graphics from other games ?

[Anon McDougle]

Not sure i f i should post somewhere else or not ??

has anyone else looked at WakFu ?? the graphics are nice like i wish UO could be if they can do it with 2D why cant we ??

 

[Old Man of UO]

WHAAAAAAAT? That makes no sense at all.

First of all, we already have two game engines that the Developers have to maintain and we certainly would not want them to change to another game engine now.

Second, just from the online screenshots, WakFu is low resolution and looks terrible to me. I'm not into anime style, and it just doesn't fit UO at all.

 

[4gregu]

WakFu is low resolution and looks terrible to me. I'm not into anime style, and it just doesn't fit UO at all.

Amen

 

[Raider Red]

Amen

I just checked it out and I almost puked from the crappy look of it,looks like it was made back in the NES/segacd days not the present.

 

[Cogniac]

If I had anything in my mind for what a future UO "should look like," it would be Diablo 3 or Titan Quest, not WakFu or Final Fantasy Tactics.

 

[Parnoc]

Not sure i f i should post somewhere else or not ??

has anyone else looked at WakFu ?? the graphics are nice like i wish UO could be if they can do it with 2D why cant we ??

Man, did you look at this game??? really????? Our 2D graphics, however much they're complained about, are MUCH better than this anime crap on Wakfu.

 

[Madrid]

If I had anything in my mind for what a future UO "should look like," it would be Diablo 3 or Titan Quest, not WakFu or Final Fantasy Tactics.

Agree 100% Titan Quest is what UO should look like and that was what I was expecting when the SA client was first announced. Instead the UO took 3 steps backwards in terms of high resolution.

UO could be so much better than it is right now. A shame what has happened and been allowed to happen to what is the mother of all MMORPGs.

 

[Raptor85]

Man, did you look at this game??? really????? Our 2D graphics, however much they're complained about, are MUCH better than this anime crap on Wakfu.

?? I looked up the game because I hadn't heard of it, the graphics in Wakfu are amazing, nice and clean, easily 2-3 times the resolution of the UO Enhanced Client, incredibly detailed, very little repetition (though shockingly similar to NISs art style, a rival company that makes other tactical rpgs....hmmm). The NES had an effective max resolution of 256x240, there's individual tiles in those screenshots with more image data than that.... Not terribly fitting of UO of course but comeon guys, give credit where credit is due, the games graphics are great.

To the OP, the reason is because EA has to make a new 3d client to replace the old failed 3d client every 5 years that only 5% of the population will ever use due to being perpetual beta. I wish instead they would just sit down, hire a artist, and do a 6 month touchup of the 2d graphics, triple the resolution of the ingame 2d art (not terribly hard to do, a little time consuming though, i forget the link but a few players here posted examples years back of what UO's art could look like if it was simply touched up instead of replaced, and it was amazing) and allow the CC to use higher resolutions (again, not that hard to do, actually a fairly simple fix)

And while they're at it, revert the worldmap changes they did for KR, it made a lot of areas look horrible in the CC.

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

The Wakfu graphics are meh and only look "better" because they are cartoon style drawn at a modern resolution.

Several incarnations of the Devs have said that the ancient CC has been holding them back for several years. Simply slapping in 'new' art isn't going to remove whatever those limitations are. The client is 15+ years old. Nostalgia is a bad reason to hold 'growing the game' hostage.

The direction they went for most of the KR art was extremely unfortunate, probably a side effect of farming it out to artists who just didn't care. Not bothering to talk to the community before thngs were set in stone also hurt that client. Poorly upsizing the CC art for the EC was a braindead move made by someone who didn't give a damn about UO's future. Not actually taking the time to address the issues with the EC, and instead running off to do myriad other things, will continue to bite them in the ass repeatedly.

 

[LordDrago]

?? I looked up the game because I hadn't heard of it, the graphics in Wakfu are amazing, nice and clean, easily 2-3 times the resolution of the UO Enhanced Client, incredibly detailed, very little repetition (though shockingly similar to NISs art style, a rival company that makes other tactical rpgs....hmmm). The NES had an effective max resolution of 256x240, there's individual tiles in those screenshots with more image data than that.... Not terribly fitting of UO of course but comeon guys, give credit where credit is due, the games graphics are great.

To the OP, the reason is because EA has to make a new 3d client to replace the old failed 3d client every 5 years that only 5% of the population will ever use due to being perpetual beta. I wish instead they would just sit down, hire a artist, and do a 6 month touchup of the 2d graphics, triple the resolution of the ingame 2d art (not terribly hard to do, a little time consuming though, i forget the link but a few players here posted examples years back of what UO's art could look like if it was simply touched up instead of replaced, and it was amazing) and allow the CC to use higher resolutions (again, not that hard to do, actually a fairly simple fix)

And while they're at it, revert the worldmap changes they did for KR, it made a lot of areas look horrible in the CC.

What he said!!

