New SA Client

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I said this in another thread, but if EA/Mythic wants to make a 3D client, they should abandon the idea of a hybrid...and should just render the world of UO in a real 3D client. EA has connections with studios all over the world, and several of them would probably be more than happy to sell their engines, or even become directly involved with the project, if given the chance. More to the point, EA owns Mythic...and they already have a 3D MMORPG client. Just slap some paint on that and use it. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel here!

The players that don't want a 3D client will keep using 2D, the ones that want 3D, will go to 3D. It's that simple.

But KR, and by extension, SA...well, for lack of a better word...suck. They look awful. That's really sad when you consider it. KR and SA have had over a decade to improve upon 2D UO, and still... FAIL!

The problem with both KR and SA is, garbage in...garbage out. You start with a flawed concept, you cut corners, and try to cater to outdated hardware, and you end up with a P.O.S. client that everyone hates.

I am really disappointed in SA. And I will not lie...it is the graphics that bother me. I had hoped that EA/Mythic, or more importantly, the UO Dev Team, would have addressed things like crappy looking characters, out of sync animations, blurriness, pixilization, lack of high res/wide screen support, art that looks nothing like the original game art (see dragons, rune beetles, etc) and a skewed Point of View. Why even bother with this client??? This is nothing but KR, with legacy art turned on, at low rez. Whooooop-tee-dooo!

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

(from Coldren's link)

OMFG YES PLEASE. Hire this person! NOW!

This is the UO of my dreams -- 2D graphics, but in hi-res. Same style, same look, just hi-res.

YES!!! Look at that! Now THAT is UO!! Look at the horse! It doesn't closely resemble a hippo, it looks like a horse!! A UO HORSE!!

I love it!

Why couldn't they do THAT instead of this ...

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

How is that possible exactly when the art in SA is the 2D stuff?

No, it's not...

2D

SA

There is a vague similarity...but that Rune Beetle is freakin' WHITE!!! Guess what color he was in KR...freakin' WHITE!

SA is nothing but KR with legacy art mode turned on, and low resolution.

It's awful.

 

[AesSedai]

I said this in another thread, but if EA/Mythic wants to make a 3D client...

- So, whomever suggested that UO wants to make a 3D client? I'm very curious to know.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

- So, whomever suggested that UO wants to make a 3D client? I'm very curious to know.

I think OSI did, on March 7, 2001. That's the day that Third Dawn launched (clever play on words Third Dawn...3D...and Dawn was invented)

Third Dawn was terrible. Kingdom Reborn was the replacement client for it. It was only marginally better.

I think you are confusing 3D vs. 2D with 1st person vs. 3rd person. KR and SA both are textured polygons, while the original 2D client was comprised of sprites.

 

[AesSedai]

I think OSI did, on March 7, 2001. That's the day that Third Dawn launched (clever play on words Third Dawn...3D...and Dawn was invented)

Third Dawn was terrible. Kingdom Reborn was the replacement client for it. It was only marginally better.

I think you are confusing 3D vs. 2D with 1st person vs. 3rd person. KR and SA both are textured polygons, while the original 2D client was comprised of sprites.

- So when you say 3D, you really meant UO:Third Dawn (another "2D" version of UO with a deceptive name that people nicknamed '3D' ~ yeah, 1st & 3rd person, as well as 2D & 3D, are easily juxtoposed these days )?

UO has & should remain 2D with a 3rd person perspective (it is far superior within this context of gameplay, imho).
& as far as the Original Post:

Improved graphics should ideally be/become an option, at least in the future, in my humble opinion.

 

[Harlequin]

I agree with what Coldren says.

There's some confusion with resolution and style when people talk about graphics. Besides, resolution and style aren't all that's important, also very important is how the different styles come together and how they merge/scale with respect to each other. I'm not deliberately bashing any client, I play all 3. Just trying to describe what I feel is the problem.



If you look at KR carefully, the statics are rendered very well by themselves. Even certain mobs are just incredible, just take a look at the giant beetle for example (without a rider). It's rendered beautifully, its carapace, esp the wing cases has this metallic green-blue sheen to it that you see in real beetles.

However, it looks drastically different from the legacy beetle. Other pets are drastically diffeerent too, swampies/dragons etc. If you were told these are new types of pets, lots of people would have gone "WOW!! I want one!!". Instead wtf happend to that cute swamppy and that majestic dragon I'd been used to for the past 11 years?



Now you put your rider on the beetle. And you go wtf? Your char is stitting so far infront of the beetle that it looks like he's almost going to drop off. (edit: It's fixed a little for the giant beetle since the size of it was reduced, but remains for the firebeetle.) I know the idea was not to cover the wing cases, and logically, I agree - if you had a beetle with that kind of long abdomen, short thorax and a small head, where else can you sit on except near the head?

So what happened? It looks like different artists with different styles each did their own rendering, without considering it's interaction with the environment, specifically the rider. A fix would be to shorten the wing cases and extend the thorax so that it provides a space for the rider. You change your artwork to make it work with the environment/theme.

Horses and llamas, you can see that there's alot of consideration done as well. Horses are taller and bigger than llamas, they got that right. But their legs are a bit too thick and too short, hooves (esp on the horse) are too wide...looks like 2 guys with big feet hiding in a horse costume.

