Navigation through New Britannia

Heh, I still prefer the R2 wolf.. xD

 

Concept art is a long way from being game art. They haven't been producing much quality game art and I would expect a lot more at this stage for a project of this scale.

Also, you're expressing an opinion, not a fact. You'll notice my posts are all opinion, and I never go about attacking other people's opinions, but I will point out logical fallacies or present my own opinion and defend it and myself against attacks from those who can't stand to hear opinions differing from their own.

The only monster they can really say is their own currently is the Lich King, which by the way doesn't even look like a traditional lich. I challenge you to show me another in-game monster or animal that is not from the Unity Asset Store.

You're also completely missing my point in that the art is lacking style and overall direction. Minecraft had plenty of style, direction and consistency.

I agree gameplay trumps art, but SotA currently has neither good gameplay nor art (nor do I think the current vision & direction for SotA's development will result in good gameplay), and when you're trying to build a modern successor to the Ultima series, which seeks to immerse a player in a fantasy game world, and to compete with the other similar offerings out there, high graphical quality and a distinct style are pretty much a requirement. I'll give you a hint: that style isn't pixely or blocky, low poly, retro, or cartoony. If this escapes you without me pointing it out, we really don't have much to talk about so you might as well put me on ignore like the other guy did.

Lastly, maybe from your perspective you can't do something (like batch process lighting changes), but I assure you there are people in this world who can make a lot of what you think is impossible possible, given the appropriate amount of time.

 

Hmm.. have you played R6. You know this is what the game looks like now right?




crank your video settings up to fantastic. give it a whirl.

Also, The Watcher was in one of the releases, it was since pulled. Just because you haven't seen it in game doesn't mean they aren't being worked on or already done.

You are simply wrong. this is proof. Take a look at the R6 screenshot gallery beautiful screenshots that are very competitive with modern games.

If you read the thread titled "ugly women" Chris talks a bit about the NPCs that they used, and how they found that there weren't many in the unity store they could use. Most weren't' good enough the ones they did use needed a whole lot of work.

 

I've played R6 and I said so earlier. I was fighting those very same skeletons in the screenshot and was not impressed with what I saw.

That screenshot also does not contain much if any original art. It's all slightly modified Unity Asset Store art. Sadly, the modifications made the skeletons look worse than the originals and I can point to other examples where this has happened as well.

https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/7110

So far you have pointed out one original monster and you're only proving my point that it's not much to show on the art side for over a year of development.

Also, if you read my earlier posts, I already pointed out the character art is original.

In my opinion, the game does not look good and is not competitive, but again, it's called an opinion for a reason.

However, it is a fact that there are a huge number of people with opinions which differ from your own and the people who think SotA's art currently meets their standards are a much smaller group.

You should let other people voice their own opinions without telling them they are flat-out wrong. That goes to show it's really not even worth addressing your posts from here on out.

 

@Tamino. I'm sorry but I'm having a really hard time trying to figure out just what it is you're trying to accomplish here. There are 5 pages of arguments and it appears you are trying to convince everyone that SotA sucks and the devs should heed your wisdom and scrap it all.

I'd like to think that's not your original intent, but honestly that's all that's coming across. You've said that you weren't interested from the start, yet you say you backed it. You say you're not interested now. So I'm just really confused about what it is you want here, other than to give your opinions that you don't like the game and probably never will. Maybe in addition to all the complaints about the game, you could also add what you're trying to accomplish.

The game is pre-alpha. Imo, it's already in better shape than some betas I've played. Your observation that more people think it doesn't meet their standards than those who think it does doesn't match my own observations on that. Did I mention pre-alpha? (and no that's not an invitation to argue the point as this thread is already hopelessly off topic and this will be my only post on this).

You say you've played this release, so maybe giving some constructive feedback in the appropriate forum would help the devs along in the development process. That's supposed to be why we're being allowed to play these sessions. This thread is supposed to be about the overland map, at least it started that way.

 

Notciflora, not trying to be offensive, but all the questions you have with regard to my intentions are answered in my posts if you actually read them and comprehend what you are reading correctly.

I say this because your paraphrasing of what I have said here is wildly inaccurate.

Rather than getting offended by an opinion which differs from your own, then proceeding to attack it as quite a few others here have done, perhaps you could simply accept that there are other people that have these opinions and they have just as much right to voice them as you do.

 

Maybe I get what you are trying to say. I have to agree that there is a unique artistic style missing from the graphics in the game.
If you look at the fantastic artwork Stephen is creating for the game, the artistic style is totally there. The colors, the shadowing, the lighting, the shapes, the creatures and persons... Everything has a unique style that creates a special atmosphere but this style seems to somehow get lost in the transition to game graphics... If the game graphics of SotA would look much more like the art of Stephen and use this unique artistic style, the game would look much better imo.

 

I agree that the much of the concept art has been consistent in style and the quality is pretty much on-par.

I also agree there is much is being lost in translation.

