These graphics look kick butt. I cant wait to play.

Originally posted by Toadmonkey

Originally posted by Kaiserjager

Originally posted by Antaran

GAMEPLAY AND IMMERSION FIRST, GRAPHICS SECONDARY..  that's what companies should do instead of the opposite, Age of Conan is a prime example of Graphics before Gameplay.

 

STO looks sweet as it is, concentrate on making the gameplay Cryptic and ignore whiners who want better graphics.

 

Semi-Related = I still play on my 48k Spectrum from time to time as the games have the immersion that 96% of PC games are lacking.

 

I disagree with the name of the thread, graphics might be an issues for some but certainly not foar all. While it might not be my prefered level of detail I think graphics shown is at least digestable.

Oh and yes, gameplay and immersion first - graphic second. Well said and I fully agree.

I don't understand why people are willing to settle like this.   Game play first- graphics second.   I want both.

This mentality will cause companies "not" to see a need to create a game with both.  I am talking about games that not only looks great, but play and run smoothly.  (reduced lag)  This type of game would account for a lot of prep work and cost.

If 5-10 million people play a MMO game, they could generate a lot of revenue each month.   With those numbers we should demand more from them.  If we settle for second rate graphics...companies will see this as an opportunity  to reduce cost.    Until enough players scream-  the status-quo will remain.

Please don't get me wrong, I agree with your sentiment 100% but if I have to sacrifice one ofr another it would be graphics for gameplay.

That is not to say I want to do it, sadly that is how it usually works.

Originally posted by Antaran

Originally posted by dethgar

Originally posted by Antaran

Originally posted by dethgar

Originally posted by warrior41

Over at the official forum, the grahics threads are numerous and heated. What do you all think of the graphics of STO, are they indeed too cartoony? And not up to the standards of leading MMOs like EVE online? Do they not surpass Star Trek Legacy?

 

Too Cartoony?

 

 They're alpha images, can't really critique them. The second picture looks like the Atlantis base in Stargate, horrible modeling job.

 The second picture looks like the Atlantis base in Stargate, horrible modeling job???    you gotta be kidding me, looks like the top of a starbase to me.

and please remember this little snippet of info, if i remember right the Wrath of Khan was the first sighting of this type of station, unsure of the date it was released but i'm pretty sure it was pre-Next Generation which ran from 1987-2004 and stargate Atlantis ran from 2004 - present day..  If anything Atlantis looks like This type of station not visa versa.. 

 

http://www.scifidesktop.org.uk/gallery/albums/sci-fi/worldwide/Stargate-Atlantis/Stargate-Atlantis_016.jpg

Now, tell me the top of that outpost doesn't look like Atlantis.

http://services.tos.net/pics/st2/st2-regula.gif

This is a Starfleet outpost station from Wrath.

 

 

You do make a valid point, i have to continue to disagree though as if you look for images of space stations from the next generation you'll find that what the devs have done is correct to the Star Trek theme.

http://starwrecked.faketrix.com/Star-Trek-screensavers-preview-3.htm

Notice the space station (at time of posting is 3rd from left on top row, between Defiant and Enterprise A)

I wasn't going to jump into this, but I can't stop myself.
 

Here's the Memory Alpha article on Earth Spacedock: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Earth_Spacedock.

And for your convenience, some of the pics:

Enterprise A leaving Spacedock (sorry if it's annoyingly big) from The Undiscovered Country:

And here's NCC-1701 approaching Spacedock in The Search for Spock:

ST:TSFS was released on June 1, 1984. Stargate Atlantis premiered on July 16, 2004.

well found TheMilton, this should end the discussion about the graphics being copied from Atlantis instead of Star Trek.

You can't have photo realism in an mmo without severely compromising performance. If photorealism is attempted, then what you will end up with is a highly instanced game world like AOC.

Remember, the graphics are just devices to help our imagination.  If you feel you need better graphics, I suggest you develop your imagination a little more.

While I think the graphics are already well on their way to being better than many MMORPG's, you've really gotta remember that what you've seen thus far isn't the final product.

This is what happens when a developer wants to share with the gamers and show off their product slightly too early... even still, I'd play the game if the graphics didn't even change IF the game features and gameplay is there and is awesome.

Originally posted by Terranah

You can't have photo realism in an mmo without severely compromising performance. If photorealism is attempted, then what you will end up with is a highly instanced game world like AOC.

