Now, I know the devs would really like to get people from WOW over to Warhammer to play the game but it is still my beleif that their was a number of factors about that games design that made it where it had so many people subscribed to it.

One of the biggest I have found, since my son's friends and my own are running the game on $500 systems was the game in itself was not a resource hog. Upon playing the game (even on extreme settings) could surf the net and be running a raid instance with about 20ish odd people on the screen without so much of a fan popping on.

In Warhammer, I hope the scenario I just gave above is not the case in the game itself, while I'm sure there are those who will continue to stick with WOW because the game will not play like it, there will be those who move from WOW with the same cruddy $500 systems expecting the game to play the same way (one of my buddies said he was only upgrading his video card in his sytem to run it).

My hopes in Warhammer is that the developer don't downgrade on the pixels and the world itself in order to accomodate people that are running these piece of crap systems and forces them out their e-machine box for once (EQ2 and Vanguard did). Now mind you, I don't want it where you have to have a system from the pentagon to run the game as in Vanguard's case but have it where the people who do upgrade to dx10 and duo quad core systems actually see a differance at the extreme setting.

For those of you that know what I am getting at with this post I'll give you an example.

I have a buddy who runs WOW on a e-machine T3644 model and she can do so on the highest settings (she upgraded her ram to 1 gig ).

Now on Thanksgiving, she brought her game to my house while visiting because they had some event going on that she didn't wanna miss. while my rig is extremely better than hers (duo core 6300 chip, 2 gigs of memory and a 7900GTX NVIDIA card) even when the settings were on extreme (highest everything)  there was still no differance  (other than performance in crowded areas) in graphics (the turd graphics pretty much went to polished turd graphics).

My fear is this, with the upcoming of Warhammer and lower end system users getting into beta will the developers catering and twinking the game to run these same type systems on do a diservice to those who have upgraded to today's technology?

It is my hopes that, when this game hits store shelves all those people running e-machine systems have to upgrade other than a video card  and a gig of ram to run this game (at least a $1200 system) and find it a crying shame if they didn't need to.

What do you here think about this?

I think a $500 system can be a pretty damn good gaming rig these days.  Especially if you build one yourself.  So saying that a $500 computer is a base line is just not true in my opinion. 

The answer is not catering to people with old machines

Nor is it catering to people with high-end machines

Nor should you hope people are forced to upgrade their system....

The ideal situation is that they client is VERY scalable.

Like LOTRO has a multitude of graphic settings, DX9 and DX10 options, and a low-res and high-res client.

The key is how it scales, not where you set the bar.

Blizzard got it 1/2 right. They made a game that scales down very well, and still looks pretty good. What they didn't do, was create a client that scales UP just as well, and looks amazingly fantastic.

Hopefully, Mythic knows this.

P.S. I like WoW's graphics simply becuase of the art style and how they stuck true to the IP (even though the IP borrows heavily from the style of the Warhammer IP)

Originally posted by heerobya

The answer is not catering to people with old machines

Nor is it catering to people with high-end machines

Nor should you hope people are forced to upgrade their system....

The ideal situation is that they client is VERY scalable.

Like LOTRO has a multitude of graphic settings, DX9 and DX10 options, and a low-res and high-res client.

The key is how it scales, not where you set the bar.

Blizzard got it 1/2 right. They made a game that scales down very well, and still looks pretty good. What they didn't do, was create a client that scales UP just as well, and looks amazingly fantastic.

Hopefully, Mythic knows this.

P.S. I like WoW's graphics simply becuase of the art style and how they stuck true to the IP (even though the IP borrows heavily from the style of the Warhammer IP)

Well I should have been a lil more specific when saying buying a machine. A store bought, premade machine from say Circuit city or Bestbuy (usually the best systems they have) is $1200-$2kish in price (should build your own, it's cheaper and probably better).

If you look up the specs of her  e-machine system I listed you would see that it is sub par by today's gaming standards. The system I put together in order to run every game out there was a lil bit over $1100 dollars and while I do think there should be a scaling limit (her system shouldn't be listed on it) I do think that visuals in a game is important "who wants to play a game on low settings for 2-3 years?".

I think Mythic in developing this game should take advantage of every technology that can be put in the game as long as it is kept with client stability in mind but to be running this game on a 4 year old technology is again doing those who go out and put together/buy a good rig a diservice.

WOW's graphics are pretty much in a category all it's own (reason I didn't play it for long).

