazelnut]

The graphics are perfectly fine for this kind of game, and there's a lot of detail in there. I like 'em.

 

[Goliath]

If Oblivion is a 10 where is Arcanum on your scale? Because Arcanum looks a hell lot better than AoD. AoD's graphics are to "sterile" i.e. unnatural. They look like those plastic figures kids play with. The wall does not look like a real wall but like a piece of plastic with a wall texture printed on it, and those soldier well...
Such graphics do support immersion, at least to me it looks I am playing with playmobil.
It is not your fault, though. 3D graphics look that way unless you go for the advanced stuff your engine probably does not even support.
However, I do not care much about graphics as far as RPGs are concerned, so AoD's graphics would not stop me from buying it.
I hope you have no plans to make this an "exploration RPG", though. Because exploring such a sterile looking world wouldn't be much fun. No graphics at all would be better in that case.

 

[Jason]

he wont make a good assassin if his outfit is practically SCREAMING "HAY IM ASSASSIN PHEAR ME". Make him wear plain clothes

That's a good point. I always use the plain dark civilian clothes for my main character when I play Silent Storm/Hammer & Sickle for that reason. There's probably stylistic ways you can still make him 'shifty' if that's needed.