Then you have the avatars and NPCs...all looking like bow-legged sailors with legs so far apart to indicate giant cojones or hemorrhoids...Robes look like bell-bottom pants when running.

And when you mount the llama, your feet touches the ground...certainly, some artistic creativity can be used here to make the llama taller or the rider shorter, with legs that are bent more in a riding position.



Instead of using the 2D terrain/statics and KR mobs, I believe it would have been alot better had they used the KR statics but 2D mobs...

 

[Harlequin]

See also this, for what a simple outline can for statics in KR:

http://www.andrea.net/uo/general/art/uokr_stroke.shtml

 

[Zodia]

See also this, for what a simple outline can for statics in KR:

http://www.andrea.net/uo/general/art/uokr_stroke.shtml

The "Ultima Stroke" is exactly what defines Ultima graphics. That site puts so many things into words/pictures that I have been thinking but had trouble communicating.
This is what is missing in the latest attempts at graphical upgrades: the Ultima Stroke. Whoever made that site is a genius and should be immediately hired as at least a consultant on UO (and preferably lead Artist).

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Ugh, I wanted to quote a few people as there is alot going on in this thread that I like, but I wanted to keep the post a bit shorter. So Coldren pretty much got it, if I agree or not does not matter, but it is still right on about the style vs the resolution. Old man still has the same stance I do, it does not matter what "graphics" they go with, or what client as long as they pick one client and stick with it and make it work. Oh well.

You don't get it because you are already addicted to UO and don't need to be convinced to play this game. Congrats.

As for you....You don't get it, It is not about UO. It is not about wow's success, my point was it sucks but has "better graphics" than UO does. Did you miss the part about how the game can look good but suck? I do not care "why" wow was successful, it sucked no matter how you look at it....And while blizzard is a good company, that does not mean their games are "inately good" it just means they put out good games more often then they put out bad ones. So it is not a comparison of EA to Blizzard, or UO to WOW, it was a comparison of games that suck to games that don't. I am saddened by the "current state of gaming" not by EA or Blizzard, but by people who would allow the "graphics" (loosely used now that everyone would like more descriptive terms to be used) determ the worth of a game. *tips hat*

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

See also this, for what a simple outline can for statics in KR:

http://www.andrea.net/uo/general/art/uokr_stroke.shtml

The "Ultima Stroke" is exactly what defines Ultima graphics. That site puts so many things into words/pictures that I have been thinking but had trouble communicating.
This is what is missing in the latest attempts at graphical upgrades: the Ultima Stroke. Whoever made that site is a genius and should be immediately hired as at least a consultant on UO (and preferably lead Artist).

.....That website is nice, and the art is well done. Not sure I would go as far as to say to give them the lead artist position, but they would certainly add to the UO experience. But then I do not work for EA/Mythic and can not really say how feasible that is for what they were targeting. =\

 

[Harlequin]

.....That website is nice, and the art is well done. Not sure I would go as far as to say to give them the lead artist position, but they would certainly add to the UO experience. But then I do not work for EA/Mythic and can not really say how feasible that is for what they were targeting. =\

I am pretty sure they've got a good team of artists that can make it work. But perhaps missing an art director that goes around the cubicles with a big stick to beat the artists into coming up with a cohesive theme/environment that meshes well together.

Lots of players submitted very good changes/renders a couple of years back when KR was announced.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I am pretty sure they've got a good team of artists that can make it work. But perhaps missing an art director that goes around the cubicles with a big stick to beat the artists into coming up with a cohesive theme/environment that meshes well together.

Lots of players submitted very good changes/renders a couple of years back when KR was announced.

Oh yea, was not doubting their ability at all. I am always on the Developers side. I only simply meant that I do not know what they are trying to accomplish...So perhaps what they gave us is pretty much on the mark for what they were trying for, of course I am not sure who they are listening to as to "what to shoot for" that...perhaps could use some looking into, but then I do not mind all the art work so does not matter to me.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

- So when you say 3D, you really meant UO:Third Dawn (another "2D" version of UO with a deceptive name that people nicknamed '3D' ~ yeah, 1st & 3rd person, as well as 2D & 3D, are easily juxtoposed these days )?

UO has & should remain 2D with a 3rd person perspective (it is far superior within this context of gameplay, imho).
& as far as the Original Post:

Improved graphics should ideally be/become an option, at least in the future, in my humble opinion.

Look, regardless of your OPINION, the difference between 2d and 3d graphics is determined by whether or not the graphics are rendered via sprites (2d) or polygons (3d), it has NOTHING to do with perspective.

Third Dawn, KR, and now SA, are all Polygon based. Original 2d...what I call UO...is Sprite based.

There really isn't much wiggle room here.

Third Dawn, KR, and SA are all polygon based. Period. That makes them 3D. I am not talking about perspective, and I am not talking about cheesy 3D movies with glasses. I am talking about graphics that are either true 2D sprites, with only x and y, or rendered polygons with x,y, and z...and understand...original UO...z was faked via sprite positions on screen (see house bugs).

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I am pretty sure they've got a good team of artists that can make it work. But perhaps missing an art director that goes around the cubicles with a big stick to beat the artists into coming up with a cohesive theme/environment that meshes well together.

Someone has worked in one too many cube farms!!

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Like I was saying in another SA thread. The biggest problem I have is the graphics.