Quote:

Like LOTRO has a multitude of graphic settings, DX9 and DX10 options, and a low-res and high-res client.

While I agree with your saying here and hope that Warhammer has this option availeable, I still hope they have it where the graphics of the game are not simplified to the point where it is in the category of the WOW settings (nothing against WOW).

Originally posted by Tonev

 

Originally posted by heerobya

The answer is not catering to people with old machines

Nor is it catering to people with high-end machines

Nor should you hope people are forced to upgrade their system....

The ideal situation is that they client is VERY scalable.

Like LOTRO has a multitude of graphic settings, DX9 and DX10 options, and a low-res and high-res client.

The key is how it scales, not where you set the bar.

Blizzard got it 1/2 right. They made a game that scales down very well, and still looks pretty good. What they didn't do, was create a client that scales UP just as well, and looks amazingly fantastic.

Hopefully, Mythic knows this.

P.S. I like WoW's graphics simply becuase of the art style and how they stuck true to the IP (even though the IP borrows heavily from the style of the Warhammer IP)

Well I should have been a lil more specific when saying buying a machine. A store bought, premade machine from say Circuit city or Bestbuy (usually the best systems they have) is $1200-$2kish in price (should build your own, it's cheaper and probably better).

 

If you look up the specs of her  e-machine system I listed you would see that it is sub par by today's gaming standards. The system I put together in order to run every game out there was a lil bit over $1100 dollars and while I do think there should be a scaling limit (her system shouldn't be listed on it) I do think that visuals in a game is important "who wants to play a game on low settings for 2-3 years?".

 

I think Mythic in developing this game should take advantage of every technology that can be put in the game as long as it is kept with client stability in mind but to be running this game on a 4 year old technology is again doing those who go out and put together/buy a good rig a diservice.

WOW's graphics are pretty much in a category all it's own (reason I didn't play it for long).

 

Quote:

Like LOTRO has a multitude of graphic settings, DX9 and DX10 options, and a low-res and high-res client.

While I agree with your saying here and hope that Warhammer has this option availeable, I still hope they have it where the graphics of the game are not simplified to the point where it is in the category of the WOW settings (nothing against WOW).

I have to agree with you. I bought EQ2 and WOW at the same time. And I was hearing that WOW’s graphics beat EQ2. And I was thinking, WTF are you on. There is no comparison to WOW to EQ2, EQ2 blows WOW’s graphics away. Then the news came out what these people were running the games on, then I thought ohhhhhhhhhhhhh. But I hope and pray that Warhammer does scale up to meet my graphic desires. Because if it doesn’t I won’t be playing it. I didn’t build my machine to play Duke Nukem. I can play Call of Duty 4 on max everything (and man do I love that game), that’s the type of graphics I want to play.

Problem is SOE games are always resource hogging games that are poorly optimised. to pull decent FPS in planetside you have to have a somewhat decent rig.

OK.  If the graphics in a game suck but the gameplay is fun and engaging then sure sign me up.  However both of my computers are higher end Alienware Aura models and I enjoy the ability to crank up the graphics to maximum capicity without my computer skipping a beat.  This being said I agree with the OP that if they downscale everything to meet the needs of lower end systems it would be a bit of a disapointment, but it wouldn't be enough to completely turn me off from the game.  I can appreciate the fact that not everybody is as fortunate to have higher end computers (for some this just isn't a priority) so I would understand if the Devs altered things in order to make a higher profit.  The ultimate goal here is money via intertainment, which in my opinion is the ultimate decision maker from those in charge at EA. 

I think this is the main reason WoW was is so popular.  For a while it was the only MMO I could play (newish one anyway).

If 80% of PC owners have computers 3 years old or older, a MMO would be very stupid not to have those machines capable of playing the game.  Do you really want to alienate the majority of all PC owners?
Now I'm just making that 80% up but I'm probably pretty right on.

Since "War is everywhere", I highly doubt that WAR will have tiny battles like that in WoW. To get so many things on your screen at once, and still have pretty looking graphics, you're going to have to have that pentagon-type PC costing at least $2000 - and that price is a do-it-yourself PC. PvP games require a lot more system resources than PvE games, both for client and server-side.

I highly doubt that you'll need at least $1200 PC to play WAR - that's not good business. I also believe that EA/Mythic are heading towards gameplay (at least I hope) rather than pretty pictures, which is probably (hopefully) why they haven't mentioned it yet in detail.

