Porsche944TurboS said:I would be much less critical of the decision to change art style if the new painted art style was closer to this:
Instead of this:
Is the concept art considered realism style? Would my issue be I don't understand the definitions? Is realism style then art with attention to detail and painted art style this bland Disney looking cartoon creation above?
I do see one silver lining. The 2nd pic looks like something a high school art student could produce in about 30 minutes. So, if this is the art the team at VR is busy making for the environment, NPC, and PC models. The game should be ready for release in no time. :)
Yeah I definitely understand what you mean. I think it is definitely possible with more polish work to get something that looks like it came out of the Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual.
In fact that reminds me of the original EQ races/classes, I think they had that oldschool painted RPG look to them. Referening Keith Parkinson's work on the original EQ box cover art. That would be amazing if they did some more polish work and gave it that cool old school RPG painted look.
That screenshot, previously posted, doesn't look "bad" ( https://www.pantheonmmo.com/#images-1 ) but it feels character personalization will shrink drastically to Wow levels (which are poor), and wasn't something I expected out an immersive game. Art direction looks like other games like Vrising / Ravenswatch which are made to be top down distant, and not made to have characters looking and feeling fundamentaly different.
Of course, Everquest had nothing more to offer, even with Luclin's version the models weren't flexible, but that was two decades ago and I hoped for something more akin to ESO's character personalization and look.
It won't be the sole defining factor, but for now all I can do is wait and see, if it comes to something better looking and if the game doesn't stumble on the same zone/arts again and again.
Ranarius said:Doesn't feel very appropriate to claim what Brad would have felt about it. Everyone is certainly free to state their own opinion and thoughts, but stating what someone else would have thought about it, or would think should be avoided.
^^This. There is a certain level of disrespect to the team when claims are made about what Brad may or may not have liked. Our team includes people who worked with him for years, including lifelong friends. Let us not presume to know more than they do.
"[MMO developers are] making the very, very early foundations of the Holodeck. Letting people recreate the 1930s or build new virtual worlds - that's what MMOs are, they're the genesis of that. Because they involve real people and that social aspect, because they're so immersive - and will be even more so in the future, with VR coming - I lose myself in them. I don't sit there thinking I'm playing a game; I'm really there. And that's what interests me." - Brad McQuaid, 2017
McQuaid liked virtual reality and it's probably no accident that, abbreviated, the company name is VR.
There is a certain level of disrespect to the team when claims are made about what Brad may or may not have liked. Our team includes people who worked with him for years, including lifelong friends. Let us not presume to know more than they do.
So very true. It is fair to cite what he actually said - which may not be consistent with what VR chose to do years later. But to assume that he would bury his head in the sand and refuse to change his approach as the world changed and as the needs of the team and the game changed ....simply wrong.
Initially I was so against the new art direction. I wanted a mmo where I could set everything to ultra on 4k gaming. I started to play Guild Wars 2 again just last week and while I was ingame, I was looking at the art work, that I really enjoyed. Then it hit me, this is what Patheon would look like and I became all for the change in art direction.
This is the vision that the team is heading towards, so I will follow that vision.
Is this the direction that Brad would have wanted? We don't know, but we do know is that Brad wanted to make a game that everyone would enjoy, a world that many would spend countless hours in and call home. A home to make new friends in, maybe later call some family. To camp in a zone for hours on in, and maybe pull a train now and again.
I still believe in the dream and with this new art direction, that dream is closer to a reality
Keep up the great work VR.
Is the latest screenshot indicative of the release product? I haven't seen that confirmed, so I assume this is the first pass and a lot more detail is incoming. I'm fine with a more painted look but like most of you don't want cartoony style graphics reminiscent of WoW. All that said, I have agreed with everything I've heard VR say so far so I trust they will make a great, fun game.