They are on the right track but the lack of anti-aliasing options and the lack of a higher maximum frame rate is what makes them bad and not the artwork it's self.

Without anti-aliasing the graphics look pretty rough and the further you zoom and scale them the worse the aliasing gets.

The frame rates are bogus though. The original client runs at 20 fps solid with no fluctuation and that is fine. But in the SA client the lower the frame rate gets the more everything around you blurs and jitters as you move. At 60 fps you get a playable frame rate. But what I don't understand is why we cannot go higher than 60 when all of the modern cards on the market will support well over 100 fps in a game like this one.

We aren't playing a full on 3d game which most cards can easily handle on moderate resolutions with a great frame rate.

So my suggestions would be to raise the maximum fps setting to 125 and add in some anti-aliasing options so that people with modern systems can take full advantage of the new client.

Since none of the people here addressed this....While it is not inside the client itself (just like it was not in the KR client) you should be able to set your fps to anything you like, with in the usersettings file. I have not heard of there being a limitation on how high you can set this, but then again...memory could be playing tricks on me. *tips hat*

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Since none of the people here addressed this....While it is not inside the client itself (just like it was not in the KR client) you should be able to set your fps to anything you like, with in the usersettings file. I have not heard of there being a limitation on how high you can set this, but then again...memory could be playing tricks on me. *tips hat*

Your actual FPS is determined by how may polygons per second your GPU can move, this of course is helped out by your RAM and CPU.

 

[Harlequin]

Someone has worked in one too many cube farms!!

I've got a pointy haired boss too! Well...not exactly...he's bald...hehehe

 

[Lord Chaos]

If I could figure a good way to set up all my multitude of characters and import macros I'd probably eventually switch....

However the thought of redoing 50+ characters worth of macros just isn't appealing.

Amen to that. Don't understand why they don't make a macro import script. (just make it an external program, then you don't need to do a lot of UI programming in SA)

They said with KR, and therefore with SA they cannot do stuff like AF and AA with the way they project the graphics onto the screen.

Good point, but sad

But I don't get it why they don't do the 2D blocks as 3D textures, where the 2D sprites are 3D texture.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

People keep confusing the Art work, with the character models. ALL the artwork, ok wait almost all the art work, basically all the art work except for the terrain is the 2d art work. The character models are from KR which are far better anyhow, Your example of the rune beetle is a sort of bad one, bad as in the rune beetle is horribly colored....I do not mind it being white, but what is with the mesh of white/blue/red/pink/brown/yellow.... Most, if not all, of the other character models look great (I have not seen a fire beetle, and a few other character models so for those who complained about the fire beetle don't tell me about it because I have not seen it and can not make a formed oppinion on either way).

So art != character models.

Lord chaos, last I checked they were formulating ways to convert the macro's from the other clients to SA. As for making UO 3D....it is pretty inconcievable given most of UO world and how we interact with it. Anyway, *tips hat* and maybe a dev will take a gander and comment on the current state of copying macros.=D

 

[Coppelia]

See also this, for what a simple outline can for statics in KR:

http://www.andrea.net/uo/general/art/uokr_stroke.shtml

Well, that's exactly my point. The black outline. And I don't want to hear any excuse from devs on how it's difficult to render it. Find a method.

 

[Crysta]

What he said.. if I meant creatures and NPCs I would have said so.. same goes for gumps or terrain.

And besides, not liking the look of a creature is "personal preference"... stop trying to make it sound like "fact".

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

Your actual FPS is determined by how may polygons per second your GPU can move, this of course is helped out by your RAM and CPU.

I would add that the Video Card Interface is part of it as well.

As a generalization (as in specific cases may not conform to this):

PCI-E2.0 DDR3 should be greater than PCIE-2.0 DDR2 should be greater than PCI-E1.0 should be greater than AGP should be greater than PCI. There is a PCIE-3.0 specification that may begin seeing the market this year. As 2.0 doubled the bandwidth of 1.0, 3.0 will double the band width of 2.0 and be backwards compatible with 2.0 and 1.0.

I agree with your option that if one wanted to do a 3D Client then they should not be hybridizing things.

The problem, in my opinion, is one of cost vs benefit.

One always hopes that new people can be attracted to UO, reality is that the expenditure of resources to do that, probably far exceed the increased revenue.

One always hopes that doing things will retain the current base. The reality is that people are here to play UO (what ever that means to them). They are not all that excited over changes. In fact if I may be so bold, it is my opinion that they will treat such changes, as you once said, as nothing more than Eye Candy to be discarded after a short period of time and will resume playing UO as they have been playing UO for the last 11+ Years.

As an example only, a lot of the SA Clients acceptance, for me, is based on the legacy bags/packs. I mean I like the new way but it is always extremely situational/specific.

I may like the List or Grid view to find those *Grumbles* hidden items after death.

BUT I really do NOT like going through 10 or 15 Quills, Saws, Tongs etc that I have so carefully placed in a neat little stack on top of each other in my Bag.

Not having the abilty to Color my bags, I really do not appreciate the feature of the Client moving the order of my bags around etc.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Your actual FPS is determined by how may polygons per second your GPU can move, this of course is helped out by your RAM and CPU.

