The I am a graphics whore thread

[Jaesun]

Could you just go start your own OMG I AM AN ART FAG! OMG I AM MASTURBATING TO ART! IT IS HEVAN! ART GHGGAHAGAGHGGGL! thread and we can get back on topic.

Thanks.

 

[1eyedking]

Jaesun, what the fuck?

Stop dogging me around, or at least grow a brain and cut the IAM 1EYEDKING I AM AN ARTFAG OLOLOL crap, it's not even cute. I know you don't like me, but jeez, man, peace out.

The most you can get out of threads like this is "yes, no, yes, no, no, you're a graphics fag, no i'm not, yes you are, you are all fags, LOLOLOL I AM CODEXER I NO NEED GRAPHICS I ARE SERIOUS GAMER" and the usual faggotry that ensues in every single goddamn Codex thread.

 

[1eyedking]

Yes, WC2 < WC3 when it comes to cartoony style, but it's not like Blizzard decided to go back to WC1.

StarCraft II is not cartoony, but it suffers from the same old "this body part is blown out of proportion" that plagues the genre. So it's even more of an abortion, TBH.

AoM's style worked well. You could tell all units apart without any problems.

PS: Jaesun. Jaesun never changes.

 

[Azrael the cat]

What's weird is how good we thought all those games looked back then.

X-Com: Wow! Great graphics! WHOA LOOK OUT, ALIEN!

Gold Box: Man, I just love looking at my little characters with their cool little weapons! Awww..

Duke Nukem 3D: Boobies!!

It was the same thing with low-def T.V. Or those big-assed cell phones. Same thing with cars, and hair styles and clothes and the way everyone loved huge, hairy bush back then...

*sigh*

I don't mind if a woman has some vintage bush.

Not as young as some folks here, but not ancient either and....a complete absence of pubic hair (waxed/shaved/etc to total absence) is actually a deal-breaker for me. It instantly kills all attraction - not an issue now that I'm married, but before then there was even an occasion or two where I went so far as to make an excuse, get out of bed and flee back home. I probably couldn't have 'performed' if I had stayed - I just can't help but think 'paedophile' as soon as I see a complete absence of pubic hair. Tidied/narrowed down a bit is fine, but I just can't comprehend the attraction in trying to look pre-pubescent.

Similarly, I still enjoy the Wizardry and Ultima games.

I wonder if there's a connection?

 

[ever]

From my experience artists find working with today's tools much easier. I think conceptually its just easier to sort of create a mesh, bind it to a skeleton, project some textures onto it and then you're done. It certainly allows for a better division of labor, although thats not necessarily a good thing all the time.

 

[ever]

I agree.

Artists have lost a lot of control of how the overall game looks. Not just because they're no longer controlling each pixel as it will appear on the screen like they were in the olden days, but because the graphics programmers are in charge of a lot of things. From the direct shading equation which can range from anything from a simple lambertian diffuse term to a full blown microfacet model like Oren Nayar for diffuse and Cook Torrance for specular, to global illumination things like radiosity, shadows, ambient occlusion and so on.

Even though there are tools like RenderMonkey and FX Composer, I don't know of too many places that would be willing to give artists any actual control over shader code.

Particle effects still have a fair amount of artist control cause they're still very wysiwyg. Not too many people attempt to do any illumination of particles in real time, and even some things you should technically be doing with GI techniques like single scattering in particpating media, its done with particles.

That's not really a bad thing though. It just means that guys doing graphics code need to be fair bit creative as well and able to communicate with the game designers and artists to capture the intended feel. I think you also need a strong dictator sort of dude leading the visual side of the game, as you do with the audio. In a set up where each artist is responsible for the mesh, skeleton, and textures of each character or the mesh / paramatrics and textures of a map / level / whatever your game engine calls it, then its a good idea for one of the work horses from that area to be responsible as the dictator. Otherwise where your artists specialize in things like one guy does just the textures and the other guy does just the animations, then it should be a graphics programmer.

 

[sea]

3D games benefit massively from anti-aliasing and a good monitor. When you have limited resolution and your visuals are presented in 2D, typically you end up with scenes that are easy to read due to the necessary simplicity. When you have more detail, screen resolution and aliasing are increasingly big problems.

