Graphics mean almost nothing when compared to gameplay, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, these days, you can put together something that looks great via Unity in a very short time. The details, though, the deep gameplay mechanics that require planning, design, and iterative implementation testing... that's where all the design goals either shine or fail.
Graphics aside, what has been shown so far is possible in NWN1 via NWScript and the standard NWN1 engine, for a comparison. Sure, it might not look as good, but gameplay wise.. nothing innovative has been shown yet. Volumetric triggers are not new. Perception checks are not new. (nor spot or search)
I did play EQ in late 98 (jumping ship from UO the instant I got in). In the very limited access Beta. It was very clunky of course and so naively raw. But since it was the first and only game of it's type, it was magical. I still have some old screenshots even.
I still remember how The dev's had some kind of scheme to let people keep their names from the beta to launch, and had hundreds of players lined up at some dock to record their info. But then something got fubar and it never happened.
Unfortunately todays legions of hackers, cheaters, griefers and bots will bring us what we normally expect in all modern MMO's. And that old style magic will only last for those in the alpha/beta's.
I love the optimism but lets get a little reality check in place first.
Graphics mean very little to many gamers. See: Minecraft. Also, the continuos flow of (popular) new pixel graphic games on places like Steam w/ releases like Prison Architect, Binding of Isaac, etc.
And comparing developmental stage graphics in games from the 90's with modern day counterparts is just... weird to do.
For my part, It's the mission statement, the vision (tm) for what we want in a game. After the dust has settled, and the insincere gamers have moved on to newer places to infect, will Pantheon's structure and community continue to sustain its niche? I wouldn't have VIP'd if I didn't believe so.
Graphics are important for Suspension of disbelief. I'm not playing project 1999 because I can't take it seriously; it's graphics are so outdated compared to what I'm used to experience now.
With minecraft no one was used to it's type of sandbox so it was easy to suspend disbelief for the sake of enjoyment. I don't believe a minecraft type sandbox can have good graphics as most of the fun is mining and placing those medium sized blocks.
What makes pantheon look more finished is the UI. All the mmos i've played of seen, the UI is completely minimalistic, to copy wow.
vjek said:Graphics mean almost nothing when compared to gameplay, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, these days, you can put together something that looks great via Unity in a very short time. The details, though, the deep gameplay mechanics that require planning, design, and iterative implementation testing... that's where all the design goals either shine or fail.
Graphics aside, what has been shown so far is possible in NWN1 via NWScript and the standard NWN1 engine, for a comparison. Sure, it might not look as good, but gameplay wise.. nothing innovative has been shown yet. Volumetric triggers are not new. Perception checks are not new. (nor spot or search)
Unless EVERY system is convoluted and never been done before, you will not ever satisfy Vjek.
Beefcake said:vjek said:Graphics mean almost nothing when compared to gameplay, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, these days, you can put together something that looks great via Unity in a very short time. The details, though, the deep gameplay mechanics that require planning, design, and iterative implementation testing... that's where all the design goals either shine or fail.
Graphics aside, what has been shown so far is possible in NWN1 via NWScript and the standard NWN1 engine, for a comparison. Sure, it might not look as good, but gameplay wise.. nothing innovative has been shown yet. Volumetric triggers are not new. Perception checks are not new. (nor spot or search)
Unless EVERY system is convoluted and never been done before, you will not ever satisfy Vjek.
lol Well someone has to play the role of critic I guess.
Graphics are important, though not end all and/or be all imo. So long as the grapics look reasonably good it's the overall quality of the game that matters to me. Emm...well... I think I am jaded in one area. I love seeing awesomely wonderful spell effects. Hope that doesn't make me a hypocrit lol.
Within reason graphics are less important than gameplay. But as Risingmist said they do have to at a minimum look reasonably good. I would rather play EQ than Black Desert if EQ was upgraded even to 2009 graphics and sophistication. But come out with a wonderful game with 1999 (EQ) or 2001 (DAOC) graphics and interface and controls - no thanks.
A majority of those on this site, supporters of Pantheon,are former EQ players.