Two thoughts swimming in the back of my mind though:
1. What's happened to the development streams and P+ videos? It's like media across the industry has gone silent.
2. How hard could it possibly be to convert to Unreal? :P
Vandraad said:What many people have come to expect is that the Unity assets used represented a mostly accurate representation of the final art style of the game even knowing those assets would be replaced with in-house assets. 9.5 years of using realistic looking assets, even after a complete refactoring of the game world, further emphasized that it would be how Pantheon would look at release. This art style change is an abrupt departure even when you accept all those assets would be replaced. The fact that the reasoning, now, is that it is for 'speeding up development' and 'improving game performance' are both difficult to swallow by many out there because of those intervening 9.5 years.
Could VR have purchased far less detailed models, building the game in a greybox mode from the very beginning? Yes, they could but there is a problem with that approach: The game is crowd funded. Getting people to pledge to support a game when you're trying to sell the vision and the vision is just greyboxes would be very difficult to say the least. Would the Kickstarter have failed even worse had it been greybox? Yes. Would the later internal fund raiser failed worse than it did? Absolutley. Art and visuals attract people to a game but gameplay mechanics keeps them playing.
If you look at M&M who started their work in an extremely rough greybox form, with little capsules repesented PCs and NPCs, that worked for them because they were not simultaneously asking people for money. They didn't need to sell a vision or an art style, but they did (and continue to do) 'sell' their game through multiple dozens of hours of real-time development streams every week. VR had to sell a future product from the beginning while M&M doesn't.
In the end, at least for me, I think the art style change will look good once you're in the game seeing in first-hand. All the assets existing in the same world with final lighting and other atmospherics, animations, movements, etc. Screenshots are crap for giving a true representation of how something will look, especially when that screenshot lacks all context and scale. I remain unconvinced that this change will decrease production time because we've heard that same statement time and time again over the years. "This tool will make development faster" has been touted at least a a half dozen times but we're still awaiting proof.
Many thoughts here, and just using Vandraad's post as a kicking off point.
I agree that while we have been told that all the art in the game is to be considered placeholder, it is hard to argue that the visual change from the more realistic we've become familiar with to that of the more cartoonish (bad descriptor, I know) is not insignificant. The percieved flavor and feel of the game is changed notably. However, I think it's worthwhile to point out that not even a year ago VR showcased the new human models. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r6pZTxY0LI). Note the images at around the 31:40 mark. It can't be denied that VR was still working toward something closer to realism than cartoonish at that time. Additionally, I can't see that model being in balance with the environment recenter shown, at all. (https://www.pantheonmmo.com/media/#screenshots-1) These factors combine to convince me that any argument suggesting VR always said the art was placeholder so the new look isn't technically a deviation, hold zero water for me.
I will grant that having many Unity assets in the game presents a lot of issues around rendering optimization. Not having shared textures, attempting to find universal rigging rather than customer building rigging for each and every model, inconcistent poly counts, etc. etc.. I think they always knew a lot of the art was going to get scrapped for original art. And I accept that all new high rez, realistic art is a huge time investment. But it's my opinion that Brad's vision was to do this right, and right isn't easy. Or cheap.
I share concerns of others who have suggested this feels like the beginnings of a slippery slope slide. If doing it the easier/cheaper way in art is ok now, what else might change because its easier/cheaper? I'd argue this slide started before the art already with some of the proposed mechanics, but this isn't the place for that argument.
I'm definately more concerned now than I've been up to this point. And I wasnt free of concern before this announcement.
Maslo said:Is the latest screenshot indicative of the release product? I haven't seen that confirmed, so I assume this is the first pass and a lot more detail is incoming. I'm fine with a more painted look but like most of you don't want cartoony style graphics reminiscent of WoW. All that said, I have agreed with everything I've heard VR say so far so I trust they will make a great, fun game.
I'm sure that there will be several more passes. But VR has made it pretty clear that the art direction as a whole is moving to a more stylized, simplified aesthetic. And doing so in large part to increase production speed (easier to make lower poly/lower texture detail), and increase performance for the client side.
