Very Bad Graphics

If you read what Executive Producer DarkStarr says about this here you will find out that things will be polish and the dates are not set in stone.

 

Polish is just that. Rounding the sharpness of the edges. Not adding new features.

If you read what Executive Producer DarkStarr said here, you'll notice that they might not be sure what they're going to do:

2014-01-03 21:51
<~Darkstarr> Nothing has changed. Current goal is still October. but at the end of the day we want a great title more than a date so being more general for end of the year is a better expectation setting statement than something specific like October. After a kickstarter is over we cannot change that text so that is why the FAQ is different than Kickstarter

14-01-21 18:00
<~DarkStarr> Violation: Our goal is to always hit our dates and only adjust content in/out

Saying that the date on the KS page is not set in stone isn't good either. I understand the whole 'meeting the date' vs 'better game' argument, but there may be some backers who don't. Sometimes I can picture Starr shaking his head after reading the stuff RG and Chris promised during those KS hangouts.

So what are they going to do? Push out the date? Adjust content out? Like I said, my fear is that we're going to get an incomplete game. The number one reason I think so? They need money to keep working, and I expect that a declared launch will be the single-most important event to bring in money, outside the final KS days. As always, they have four more episodes to get it right. Let's hope that the fickle casual audience hasn't moved on by then.

 

^ I have to say, I would be surprised if they actually meet the deadline of 9 months. With all that still needs to be done, I just don't know if I see it happening. If that were to be the case, I wouldn't complain either. I would rather have the full release pushed back a bit, rather than have a rushed end product (if it came down to that).

 

Well, I think it is fairly obvious they need to accomplish that milestone and to Darkstarr's response, will cut features and/or content first, to make that happen.

If they don't, that is not going to help them in the long run for Ep2 fund raising given a history of not making a deadline. Features "missing" or in development is one thing, not hitting those dates will be a deal breaker to a lot of people.

It's just how things roll, and Simcity is a prime example. Delivered on time, missing/busted lots of features, but they were still able to maintain a user base, for quite some time, with the promise of iterating the content past the delivery date.

It was more about being able to play for most people, regardless of the jacked up state.

Though I prefer polished releases, in this case, it could end up not being feasible.

 

As long as I can play beta while they are fiddling around with bringing this game up to THEIR expectations... I don't mind how long it takes. I wouldn't build an airplane model with tape just because it is faster and gets it done. Everyone is going to see the model and laugh at it and in a year it'll fall apart. This is UO2 gosh darn it. It needs to be right.

 

Pushing a game out a few months and still being highly successful is pretty common. I only see any issue if they push it out beyond Jan 31, 2015.

They need the game to be good enough for people to want to pledge for episode 2 so they can afford to make the next episode. Also selling in-game items during episode 1 will help go towards running/developing costs while Episode 2 gets rolling. It's crucial that they receive enough positive feedback on episode 1 for that to happen. They wont get that if they rush a release just to get it out.

Now that being said, that doesn't mean a game can't come back. Final Fantasy 14, bad reviews, I didn't like it. They worked on more and more content and closed it down for internal development to bring it back and it was great when it came back. Great reviews, I enjoyed it, it was a completely new game in my opinion.

The only way Square-Enix could pull that off though is they had the finances to do it. Would RG be able to float it to episode 2 or 3 until reviewers can say yes, this game is good? Or will fanatical players continue purchasing in-game items and pledging for episode 2 to improve the initial release?

It's risky either way they try it. I think they would be better off pushing the release date back if needed, but it's up to them and what they can financially afford and the amount of press they can generate.


Or the other option is they amaze and astonish everyone with being able to get all the features in and have a great looking and fun game.

 

Back on the topic of graphics, the worst looking part of the game are the character models. They are building those in-house and they can continue to improve on them until they get good. 9 months of adding textures and styles and different body shapes and the like and making them look good if they work on it, I think there is a ton of room for things to look really good by release.

 

Could they be better? Sure. Are they more than adequate? For me: yes. The performance was good enough at 1920X1200 on both of my systems and hey if the graphics get better it's just a bonus for me at this point. I am neither disappointed nor concerned.

 

Although I do agree with much of what you said, and RG and team are by no means EA. Your comments remind me of the opposite outcome of Simcity when it comes to Ultima Forever.

EA never really said anything during the development process and let players minds run wild with excitement from seeing a few shiny pictures, and then game play being horrible. Only to have EA constantly push back major content releases to fix community issues. And now they have a game that has no promise of ever being fixed.

On the plus side though, SotA has an AWESOME dev team, listens to the community, makes changes based on that feedback, and lets us in on the whole process. Even though its just my personal opinion, and shouldn't sway the outcome of a release date. I would be totally fine with them pushing it back as need be to make necessary changes, because they actually do care about their customer and fan base, unlike other companies.

 

I agree that it could be argued that Ultimas IV and V were a little behind in the graphics area. I might have my time frames off, but by that time you had a flood of adventure games like the King's Quest titles out. Graphically they were more impressive, but they were basically a series of pre-rendered, scripted scenes. Ultima was less graphic, but you could go out and do whatever you wanted with less restriction - a much more open world. With the computing power these days you can have beautiful open world, open story RPG's. A lot of people forget that back then, you couldn't have it all. Some aspects had to be sacrificed to make others stronger.

Short version - I think you're right when it came to that time period in the Ultima series.

 

They should probably start leaning more in to the Witcher -type of graphical style. Not graphically per se, but stylistically.

This would make the overall look of the game much better. Right now it looks like a mess between WOW and Oblivion.

 

^ Amen. Perhaps something like the Witcher, not Minecraft

 

You're being sarcastic right?

 

They said early on they were looking for a Fable 3 color scheme, graphic styling is a combination of Stephen Danielle (lead concept artist) and Richard Garriott's direction. Switching graphics styling, halfway through a project doesn't sound good. I found nothing resembling WoW in this game. WoW has a distinct cartoony style.. league of legends also uses this style (presumably because DoTA was for Warcraft 3, also cartoony).

 

^ What Mishri said.

The current graphics are great for what is needed/necessary at the moment. It fits the motif of what I imagined the world to look like, especially with all the PotAs. They can be improved upon, as can anything really, given time, patience and $$. Graphics don't make the game. Ultima Online is the perfect example of retro graphics yet solid gameplay. I guess Minecraft can be tossed in there.

 

Just wanted to agree 100% with Mishri, RelExpo and others who think that the graphics are good and will continue to improve. Regardless, graphics don't make or break a game. It's the gameplay and immersion ( Mishri's favorite word ) that really matters.

 

I disagree with OP, The graphics need some minor cleaning up in some areas but that's it...When I was able to play with all the settings cranked (not for very long without a crash) it looked fine, not cutting edge, but more than adequate.

I would rather the time spent on:
1.) Creating great quests, storytelling and player decision making.
2.) Perfecting combat and PVP play.
3.) Adding more interesting points of interest.
4.) Making crafting even more fun.
5.) Adding new spells and combat animations
6.) Bug fixing .

content/features > graphics

Have you played Starbound yet? Another great example of content over graphics...

 

Graphics is decent, but would prefer if character graphics improved.
Beside that i would prefer if graphic team made more content rather than working on improving the current.

 

not sure if this was mentioned, and search isn't being helpful, but my only real complaint about the way the game looks is the lack of variety for the NPCs. it feels weird to walk into a tavern and find it populated by models of the same old man.

 

I'd suspect they were only placeholder graphics and that the final version will have a pool of available skins for various NPC types