Kosac

Daoc and rift also use gamebryo engine. In fast I think daoc was one of the first games to use it along with Morrowind. War uses the same version as fallout3 , oblivion and rift. Although all have modifications, e.g. war concentrated on large player groups, rift concentrated on post processing effects.

Skyrim uses a very heavily modified version of gamebryo, to the point where its almost a completely new engine. I suspect TESO will be using some modified version.of the skyrim engine (e.g. less pretty but better at crowd handling). There's nothing particularly wrong with gamebryo as a mmo engine.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Kosac

Daoc and rift also use gamebryo engine. In fast I think daoc was one of the first games to use it along with Morrowind. War uses the same version as fallout3 , oblivion and rift. Although all have modifications, e.g. war concentrated on large player groups, rift concentrated on post processing effects.

Skyrim uses a very heavily modified version of gamebryo, to the point where its almost a completely new engine. I suspect TESO will be using some modified version.of the skyrim engine (e.g. less pretty but better at crowd handling). There's nothing particularly wrong with gamebryo as a mmo engine.

TESO guys did say that they were gonna focus on having hundreds of players battling it out, and still have it playable. So think your right here.:-)

 

Originally posted by xSyngex

Originally posted by Zinzan

Originally posted by Voiidiin

Originally posted by meddyck
One mistake this game can't afford to make is what happened with SWTOR and GW 2. The game engine must be able to handle huge fights well with no culling (invisible players) or massive framerate drops. So yeah it's not going to have the most amazing visuals of any MMO released in the next few years. But it also can't look bad or too dated either. Graphics at about the level of WAR would work.

I agree, i play alot of GW2 and i can't stand the culling aspect of it, why after 5-6 months they realize including 2d representations is better than invisible representations is beyond my reasoning.

Just glad we can get a veteran like Marc Jacobs back into the RvR gameing where he knows what works (DAoC) and what does not (WAR).

I think your right and a lot of people need to remember MJ made some great progress as well as some horrific mistakes along the way, many seem to be forgetting this.

The question is, has he learnt from his experiences?

The guys a fucking mormon he has "learnt" nothing look at his post...

 

Wow, aren't you out of line there buddy? I am suprised you haven't been banned yet.

The engine and character control need to be fluid, and capable of supporting a lot of players on screen. So obviously we can't expect top notch graphics. That said, a good art style is far more important to me than polygon count anyway.

Can't we have both?  High and low quality graphic options?  I don't think it's to much to ask for..

Originally posted by Zinzan

Originally posted by dimnikar

I'm sorry, but no.

 

Graphics are extremely important, especially in a genre that's supposed to be deeply immersive.

Indeed, gone are the days of playability over looks, these days gamers want and expect both. PC's are powerful enough to deliver both and as long as the game has scalable graphics for lower-end PC's to balance lookks vs performance it'll all be good.

PC's may be powerful enough to deliver both; but I don't know if small development houses (read City State) are able to deliver both.  I think we all need to temper our expectation for graphics, and realize at best they will be a few years behind state of the art.  But what CSE can do is deliver good graphics (probably a licensed engine) with a (hopefully) robust gameplay engine that will keep us engaged for years.

Originally posted by dimnikar

I'm sorry, but no.

 

Graphics are extremely important, especially in a genre that's supposed to be deeply immersive.

If you really feel that way go play Guild Wars 2 and let me know how immersive that game is.

My point is an immersive game requires way more than state of the art graphics.  Graphics are important, but the gameplay is even more so.  I would rather have a game with a "7" for graphics and engaging gameplay, than a game like GW2 (for example) which is a "10" for graphics, but with gameplay that is rather blah.  

It's all in how CSE decides to use their funding; pretty shiny graphics and sub-par gameply or good graphics and (hopefully) good gameplay.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
I disagree.

You need pretty good graphics. I'm not talking ps2 or tsw quality that stops people on low end systems playing the game. But gw2 type quality is about right.

I don't know, but I think expecting Guild Wars 2 type quality from this independant publisher might be a bit much. But this game probably won't be released for another two to three years so maybe by than that won't be impossible.  Just remember, CSE will have limited funding and making great graphics takes great dollars.

To make a great game with a long shelf life you need great gameplay, great storytelling and great graphics. Graphics is probably the least of the 3, but then again it's the graphics that gives the amazing factor so it shouldnt be under valued.

I think it'd be fine with DAOC type graphics. I don't have to have the best graphics to enjoy a game. Heck look at Ultima Online, I've been subscribed to it since release despite the graphics, I still am subscribed, because it's still a good game.

