Originally posted by Pivotelite

 

Glad to know GW2 also did the "everything moves" thing TERA went with, love the fact all trees/shrubs/grasses blow in the breeze and the fact clouds move in some places. Dust, fog, rain and snow also help. :)

Yeah, it's great that those touches are being added to games these days. Just seeing the moon traverse the sky at night really adds that "nice!" factor to things. Even adding audio changes to go with it enhances the visual... night falls, fireflies and crickets come out... totally suck-you-in immersion. It's a good day for MMOs with developers thinking in this detail.

when people talk about age of conan's graphics it always comes back to tortage, yes tortage is beautiful and probably the best zone in any mmo but, the rest of Aoc doesn't come near to that quality. I found the rest of the world to be souless and barren.

Originally posted by p_c_sousa

fiontar amazing SS. in what resolution you take them? skill bar seem so litle, you redimension ?

Many are screens I didn't take myself. I've seen some screen shots at over 5000 pixels wide and some taken from three monitor setups in a sort of panorama aspect ratio.

The GUI in that shot seems to be from an original res of at least 2560x1440.

Like with Hi-Def TV's and printing resolution, at some point you reach a technical level where increases in polygon count and particles in effects, etc, reach a point of diminishing returns.  It might make a difference if you blow the picture up to 60" on a super-hi-def flatscreen, but does it really make that much of a difference in how much you enjoy a game past a couple of "oohs" and "aahs" as you play on a 24" hi-res monitor? At some point, being able to see individual strands of hair or a speck of dirt on a tunic just doesn't matter any more, and it certainly isn't what keeps anyone playing the game. What matters is if the game is enjoyable and pleasing to look at, and the art style and graphics enhance rather than subtract from your enjoyment of the game.

The art in GW2 is beautiful, IMO, and the graphics are way more than sufficient to make the beautiful art come alive in an enjoyable animated style for playing the game. IMO, there's really no point in trying to take GW2 graphics up to the polygon count and sheer, minute, mind-boggling detail of some other games that are extreme in that category because (1) it's just not going to add that much to the game (diminishing returns), and (2) it's just going to leave behind a lot of people who want to play the game. IOW, nobody is going to not buy, play & enjoy WW2 simply because ANET hasn't  maxed out the technical capcity of modern graphics engines - yet, anyway. We haven't seen the final, optimized build.

I mean, good grief, WoW is still the king, with AoC and FFXiV far, far behind. That tells you all you need to know about how important the "technical" side of graphics is in this industry.

Just to show an example, this is one of the panoramic shots I grabbed off the web.

5760x1080

All the images I've posted, including this one, can be seen in their full resolution by clicking the image.

I mean, I'm not sure why anyone needs graphics that are better than those screenshotted above, or this:

Originally posted by Gabby-air

Those are good aesthetics not good graphics, for good graphics look for AOC. 

I agree, I like GW2 gameplay so far the graphics are just above average at best.  AOC and Tera graphics are just amazing. Conan's armor layers still blow me away and Tera has that asian magic coding going on, insane graphics with smooth gameplay.

I place down 4 screenshots.

I end my turn.

Fiontar, your move!

Originally posted by cloud8521

Originally posted by Four0Six

Originally posted by cloud8521

Originally posted by Four0Six

It seems many speak of "style" and not "polygon count"

To do a graphics comparasion, it is all about the polygon count in a 3d game.

To compare style is to compare Dali and Michalanglo, and comment that Dali is better because you dont like churches.

no. i already made this clear graphics in video games are more then about the polygon count.

Your "logic" includes subjective opinion.

Logic is NOT subjective, validating MY argument.

BOTH Dali and Michalanglo are amazing, but choose to paint in vastly different styles appealing to vastly different groups. Making an argument about which is better is, again, fail.

 

By doing a comparasion with just polygon count and maybe what dx a game runs on, leaves us with a simple technical argument that is free from opinion and therefore more solid.

 

so your telling me that  you will take a cement barrier from crysis 2 (which had  been insanlely overdone on the pony count in the pc DX11 patch) and say  that  cinderblock looks better then any cinderblock ever because it has  alot of ponygons. even though its  texture left more to be desired and was lax in the art department?  but it was the best because its poly count was just that  high?

no dude, you have to look at the whole plicure (get it... graphics are visual)  you have to tace art, style of art,  the polies are a factor...  but you cant just say poly is all you need to call something better. you need to put it all together and with art you got to be subjective

What if art style doesn't matter when you are judging which ones has the better graphics? The thing with polygons is that they are used to give a smooth transition between different flat surfaces  (Just imagine an orange made of lots of triangles). However, there is a point where the human eye can no longer distinguish the difference between two large sums of polygons; I don't know if we have reached such large polygon counts yet.