These players are not that concerned with graphics and animations , myself included. IF this cross section of MMORPG players was concerned with graphics we never would have played EQ in 1999. Even for that day and age the EQ graphics were sub par. So it simply stands to reason this group would be "ok" with sub par graphics and animations in this day and age.
I work with two people that are concerned with graphics. Hard core WoW players one who no mater how hard we tried we could not get him back in 1999-2000 to get into EQ with us, his reasoning, "I can't bring myself to put out $25 for a game with dated graphics like that" he never did buy EQ. He did however buy Wow on release and has payed subscription ever since for 3 accounts, himself his daughter and his son.
He is getting pretty bored with Wow and has been watching pantheon through me but he has the same problem... not interested with these animations (he's ok with where the graphics are going) in the last 3 hour stream he watched right up until he seen the animation for the wolf attacks... he turned it off there and asked me to let him know when they get that fixed.
My point. Of course the majority here is ok with sub par animations, those that are not, won't join us yet. Unity is capable, the Devs are willing, all the tools are in place. I just have yet to see if the Devs are capable.
Risingmist said:Beefcake said:vjek said:Graphics mean almost nothing when compared to gameplay, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, these days, you can put together something that looks great via Unity in a very short time. The details, though, the deep gameplay mechanics that require planning, design, and iterative implementation testing... that's where all the design goals either shine or fail.
Graphics aside, what has been shown so far is possible in NWN1 via NWScript and the standard NWN1 engine, for a comparison. Sure, it might not look as good, but gameplay wise.. nothing innovative has been shown yet. Volumetric triggers are not new. Perception checks are not new. (nor spot or search)
Unless EVERY system is convoluted and never been done before, you will not ever satisfy Vjek.
lol Well someone has to play the role of critic I guess.
Graphics are important, though not end all and/or be all imo. So long as the grapics look reasonably good it's the overall quality of the game that matters to me. Emm...well... I think I am jaded in one area. I love seeing awesomely wonderful spell effects. Hope that doesn't make me a hypocrit lol.
I think that you can't get away these days with either graphics/animations or gameplay. You need both. There are people outside the ex EQ community who also want to play this game. You can reply with various forms of 'we don't care, there's enough of us', but that's an attitutde that could be described by some as 'brave' or 'bold'.
The wolf animation was, frankly, a bit embarrassing. As were all the animations in the streams. But I chose to be pleased about this, because animations are not priority 1 on the development list so it shows the thinking and development is more likely to be where it should be right now. (AoC making that awesome horse mounting and riding animation was demonstrably a very bad way to spend what turned out to be such a huge proportion of dev bandwidth!)
However, even though good animations aren't top of the dev list, they ARE 'above the line' - i.e. they will absolutely be needed to make a nice polished game that attracts good reviews from the press and therefore attracts players.
I always thought Tanarus was the basis for the EQ engine? so if you want to see before EQ thats worth a look :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj3uEcPbi-Y
Was a great game btw.
GFX can really help however if the gameplay is good enough this more than makes up for it IMO. I've played some stunning looking games that have been terrible to actually play and visa versa.
I do enjoy playing a game with great graphics. It helps to draw you into the world. But the thing that keeps you in the world is the community. I've played some interesting MMOs with great graphics but the community really sucked so I couldn't stay with those games for long.
I find the Pantheon forums to be some of the best forums around for a game and therefore I am confident that I'll enjoy the game because the people seem decent and friendly. I know that when the game is released the dynamic will change on the forums but for now things are going great. Like everyone else I am (im)patiently waiting for pre-alpha to land to see how the game really plays and to get some serious testing done :).
I think Unity Engine does some things really well, and there are parts that catch my eye as being very realistic, particularly lighting off reflective surfaces (floors, walls, etc.). Some areas do look as good as any other MMORPG, already, and some look a little like they are not quite there yet. The good news is that gameplay and experience is way more important than graphical fidelity, and to already be in that shape is really encouraging. The even better news is that each pass the artists and worldbuilders make is noticeably cleaner, and Unity Engine itself keeps getting better.