Well, I just mean I do not feel that rending UO at 120 fps would really do anything...there are not many polygons going on, and also not sure if there was a limit that they restricted the game to inside the client code. I only know you can manually set it.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

...

Grimm's post actually goes a long way in why I'm wanting higher resolution (models and KR artwork) as an OPTION.

Not everyone has a high end graphic card. BUT by the same token, there ARE people who have graphic cards that were made at the time KR went live and newer that handle KR very well and with a good amount of stability.

I also think the people who have those cards would rather have the ability to push their cards a bit and see what they can run and stay stable.

Basically, SA should have two graphical modes:

Low Resolution (or Legacy if you prefer) which is the current default mode. This should be the stanard SA mode to bring in the most people possible.

and

High Resolution (or KR if you prefer) which would be the optional setting which would use KR artwork and/or higher resolution Legacy artwork (whichever works better... personally, I would love KR house tiles and plants but Legacy items, but that'd be MUCH more difficult to rewrite the artwork files to handle partial toggles).

If people can run SA in the High Res mode in a manner that shows good stable performance, then they should have that option to do so.

In a disagreement and response to Grimm's post, I have to wonder if his definition of "optimize" is the same as mine because while it might perform well, outside of the "native" resolution, it is VERY rough visually and as such is not really "optimized" as a whole.

His statement is disheartening, but not one that I would say "Oh well, time to give up", but instead say "This is something to try and see if it will work".

The problem is that having a high end system and a high end graphics card did not help with the stability of KR at all. It had issues regardless of your system.

On a side note...

We've also discussed the possibility of providing higher resolution animations at a later date, but right now that's kind of on the shelf due to more pressing matters.

Was posted in http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?t=148605

So there is some hope for you guys. For me personally I can go either way as long as performance, stability or functionality doesn't take a hit for it.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

The problem is that having a high end system and a high end graphics card did not help with the stability of KR at all. It had issues regardless of your system.

On a side note...



Was posted in http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?t=148605

So there is some hope for you guys. For me personally I can go either way as long as performance, stability or functionality doesn't take a hit for it.

Have to agree, even with my intel quad core KR was not the best client for me to use. It was not horrible....but still, was very problematic. BUT While the developers do insist it was the graphics that made it unstable, I believe they could have kept the graphics and fixed the client....I mean there are games with better graphics than uo that are stable.

 

[Coldren]

That was quite a sermon there Coldren. I have to agree strongly with your commentary about the issue being "style and resolution". Few people have said it but that is the proper way to describe what all the fuss is about regarding "graphics".

Personally I like the style of both KR and Legacy art - they're just different ways of showing the beautiful world of Sosaria that I love so much. So "style" is not really my concern. It's all about the resolution. If I could have a new interface (KR/SA) with Saphireena's high resolution legacy art I might never play another game again for the rest of my life.

At the very minimum, we need the resolution issue resolved in SA. If they are not (or can't) give us a KR option at least bring it back up to current legacy standards.

Yeah, I suppose it was a bit preachy and a bit over-the-top, but sometimes things click in just the right way that it sets you off.. This is one of those topics.

And you have a well-adjusted attitude. It doesn't matter what you like, KR, SA, Legacy, 3D, all the above. It's all about the world, and how we envision it. Some have grown accustomed to and love the classic style, while some have come to love the style found in KR. I really have no gripe against either - Love what you love, and don't let anyone tell you any different.

And I honestly HOPE they give people who want it a KR toggle. I said it in another thread, that when people were saying adopt KR because it's the future or nothing, that it doesn't matter what's newer or better. If people lose the vision of the world they love and are forced to play one client over the other (In this case, KR over 2D), they won't stay - And I'll stand by that statement with the people who have come to love KR. The Dev's opened Pandora's Box on this one. You gave yet another way to view the world - You can't just yank that away from them again like you did to the 3D users.


And Saphireena was and is a very talented artist. I believe she still lurks here from time to time. I think, and I could be wrong here, that she was indeed offered work with EA, but she couldn't accept as she lives in Sweeden. A loss for us all.

But I agree. If the Devs can replicate the style she brought to life, or in some ways resurrected from the past (See the Ultima Stroke) with that high a resolution, preserving that style, and give it the benefits of the rest of the SA interface, it'd be a dream come true. It'd be a sure-fire hit among players.

Let's hope for the future, but until then, keep trying to make it better for all of us.

We're more than the sum of the clients we prefer - We're Sosarians.

 

[Sir_Bolo]

I can realistically see a toggle for Legacy/Reborn graphics for items in the SA client - same thing as the Legacy Graphics toggle in the KR client, just with a different default value.

I don't think we'll get a simple toggle in the configuration for high-resolution monster art though, as that would practically double the client size.
Maybe a separate download option with monsters rendered in high resolution?

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Have to agree, even with my intel quad core KR was not the best client for me to use. It was not horrible....but still, was very problematic. BUT While the developers do insist it was the graphics that made it unstable, I believe they could have kept the graphics and fixed the client....I mean there are games with better graphics than uo that are stable.

None have even half the amount of "Things" in the world that UO has either. DFO had to sacrifice so much to make a 3D world with at least some of the UO concepts. Items on the ground were one of the first things removed. A Siege in DFO generally brought down the entire server for a good while lol. DFO is also using far more sophisticated server tech.