As for storytelling, I don't need that. If I want a story, I'll read a book or watch a movie. I don't need it in an Mmorpg.

Originally posted by Bladestrom
To make a great game with a long shelf life you need great gameplay, great storytelling and great graphics. Graphics is probably the least of the 3, but then again it's the graphics that gives the amazing factor so it shouldnt be under valued.

Storytelling?  In an MMO?  I disagree.  Storytelling implies a beginning, a middle and an end.  To me an MMO should not have that.  An MMO needs to be an open world where everyone has their own beggining, middle and end as determined  by the player.  Everquest had it right at first when they said "you're in our world now", because that's what it should be.  You are in a different world, not a game with a story.

Otherwise I agree with your post great gameply trumps all and graphics are a distant last as long as they are good and do not detract from gameplay.

If the game is good I will settle for WoW release level graphics. I stop noticing this stuff couple days into the game. Smooth combat in a fight where you have hundreds of players present is MUCH more important.

I think graphics are important for any RPG (not just MMO), but not in terms of eye candy. Graphics are important in terms of customization.

 

For example, Ultima VI was a very good rpg and ahead of it's time not so much because of the graphics, but because of the fact that the graphics enabled the customization of the character (ie. different armor and weapon makes the avatar looked different, enabling the user to see crafting task such as baking bread, etc).

 

Players like to customize their toon in an rpg, no doubt about it on that one I think.

Can't speak for anyone but for me animation trumps graphics anyway. Without fluid movement polygon count and texture resolution mean jack shit. The key to smooth and fluid combat is smooth and fluid animation, not strobe light level frames of animation. Graphics mean something but don't mean everything. Crysis level graphics with minecraft level animation mean nothing. Crysis level graphics with SWTOR Ilum like performance also means nothing.

 

In the end its all about finding proper balance. What looks good, moves good, but also has the performance abaility to keep 100+ people on screen at once while spells/seige/melee is all happening is going to be the key.

Sure, graphics are important.  But, when you can't even see players on your screen due to limitations of the engine, it's a moot point. 

Originally posted by Raagnarz

Can't speak for anyone but for me animation trumps graphics anyway. Without fluid movement polygon count and texture resolution mean jack shit. The key to smooth and fluid combat is smooth and fluid animation, not strobe light level frames of animation. Graphics mean something but don't mean everything. Crysis level graphics with minecraft level animation mean nothing. Crysis level graphics with SWTOR Ilum like performance also means nothing.

 

In the end its all about finding proper balance. What looks good, moves good, but also has the performance abaility to keep 100+ people on screen at once while spells/seige/melee is all happening is going to be the key.

Sadly it appears CU will be a pvp-only game, so they can have no excuses. It needs to be able to hold an entire server in one fight or it's not good enough.

Unless this game restricts player numbers or instances the pvp, players won't be off pve-ing, levelling, questing, they will all be in pvp....all of them.

Originally posted by Zinzan

Sadly it appears CU will be a pvp-only game, so they can have no excuses. It needs to be able to hold an entire server in one fight or it's not good enough.

Unless this game restricts player numbers or instances the pvp, players won't be off pve-ing, levelling, questing, they will all be in pvp....all of them.

Well, you are wrong here. They did mention crafting and housing and I wouldn´t underestimate the importance of these features in a nichegame, that plans to focus on a player-driven economy.

I do agree though, that CSE is forced to deliver a smooth gameplay even or especially when hundres of players are coming together. A RvR-based game needs to be lagfree if its going to have any chance of succes.

Still - in my humble opinion - they shouldn´t just render graphics unimportant. Sure, the way Camelot Unchained seems to go it doesn´t need any next generations graphics and be top of that gameaspect, but it should at least still look competitive compared with other games at that time.

This is  a low budget MMO developed by a handful of developers. Don't worry, you're not getting anything fancy

Originally posted by Zzulu
This is  a low budget MMO developed by a handful of developers. Don't worry, you're not getting anything fancy

Low budget with just a handful of developers... hmm... sounds like Daoc when it first launched. ;)  It was pretty amazing to me that they could pull off a seamless, persistent world when the big dawg (Everquest) those days was sectioned into a bunch of zones.

I wouldn't expect anything insanly top end, but id hope theres some decent details in the models and effects. I honestly dont think GW2 graphics are that great, i dont see why they wouldn't be able to match or beat them.