To me, the worst thing to do would be to chase some sort of graphical nirvana and ignore the feel of the actual game. I think that plagued the industry for several (many?) years and we are just now getting back to gameplay as king. I personally don't care that much about the graphical quality as long as I feel "immersed" in the world. However, it is nice seeing pretty sights and cool animations as icing on the cake.
Cant agree with you more Zippyzee. I really love visuals, and I do digital painting and 3modeling/animation myself (hobbyist). So I dont seel visuals short. But in the overall scheme of things visuals give you a moment of awe when you first experience them and then they fade. The gameplay and it's depth is what's going to keep me engaged for years.
zippyzee said:I think Unity Engine does some things really well, and there are parts that catch my eye as being very realistic, particularly lighting off reflective surfaces (floors, walls, etc.). Some areas do look as good as any other MMORPG, already, and some look a little like they are not quite there yet. The good news is that gameplay and experience is way more important than graphical fidelity, and to already be in that shape is really encouraging. The even better news is that each pass the artists and worldbuilders make is noticeably cleaner, and Unity Engine itself keeps getting better.
To me, the worst thing to do would be to chase some sort of graphical nirvana and ignore the feel of the actual game. I think that plagued the industry for several (many?) years and we are just now getting back to gameplay as king. I personally don't care that much about the graphical quality as long as I feel "immersed" in the world. However, it is nice seeing pretty sights and cool animations as icing on the cake.
I watched the latest sneak peek on my tablet and I have to say everything was clear and defined..even on that little machine. Its an Asus Zenpad. So far I think the scenery in Pantheon is absolutely gorgeous, give the development stage it is at...well the parts that we've seen thus far. Again gameplay is everything, and my first intention is to explore that virtual world, die lots and just enjoy my home away from home. :) Testing along the way of course :D
Cana
Vasimr said: I had a thought... Does anyone remember what EQ1 looked like in its early stages of development? https://youtu.be/5ae-1KuAvMY No offense to its creators (obviously) but it looked like something I would never play. After release EQ1, for its time (1999), looked amazing and I enjoyed the gameplay tremendously. Now, look at all the various pre-alpha gameplay footage of Pantheon, especially the most recent from December of '16. Aside from some animations and the possible lack of all the race/gender/classes not being in place (yet), Pantheon looks more finished than some "finished" games out there. If I'm to judge Pantheon's creators the same as I am EQ1's creators (some of the same people I know) then Pantheon will undoubtedly be a truly epic and amazing game to play. Seeing how far EQ1 came from alpha to release, Pantheon will be the one game to rule them all!
I was in last phase testing for EQ1, yes looking at the graphics now..they seem clunky and almost minecraftish lol. BUT when it released, I was there with bells on..the first 3D game (I had been playing 2D before that) Once in...never looked back at any other game. Stayed til just after Luclin released. Made many memories and friends in those days. Looking for the same thing with Pantheon. :)
>Again gameplay is everything, and my first intention is to explore that virtual world, die lots and just enjoy my home away from home. :) Testing along the way of course :D<
Gameplay *is* everything once the graphics meet minimum levels. They do have to meet those levels and I am completely certain that by the time of beta if not sooner they will.
I intend to explore the virtual world, SERIOUSLY explore the character creation options, and never die unless required by testing. I will die, of course but that is the goal. I have played about every major MMO since DAOC with at least one hardcore character that would be deleted after the first death (exclusive of crashes) and always got at least one character to maximum level with no deaths (FFXIV being an exception - too many things requiring a group that you *had* to do)
Have to say, I didn't bother kickstarting Pantheon when it first launched because it simply looked terrible. Awful. I didn't care if it was Everquest 1 reskinned. I had zero interest and would rather play P99, I wanted to want it, but couldn't justify it. It wasn't until the first big stream after they improved the pre-pre-pre alpha, then they said graphics/animation improvement, then I backed. It's a tired and boring trope to say gameplay is everything. There is a minimum level of graphics that are required. I consider current Pantheon to be that minimum for an MMO. As of the December stream.
Ultima Online was a big deal back in the day, thing was, I chose EQ because it was 3d and the graphics were better. Glad I did, but graphics were a factor then and they are now.