Age of Conan another high graphic game can only muster 45 vs. 45 people in an instance before things get unbearable. This is even in a heavily instanced world.

Games now days are sacrificing mechanics and amout of "things" in the world for those high end graphics. I mean seriously, if it was possible to have all UO has to offer and the high end graphics to boot wouldn't a game have been made by now that would have stolen us all away? MO is another high graphic MMO that is going off of UO inspiration, but even it will fail at having as much as UO does. Graphics and Gameplay seem to be opposite of each other, the more you have of one the less you can have of the other.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I can realistically see a toggle for Legacy/Reborn graphics for items in the SA client - same thing as the Legacy Graphics toggle in the KR client, just with a different default value.

I don't think we'll get a simple toggle in the configuration for high-resolution monster art though, as that would practically double the client size.
Maybe a separate download option with monsters rendered in high resolution?

Didn't I post this same thing in this thread? Or was it somewhere else....

Either way, we can easily get KR art and legacy art, but it is the Resolution toggle that will not happen, it would almost require another client....I say almost because while they could have a toggle option for all 4 options, it would be a surmountable amount of information for people who would only use "1" option, that is how many people are going to toggle between 4 different graphical options? Or even two for that matter.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

None have even half the amount of "Things" in the world that UO has either. DFO had to sacrifice so much to make a 3D world with at least some of the UO concepts. Items on the ground were one of the first things removed. A Siege in DFO generally brought down the entire server for a good while lol. DFO is also using far more sophisticated server tech.

Age of Conan another high graphic game can only muster 45 vs. 45 people in an instance before things get unbearable. This is even in a heavily instanced world.

Games now days are sacrificing mechanics and amout of "things" in the world for those high end graphics. I mean seriously, if it was possible to have all UO has to offer and the high end graphics to boot wouldn't a game have been made by now that would have stolen us all away? MO is another high graphic MMO that is going off of UO inspiration, but even it will fail at having as much as UO does. Graphics and Gameplay seem to be opposite of each other, the more you have of one the less you can have of the other.

Hey who told you you can take my argument? lol.... I have been agressively arguing that the graphics do not make the game for days now, in fact since the beta release. I just got tired of it....I am not changing sides on this argument, I am simply stating that they *could* have done it, not that it would be easy....or even cost effective. But hey, who cares about game play when you can look at a landscape for hours on end? I sure dont, nothing like a playable screensaver to pass the time if you ask me. (please note the sarcasm) *tips hat*

 

[Coldren]

Ok.. Once again, we're getting off track, and bias' are starting to show. Everyone step back. We need to stop and make sure a few points are understood before this becomes another Me. Vs. Them thread, as it has already degenerated into to some small degree.


First Point - We can all agree, one client is better than.. Well, more than one?

From a technical, and a cost-benefit standpoint, which is the better alternative: 2 Clients with 2 entirely different code bases supporting 2 different, let's call them, art styles, or 1 client with 1 code base supporting 2 art styles?

Ideally, yes, 1 art style would be best, but here's the problem. The Dev's let the cat out of the bag with the entirely different art style allowed in KR. Some people have grown to like it. Weather or not I or YOU like it doesn't matter - Some players do, and we should respect their tastes as well as our own, or we're all just being god damned hypocrites.

So to that end, a KR toggle makes sense for EVERYONE, Pro-KR or not.



Point two - We can all agree, KR Toggle or Legacy only, that we NEED a higher resolution option. Even for legacy, SA doesn't look.. Clean.. Part of the appeal of KR was the resolution allowed for some very sharp and detailed art. Even if you DIDN'T like the STYLE, you have to give credit where credit is due, and acknowledge KR has superior RESOLUTION. And the fact that it could scale also made it technically superior to 2D.


Point Three - How is it that a modern game engine, with any hardware made after 2005 STILL can't show legacy artwork with at least the SAME resolution as FAST as a decade plus old engine? HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? Items in house are still being drawn one at a time.

How does this factor into the discussion? THE CLIENT IS STILL SUB-PAR. Make no mistake, it's still LEAPS ahead of where KR was at launch, or in my opinion, is now (ARTWORK NOT BEING THE ISSUE). And if rendering the KR graphics was a major issue with the stability of the client as GrimOmen said, than they need to get their damn act together, because those resolutions aren't that high, and the engine can do FAR more powerful things than this (See Oblivion, WAR, and a host of other Gamebryo games for a good example). It's not even true 3D - It's a pimped out side scroller for christ sake.

Before we even entertain the idea of adjusting graphics or giving toggle options, can we all come to the consensus that what is REALLY best for UO is to make the ONE, SINGLE NEW CLIENT the top priority? Can we all agree to some sacrifices in personal taste long enough to focus on making sure the client doesn't bomb from usability issues before we argue what the **** a horse should look like, or how big a door should be?

Can we all at least come to agree on THIS?

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

...
Can we all at least come to agree on THIS?

Well 1 Unified Client, that every one loves, would be ... well great but .....


Let us consider something.

Is this true? 2D vs KR/SA = KR vs SA.

Is one not more contrasted than the other?

Could one say (and be telling the truth) that the KR vs SA is digging into which shade of grey is better? I look at an SA Dragon and a 2D Dragon and .... well I don't know what game some are playing but when they say that SA is 2D art ... I just need to wonder what game they are REALLY playing.