I don't know what you're expecting this game to look like, but my preference of a game is this; Animations (how smooth the character is to control, and how you see others) and gameplay on par! Then sound, then pretty pictures.

Aren't they using the same engine as they used in DAoC, but an updated version? I think that engine was used for Oblivion, so if it's even more updated than that, then it will look good.

Let's not forget, this game isn't due out until next year, so the top-end PC's today will likely be a recommended spec by then, and cost only $600.

If you're expecting this game to be running any more than slightly more polished turd graphics I think you're fooling yourself. The game would slow down to a snails pace for 80% of the people trying it out (random number).

As for the guy remarking WoW <-> EQ2.  Eq2 is *clearly* an example of technical prowess in the graphics department and in that regards is bounds and leaps beyond WoW. *However* I personally think WoW looks a lot better than EQ2.

EQ2 with it's technical realistic look has a pallette of grey to deep-brown and making a game trying to be as realistic as possible makes every possible flaw stand out immensely as well.

*I* still prefer the artistic use that WoW has shown in it's graphical endaveours. They have shown that you can create a beautiful world with very little graphics. I hope more developers start picking up on that and start *using* their graphics instead of upgrading them over and over. Then maybe finally they can focus on more gameplay and we don't have to upgrade our system every 6 months to keep up with games that look graphically better but improve nothing on gameplay.

Originally posted by iCeh

Since "War is everywhere", I highly doubt that WAR will have tiny battles like that in WoW. To get so many things on your screen at once, and still have pretty looking graphics, you're going to have to have that pentagon-type PC costing at least $2000 - and that price is a do-it-yourself PC. PvP games require a lot more system resources than PvE games, both for client and server-side.

You can build a computer that is better then alienware for only $1500 i did it. =)

Originally posted by aionowns

Originally posted by iCeh

Since "War is everywhere", I highly doubt that WAR will have tiny battles like that in WoW. To get so many things on your screen at once, and still have pretty looking graphics, you're going to have to have that pentagon-type PC costing at least $2000 - and that price is a do-it-yourself PC. PvP games require a lot more system resources than PvE games, both for client and server-side.

You can build a computer that is better then alienware for only $1500 i did it. =)

I agree, the system I put together myself cost me approximately $1,145 and the same specs from the Alienware site would have been $5,200 (big difference in price). I think with Alienware, you are pretty much paying for the name and not the system so to speak.

Currently the system I built last year can be built for about $600 - $800 now so I should have labeled the computer system in years instead of price as a minimum (what's on most gaming boxes today other than WOW's) as about 95% of today's games you cannot run on WOW's specs (card with vertex shaders capability anyone).

And for the record I think WoW is the best looking MMO I have ever seen.  It may not be technically superior, but there is just something about the style that I just love.  Everything is crisp and easy to see. 

Ever notice how different the color of the sky is from the ground?  In most other games I’ve noticed the difference is not as pronounced.  Take Tabula Rasa for instance, the first level everything is about the same color.

I think the WoW artists make great use of contrast.  I would go so far as to say, whoever the WoW art director is, he/she is the best in the business. 

Like another poster said, the best solution would be to scale it for a wide range of computers, both low and top end.  Then everyone is happy. (mostly)

Catering to only one side or the other is foolish and will cost them subscribers.

Well I play and enjoy roguelikes, so I know where my priorities are.

I do 100% agree that scalability is where its at, but only if the lower scale is handled with care instead of "let's just reduce the textures via photoshop and reduce the model nodes via milkshape" or something where it is obvious that it is a throwaway.

Thanksfully PC prices and componants  are coming down. However, WAR is a PvP game, and as such there is competition. Just like players will spend RL money to buy in game currency, items, characters. They will also spend money to get the most up to date, fastest, clearest system in order to provide any advantage on the battlefield.

Torrential

Originally posted by GreenChaos

And for the record I think WoW is the best looking MMO I have ever seen.  It may not be technically superior, but there is just something about the style that I just love.  Everything is crisp and easy to see. 

Ever notice how different the color of the sky is from the ground?  In most other games I’ve noticed the difference is not as pronounced.  Take Tabula Rasa for instance, the first level everything is about the same color.

I think the WoW artists make great use of contrast.  I would go so far as to say, whoever the WoW art director is, he/she is the best in the business. 

I agree. And I think this is the main reason for WoW's success - not many people like the realism look. They want everything to look clear, and want to be able to identify what classes they're coming up against just by looks itself. Realistic looking graphics makes this far too difficult, mostly because gaming and realism don't mix - it ends up looking awful.

