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)

Antaran:   I hope you don’t mind I broke up your text: Easier to read.

"I think everyone would like to have both but look at the market these days. games with lower graphic requirements have the immersion and gameplay where as the games with super or good graphics suffer. One of the reasons for this is cause not everyone has a super computer, this in turn means the company can concentrate on gameplay and provide decent graphics without going overboard, which will run on more systems, hence more income as they'll be more players paying sub fees."
I played guild wars on a P3 800 with 1 gig of ram. I am still amazed I was able to do so. Is that a good thing? Not really- I would have upgraded my system if needed.  That system at the time was below the market norm. So the graphics for Guild Wars could have been better then they were.
I believe the avg computer today can deal with much better graphics then the MMOs being created. IMHO.

"Also, over the past 5-7 years that i've played MMORPG's only SWG contained both Gameplay and good graphics Pre-NGE. Some might argue this truth, fair enough everyone is entitled to their opinions, the simple fact is that if Cryptic release the game with the graphics shown (both on website and from the webcast trailer) then they will recieve more subscriptions as many more systems will be able to run the game, again this will depend on the Content, Gameplay and Immersion in the end."
If one company steps up and create a game that I am referring to.....Current MMO games may find their members bailing. It only takes one company to change the market. Then it will become the norm for the industry. I am hoping for an industry change. Not just one game.

. How many people pre-ordered Age of Conan and have left it now? i'd estimate about 50%+ of the population from the first week of it's launch.. this was because the game devs had centered their focus on making the graphics supreme yet the content etc was lacking, bugged or missing.
Conan: Broken promises in any industry will turn off consumers. A Company can't piss on the consumer’s leg and tell them that it is raining.  Conan falls short.  

SWG had good graphics and required a decent system to run the game smoothly, the devs completely changed the gameplay with the NGE and over 75% of people left.. again, it's the gameplay that draws people not the graphics or SWG would still be strong today.
This example really supports my claim. You said SWG had “good graphics”. Didn't they have a good consumer base playing the game?   From what I heard they had both good graphics and good game play- till changes occurred.

i hate doing this as i hate WoW but again i have to mention the simple fact that it's GAMEPLAY draws people in yet the graphics are rubbish and cartoony.
What would happen if the graphics were great?  Would they say na...I don't need great graphics?

MMOs take a long time to create and cost a lot up front. Sounds like Hollywood. In a way they act like Hollywood and don’t take chances. How many WOW games are out there? It only takes one company to change the industry.

PS:  I will play Star Trek unless the game play sucks (the graphics will be so so).....Or until that one company comes along.
 

I hear what your saying m8 and understand fully, i'm just trying to convey what i see in MMO's today as an example of how companies prioritise their teams working on a game..

Yes SWG had both good graphics and good gameplay untill November 2005 when the NGE (new game enhancements) went live, i brought this game up as an example to show that good graphics alone isn't enough to keep even the most loyal of players once the gameplay is removed.

I agree with you though, it would be good to see a game contain both graphics and gameplay but unfortunately it just isn't on the cards, a companies budget or designers limits what they produce, so they tend to focus more on one or the either instead of both..  another example would be Champions online, everyopne thinks it's going to be the CoX beater or CoX2, it's a shame the graphics are lacking in the video they have on website, that game looks seriously cartoony, only the gameplay will save it otherwise the people will who are interested will end up going back to or joining CoX.

At the end of the day companies don't design both good graphics and gameplay anymore, as much i would like to see another game released like SWG was pre NGE it just isn't gonna happen. STO on the other hand may be different, it's graphics don't look too bad and from what was said in the webcast interview where they released the first trailor, the gameplay could be awesome (as long as  they stick to their guns and don't cave in to the children who want a WoW/LotRo simplistic style).

Antaran: Heh we really agree mostly. Your talking about what is going on today and I am talking about what could/should be.

 The budget is what the forecast bottom line says it could be. AND what "others" in the industry are doing. Companies mostly set priorities details after the budget is set. Why create more expense if you can get away with less. Time constraints "Potential revenue loss" also effect the design process.

I am cheering for that one fish to cause the school to change direction. Change the budget "industry standard" (means great game play and great graphics a must).  Companies that can't do both will go up belly up.   (or end up swimming with the B crowd)

Clearing throat     I have a dream..........

PS:  I don't think STO graphics look crappy.  Cartoony  yeah.  Does Star Trek graphics feel right with the cartoony look?  That would be another topic for me. 

Originally posted by Toadmonkey

Antaran: Heh we really agree mostly. Your talking about what is going on today and I am talking about what could/should be.

 The budget is what the forecast bottom line says it could be. AND what "others" in the industry are doing. Companies mostly set priorities details after the budget is set. Why create more expense if you can get away with less. Time constraints "Potential revenue loss" also effect the design process.

I am cheering for that one fish to cause the school to change direction. Change the budget "industry standard" (means great game play and great graphics a must).  Companies that can't do both will go up belly up.   (or end up swimming with the B crowd)

Clearing throat     I have a dream..........

PS:  I don't think STO graphics look crappy.  Cartoony  yeah.  Does Star Trek graphics feel right with the cartoony look?  That would be another topic for me. 

Aye, well maybe one day we'll get what we dream about m8, as i too hope that companies will design games that have decent graphics as well as outstanding gameplay.

like i say though that time is a long way away, by the time the Athlon 64 X2 20000+ comes out we'll be able to play what we would like and dream of today, but by that time they'll be people wanting more (as always).

Companies first and foremost make games to make them money, which in todays financial situation means lower end graphics or average graphics so the games will be able to run on more systems, more systems able to play means more sub fees and more income/profit.

I have to use Age of Conan as an example of my next statement.. AoC was slated as having excellent graphics which it does, no denying, only trouble is the game won't work on a lot of systems even top spec machines are having problems. I have an AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ CPU with 2gb ram, running windows XP and a cheap 8600GT (by cheap i mean chipset for it). This system of mine was outperforming quad 3ghz with 4gb ram and 8800GTX sli etc on AoC. the gameplay of AoC is the same as ever with just the combat system tweaked and yet another theme. if AoC had the content that the devs announced it would have prior to BETA then i think the game would have been the best on the market and it would have contained everything anyone wants in an MMO..  it was a nice try but they ditched the gameplay to please the simplistic audience during BETA and it got released with little to no gameplay longevity at all..

with STO all i can say is that if the gameplay is how i percieve it to be (from the interview and questions on the webcast) then it will most certainly have the gameplay to it, graphics may get altered by the time the game is due for release, only time will tell, if not then current graphics are good enough for me if the aformentioned gameplay is included. It may be set in the Star Trek universe but it's being designed to appeal to all types (from my understanding) and therefore Star Trek is just the theme, they are going through all the books, episodes and movies for historical reference so they don't crash the genre, but in actual essence they pretty much have free roam with it being set (i think) about 30 years after the Nemesis film.

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.