people have way to high standards these days

Mount and blade looks fine in my opinion.

Originally posted by Scriar

 

I think one think that has to be right however with low end graphics is the animation, if the game looks sluggish when playing an ugly game it will really take away from the gameplay. WoWs grapics are terrible but they get the animations right, on the other hand Wars graphics are also terrible just like the animations which really brings down the game imo. To bad gamplay sucks in both of those examples.

I've seen this comment a lot. Some people seem really sensitive to animations. If they are slightly off it seems to wreck the game for me. I don't seem to have this same sensitivity for animation. I'm looking at the artstyle fo the graphics mostly, and if the animations aren't perfect it doesn't really seem to bother me that much.

I liked the WAR graphics ok. I mean they weren't really anything special, but certainly a alot better than WoW graphics. I didn't see a huge problem with the WAR animations. I was disappointed with the game design, and so much instanced PvP in the scenarios, and lack of good PvE and group play, but the animations weren't a major concern.

Darkfall looks like Lineage 2, with WoW shape/geometry style characters. Nothing special, looks somewhat worse than expected from an up and coming MMO.

Fallout 3.

i'd say the current Runescape 3d graphics would be as low as i would go before i seriously consider whether to keep going or not.

Originally posted by Death1942

i'd say the current Runescape 3d graphics would be as low as i would go before i seriously consider whether to keep going or not.

I think I could handle that. Doesn't look so bad I wouldn't play if it was interesting.

Originally posted by Master25

Originally posted by Deathstrike2

Originally posted by Nadia

 I somewhat agree

but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag

 

get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks

 

 

Define mass amounts.  You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay.  In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.

 

 

L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.

Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?

First, I'm not sure what click to move has to do with graphical quality and this discussion, but L2 also has WASD as an option if it makes that big of a difference to you.

Second, my question was to define huge battles.  L2 does have some fairly big ones, but words like big, huge, etc. are all relative.  You answered my question with the same question. 

I'm not really that bothered about graphics. I honestly think that the interface and controls are much much more important.

To me, UO is a perfect game. Unfortunately, I was perhaps a little young to have appreciated it in its heyday. What really puts me off playing it now are the awkward controls and interface. Even with Kingdom Reborn, the interface is still a little awkward and the movements is just horrendous!

I really don't care about the graphics. The difference between 2D and 3D UO, graphics-wise, is nothing to me.

(What sounds like) 8-bit sound, crappy interface and movements controls, however, are a big problem to me.

However, graphics and interface are often linked. So I would say EQ graphics and interface would be minimum for me.

Originally posted by Master25

Originally posted by Deathstrike2

Originally posted by Nadia

 I somewhat agree

but I dont think you can (yet) have good graphics and mass amounts of players in same area and no lag

 

get past this and I may care about graphics more -- but lag stinks

 

 

Define mass amounts.  You can definitely have raid size encounters with great graphics and realitively smooth gameplay.  In games like L2, I hear you can have really huge battles with good performance.

 

 

L2 a click to move game, must be awesome.

Huge battles, what's really huge battles in L2?

Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game.

and L2 is an open PvP game, theres no RvR, theres no rules...you want something in the game, well if other people do, then you'll have to compete over it, so it all depends on the circumstance, and your server/community. There have been some raids that involved hundreds of people, and there have even been castle sieges with 500 or close to a thousand people fighting to win.

Needs to be 3D and not look cartoony or like an anime. Anything there I can handle :]

Dots like pong style. But for that gameplay would have to be pretty amazing.

Else I still like UO 2d and if gameplay supports it I can live with that graphics.

Problem with most 3d engines is that they don't allow you to put things on the ground ...which is annoying.

crappiest graphics for gameplay? cant say anything about mmos but ...

quake 1? quake 2?

blade of darkness?

diablo 1?

the thing is neither of those games have crappy graphics. the whole style and making is just great. they are just old. crappy graphics are... hmmm most of new cloned mmos actually.

lets say runes of magic? now thats crappy graphics. overkill ammount of effects, but animations that are more than 10 years old. now thats crappy graphics i cant stand at all.

Originally posted by Brenelael

Originally posted by darwa

Probably Star Trek Online, if the gameplay turns out better than it sounds.

/duck

*Throws a duck at Darwa*

 

Well I played Runescape off and on for 2 years if that's any indication. 1 year of that was before the graphics upgrade. I also still play games like X-com and Master of Orion just because they are that great to play. I would trade fancy flashy graphics for game play every time.

 

Bren

This **
 

I don't need fancy graphics if the gameplay is truely awesome.

Hmm personally I feel your not getting the best representation since a lot of people that would reply to this kind of thread are the gameplay > graphics type.

Anyways heres my 2C:

While gameplay is very important to me, so is graphics. I liked WoW because of its art style. It had a weak engine, but an excellent art style. I liked AoC's graphics because it was a powerful engine, however the art style was not always consistent. You could clearly see areas where very little effort had been made. But I guess thats evident in all  MMOs.

Aion seems to be the win win for me. Good graphics engine, amazing art style.

Overall I'd say having a decent art style is more important than the graphical prowess of an MMO. That being said, I have no problem with a game which has WoW graphics and good gameplay.

Nothing from AC  (or Runescape) quality down with 3D. With AC I actually have issues seeing different items in the game. It's horribly annoying.

As for 2D, if anyone has heard of a little game called Endless Online, I would not go below that in terms of graphical quality.

I would PREFER those found in City of Heroes and EQII with active physics systems, then again, I'm the kid who bought the The Orange Box just to fling stuff around with the gravity gun... I like my physics :D

EQ1 level would be my lower limit. I didn't finally quit EQ because oif the graphics it was mostly because I'd already explored most of the world and large chunks of it I'd explored hundreds of times over the years.

edit: Actually, having just written that I wonder if an individual's miniumum graphics level is whatever game they first really got into.

Also there's multiple aspects of game "graphics. A lot of the oriental games have incredibly beautiful graphics but the male character faces all look like girls (to me). I can't get my immersion fix when my char looks like that.
 

"Please explain why click to move hinders or improves the quality of gameplay other than making it feel like less of a FPS game."

If you like the immersion of playing the game in first person view then click to move is no good. It's not about being *like* an FPS game, it's about the immersion of the first person view.

Originally posted by tigris67

Originally posted by qombi

Everquest the original graphics suite me just fine. I think they had character, you can tell the artist put some heart into them. The artist can only do what they can with the tools provided. If I can tell the artist put their heart into their work no matter how primitive the tools are .. I usually am quite happy.

I have often wondered if the artist for the original graphics were different than the artist that updated the graphics during Luclin. To me it feels like there wasn't much passion in making those updated models. I actually prefer the first ones.

 

I agree with you, I turn all my new models off when playing EQ1. I prefer the blocky old models from 1999-2000, But I can't help but wonder if its nostalgia talking as opposed to if they were actually "better". I will never know considering that I consider myself with a strong bias.

Strange, considering your sig has nothing but the newer models in it.  

L2.. or some will kill me for this EQ2... thats as far down the chain as I'll go.

Admittedly I'm a graphics whore... and I maintain a high end machine to suit my taste. 

I consider artistic design more important then a lot of polys.. as you will see by some of my choices. 

The only MMO's I like the graphics of are:

Vanguard

LOTRO

WoW

AoC

WAR

L2

Of those WoW and Vanguard are the only ones I enjoy playing, and Vanguard is dead as far as I'm concerned... so I'm playing WoW.