I am unsure though if implementation of different physical effects is considered to be a part of graphics: such as the implementation of light effects. If so, then polygon count is not the only important factor.

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

it is beautiful no doubt (GW2) but a bit washed out for my taste. I prefer the photo realistic look it's more immersive to me. Artismal or whatever reminds me I'm in a game. In Tera I find myself getting as close as possible to see a new mob's detail before I get wacked, they need to steal an art dev from that game.

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Edit: 

I can link you to a ign review where they make a clear difference between the art style and the graphical implementation of http://cube.ign.com/articles/390/390314p3.html. The game in question there was the cell-shaded game: Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker. I quote the article there: 

"Graphics

There are bound to be differences of opinion and more probably heated disputes over Wind Waker's style. The cartoony presentation shocked gamers when Nintendo unveiled it for the first time and sure enough some long-time Zelda fanatics even swore off the franchise because of it. But whether one's in favor of the graphic choice or not, there can be no disagreement over Nintendo's triumphant execution of it. It is, perhaps, the most beautiful cel-shaded videogame to date, period.

The sad truth is that the mainstream audience may, with no understanding of the technology required to realize the style, shrug Wind Waker's visuals off as primitive. However, players with keen eyes and an appreciation for the art of making games will know that Nintendo has not only created a hugely stylistic world down to every last detail, but also pushed the power of GameCube to do so.

The environments, from the open sea to the dozens of islands that Link explores, are so gigantic in size that it's an achievement in of itself. But the level of clarity that blankets each locale is just amazing. The draw distance is unchallenged by any other game and as such it's possible to look literally miles into the distance with Link's telescope. Ocean waves animate onto sand, birds flock around in the distance, the leaves of palm trees blow around, particles float lazily, and all sorts of characters run about while doing their own scripted thing, all with fluid, cartoon-like motions. But that's hardly all. The models are all detailed and well textured, fitted with self-shadowing and facial animation, too. There are effects like heat-shimmering and huge particle explosions, real-time lighting, depth of field blur, reflections, transparencies, refraction and more. Everything runs fairly constant at 30 frames and the title also supports progressive scan mode. The game is just gorgeous.

"

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

My bad. You're right.

http://www.fpsguru.com/game/308/article/1899/Mass-Effect-3-Review.html

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

My bad. You're right.

 

http://www.fpsguru.com/game/308/article/1899/Mass-Effect-3-Review.html

Thank you, but that article does not have a "graphics score", it has an "aesthetics score". 

Edit: Art style is indeed important for the "aesthetics". In theory, you can hate the aesthetics of a game due to the art style even though the technology behind the implementation of that art style is insanely good. 

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

My bad. You're right.

 

http://www.fpsguru.com/game/308/article/1899/Mass-Effect-3-Review.html

Thank you, but that article does not have a "graphics score", it has an "aesthetics score". 

Oh. Cool. Yeah, there are a ton of single players games with an aesthetics score in their review. I thought that is what you were arguing about, but obviously I was wrong.

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

My bad. You're right.

 

http://www.fpsguru.com/game/308/article/1899/Mass-Effect-3-Review.html

Thank you, but that article does not have a "graphics score", it has an "aesthetics score". 

Graphics encoumpances aesthetics as  graphics are the visual media

Anyone who think most game reviewers are capable of separating "graphics" from the overall art is fooling themselves.  Beyond some obvious polgon count and lighting stuff, they are complete slaves to the visual tricks a good artists uses.

They usually couldn't be less aware.

Also most game reivews suck balls.  Single player or MMO.  Why bother arguing about them?

Originally posted by cloud8521

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

 

However, art style shouldn't be a factor and reading single player reviews, they never seem to have allowed  the "art style" to influence when they set a score in the graphics section. 

Can't be more false than that. There are many, many reviewers that take aesthetics into consideration.

Link to  reviews where it is evident that the "art style" is being taken into consideration for the graphics score. I haven't noticed them, so it would be good if I could see them. 

Here's one for instance:

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/518/view/reviews/load/152/Are-Aesthetics-Enough.html

That's not a single player review, I specifically refered to "single player reviews". The reason why is beause the single player arena has a far longer tradition of professional reviews of many genres with different art styles. 

My bad. You're right.

 

http://www.fpsguru.com/game/308/article/1899/Mass-Effect-3-Review.html

Thank you, but that article does not have a "graphics score", it has an "aesthetics score". 

Graphics encoumpances aesthetics as  graphics are the visual media

not true!..graphics are just mathemathic formulas used to draw lines and shapes. Aesthetics is all about art and conveying a type of theme or mood.