58 replies to this topic

[Mordhar]

It is not matter of visual eye-candies. Most important thing is how graphics used to add more depth to gameplay.

Example: MW3 vs MW4. Mechwarrior 4 have more powerful engine than older MW3, much better picture and special effects. But in MW3 graphics (pretty advanced for the time of release) used better. These two games have different approach to interaction with the game environment.
In 2012 both of them looks outdated. Once great MW4 graphics now can only bring a sad smile on player’s face. But in case of MW3, it is not a problem: graphics still do what they designed for – adds to immersion, and continue to do so even 10 years later.

My answer to the poll: I prefer functionality over eye-candies.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Mordhar, on 06 March 2012 - 12:40 AM, said:

It is not matter of visual eye-candies. Most important thing is how graphics used to add more depth to gameplay.

Example: MW3 vs MW4. Mechwarrior 4 have more powerful engine than older MW3, much better picture and special effects. But in MW3 graphics (pretty advanced for the time of release) used better. These two games have different approach to interaction with the game environment.
In 2012 both of them looks outdated. Once great MW4 graphics now can only bring a sad smile on player’s face. But in case of MW3, it is not a problem: graphics still do what they designed for – adds to immersion, and continue to do so even 10 years later.

My answer to the poll: I prefer functionality over eye-candies.

The only real functional argument for graphics and game play going hand in hand is in terms of setting a minimum bar. For example smoke and concealment in shadows might be important for your game. These are both gameplay elements and graphic options. You have to make sure players can't turn them off for an unfair advantage.

[LimiterOne]

Dlardrageth, on 05 March 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

Yep, I bet that works a charm with international shipping and customs and what not. Let's see, do I order in the US, Canada or China shop? Oh, wait, none of these countries is actually even withing a 1000 miles of mine... And hey, while spending 500$ on a whim might be no big deal for you there or me here, in some countries it is.

:EDITED:

Then research on NewEgg and get the parts on Amazon, cool rolly-eyed emoticon guy. Or, as I said, if you're using a machine that's 8 years old and you can't play modern games and you don't want or can't afford to upgrade, don't try to play modern games. Stick with stuff your machine will run. Or were you just looking for an excuse to take a shot at an American? Ah, yeah, judging by your tone I'd say that's far more likely.

Thanks!

LO

[LimiterOne]

TheRulesLawyer, on 06 March 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

The only real functional argument for graphics and game play going hand in hand is in terms of setting a minimum bar. For example smoke and concealment in shadows might be important for your game. These are both gameplay elements and graphic options. You have to make sure players can't turn them off for an unfair advantage.

I would agree with this, although I still expect a pretty high degree of graphics capabilities and realism from the standpoint of "pretty"... the better the graphics and sound, the more immersive the experience. However, I think that there are a great many items that should be scalable simply for the sake of the eye candy factor and should have no effect on actual gameplay in any way.

Peace

LO

[Fugu]

If you're talking about something like motion blur and other effects, that others might find distracting:
No, I will not turn any of that stuff off if the game runs fine with it.
Somehow I found that I can play better WITH motion blur. Most of my aming skills come from Unreal Tournament wich I played on an old FTP monitor. So I kind off adapted very well to smeared visuals.

To me it's also part of the fun. It's supposed to be a simulation and would be a lot more fun to me when I can imerge better due to more natural looking grafix.

[xX ColeBane Xx]

Obviously everyone wants to have awesome game-play, but great visuals wouldn't hurt, otherwise they would just reskin old games

[DooMachine]

I want uber graphics quality. I want the streets to fill with dust clouds as buildings half collapse under barrage of missles. I want persistant scortch marks on damaged mechs and i should be able to tell how hot that guys mech is by the glow of his ppc barrel. Basicly the visual quality that was in the reveal trailer of mw5. So what if lesser machines gasp. This is cryengine 3 afterall. It should be a site to behold. Im so tired of online mmo games having graphics that would have been sad 5 years ago just so it will run on a consumer laptop.

If cource as long as the game play is solid people will forgive some level of compromise but if mwo cant top mwll in graphics quality by a fair margin i will be a little sad.

[Shai tan]

I had an argument with one of my buddies last night about why he turns down vis settings in BF 3, just so he can be competitive. I flatout refuse to do this. We didn`t come all this way in gaming and technology to start turning down vis options. I will play the Cry 3 engine as it was intended. Maxed out as much as I can. ;p

If the majority wanna use turned down vis exploits, have at her man. You and I know they are gonna do whatever they can for the percieved edge. I`ll rock my way, and they will rock their way. It`s all good. But for some of us, it`ll certainly look a whole lot better.

Edited by shai`tan, 13 March 2012 - 03:37 PM.

[AceTimberwolf]

Gameplay would go great with my (x2)MSi 580 Lightnings = ) ... i have a third one on my Living room computer if i need to salvage it LOL

[Belisarius1]

The first one is the only really useful question, but's it's also kind of crazy. Why can't I have a good looking game which is also balanced?

If I could only pick one, I'd obviously choose balance, but the question is kind of like "which would you rather? buy a ferrari and never in your life be able to drink coffee again, or vice versa?" How in the world do those two things affect or exclude each other?

Edited by Belisarius†, 13 March 2012 - 09:01 PM.

[Fachxphyre]

I would much rather have a solid physics engine, smooth gameplay and good sustained FPS than some pretty effects. That being said, my current rig is pretty sexy for a laptop, with a Geforce GTX 460m card with 1.5 GB of GDDR5 goodness, so hopefully i'll be able to nearly max out the graphics settings on the game while maintaining framerate.

[Duncan Carlyle]

Always gameplay... anything will be better than MW4 graphics anyhow...

[Zarkan]

Is there some particular reason why I should need to choose? I can't say I see this as a binary option one or the other.

[zCrispy]

Quality gameplay should be the main priority of MWO. Since they are bringing this game back to the market, graphics are not as big of a concern to me.

[HighlandWolf]

with todays tech there is absolutely no reason why you cannot have a great game that doesnt look brilliant, look at eve..looks beautifull and works great..very smooth and in depth.

[pcunite]

Gimme both ...

[cinco]

Gizeh, on 05 March 2012 - 06:03 AM, said:

I don't realy get it. Since when is the graphic of a game connected to its gameplay? If the gameplay is bad, graphics won't change that, no matter how good or bad they are.

But you can still make a game with good graphics (more or less just the engine you pick and the artwork you put in it) and a good gameplay (to some extend this also depends on the engine, but much more design of the game(play), balance, content, etc.).

With MWO we have a game, that will use the CryEngine3. I would say, this is one of the Top 3 Engines for modern games right now. We already now, that it will look good.(Ofcourse there is still some space to raise and lower the graphics, but all in all we can expect a very good looking game.)
About the gameplay we can say almost nothing. It can be good, can be bad. Who knows? It all depends on the developers and the ressources they put in different aspects of the game. A much more interesting question would be: Would you like content over balance?

But as said before I don't see where "willing to give-up the eye-candy to benefit game-play" will work?!

nailed it. and only the 3rd post in. i have some faith in this community.

[Kifferson von doober]

They could leave it looking like mechy 3 mercs and i'd be cool if it played right and ran smooth!

[Jahooley]

i would sacrifice style for substance wherever necessary.