I find myself in agreement with Feyshtey :-o
If it is the difference between clunky frame-rates with highly realistic graphics or smooth high count frame rate with more stylised graphics, give me the smooth play every time.
chenzeme said:I find myself in agreement with Feyshtey :-o
If it is the difference between clunky frame-rates with highly realistic graphics or smooth high count frame rate with more stylised graphics, give me the smooth play every time.
I think the constant reference to clunky framerates versus smooth framerates regarding graphic detail is a false dichotomy. VR could use the painted art style, yet add at least a little better texture and detail without some massive decline in framerate.
The decision doesn't have to be either extreme!
I really dislike some of the pics I've seen because of lack of detail. Especially the new proposed Oggrym. It's a bland, boring cartoon figure that makes me want to give it a Scooby snack, not kill it.
So, I'm going to take VR at their word. It's all about "Time". It would seem the only chance they have at releasing this game at some point in the next umpteen years is to use dramatically less detailed models and environment.
Ok!
I just hope Vandraad is correct in his assessment that the new modes will look dramatically better in game than the stand alone pics posted to date.
Porsche944tu: I think the constant reference to clunky framerates versus smooth framerates regarding graphic detail is a false dichotomy. VR could use the painted art style, yet add at least a little better texture and detail without some massive decline in framerate.
VR: We have opted to shift our in-game art direction to address several needs:
Performance – We have run into difficulty with the former art performing well on even the beefiest of machines. We have made progress on this front but ultimately determined we could get better gains by a shift in style.
VR have stated that their current realistic style is causing an issue with the game "performing well" on player machines and the speed of the creation pipeline. Given this, the comparison between realistic/simplified stylised graphics and frame rate is a valid one. I do agree that the stylised graphics can be just as demanding as a realistic version; however a stylised graphic style is generally less so. In realistic graphics, every blemish will be instantly recognisable, not so much in a stylised version. It is easier and quicker to create each model when you dont have to be realistically perfect; simpler graphic models are also quicker to render.
It is not true to simply say that adding a "little better texture and detail will not cause a decline in frame rate"; every added detail takes development resources and render time to create. Every added edge, vertex, face, texture, shading, effect, (etc., etc.) adds to the development and render complexity. Multiply this to every player, mob and world element, then the "little" change will have a measurable impact and thus the framerate is reduced by some amount. Every little improvement you introduce, the more impactful the sum of them becomes. The longer each frame takes to resolve, the less time there is for other game systems. Nothing comes for free in rendering a 3D world.
The trick is to balance the development of a graphics style and getting a game out that is smooth to play as well as looking good. As I said, way back in another post: "...Until we see the artwork in action, we cannot definitely say it is good or bad...". The problem with art is that it is very subjective and at the end of the day, this is a personal choice whether we consider the art direction to be good or bad. Regardless, it is the direction VR have chosen because of technical difficulties.
Until we see it in action, I will hold my judgement.
They are holding the new art demonstration because they believe that almost all of us will think the new art is far better than the very linited examples shown earlier, and far better than what we imagined it might be when we saw the first announcement.
I am certain that they are right.
I like stylized because it gives them a little more freedom to design outside the box. I always felt like Pantheon's gameplay and it's graphics didn't quite work together, at least for me. Excited to see tonight's video to see if they seem to come together a little better. I'm all for the new art style if it means a better looking/performing game. Bring it on.
Just my personal thoughts on this topic:
1) I don't mind if they go with an art style that is less realistic. As long as it doesn't go so far as to be blocky like 'Minecraft' or Hand-drawn like 'Binding of Isaac'. Most of the time when you are dealing with Fantasy RPG games, the ones that try to be super realistic only end up feeling creepy or Uncanny Valley'ish. So a more artistic style rather than super realistic is usually more appealing for me personally.
Ultimately the graphics of a game has never been the thing that makes are breaks the game for me. It's mostly about the UI and controls of the game, and how it feels when I'm in control of the character. Back when WoW was first launching we (my friends and I) were discussing what we had seen and if we were going to leave EQ and switch over to WoW. I told them then that it totally depended on the UI and how it felt when playing and had nothing to do with the graphics. When I finally got a chance to play WoW and realized how adaptable the UI was and the feeling of your character when you took a step or turned, strafed, and used an ability or spell, etc... I immediately was hooked in and decided I was going to make the switch. The art style had nothing to do with it.