For someone highlighting Dragon Age earlier, I'm not so sure that's the best example. When you pull out into tactical mode, the game uses separate rim lighting and removes fog from the scene to make characters stand out. That said, the UI elements do help a lot and are probably still necessary.

Really, it all comes down to art design. Realistic doesn't by definition mean hard to look at, or muddy, or whatever, and neither does 3D. See a game like Left 4 Dead, where despite chaos on-screen, smart art direction and lighting make it easy to see what's going on. Funny enough, The Witcher II actually suffers from the "too realistic" problem more than most games I've seen despite otherwise stellar art direction - the slightly over-aggressive ambient occlusion and the use of the same lighting model for both environments and characters unfortunately means that monsters etc. can blend in with the environment just a bit too readily - good for real life, not necessarily good for gameplay.

 

[Jaesun]

Where I'm less forgiving is in interface and controls. The fact is that I honestly have a lot of problems playing older games not because of the fact that they look bad (they're more than functional in this regard), but because they're just so archaic to actually play. Poorly-designed menus, laggy and imprecise controls, etc. are all timeless, and they will hurt a game far more now that interface standards have improved so much.

Examples?

Still waiting for your answer on this sea.

Just FYI.

 

[thursdayschild]

And fuck you pagan was immersive

hahahaha cry more grandpa perhaps if cathode ray tube technology still impresses you with all the newfangled electricity thing they invented

WHOOP ULTIMA MATTEL EDITION AGES TWO TO TWELVE

In constrast here is the improved detail of modern high resolution graphics that only an experienced adult rpg gamer with an eye for quality can fully appreciate.

I don't really "get" good graphics.

1993

2000

2006 (admittedly, different sub species of beholder)

In pixelart or relatively low resolution sprite/prerendered graphics like the infinity engine games due to a fixed camera angle every single pixel displayed on screen that you see has been presented as the artist envisioned, short of obvious external factor shit like monitor quality and you wearing sunglasses at home or something.

Then in games like NWN or Dragon Age you get enemies looking like this due to how tile graphics are for fags now and john carmack hasn't figured out how to make high poly 3D models scale down well and look good and distinct:

Note in all preview in-combat publicity shots not only is the angle untenable for normal non retard gameplay but zoomed in as well to avoid this kind of indistinct muddiness that you get with the zoomed out viewpoint a normal person would play with. I say this from not having played DA:O with bloom on. With realistic next generation depth of field blurring what level of detail left is effectively postprocessed away into gritty and mature mashed potatoes telling you a story.






Bonus RTS comparison


Red Alert 2 - 2000

Red Alert 3 - 2008

On the other hand, architecture usually does quite well if the base models are good. Economic management games
have generally gotten prettier over the years.

It's not a technical failing, their artists juck suck donkey balls.

 

[Falkner]

I am so glad you quoted the whole post for that.

 

[jiujitsu]

[quote="Azrael the cat"Not as young as some folks here, but not ancient either and....a complete absence of pubic hair (waxed/shaved/etc to total absence) is actually a deal-breaker for me. It instantly kills all attraction - not an issue now that I'm married, but before then there was even an occasion or two where I went so far as to make an excuse, get out of bed and flee back home. I probably couldn't have 'performed' if I had stayed - I just can't help but think 'paedophile' as soon as I see a complete absence of pubic hair. Tidied/narrowed down a bit is fine, but I just can't comprehend the attraction in trying to look pre-pubescent.[/quote]

The main appeal of a clean shaven pussy is slippery slick contact and your mouth doesn't have to touch hair when it's down there. I seriously doubt a substantial percent of men think anything remotely associated with pedophilia when they see a clean shaven vulva.

It's not about looking younger by any means. It's about NOT having hair all over the place.

For the record I don't care either way.

 

[thursdayschild]

I am so glad you quoted the whole post for that.

I knew you would be.

 

[sea]

Still waiting for your answer on this sea.

Just FYI.

Sorry, missed that as I only checked the more recent pages.