But I'm concerned we're not seeing more production of in-game art happening at this stage of the game. Most new developments are on a technical front.

Like others have observed, it has become pretty much obvious to me the game will not be shipping on its original timeline, but I never expected that.

Again, I want this game to succeed just as much as everyone else here, but not the vision of it as currently put forth. I want the essence of the vision to succeed: a worthy spiritual successor to the Ultima series, whether it be the single player Ultimas or UO or some kind of a combination of the two. I would love to also see some innovation and for this team to dare to do something different. But so far, I have not been impressed with what they have come up with and they're failing to attract my interest for any reason other than that I am a loyal fan based on past games.

It has nothing to do with the pre-alpha state of the game, either. I can tell whether I will like a game or not based on more than its current state, but also its design and vision. And I think one of the the core problems with SotA at the moment is the vision, or at least the lack of a vision which resonates with a big enough audience to make its development sustainable.

It's odd because I can still read my faded printout of the pre-beta UO FAQ and it will excite me much more than anything the developers have said about this game as the vision was clearly laid out there and resonated deeply with so many people that they were able to partially crowdfund it in a time when crowdfunding had never even been heard of, all the way back in 1995!

Heck, I loved the UO pre-alpha so much that I brought it back from the dead by creating a server emulator for it at a time when no one could even find the client, much less play it because of the lack of a running server (circa 1999-2000, after UO's release).

When WoW came around, and the friends and family alpha game client was leaked to the internet (circa 2003), I repurposed my UO pre-alpha server code into a WoW server, enabling anyone to log in, create a character, explore the game world and see and chat with other players when all they could do before that was see the login screen. I later joined forces with a group which had been doing something similar. We got as far as enabling people do basic PvP and PvE combat before the WoW beta even began, giving people outside of Blizzard's circle and the press their earliest glimpses of the game. I said about the game back then, when we were testing a build of our server with around 200 people logged in at the time, "this game is going to be a smash hit." I did not know how right about this I would become at the time.

Anyway, they can still change course of SotA and fix these problems I've been trying to point out, but it will take awareness first, hence part of the reason I decided to speak up about it rather than being part of a silent majority who are on the fence about this game. Hopefully more people will do the same in an effort to push this game in a better direction.

 

I think the practice of buying Unity store assets and improving them (and returning them to the original creators) is a smart development tool that helps not only Shroud's budget and time concerns, but also our relationship with the Unity community. RG made a great analogy once about movie sets - they don't hand craft every plant and chair you see on set, they buy props and arrange scenes out of them.

We have seen them continue to improve assets that are already in use, and I think (and hope) that they will continue to do so as development continues. I think the landscapes reflect the concept art rather well, but I'm looking forward to seeing future character improvements. IMHO anything that brings Stephen's art concepts to fruition would be a boon.

Tamino, I find that your arguments are ignoring the considerable value of Portalarium's relationship with the community. This game is far ahead of most others when it comes to player involvement and contributions. New Britannia is already a place I want to be. Come make some friends and maybe you'll see a new side to things you have not previously considered.

Graphics can be improved, art can be revised, features can be added, but the robust groundwork that is being laid is of immense worth and shows that Portalarium is taking the long view. This is indicative of a thoughtful process that looks beyond initial release and toward building a strong and lasting presence. Seems to me they have their priorities straight.

 

I think the devs should maybe take the risk and take one of Stephens artwork and create a 3D scene out of it that looks as much like the painting as possible - using the same artistic style, the same colors, lighting etc. Then we would see if the game would benefit from it.

How about the swamp?

 

The Mimic and I believe the Satyrs are original as well. How about the cave wrasse? The player housing is original. If you want to see what people worked on in a day by day basis they post it in the standup thread so you can see where the dev time went on what items. From what Chris said most things you see in the store don't look as good once you get them in game, they use lighting that doesn't work for this game, so they look pretty bad when you just put them in. So I know a lot of time was spent on the animations and making everything look better.

I just don't think you are giving them credit for what they've done and the improvements they've made over the past 6 months. I think you are downplaying what they've done and you are saying you know how to do everything better than this team; many of whom have a ton of experience on AAA titles, even recent ones.

If something isn't fun, something isn't working right, something looks bad, then feel free to share what your thoughts are on those. But you are criticizing their knowledge and their work, and their abilities. That isn't cool.

 

I looked at both on two different monitors, I have to say, in my opinion,the monitor settings seem to make a big difference.

On the monitor that has 'warm' settings (A bit of a reddish tinge) the in game screenshot looks better. The unity asset ones seems yellow with brown streaks. The in game screen looks more natural to me.

On the monitor that has 'cool' settings (A bit of a bluish tinge) the unity assets look better. The white of the bones seem more natural here (though the brown streaks added to it are still not great.) The in game grey looks too grey and unnatural.

I think in a case like this, monitor settings are very important when forming an opinion.

EDIT: Just did a quick look to see the color of a skeleton. They can be either but the teeth almost always seem to be white.