When I look at the SA Client and the KR client and read how the SA Client is a redo of the 2D Client, I just need to wonder what game they are REALLY playing.

In short, shall we burden the UO Team with needing to give each and every single subscriber their own, unique, version of Grey?

How about I start a campaign for Dragons to be Grey and Red rather than the Uniform Coloring of the Dragons in KR and SA Oh wait, that is right some insist that the SA art is the 2D Art, color and all?

I want a toggle for having the Dragons be Grey and Red.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Lord chaos, last I checked they were formulating ways to convert the macro's from the other clients to SA. As for making UO 3D....it is pretty inconcievable given most of UO world and how we interact with it. Anyway, *tips hat* and maybe a dev will take a gander and comment on the current state of copying macros.=D

Actually you can render 2D surfaces onto a 3D model. So basically what you do is make the world a 3D plane made up of blocks identical to the old 2D world blocks. Then make 2D textures with the 2D art in the 3D world and stack them ontop of eachother. As they would have 0 Z-axis, they wouldn't pile up just like in the 2D client.

You can then apply various AA tricks onto the surface and the rendering.

 

[Lord Chaos]

What he said.. if I meant creatures and NPCs I would have said so.. same goes for gumps or terrain.

Again, the basic artwork (items, statics, terrain) is not identical to 2D. Its fuzzier, darker and less colorful.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Actually you can render 2D surfaces onto a 3D model. So basically what you do is make the world a 3D plane made up of blocks identical to the old 2D world blocks. Then make 2D textures with the 2D art in the 3D world and stack them ontop of eachother. As they would have 0 Z-axis, they wouldn't pile up just like in the 2D client.

You can then apply various AA tricks onto the surface and the rendering.

What does this have to do with what you quited me on? o.o

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Coldren, unfortunately...2 clients with the same code base would be the most cost effect, you did not even give that option...lol.

1 client with the same code basis with 2 art models would actually not please anyone, since everyone is griping over the art AND resolution, and we just can not have 4 different graphical modes and still be reasonable.

as for enigma....see my post here http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?p=1321434#post1321434

 

[Trebr Drab]

Coldren, I'd like to point out to you that the Devs saw those pictures back when the KR graphics problems arose. They had the choice back then to redo the art like that or to go the path they did choose.

There is no hope. Not as long as the current decision makers are in place. And they've been there over several years and through a move. Nothing is going to change. It's like a grim omen.

 

[Coldren]

Is this true? 2D vs KR/SA = KR vs SA.

Is one not more contrasted than the other?

Could one say (and be telling the truth) that the KR vs SA is digging into which shade of grey is better? I look at an SA Dragon and a 2D Dragon and .... well I don't know what game some are playing but when they say that SA is 2D art ... I just need to wonder what game they are REALLY playing.

When I look at the SA Client and the KR client and read how the SA Client is a redo of the 2D Client, I just need to wonder what game they are REALLY playing.

In short, shall we burden the UO Team with needing to give each and every single subscriber their own, unique, version of Grey?

How about I start a campaign for Dragons to be Grey and Red rather than the Uniform Coloring of the Dragons in KR and SA Oh wait, that is right some insist that the SA art is the 2D Art, color and all?

I want a toggle for having the Dragons be Grey and Red.

2D vs. KR is not the same argument of KR vs SA.

SA is largely built on the same code KR uses, but it uses different art that is in many ways similar to the art used in 2D. There are exceptions, of course. Some of the KR style permutated into the SA client, but on the whole, it's largley closer to 2D than KR. Trees, static objects, backpack items, etc., all look comparable to 2D. Dragons and player characters do look different than 2D.

And there is the difference that the style used in KR allowed for a higher resolution. Dermott has made man examples comparing the possible resolution of KR artwork vs SA/2D artwork. KR wins on that front.

What he is asking for, though, is that the style KR allowed to happen for EVERYTHING in the world is different than what SA/2D offers, and he is right. He doesn't want to lose that, and I don't blame him, even if I don't share his opinion. I wouldn't people to force me to play a game that has the style of KR any more than he wants to be forced to play a game that has the style of hybrid that is SA.

Eventually, the argument will be 2D vs. SA.

If your problem is with specific items, well, I can't say I disagree there, either. I liked the way player characters looked in 2D, and platemail in SA/KR is so atrocious to me it's painful to look at, but I'll manage.

Grey and Red Dragons, and other hueing issues have been a long standing issue with the KR architecture, which SA is largely based off.

 

[Coldren]

Coldren, unfortunately...2 clients with the same code base would be the most cost effect, you did not even give that option...lol.

[Edit] Sorry, misread your quote.

Well, in some ways I guess, but if the clients have the same code base, the only difference is the files with the art assets. If the engine can't render one style exactly the same as another and function the same, than it's really going to require 2 different clients, isn't it?

1 client with the same code basis with 2 art models would actually not please anyone, since everyone is griping over the art AND resolution, and we just can not have 4 different graphical modes and still be reasonable.

I believe you are wrong. I could most definitely be wrong, but unless one of us has more experience with texture creation, I believe what follows is accurate.

You still only need two different art assets, with different styles of art. The difference is, you create the assets for both KR and Legacy styles at a very high resolution. When you create the files or textures to be rendered, you do so by saving each at the same resolution they were created, and then another at a lower resolution.