2) I do not feel like this change in art style is in any way going to slow down production. I have no idea how much work will go into transitioning the artwork they've already finished into the new style. It's even possible that this change happend long enough ago when they first hired the new artists that most (if not all) of the in house artwork already matches this newly 'announced' art style.
I do though believe them when they say that this new art style will actually be easier and quicker to produce going forward into the future. And so I look forward to seeing much more content being showcased as the game gets more zones finished.
3) I wonder why VR decided to announce this change to art style without being immediately ready to showcase said new art style.
The initial announcement was done in the Aug 31st, 2023 newsletter. We have only had those 2 official screenshots which don't really give us a solid feeling for what this will be like in a live gameplay setting. VR has now told us that on Sept 21st on Youtube they will be launching a video that will show us this new art style.
Now it may seem like 3 weeks is not really a large time in the grand scheme of things, but it has given rise to at least a 4+ page thread of people debating back and forth on the pro's and con's of this change before we've actually gotten a chance to see the change and hear from the VR team about it.
Now perhaps this was done purposefully and it's just going over my head. I'm not a Marketing guy, and perhaps this is just some special marketing trick that is actually doing the opposite of what it appears to be doing... but from my perspective this seems like a pretty silly move. Why come out and say there is a change, give us 2 very subtle screenshots, and then wait 3 weeks while the community tears itself apart yelling at each other about it before you actually post a full Video showcasing the changes.
Now perhaps said Youtube video was not ready 3 weeks ago which is fine, but it begs the question: Why tell us about it if you weren't ready to show it? All you have done is created chaos as the community explodes with theories and doomsday scenarios for 3 weeks while we wait to get the official video that shows us what it's actually all about.
If the video launched right away the day of the newsletter, or within a day or two after, then the community could be an informed group debating the topic with an actual understanding about what the art will actually look like, and direct words from the VR Dev's on what this means for the future. Instead we are a group of people pretending like we know what we are talking about, possibly ranting about things that we are maybe going to feel silly about once we watch the video you've prepared.
The more I think about the future of Pantheon and it's current art direction, the following comes to mind:
If Pantheon has the depth of gameplay, challenge and immersion that games like EQ, WoW and (insert your favorite MMO) then things will be fine. The animation, control and production polish that WoW has is almost unmatched, IMO. If Pantheon delivers on and exceeds that, then things will go well.
No matter the art direction.
Great animation/control alone brings a game to life and fun to play. If they can achieve what Joppa and Kyle have expressed they want from Pantheon in terms of adventure, animation, impact, interaction, combat, gameplay and immersion, then things will go very well.
Just playing older MMOS and how they still make me feel lets me know that there is a lot more to my wholistic enjoyment of MMOS than the graphics being the 'best.' I'm not a huge fan of the new art direction, but I KNOW(from my enjoyment of my favorite MMOS) that if the other things are done well it truly and sincerely won't matter that the art direction changed. I will be too busy thoroughly enjoying the game and making similar life long memories of Pantheon like I did with WoW and the other MMOS I played for it to be the concern it is now.
After watching the reveal it is a good direction, but definitely needs more polish work. Right now it looks too WoW/Torchlightish. Hopefully more work can be done on it, to give it more of an oldschool look. I think a good example is the human model. The example looks like paint and it looks good! But the ingame model has this very plastic/toyish appearance. Something is not translating well between the concept painted art and in game model. It feels VERY close, but still not 100% there.
I keep trying to compare the concept and in game, the concept looks fantastic. It definitely looks hand painted. But something is not translating well to in game. Something feels off.
I will go ahead and add the female version as well comparison. If anyone is an artist or graphic designer, if you can tell me why they look different I would definitely be interested. Because again I REALLY like the concept art, but why does the game side look off?