 

Remember, the graphics are just devices to help our imagination.  If you feel you need better graphics, I suggest you develop your imagination a little more.

The photo's provided a couple of posts above your post were (i assume) aimed at the poster who said that the top of the Star Bases on STO images looked like Atlantis from SG Atlantis, the pictures are to point out to him/her that Star Trek used them long before Atlantis and that the devs are correct in putting them in game.

Originally posted by Antaran

well found TheMilton, this should end the discussion about the graphics being copied from Atlantis instead of Star Trek.

Thanks, Antaran. That's what I was hoping for.

Once again graphics dont make or break the game the content and actual gameplay.. game that tout superior graphics in the end are all flash and no bang, meaning look at the prime example:Age Of Fail....I mean Conan...same goes for WAR..

Originally posted by ebonfire

Welcome to S.T.O comic book space adventures!  Did you guys honestly expect anything less from the Cryptic engine?

rofl. I agree but im still gonna play. cant pass this up, its the first star trek mmo.

oh yea and warrior, er whatever the Phlox your name is, :) GRAPHICS ARENT A MAJOR ISSUE. You make it sound like the effin sky is fallin because it doesnt look like some sort of virtual reality sim or some sh**.

Would just like to point out a small detail about the cost of making computer games, especially MMOGs, to those complaining that they want both graphics and gameplay. The truth is that companies have only so much funding when trying to make a game. As mentioned earlier, this means that you have to prioritize which you preffer, gameplay mechanics or graphics. All companies would love to give you both, but they simply do not have the funding to do so. The more powerfull the graphics engine, the more time it takes to create art and change it to fit the game they want to make. Please don't think that developers are trying to find ways to cut costs and just pocket the money, most developers are doing the best they can with the funding available.

PS: I am not saying that no companies try to scam you, or that you are not entitled to your opinion.

Originally posted by Dreamstrider

Would just like to point out a small detail about the cost of making computer games, especially MMOGs, to those complaining that they want both graphics and gameplay. The truth is that companies have only so much funding when trying to make a game. As mentioned earlier, this means that you have to prioritize which you preffer, gameplay mechanics or graphics. All companies would love to give you both, but they simply do not have the funding to do so. The more powerfull the graphics engine, the more time it takes to create art and change it to fit the game they want to make. Please don't think that developers are trying to find ways to cut costs and just pocket the money, most developers are doing the best they can with the funding available.

PS: I am not saying that no companies try to scam you, or that you are not entitled to your opinion.

 

If talking to me..... What I was alluding to was an  "industry standard".  A demand for both.   I don't think this idea is that far off.  Technology  both hardware  and software programs eases the overall cost and development time.

However.......I like to add my perspective to an issue you brought up:

Cost cutting is a way of life for all companies.  The only exception are companies who don't care about profits. Problem would then be..... Who would invest or loan money to a company that does not care about the bottom line?    As an accountant I never worked for a company that did not cut cost.  Some cuts were made at the expense of the product.

This industry is no different.   How many games have you bought that were half baked?  Games that needed patches because they were rushed out the door.    I read an article that one game eliminated a whole aspect of the game (almost completed) because time release was a problem.   Later the game designer admitted that the segment cut really would have added to the overall storyline-improve the game.  Richard Garriott  (before EA bought them) didn't release games until he was happy.  Richard in an interview talked about cutting out parts of a game to met deadlines EA made. That is one of the things he hated when EA took over.

Remember the manuals that use to come with the games.  Thick healthy books full if information that we could read.  Those got cut out.  Today consumers adjusted with web sites full of detail info....but that was not always  the case.  Grrrrrrrrr cheap bastards was my thinking back then.

I didn't touch scams in the industry because they were to easy.

Originally posted by warrior41

Over at the official forum, the grahics threads are numerous and heated. What do you all think of the graphics of STO, are they indeed too cartoony? And not up to the standards of leading MMOs like EVE online? Do they not surpass Star Trek Legacy?

 

Too Cartoony?

 

 

 

 

They do not look to bad.  The modeling job in the second does not have a Star Trek feel to it (like someone else said) minus the ships.  We can't see the whole model of that structure either so it is hard to judge it.   

The first picture looks like they pulled models straight from previous games and the modeling community.  Not a bad thing just an observation.  I guess there is only so many ways you can model the ships that are shown. 
 

WTB playable Borg.  Or are they playable? I'll be honest I haven't been paying to much attention to the game.  Just waiting for the release and then I plan to try it out.