 

[Woodsman]

I always thought something similar to Drakensang would be nice:

Check the screenshots:

http://us.drakensang-online.com/media

The only problem is that it's a browser-based gamed.

 

[MalagAste]

The Wakfu graphics are meh and only look "better" because they are cartoon style drawn at a modern resolution.

Several incarnations of the Devs have said that the ancient CC has been holding them back for several years. Simply slapping in 'new' art isn't going to remove whatever those limitations are. The client is 15+ years old. Nostalgia is a bad reason to hold 'growing the game' hostage.

The direction they went for most of the KR art was extremely unfortunate, probably a side effect of farming it out to artists who just didn't care. Not bothering to talk to the community before thngs were set in stone also hurt that client. Poorly upsizing the CC art for the EC was a braindead move made by someone who didn't give a damn about UO's future. Not actually taking the time to address the issues with the EC, and instead running off to do myriad other things, will continue to bite them in the ass repeatedly.

This. I personally detest Anime. I would quit if they made UO like that.

And I agree 100% about KR. I seriously wish they could get an art team that actually studied what it is that makes UO great. One thing is the incredible diversity. I mean sure all the large beds look exactly alike... only each bed can be colored to suit the owner. Our dying system is better than most. The variety of things you can do with colors is awesome. They should have fixed plants to be hued properly. What we got for art in KR was horrible and sadly some of that god awful crap is still in the EC. Like the poor Hiryu. I detest what was done to that poor creature. Whoever gave the go ahead to change that majestic vulture/turkey with feathers creature to a naked chicken with a tail 3x larger than it should be out to be flogged. There were some "improvements" to the mobiles but much of it was just horrible.

 

[G.v.P]

An MMO has to look well yet run well. Titan Quest supports 2-6 player multi-player. Diablo III supports 2-4 for adventure and it looks like maybe up to 6 for PvP arenas. Drakensang looks like it supports 2-4, and is a browser-game. Wakfu is turn-based combat with up to 6 players on the same team. UO has to be able to support 25-50 characters on a sub-server (can't imagine more than 50 on at one time) without any setbacks, and, since it's a real MMO, there could obviously be more than 50 on at one time (would probably kill the server).

 

[Raptor85]

An MMO has to look well yet run well. Titan Quest supports 2-6 player multi-player. Diablo III supports 2-4 for adventure and it looks like maybe up to 6 for PvP arenas. Drakensang looks like it supports 2-4, and is a browser-game. Wakfu is turn-based combat with up to 6 players on the same team. UO has to be able to support 25-50 characters on a sub-server (can't imagine more than 50 on at one time) without any setbacks, and, since it's a real MMO, there could obviously be more than 50 on at one time (would probably kill the server).

The server doesn't process graphics at all, that's all client side, it doesn't care whether you're playing entirely from an overhead ascii map or from a graphical engine that requires paired geForce 500 series cards to run on minimal detail, that won't effect the speed the server runs at at all, all it cares about is your x/y/z location, a list of items, etc...

Most mmo's actually, UO included, had very good graphics for their time when released, hell when i started playing Aion I had to buy a new graphics card, my one year old card wasn't powerful enough to even run the game at 20 fps at anything above 1024x768.

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

I always thought something similar to Drakensang would be nice:

Check the screenshots:

http://us.drakensang-online.com/media

The only problem is that it's a browser-based gamed.

That's a nice looking game! Thanks for the link!

I could easily see UO being closer to this than WakFu, sorry OP.

-GO

 

[Pinco]

if UO reach the drakesang texture level, we surely be able to get more people... for now we have the ground

oh and since you grimm are around I'd like to show you an abomination that I've found outside the blighted grove:

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

if UO reach the drakesang texture level, we surely be able to get more people... for now we have the ground

oh and since you grimm are around I'd like to show you an abomination that I've found outside the blighted grove:

Aye, yie, yie.

<Faceplant>

Thanks for the heads up, Pinco!

-JP

 

[G.v.P]

The server doesn't process graphics at all, that's all client side, it doesn't care whether you're playing entirely from an overhead ascii map or from a graphical engine that requires paired geForce 500 series cards to run on minimal detail, that won't effect the speed the server runs at at all, all it cares about is your x/y/z location, a list of items, etc...

Most mmo's actually, UO included, had very good graphics for their time when released, hell when i started playing Aion I had to buy a new graphics card, my one year old card wasn't powerful enough to even run the game at 20 fps at anything above 1024x768.

Oh I know, I mentioned servers because I'm not sure how many players can really sit on one UO sub-server at a time now. I remember back in maybe 2000 I nearly crashed the shard when I tamed 20 horses and had them all stay at a bank so I decided to release them. A week prior a guy crashed the shard by herding hinds through Moonglow. The UO servers used to crash so often when UO was a young a game, people don't realize how stable the servers are nowadays. I do miss endless pets though .