It's really not so much specific games that have crippling issues as it is some of the wider design trends in older titles that are a bit off-putting for me. Ultima Underworld, Pool of Radiance and similar dungeon crawlers that spend so much screen space on interface and not so much on the actual game, Betrayal at Krondor and its "click the arrows to move" (inherited from a lot of other older dungeon crawlers), interfaces that try to cram too much information into single screens when there's clearly not enough resolution to display the content in a way that's easy to read (Civilization, if we're permitting non-RPGs), conversely UIs that don't make very economical use of screen space (arguably Betrayal at Krondor, some of the Ultimas and Gold Box titles, Arena and Daggerfall, especially as far as things like oversized icons and buttons go), most pre-mouse titles that at the same time don't have hotkeys around, lack of sorting options for inventory as seen in many, many RPGs and didn't even really become standard until into the 2000s (Fallout's list inventories being particularly painful to navigate, lack of a "take all" button while looting), fonts that are difficult to read due to using all caps/poor choices for low-resolution screens (Pool of Radiance I always felt was hurt by this), etc.

My point isn't so much that those titles are unplayable as a result, but rather that next to modern titles, developers had yet to hammer out the same understanding of context, i.e. character sheets and stats didn't need to be on-screen 100% of the time. I don't think it was really until Diablo, Infinity Engine titles, etc. that interface standards started to be hammered out in a way that made sense in a PC game, with respect to hotkeys, more logical organisation of game functions, less wasted space, that sort of thing. This also went hand in hand with hardware, where graphical representations started to become more than just vague abstractions, and the rise of the mouse meant that now you could effectively "multitask" in the game without needing separate windows, sets of controls etc. for functions that could otherwise be displayed simultaneously. To clarify, I think there is legitimacy to the argument that graphics in Gold Box titles don't matter much because those games were about mechanics, not atmosphere, visuals, real-time action etc., and therefore the interface didn't need to display more than it did... but I also think it's generally a matter of fact that things have improved since then, and lessons learned in later game development could have produced more fluid UI navigation overall.

I should also once again clarify that, growing up not playing any RPGs or strategy games made before about 1995, my frame of reference is different; anything earlier goes past my comfort zone and generally. Obviously if that's how you started out playing RPGs, older UI standards are likely second nature to you. There's always going to be that layer of subjectivity around UI design, not to mention it always varies from game to game, especially when you get games like the aforementioned Gold Box titles where the interface is in some senses more tied into the gameplay than more modern games.

 

[made]

It's not so much a then vs now issue, there have always been games that put a lot of effort into UI and usability, while others simply didn't care.

Late GoldBox games play more comfortably than the early titles. Ambermoon and Black Crypt are two examples of extremely well designed UI's, 2 decades old. Ultima 7 is another, messy inventory aside.
In contrast, Witcher 2 and New Vegas are modern games with terrible UIs.

 

[ever]

Ultima VIII inproved on Ultima VII's user interface with the addition of double click to close, instead of those silly ticks.

Both games would have benefited greatly from a higher resolution so the inventory / container windows don't obfuscate the scene and, more importantly, one another so much. This is one of the reasons Exult is a pleasure to play.

I really like the whole there is no U.I till you need it thing. That's a great way to about it.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

HOMM II - 1996

HOMM III - 1999

HOMM IV - 2002

HOMM VI - 2011, 15 years after HOMM II
http://i.imgur.com/ebUKw.jpg (size)



These are all the nicest screenshots involving a grasslands overworld I could find per game in GIS, aka I did not pick a shitty HOMM IV picture. The VI shot was taken straight from Steam.

The thoughts about the art design of map elements over the years I leave to the good taste of the codex.

 

[Luzur]

troll thread 1/10

END OF LINE

 

[Orgasm]

And fuck you pagan was immersive

hahahaha cry more grandpa perhaps if cathode ray tube technology still impresses you with all the newfangled electricity thing they invented

WHOOP ULTIMA MATTEL EDITION AGES TWO TO TWELVE

In constrast here is the improved detail of modern high resolution graphics that only an experienced adult rpg gamer with an eye for quality can fully appreciate.

I don't really "get" good graphics.

1993

2000

2006 (admittedly, different sub species of beholder)

In pixelart or relatively low resolution sprite/prerendered graphics like the infinity engine games due to a fixed camera angle every single pixel displayed on screen that you see has been presented as the artist envisioned, short of obvious external factor shit like monitor quality and you wearing sunglasses at home or something.