Anyone played Team Fortress 2? Those graphics are amazing imo, the character models are perfect, the animations are brilliant and distinctive for each one. Though these graphics wouldn't fit in the scene of Warhammer very well, I hope they make character distinctions so it's easy to know that it's a Mage coming towards you, and not only that, you know what main tree that Mage is specialised in.

my PC is getting on a bit now (P4 3.0, 1Gb ram x800 256mb gfx card ect.) and i personally dont want to go out and spend £600 on a system that will run WAR for the express reason that money is an issue for me at the moment. i would prefer any MMO i play to have a scalable GFX engine that can cater for people like me, got a 1 year old and another on the way. so i cant just rush out and buy a brand new rig to play 1 game (as WAR is probably the only thing that i am waiting for apart from spore, and we all know that aint gonna be around for ages yet LOL) i can play EQ2 at reasonable quality and wow at top quality at a solid 40FPS in fact my pc has only started running into snags in the last few months with games like crysis and others. hopefully the devs at mythic will realise that not everyone can afford to go out and spend £££ on new graphics cards and more £££ on RAM. and as stated previously in this thread as a PVP game with masses of players all combating on screen at the same time, even those with high end systems will feel the pinch if the graphics are made with high polygon counts and too many shader effects. so seriously mythic would be fools to create this game with a big memory hungry graphics engine as it will stop a ton of players subbing to their game.

Originally posted by Tonev

... (the turd graphics pretty much went to polished turd graphics).

This quote is a gem.

All WoW gameboxes should contain the warning that their turd graphics become polished turd graphics at the extreme high settings.

To me, this is one of those spit-shtick moments where you blow your beverage all over the monitor.  Mainly because that's pretty much how I feel about WoW's graphics.

~~~

On a more serious note, I hope that WAR's graphics will be pleasant to the eye, but not overly graphics-intensive.

I run a Pentium 4 @ 3.0Ghz with 2GB RAM and a 512MB Radeon X1650 graphics card.  My connection is 6 Mbps cable.  I'd like to be able to continue to use this system for another year or so before upgrading to the HAL 9000.

When in RvR, with lots and lots of players, I just hope to have the options to turn off excessive FX so I can keep my framerate steady.

Originally posted by Tonev

Now, I know the devs would really like to get people from WOW over to Warhammer to play the game but it is still my beleif that their was a number of factors about that games design that made it where it had so many people subscribed to it.

One of the biggest I have found, since my son's friends and my own are running the game on $500 systems was the game in itself was not a resource hog. Upon playing the game (even on extreme settings) could surf the net and be running a raid instance with about 20ish odd people on the screen without so much of a fan popping on.

In Warhammer, I hope the scenario I just gave above is not the case in the game itself, while I'm sure there are those who will continue to stick with WOW because the game will not play like it, there will be those who move from WOW with the same cruddy $500 systems expecting the game to play the same way (one of my buddies said he was only upgrading his video card in his sytem to run it).

My hopes in Warhammer is that the developer don't downgrade on the pixels and the world itself in order to accomodate people that are running these piece of crap systems and forces them out their e-machine box for once (EQ2 and Vanguard did). Now mind you, I don't want it where you have to have a system from the pentagon to run the game as in Vanguard's case but have it where the people who do upgrade to dx10 and duo quad core systems actually see a differance at the extreme setting.

For those of you that know what I am getting at with this post I'll give you an example.

I have a buddy who runs WOW on a e-machine T3644 model and she can do so on the highest settings (she upgraded her ram to 1 gig ).

Now on Thanksgiving, she brought her game to my house while visiting because they had some event going on that she didn't wanna miss. while my rig is extremely better than hers (duo core 6300 chip, 2 gigs of memory and a 7900GTX NVIDIA card) even when the settings were on extreme (highest everything)  there was still no differance  (other than performance in crowded areas) in graphics (the turd graphics pretty much went to polished turd graphics).

My fear is this, with the upcoming of Warhammer and lower end system users getting into beta will the developers catering and twinking the game to run these same type systems on do a diservice to those who have upgraded to today's technology?

It is my hopes that, when this game hits store shelves all those people running e-machine systems have to upgrade other than a video card  and a gig of ram to run this game (at least a $1200 system) and find it a crying shame if they didn't need to.

What do you here think about this?

You are a genius.