How can we judge beta screenshots or even gameplay at this point of production??

Originally posted by warrior41

Over at the official forum, the grahics threads are numerous and heated. What do you all think of the graphics of STO, are they indeed too cartoony? And not up to the standards of leading MMOs like EVE online? Do they not surpass Star Trek Legacy?

 

Too Cartoony?

 

 

 

 

Honestly I have no problem with the graphics to this game, I think graphics are more important to me than to some others who play mmos but I can honestly play an mmo that didn't have the best graphics for me as I have in the past with WoW and SWG, with wow the graphics were always too cartoony for me and I've never liked SWG graphics or any of SOE for that matter but the other factors I personally look for can easily outweigh the graphics as long as they aren't bad enough to take away from my experience. I would certainly not say that I don't think the graphics could look better form what I've seen but I can in no way shape or form say they are bad or in a state that I won't play.

Originally posted by jaxsundane

Originally posted by warrior41

Over at the official forum, the grahics threads are numerous and heated. What do you all think of the graphics of STO, are they indeed too cartoony? And not up to the standards of leading MMOs like EVE online? Do they not surpass Star Trek Legacy?

 

Too Cartoony?

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly I have no problem with the graphics to this game, I think graphics are more important to me than to some others who play mmos but I can honestly play an mmo that didn't have the best graphics for me as I have in the past with WoW and SWG, with wow the graphics were always too cartoony for me and I've never liked SWG graphics or any of SOE for that matter but the other factors I personally look for can easily outweigh the graphics as long as they aren't bad enough to take away from my experience. I would certainly not say that I don't think the graphics could look better form what I've seen but I can in no way shape or form say they are bad or in a state that I won't play.

I completely agree with jax(i will admit that the second pic is taken from a bad angle though and looks better in full).  But then since the graphics aren't even at beta  yet how can I really judge them.  I agree they could spend an absolute obscene amount of money to develop this game with absolutely stunning graphics and another obscene amount of money on the servers to run it, but then they would end up with only 5 ppl with the computing power and ISP needed to play the thing, not exactly good business sense

The graphics i've seen so far look good not a major issue here for me, but will wait and see how ppl say the game plays(much more important) before i decide if i want to play it

I really hope the developers don't give in to the very small minority that want STO to be nothing more than a star trek simualtor that only they can  and want to play

i dont care about graphics... i care about gameplay , meaning content galore not flash and no bang for your buck, seems that most companies care about is the graphics so they spend all this money on them but they left out one vital thing the gameplay. Example Star Wars Force Unleashed loved the game, beautiful graphics. but it ended so quickly and it was a let down that the most hyped game for consoles was a big disapointment cause of how quickly I could complete the game. Stop focusing on flash... graphics galore wont make it a best seller if it fails in content.....

Originally posted by firefly2003

i dont care about graphics... i care about gameplay , meaning content galore not flash and no bang for your buck, seems that most companies care about is the graphics so they spend all this money on them but they left out one vital thing the gameplay. Example Star Wars Force Unleashed loved the game, beautiful graphics. but it ended so quickly and it was a let down that the most hyped game for consoles was a big disapointment cause of how quickly I could complete the game. Stop focusing on flash... graphics galore wont make it a best seller if it fails in content.....

Damn, wish i'd read this and loaned out Force Unleashed beforehand, just payed £35 for it on the Wii lol

here's a summery of what i've read on these forums and the Official Forums..  The majority of potential gamers seem happy with the graphics and are just hoping for the content to be good now, only time will tell on that one though. i myself think the game has good graphics, my system out performs a lot of my friends who have quad core and £2,000+ systems, so awesome graphics that only a few can run don't bother me, average graphics as shown from the current screenshots are good enough for me and builds my hopes that they have concentrated more on gameplay and content which is where most developers go wrong.

Keep up the good work Cryptic, ignore the graphic bashers and continue to concentrate on gameplay, you'll get far more players that way.

i found it lie...star wars lego...

my brother used to play that crap. it turned out to be worse. i hope it will enhance the gameplay.

Kinda hard to comment on a 200*200 image of a screen thats suppose to be 1024+

Originally posted by Antaran

Originally posted by firefly2003

i dont care about graphics... i care about gameplay , meaning content galore not flash and no bang for your buck, seems that most companies care about is the graphics so they spend all this money on them but they left out one vital thing the gameplay. Example Star Wars Force Unleashed loved the game, beautiful graphics. but it ended so quickly and it was a let down that the most hyped game for consoles was a big disapointment cause of how quickly I could complete the game. Stop focusing on flash... graphics galore wont make it a best seller if it fails in content.....

