Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JeniM
Quote:
|
Besides, why is there a second thread about this article over the one inde posted?
|
Originally Posted by JeniM
Quote:
|
|
Originally Posted by TaCktiX
It will, everything points to it. Everyone complains about GW:EN being "incomplete" or "rushed out there." But look at how GW:EN looks. The water, fire, wind effects in it are astonishing. I remember the preview weekend when their servers were overloaded, I thought that GW:EN had overloaded my computer's ability to render such beauty (thank goodness it hasn't, I love GW on maxed settings).
|
|
Originally Posted by zwei2stein
Superficial stuff like shader effects dont make pretty graphics that add to longevity of game. Good artits do. I couldnt care less about zomg a bit better reflection! Anet is sooo lucky to have decent art team. /check out really old screenies of gw pre and post art change. it was same engine, and preart change stuff looked terrible/
And good graphics dont make good game (or at least long lived decend game). Good design does. |
|
Originally Posted by Fril Estelin
I fully agree with the first part of your answer, but not with the 2nd one: an artist cannot express himself if he doesn't have the tools. Shaders and othe reflection models may seem superfluous, but it is sometimes essential to what is shown. But let's not forget that the two aspects work hand in hand: GW is inherently amazing thanks to great artists that found a fabulous dev team to help them express their art.
|
|
Originally Posted by zwei2stein
Thats true, but such tools often become abused just to show off thier existance. I guess its to impress people who go all wild on such things. (i.e. such abuse are "new" portal effects - totally out of place and screaming "look, we have shaders!").
If its used correctly, you dont notice that effect being there, it just fits. Besides, good texture on good model goes a LONG way in implementing artist vision. (for example, lots of games feature beautifull realistic water, which looks totally unrealistic because rest of game is not compatible with it, should artist have not used effects, it would look much better.) |
|
Originally Posted by Redfeather1975
Physics would be awesome. I just can't figure out how they can accomplish that in a massive multiplayer persistent environment.
But, yes physics would rock if they could pull it off. Emergent game play is incredible when physics are involved. I really think an mmo fully exploring emergent game play possibilities is long overdue. |
|
Originally Posted by KANE OG
Wrong. As I've quoted him before in other threads, Jeff "whatsisname" said specifically in PC Gamer that GW2 was built on the GW1 engine.
KANE |
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
Just FYI: The interview to which this thread links is old. According to Mike O'Brien, this was a phone interview given back when all the other interviews were being done, around the announcement of GW2 and even GW:EN, well before the release of the Bonus Mission Pack -- likely back in the spring or summer of this year.
Just thought you'd want to know. |
|
Originally Posted by KANE OG
LMFAO Mizz Gray. The link I provided is on the front page of Guru right now. Is anet, and/or Guru giving outdated info or what?
KANE |
|
Originally Posted by tmakinen
I don't find anything wrong with this kind of concept testing - quite the contrary, having a vision for a wonderfully innovative new game is one thing but finding the mechanisms that both flesh out that vision and also entice people to play it is another issue altogether. The really ingenious insight that made GW stand apart from the rest of the MMORPG genre was the proposition that level (and thus grinding) is pretty much inconsequential for the enjoyment of a game. The original GW got it right to a large extent, now these new game modes (EotN buff, Costume Brawl, BMP) that are introduced to test the reactions of the community point to a direction where even the remaining vestiges of off-the-shelf RPG mechanisms are discarded.
|