Anyway, my point is while it's fun to compare games stylistically, UO isn't ever going to look like Diablo III and run like Diablo III unless the players are willing to upgrade their CPUs and VGAs. The client side has to support the graphics and the players and the on-screen rendering of up 25-50 players, and the vast majority of the users would need to get much better computers and specs to run a game that looked AND played like Diablo III. If they can make it happen and people can run the new UO without needing to spend $600-1000 on a new system then that's cool, otherwise Bioware-Mythic needs to just design a true 3D UO2 already ;P.

 

[Woodsman]

Anyway, my point is while it's fun to compare games stylistically, UO isn't ever going to look like Diablo III and run like Diablo III unless the players are willing to upgrade their CPUs and VGAs. The client side has to support the graphics and the players and the on-screen rendering of up 25-50 players, and the vast majority of the users would need to get much better computers and specs to run a game that looked AND played like Diablo III. If they can make it happen and people can run the new UO without needing to spend $600-1000 on a new system then that's cool, otherwise Bioware-Mythic needs to just design a true 3D UO2 already ;P.

While I'm sure there are some players still running on 8-10 year old machines, mainstream dual-core machines have been out since 2006. Most people do replace their machines at some point over 10-15 years. There comes a point at which you have to stop catering to the 1990s.

I'm sure some people running 10 year old machines would actually save money on their A/C bills if they upgraded to a newer computer, more than enough to offset the costs of a new machine. Those old computers threw out a lot of heat. Plus it would save them time on doing a lot of things those of us with newer machines take for granted.

For $200, you can get a refurbished 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo machine with 2GB of RAM. If you jump up to the $500 range, you can get a Quad-Core with dedicated video card and 4GB of RAM, or get into the Intel Core i series. Dell Outlets offer similar deals, although usually with more RAM and with Windows 7.

 

[G.v.P]

Well as an example, I love Dragon Age, and I'd love UO to look like Dragon Age, but it's a single player game and it will sometimes lag and crash on my 2.8 GHZ Dual Core w/ 4 GB ram and 512 mb vid ram circa 2006. LA Noire is even worse w/ same setup except 1 gb vid ram but some of those issues are due to a poor port job. But anyway, I wouldn't expect to run either as a multiplayer game with better user experience, you know? I just bought a 1.4 GHZ Quad Core laptop w/ 8 gb ram and 1 gb vid for $600, I'll have to see how it runs Noire. Still downloading L4D2 ;P.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

I always thought something similar to Drakensang would be nice:

Check the screenshots:

http://us.drakensang-online.com/media

The only problem is that it's a browser-based gamed.

That's a sweet looking game. It's F2P I may have to at least check it out. I'm surprised, in this day of FPS style games, to see a new game with the isometric overhead view like UO.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

After careful consideration I'll simply say that I'll wait to see how GrimmOmen's EC artwork revamp plays out. Saying anything else would be ranting more about a certain faction of UO players/posters than it would the topic itself.

 

[G.v.P]

That's a sweet looking game. It's F2P I may have to at least check it out. I'm surprised, in this day of FPS style games, to see a new game with the isometric overhead view like UO.

If you like PvP you should check out League of Legends, it's my favorite game to play right now and it's 3D isometric F2P. You play 10-60 min games (three different modes) in a 5v5 or 3v3 setup in a setup that's kind of like a fighter-rpg-rts all in one. They call them MOBAs, massive online battle arenas. For those more inclined to PvM there are also co-op vs. ai games, which have been improved upon greatly since I started playing. Credit to Demon Slayer for making me addicted to this game, haha. Great pick-up and put-down game for those who want to have fun but don't want to be tied down all night doing a harry.

Heck, I bet a Dragon Age MOBA would be successful let alone a MMO ...EA have any MOBAs cooking?

 

[Wenchkin]

I really like Wakfu, but I wouldn't want UO in that style (well maybe for me, but I wouldn't expect many others to like it lol).. They're very different games. Wakfu is very light hearted like Dofus, it has nice game systems and I enjoy it, but I think UO players are a wee bit more serious and want something more "grown up" heh. Though my partner and I were chatting lastnight about how this or that wouldn't have gone down well with UO players yet Dofus/Wakfu ones love it. It's interesting how different game communities develop very different likes and dislikes around certain things.

All I want is a UO where the graphics all look like they're from the same game, finished to a standard that the artist would be proud of. There are some abominations in the newer artwork that I wouldn't forgive even a newbie artist for. I think there needs to be some control over a consistent world look and quality and some models would have been better with an upgraded version of the 2D graphic than the new "improved one"

I find it a shame in some ways with the EC, like the interface (plain vanilla without mods) and some of the graphics are beautiful. But the bad bits are so bad I just can't play it. Especially when I use certain tamers and all their favorite pets look awful.

Wenchy

 

[Coldren]

That's a nice looking game! Thanks for the link!

I could easily see UO being closer to this than WakFu, sorry OP.

-GO

Wow.. I didn't know Drakensang was BROWSER based.....

Maybe Richard Garriott has some idea of what he's doing with New Britainnia if he can make it look like that.