 

Damn, wish i'd read this and loaned out Force Unleashed beforehand, just payed £35 for it on the Wii lol

here's a summery of what i've read on these forums and the Official Forums..  The majority of potential gamers seem happy with the graphics and are just hoping for the content to be good now, only time will tell on that one though. i myself think the game has good graphics, my system out performs a lot of my friends who have quad core and £2,000+ systems, so awesome graphics that only a few can run don't bother me, average graphics as shown from the current screenshots are good enough for me and builds my hopes that they have concentrated more on gameplay and content which is where most developers go wrong.

Keep up the good work Cryptic, ignore the graphic bashers and continue to concentrate on gameplay, you'll get far more players that way.

Well I was being honest about the Force Unleashed :P its only 10 levels that is nothing compared to older games they have put out.....I do think its time for a remake of X-Wing Vs. Tie Fighter or X-Wing Alliance..

Some folks prefer substance over looks.

But there is nothing wrong with the graphics at this time, and considering that release is at least two years off, I think there may be some improvements (Jeez the game isn't even alpha state yet, get a grip).

If you want a pretty game with little to no content, Funcom released one of those back in May, You might want to check it out. But I for one look for a well made game heavy in content and fun, pretty graphics are nice but they aren't neccesary. 

Originally posted by Soupgoblin

Some folks prefer substance over looks.

But there is nothing wrong with the graphics at this time, and considering that release is at least two years off, I think there may be some improvements (Jeez the game isn't even alpha state yet, get a grip).

If you want a pretty game with little to no content, Funcom released one of those back in May, You might want to check it out. But I for one look for a well made game heavy in content and fun, pretty graphics are nice but they aren't neccesary. 

true enough gameplay is a big factor w/ alot of games out today. i saw a few people post about starwars the force unleashed. mind u the game had a fun storyline but it was so short it was pathetic (beat the game in 8.5 hours) & with no effort put into replay / online play, im glad i just rented it.

as for STO they said there using the same engine that was used for champions online which i believe is the same one they used for CoX so have a look at those 2 games to get a idea of what to expect graphics wise.

having a graphically appealing game is awesome but you also have to remember that not everyone has a computer that is top of the line so im sure using the engine that they have they can hit a larger mmo-population than if they did like AoC did & had graphics that almost required people to go get a new comp / upgrade if they hadnt in the last year or so.

I don't necessarily think they are cartoony, but they don't capture the Star Trek look either (imho). If you watch the show, then many space scenes have a very different lightning scheme compared to we see in the screenhots from STO.

Originally posted by mattneil2004

Originally posted by Soupgoblin

Some folks prefer substance over looks.

But there is nothing wrong with the graphics at this time, and considering that release is at least two years off, I think there may be some improvements (Jeez the game isn't even alpha state yet, get a grip).

If you want a pretty game with little to no content, Funcom released one of those back in May, You might want to check it out. But I for one look for a well made game heavy in content and fun, pretty graphics are nice but they aren't neccesary. 

 

true enough gameplay is a big factor w/ alot of games out today. i saw a few people post about starwars the force unleashed. mind u the game had a fun storyline but it was so short it was pathetic (beat the game in 8.5 hours) & with no effort put into replay / online play, im glad i just rented it.

as for STO they said there using the same engine that was used for champions online which i believe is the same one they used for CoX so have a look at those 2 games to get a idea of what to expect graphics wise.

having a graphically appealing game is awesome but you also have to remember that not everyone has a computer that is top of the line so im sure using the engine that they have they can hit a larger mmo-population than if they did like AoC did & had graphics that almost required people to go get a new comp / upgrade if they hadnt in the last year or so.

I don't believe it is the same engine as CoX, but it is the same as Champions (I'll have to check to be sure though).

When I look for a game my first interest is content and story, once I am satisfied that the game has enough content and the storyline is interesting I check out the graphics (but won't exclude a game lacking modern graphics if the other two requirements meet or beat expectations).

To use an analagy:

Think of them like a woman (or a man for the ladies). S/He may be pretty, but be very shallow, a picky bitch, emotionaly flawed or have a lot of baggage that will make spending time with them very agrivating, but chances are, his/her not as pretty friend, won't have all those problems and would be a little more grateful for your attention.