You're still only creating the item model or asset twice (Much like we are now with 2 different clients). Two assets with different styles, being saved or rendered in four different ways, isn't as intensive as creating four different assets from scratch.

It's much easier to scale the resolution of a texture DOWN than UP.

And no one will be pleased with everything, ever. But does that mean we shouldn't try?

 

[Coldren]

Coldren, I'd like to point out to you that the Devs saw those pictures back when the KR graphics problems arose. They had the choice back then to redo the art like that or to go the path they did choose.

There is no hope. Not as long as the current decision makers are in place. And they've been there over several years and through a move. Nothing is going to change. It's like a grim omen.

Of course they knew about it. People can make the wrong decision, moreso due to group think.

However, you are right. As long as they are in charge, they call the shots, no matter what we say.

So do we just throw our hands up and quit, or do we keep pushing and screaming until they here us and make better decisions?

Feel free to sit by idle and watch the show. That's perfectly acceptable.

I'd rather go out kicking and screaming at the top of my lungs than wallow in defeat. 'Cause you can be damn sure, between these forums and elsewhere, they've heard my voice at least once. And it's not going away.

 

[Gildar]

I'm of the opinion that 2D and SA should use the same graphics. We shouldn't have another 2D-KR split where you could very easily go "but those aren't even the same game!"

With that said... I also think SA should have (at least) two patching options.
One for 2D-resolution graphics, one for higher resolution graphics. Everybody would have the game look the same (essentially), but those who are willing to spend the extra time downloading patches and extra hard drive space storing the data, and have a computer that can handle the extra processing can have less pixelation.

 

[Trebr Drab]

I've tried to have my voice heard for years. I've watched others try too. It falls on deaf ears.

You are welcome, of course, to keep trying. In my opinion, we can't win. We never could. Even Garriott couldn't win his battle with "them", EA, the system in place, the Corp., what have you.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I believe you are wrong. I could most definitely be wrong, but unless one of us has more experience with texture creation, I believe what follows is accurate.

You still only need two different art assets, with different styles of art. The difference is, you create the assets for both KR and Legacy styles at a very high resolution. When you create the files or textures to be rendered, you do so by saving each at the same resolution they were created, and then another at a lower resolution.

You're still only creating the item model or asset twice (Much like we are now with 2 different clients). Two assets with different styles, being saved or rendered in four different ways, isn't as intensive as creating four different assets from scratch.

It's much easier to scale the resolution of a texture DOWN than UP.

And no one will be pleased with everything, ever. But does that mean we shouldn't try?

Well I can not speak on your knowledge of the matter....But I can say my point of having the 4 graphical options is that it is not practical, you need the code to handle it and the client size rises for each new graphical option, despite the fact it is just downsizing the high resolution textures.

Of course, if you simply downsize the high resolution textures you end up with the blur the sa client experiences with the Character models (such as ogre lords) where as with 4 seperate textures it could at least look nice, even tho 2 of them would be in a lower resolution.

Honestly I suppose we could go with 3 graphical modes, legacy low res legacy high res and KR high res since no one would ever miss the KR low res (it would not have exsisted before this point) but still alot of work and the client would most likely double in size.

Edit: I am all for trying, thats why I pointed out we need 2 clients that run on the same architecture. that was we could effectively try to please everyone. lol

 

[Fink]

<Supreem> sorry magnus although a small percentage of our players liked the KR art... the majority of them rejected it

I must've missed voting in that poll.

I'd like to know how small a percentage that was, and how such a figure was obtained. They can't be using client log-in stats because those do not reflect an artistic preference. I would hazard a guess that more people who didn't use KR opted out over (their) performance issues rather than the way it looked. Of course, some overlap between performance & looks is to be expected, but one doesn't equate to (or for that matter negate) the other. Seemed most people who rejected KR claimed not to care about graphics, so again.. the function, or lack thereof, would be the deal-breaker. It can look fantastic but if it doesn't actually work for the player, it won't get used.

I want the KR art.

Even if they scaled it down somewhat to reduce overhead, that would be infinitely preferable to scaling legacy art up.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I must've missed voting in that poll.

I'd like to know how small a percentage that was, and at how such a figure was arrived. They can't be using client log-in stats because those do not reflect an artistic preference. I would hazard a guess that more people who didn't use KR opted out over (their) performance issues rather than the way it looked. Of course, some overlap between performance & looks is to be expected, but one doesn't equate to (or for that matter negate) the other. Seemed most people who rejected KR claimed not to care about graphics, so again.. the function, or lack thereof, would be the deal-breaker. It can look fantastic but if it doesn't actually work for the player, it won't get used.

I want the KR art.

Even if they scaled it down somewhat to reduce overhead, that would be infinitely preferable to scaling legacy art up.

I would say it was polled based on the client log in rate vs the voices of people yelling that the art sucked, of course the voices are hardly a good basis either since not everyone speaks up (I did not speak up about this issue untill recently) I do not recall them saying how it was polled, but I do remember them saying it was something like 95% of the client base did not like KR.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

2D vs. KR is not the same argument of KR vs SA.

SA is largely built on the same code KR uses, but it uses different art that is in many ways similar to the art used in 2D. There are exceptions, of course. Some of the KR style permutated into the SA client, but on the whole, it's largley closer to 2D than KR. Trees, static objects, backpack items, etc., all look comparable to 2D. Dragons and player characters do look different than 2D.