 

I just wanted to pop in here and express how disappointed I am in how the debate over the hex system has been shut down and shunted into here.

Thanks.

 

Those topics were redirected here because they were providing feedback about the current map for ease of feedback aggregation. You are welcome to leave feedback here about the current map.

 

I was mostly referring to a lack of contrasting tones and the low resolution in the modified skeletons (especially the chainmail), which shows up on just about any monitor whether color balance is perfect or not.

Scene lighting is also bland, and the level design of the scene itself (which the screenshot does not convey--you have to explore it) is not up to par but it remains to be seen if it's just a placeholder. I hope it is because I expect much better quality.

Another example is the model they chose for the kobold. Here's the original, from the Unity Asset Store:


https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/4530

Now look at the modification.


They claimed they are making improvements, but the jaw on that thing looks terrible compared to the original.


Last, they made a "Lich King" that looks like a wraith. It has an exaggerated cartoony style in terms of the shape language and the detail level while the rest of the game doesn't jive with this style. I'd expect to see this in World of WarCraft or something.

 

RG brought many generational followers to his new baby, marketing the project using nostalgy sentiments, but there seems to be two classes of adepts : those who played UO and those, more aged, who played the Ultima series back in the 80s (30 years ago). Since those games were supporting different map systems, expectations are conflictive, which explains why the topic is so ...sensitive. Conciliating both populations wont be an easy task, but it is feasable if the team manages to liberate the hexagons from the clostrophobic feeling experience in what I regard now a beta version of the game, since it is fairly uncommon to be in pre Alpha less than a semester from the forecast launch date.

I also don t bite into the small budget argument, since teams with very limited funds managed to create open worlds and there is absolutely no reason in current financial markets conditions to go the shoestring way, limiting funding to crowdfunding. As a former UO player, I understand other UO players frustration, but since the choice seems to be carved in marble, the remaining options are adapting or leaving. I ll wait for release 7 to check if there is any improvement on the immersivity of the universe and make a decision then.

 

pre-alpha/alpha/beta aren't about when the product will ship, it is about how far they are into the development.

Pre-Alpha is a state before the product is ready for testing

Alpha is when they are testing features(verifying the features work)

Beta is when all the features are in and complete - this part is used for debugging, performance optimizations, verifying everything works as intended and to reach as bug free a state as possible.

Usually at the end of Beta they'll put out a Release candidate, which is ready for shipping aside from final bug squashing. Once it's mostly bug free, off for shipping/release.


Considering the very early state of the features pre-alpha or alpha would be the only possible categories this can be put in. We aren't even able to test many features still, pre-alpha sounds correct.

Most people never see a game until late alpha stages (features are in, and being tested) People now are invited for closed beta (early into beta testing) and open beta (near the end of beta testing, usually RC's with most big games)

This is something players aren't used to seeing, the pre-alpha stage. and most people arent' used to even an alpha stage. To think you can make a decision on a pre-alpha version 7 on what this game will be like.. The map likely wont have all the functionality built into it for 3 or more releases... Do what you like I guess. You do know this game wont be out in 5 months right? Most of us were guessing during Kickstarter that Oct 2014 was a very ambitious timeline. I think it proved to be true. The only way we could have the game then is to strip out the features. - It's better to miss the October release and have features than release a game that doesn't stand out from the crowd due to not having the planned features in it. If you look at the features promised so far, and what we have in the game, you'd know they have a pretty massive to-do list just to get them in the game, let alone tested. (I'm curious if some of these, such as taming, is slated for after episode 1 launch)


As far as the open world, they can make an open world on a small budget. It will be smaller, not as detailed(lower end machines can't handle high quality detailed open worlds), and not able to easily move around where things are as they develop them.

 

Contrasting tones - check, I see that
Chainmail - Wasn't pleased with either. In SotA it looked like material with a pattern (from the screenshot) and from the app it looked like a piece of cloth with a bunch of holes punched into it.

Lighting looks ok to me but they are still tweaking it so will have to wait and see on that one.

Jawline looks the same to me in both (with bigger teeth in SotA) but the upper part of the mouth seems to be pulled back and snubbed in the SotA version. I'm fine with this though. Again I am colour oriented so the first thing that jumped out at me was the colour change. I prefer the SotA one in this case.

Agreed - The Lich could use some work but then they placed it in a really dark area which helps to hide many shortcomings and it was one of the first to be included in game so probably has not been revamped since. I wouldn't worry too much about this. If they keep it they will likely touch it up a bit.

Could be worse:

 

I'd also like to give the dual scale map system 2 different names. The world adventure and Scene Adventure = overworld and hex. The emphasis should be that we are still adventuring, still exploring and finding new things and encounters. Maybe someone else can come up with different terms that sound appealing. If there is anything consumers like it's good buzz words.

 

Yikes! I hope not. I think we are all assuming they are going to take their time and that we're still pre-alpha.

If this is beta, I'd be asking for a refund like some others have done. Maybe even demanding it.