Then in games like NWN or Dragon Age you get enemies looking like this due to how tile graphics are for fags now and john carmack hasn't figured out how to make high poly 3D models scale down well and look good and distinct:

Note in all preview in-combat publicity shots not only is the angle untenable for normal non retard gameplay but zoomed in as well to avoid this kind of indistinct muddiness that you get with the zoomed out viewpoint a normal person would play with. I say this from not having played DA:O with bloom on. With realistic next generation depth of field blurring what level of detail left is effectively postprocessed away into gritty and mature mashed potatoes telling you a story.






Bonus RTS comparison


Red Alert 2 - 2000

Red Alert 3 - 2008

On the other hand, architecture usually does quite well if the base models are good. Economic management games
have generally gotten prettier over the years.

It's not a technical failing, their artists juck suck donkey balls.

 

[Junmarko]

I can't play ascii games. I just can't. Other than that I'm not that picky.

Amen to that. I can handle any game with dated graphics, but ascii....wow... all I can say is some people are dedicated (or still live in their parents basement)

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

You have successfully added Junmarko to your ignore list.

Return to the post

 

[Tel Velothi]

*pubic hair on girls discussion*

>>thread about graphic whoring
>>discusion about pubic hair
>>yup, I'm on codex

You have successfully added Junmarko to your ignore list.

Return to the post

Why are you telling it to us? People, listen:
WE DON'T CARE WHO YOU JUST ADDED TO YOUR IGNORE LIST.
YES, YOU ARE AWESOME, WE HAVE NOTICED IT.
NOW PLEASE, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.

Thank you. Don't take it personal - it's for all peaple announcing that they added someone to ignore list and therefore they are awesome as fuck and so cool.

Peace.

 

[Jaesun]

Still waiting for your answer on this sea.

Just FYI.

Sorry, missed that as I only checked the more recent pages.

It's really not so much specific games that have crippling issues as it is some of the wider design trends in older titles that are a bit off-putting for me. Ultima Underworld, Pool of Radiance and similar dungeon crawlers that spend so much screen space on interface and not so much on the actual game, Betrayal at Krondor and its "click the arrows to move" (inherited from a lot of other older dungeon crawlers), interfaces that try to cram too much information into single screens when there's clearly not enough resolution to display the content in a way that's easy to read (Civilization, if we're permitting non-RPGs), conversely UIs that don't make very economical use of screen space (arguably Betrayal at Krondor, some of the Ultimas and Gold Box titles, Arena and Daggerfall, especially as far as things like oversized icons and buttons go), most pre-mouse titles that at the same time don't have hotkeys around, lack of sorting options for inventory as seen in many, many RPGs and didn't even really become standard until into the 2000s (Fallout's list inventories being particularly painful to navigate, lack of a "take all" button while looting), fonts that are difficult to read due to using all caps/poor choices for low-resolution screens (Pool of Radiance I always felt was hurt by this), etc.

My point isn't so much that those titles are unplayable as a result, but rather that next to modern titles, developers had yet to hammer out the same understanding of context, i.e. character sheets and stats didn't need to be on-screen 100% of the time. I don't think it was really until Diablo, Infinity Engine titles, etc. that interface standards started to be hammered out in a way that made sense in a PC game, with respect to hotkeys, more logical organisation of game functions, less wasted space, that sort of thing. This also went hand in hand with hardware, where graphical representations started to become more than just vague abstractions, and the rise of the mouse meant that now you could effectively "multitask" in the game without needing separate windows, sets of controls etc. for functions that could otherwise be displayed simultaneously. To clarify, I think there is legitimacy to the argument that graphics in Gold Box titles don't matter much because those games were about mechanics, not atmosphere, visuals, real-time action etc., and therefore the interface didn't need to display more than it did... but I also think it's generally a matter of fact that things have improved since then, and lessons learned in later game development could have produced more fluid UI navigation overall.

I should also once again clarify that, growing up not playing any RPGs or strategy games made before about 1995, my frame of reference is different; anything earlier goes past my comfort zone and generally. Obviously if that's how you started out playing RPGs, older UI standards are likely second nature to you. There's always going to be that layer of subjectivity around UI design, not to mention it always varies from game to game, especially when you get games like the aforementioned Gold Box titles where the interface is in some senses more tied into the gameplay than more modern games.

Alright, thanks for the response.

 

[visions]

*pubic hair on girls discussion*

>>thread about graphic whoring
>>discusion about pubic hair
>>yup, I'm on codex

 

[circ]

What's the last screenshot from? Civ V?

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Caesar 4 I think.