And there is the difference that the style used in KR allowed for a higher resolution. Dermott has made man examples comparing the possible resolution of KR artwork vs SA/2D artwork. KR wins on that front.

What he is asking for, though, is that the style KR allowed to happen for EVERYTHING in the world is different than what SA/2D offers, and he is right. He doesn't want to lose that, and I don't blame him, even if I don't share his opinion. I wouldn't people to force me to play a game that has the style of KR any more than he wants to be forced to play a game that has the style of hybrid that is SA.

Eventually, the argument will be 2D vs. SA.

If your problem is with specific items, well, I can't say I disagree there, either. I liked the way player characters looked in 2D, and platemail in SA/KR is so atrocious to me it's painful to look at, but I'll manage.

Grey and Red Dragons, and other hueing issues have been a long standing issue with the KR architecture, which SA is largely based off.

Let us disagree, my opinion is SA is, UI/Presentation wise, is 90%+ of KR.

This entire argument about Resolution/Quality is (The pointed finger at Hypocrisy) is .... what can one say, the SA Client isn't LIVE it is Beta. I am 100% confident that .... people are perfectly aware they are attacking a Beta Program as though it were Production. I am equally 100% confident these same people made the argument when KR was being developed that "Hey stop this crap, it is in Beta".

So you can spend the assets and resources to carry a subtly different shade of grey OR you can get the Functionality (as Fink said) right then migrate/upgrade the shade of Grey.

It is a function of choosing.

My perspective is (without poking at people)

2D vs KR = Revolutionary
2D vs SA = Aggressive Evolution
KR vs SA = Give the numerical values of those two shades of grey, they are to close together to be able to tell which is which (visually, UO, interface wise).

 

[Coldren]

No one ever "Wins".

It's how you play the game, and if you think the game is worth playing.

 

[Coldren]

Let us disagree, my opinion is SA is, UI/Presentation wise, is 90%+ of KR.

On that point, I don't think we're that far apart. For the UI, I agree. It's 90% KR, but certainly BETTER than KR.

Graphics, eh. I guess I see more of the legacy work than the KR work, but maybe you see it differently. I guess this is where we differ, but I think more people are noticing the Legacy style more than the KR style. I could be wrong of course.

This entire argument about Resolution/Quality..

And more importantly, STYLE. Style is an aesthetic preference, where resolution is quite measurable.

Quality? Do you mean performance, or bugs or capability?

I am 100% confident that .... people are perfectly aware they are attacking a Beta Program as though it were Production. I am equally 100% confident these same people made the argument when KR was being developed that "Hey stop this crap, it is in Beta".

Can't say I disagree with you.

However, SA is at this moment in beta. KR at one point WAS in beta. This statement is no longer true once it is officially released. THAT logic is not subjective.

So you can spend the assets and resources to carry a subtly different shade of grey OR you can get the Functionality (as Fink said) right then migrate/upgrade the shade of Grey.

And I stated as much in my previous post. I completely agree. Get the client stable and better performing first, THEN handle artwork.

My perspective is (without poking at people)

2D vs KR = Revolutionary
2D vs SA = Aggressive Evolution
KR vs SA = Give the numerical values of those two shades of grey, they are to close together to be able to tell which is which (visually, UO, interface wise).

We both agree, the UI is almost identical between KR and SA, but SA functions far better than KR did.

Need to see the difference in art between KR and SA? It's been shown.

...

Ok, I went into KR and SA and did some picture taking. Every shot provided were taken at Default zoom levels for each client first in one, then in the other form the same tile, then cut out as precise as possible to match the images being compared, then saved as PNG to retain image quality. No further image editing has been done to tweak the clarity, pixelation or details. Each image is as I see them in game.

First up, the Banana Trees, one tall and one short from Isamu Jima (45.0N x 9.12W for those who want to visit them):

Tall Banana Tree

Short Banana Tree

Second are a couple of floortiles... dark redwood and light yellow... mind you again these are the same tiles (something that seems weird given the yellow wood tiles):

Dark Red Hardwood Floortiles

Light Yellow Floortiles:

Next is the "famed" UO sandstone... in this case a small section of Luna Sandstone... note the texture differences, color, and how the shadowing brings out detail in the KR version:

Next is a larger view, my upper patio at my cabin. The patio was created and decorated with KR in mind. Notice the difference between the potted plants, the fountain, squirrel statue, bonsai tree, etc. The two rubble plants in the bottom right are lush in KR while they look straggly and wilted in SA.

And lastly, a look at items in grid view. Now here is somewhere where I'm more of a "let's split the difference" in opinion. The SA/2d graphics are too small, KR too big and in the cases of equipment (armor and weapons, not shown), the difference between KR and Legacy are simply too much that it took quite a while even for me to be able to identify common weapons and armor by sight. In this case I would want 2d/SA item artwork, but at a higher resolution for quality and larger size in the grid slots. Note both UI settings are 85%. Also... no commas!

No one is going to go through and find every single difference, but there IS a difference in many places.

 

[olduofan]

i agree the dragons look very bad in sa/kr i hope we can get the legacy art for creatures/ monster /dragons ect. dragons in the 2d client look FAR BETTER imop