Imagine ordering a Ford Raptor, and then the dealer sends you a picture of a Honda Ridgline the manufactuerer is building for you. Sure, they can get it to your doorstep faster, it's easier to asseble, practical, and does similar things. But is that what you signed up for? Is it going to make you as happy versus if you waited even longer?
Hopefully if we close our eyes they'll still drive the same just like this game.
I love the new art style! I think the tweaks need to happen around the vibrancy of the colors and saturation. Everything feels very bright, saturated and "happy" and I think if they muted them slightly, or desaturated them a bit, they could potentially have a less cartoony feel to it. Just looking at the concept art vs. in-game you can tell the difference in vibrancy of the character models. The male flesh tone in-game looks more red and pink and the concept art coloring feels more grounded in reality with muted tones.
Avaen said:I love the new art style! I think the tweaks need to happen around the vibrancy of the colors and saturation. Everything feels very bright, saturated and "happy" and I think if they muted them slightly, or desaturated them a bit, they could potentially have a less cartoony feel to it. Just looking at the concept art vs. in-game you can tell the difference in vibrancy of the character models. The male flesh tone in-game looks more red and pink and the concept art coloring feels more grounded in reality with muted tones.
Totally agree on the color saturation, it seems too high (although this may depend on the lighting also). The world in the old streams and images so far seems a lot less saturated.
Another thing that annoyed me in the new stream is that the world seems very foggy/hazy in a lot of places. Could be a weather effect but I somewhat doubt that.
On the character models: The impression from the male models is surprised/unfriendly: All of the faces have down-turned mouths, and the eyes are way too large (and it looks like their eyebrows are raised). The female models with their open mouths, again slightly down-turned, create a exhausted/annoyed look for me. IMO it would help to use a different expression for both when making such demonstration screenshots.
Horrible art direction really puts me off so much that I want my money back. :/
Looks like a phone game.
Arguing or worrying about the art direction at this point seems sort of irrelevant. It's like if you started building a house 10 years ago and today start discussing the art you are going to hang on the walls or the color paint you will use while the house has no roof, walls or floor and only a dilapidated foundation that has been exposed to the elements for 10 years.
Sarim said:Avaen said:I love the new art style! I think the tweaks need to happen around the vibrancy of the colors and saturation. Everything feels very bright, saturated and "happy" and I think if they muted them slightly, or desaturated them a bit, they could potentially have a less cartoony feel to it. Just looking at the concept art vs. in-game you can tell the difference in vibrancy of the character models. The male flesh tone in-game looks more red and pink and the concept art coloring feels more grounded in reality with muted tones.
Totally agree on the color saturation, it seems too high (although this may depend on the lighting also). The world in the old streams and images so far seems a lot less saturated.
Another thing that annoyed me in the new stream is that the world seems very foggy/hazy in a lot of places. Could be a weather effect but I somewhat doubt that.
On the character models: The impression from the male models is surprised/unfriendly: All of the faces have down-turned mouths, and the eyes are way too large (and it looks like their eyebrows are raised). The female models with their open mouths, again slightly down-turned, create a exhausted/annoyed look for me. IMO it would help to use a different expression for both when making such demonstration screenshots.
>Eyes too large on models, they don't seem to match the proportions of the concept art, creates this almost cartoonish appearance
>Lighting, color, saturation etc. Something is definitely off. It reminds me of when they did HDR off vs HDR on, it is amazing just how much lightning can change something. This might explain the kind of toyish/WoW look to it.
>The women almost seem to have the same jaw as the man model, same cheekbones as well. They don't seem to match closely the feminine concept art jaw/cheekbones.
>Proportions of eyebrows seem off as well
Just some observations and connections. Again not an artist or graphic designer, but hopefully will give the team something to think about when considering the game and paint design.
![[005]20230511_OggrymIce(PREVIEW).png](https://pantheonmmo.com/wp-content/uploads/pan-media/live/concepts/%5B005%5D20230511_OggrymIce(PREVIEW).png)