Rogue said:Have to say, I didn't bother kickstarting Pantheon when it first launched because it simply looked terrible. Awful. I didn't care if it was Everquest 1 reskinned. I had zero interest and would rather play P99, I wanted to want it, but couldn't justify it. It wasn't until the first big stream after they improved the pre-pre-pre alpha, then they said graphics/animation improvement, then I backed. It's a tired and boring trope to say gameplay is everything. There is a minimum level of graphics that are required. I consider current Pantheon to be that minimum for an MMO. As of the December stream.
Ultima Online was a big deal back in the day, thing was, I chose EQ because it was 3d and the graphics were better. Glad I did, but graphics were a factor then and they are now.
Eh. Back in the day I had loads of fun playing games like Baldurs Gate which didn't have great graphics but the game play was awesome. If I had known about Ultima Online when it came out I probably would have played that instead of EverQuest. But I ended up on EverQuest instead and enjoyed the hell out of it.
I still play old games that I have bought from GOG.com and it doesn't bother me at all. It is all about the game play for me. Good graphics mean nothing when the game is awful and good graphics mean nothing when the game is awesome.
If the game is awesome and the graphics suck I'll play it. If the game is rubbish and the graphics are awesome I won't play it. Pretty simple really.
zippyzee said:To me, the worst thing to do would be to chase some sort of graphical nirvana and ignore the feel of the actual game. I think that plagued the industry for several (many?) years and we are just now getting back to gameplay as king. I personally don't care that much about the graphical quality as long as I feel "immersed" in the world. However, it is nice seeing pretty sights and cool animations as icing on the cake.
I would definitly agree with this statement. The past decade has focused so heavily on graphical engines and creating the most perfected realism, often leading to developmental pushbacks which span near a decade in reprocessing. Yet, focus on character development, environmental background, and mechanics have often taken a back seat, leading to an uninspiring experience which was less than desireable when compaired to their 1990 and earily 2000 equivlent franchises. I've played a few games recently where the graphics are near to the point of being stick figures, yet the mechanics and character development is so compelling that it more than compensated for the lack of time devoted towards more realistic graphical development. I'm pleased to see that VR is pushing for a balance, and prioritizing accordingly.
"The way a game looks means I will not play it". I do not want to offend anyone but this comment is not only shallow in thought it shows a very inexperienced "gamer" when it comes to the RPG style games.
You must remember that EQ1 was basically a first for its time, it was a MUD with graphix.. I have played MUD's that beat anything out on the market today and for those that have no idea what they are.. They are all text. In reality MUD's were "better" as your mind created the world you explored and now we are "lazy".
I joined eq1 a week after it came out, big blocky ogre's.. fat bottomed trolls.. and it was amazing. I spent hours fishing with my ogre in belief I may catch something interesting, spent hours swimming looking for that secret passage that did not exist.. The true aspect of making a game amazing has zero to do with how it looks, zero to do with how fast your can level or how powerful you can become. An amazing game is one that builds a community, not some cue up co op game such as WoW.. Or a game that everyone on the server can be killing the same "mob" or do the same "instance" at the same time.. When a game is released that creates an enviornment that you want to play because of the community that plays it then you have created something worth playing. Until then some can hold onto hope and others can judge things by how they look, how fast they level or how powerful they can become as quick as possible. I played eq1 for 12 years, one raid into POP and I quit, what do I miss? The people.. Yet the gaming population of today may never give that back to me, I can only hope.
>I still play old games that I have bought from GOG.com<
GOG is wonderful - it brings old games that cannot be played on today's computers back to life with DOS emulators and the like. I have the full wizardry, might and magic and baldurs gate series and quite a few others from GOG.
>I do not want to offend anyone but this comment is not only shallow in thought it shows a very inexperienced "gamer" when it comes to the RPG style games<
I suspect you failed in your first stated objective. Thus "this approach would lead to a rather shallow game" and "as an experienced gamer I have seen that ...." convey the same opinion but are less likely to be misread as "you are shallow" or "you are inexperienced".