The problem with the buildings is the lack of imperfections. They look too perfect. They need different textures, more grit, erosion, cracks, and other things that make them look lifelike.
That is the kind of thing they'll probably address as they go.
Like I said, I couldn't really put my finger on what the issue was. I think you might of explained what I was thinking. I definitely agree with you and hope they take this constructive criticism to heart. I want nothing else but for this mmo to be successful. The little details sometimes make all the difference.
It looks dated to me already...Looks like something from early 2000s
Graphics are way better than any of the other games I play or enjoy.
My concern is the opposite, that the graphics requirements will be higher than my current computers can handle.
The odds of my dropping $1000/computer just to play one game are pretty much non-existent. If it comes to that I, my wife, and my two daughters will most likely just stick with EQ/EQII/Rift.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
This is art not game play. Every mmo company does this as a place holder for the wait.
Why analyze this ?...... Besides it's a fantasy world anyway, anything goes.
I would give it a fast glance and say "nice", then move on..... Lets wait for the game or more footage of game play.
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
The difference in these mountains is that a person could walk most of the way up the mountain before requiring specialized climbing gear. In the first picture, a person could hike all the way to the summit. In the second picture, basic hiking could access the saddle area (left side, skyline) before meeting anything close to a vertical climb. Depending on the back side, a hiker could probably walk over both of these mountain ranges. These probably aren't examples of impassible terrain, like the game art seems to be.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
The difference in these mountains is that a person could walk most of the way up the mountain before requiring specialized climbing gear. In the first picture, a person could hike all the way to the summit. In the second picture, basic hiking could access the saddle area (left side, skyline) before meeting anything close to a vertical climb. Depending on the back side, a hiker could probably walk over both of these mountain ranges. These probably aren't examples of impassible terrain, like the game art seems to be.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
In that one pic it may be impassable but only because it makes the border of the zone. In the pick above it with the misty mountains all look passable if you ask me. As was asked before with a zoned area what would you do besides make impassable back grounds to line it?
How about a complete zone-to-zone transition, like N Qeynos to Qeynos Hills in EQ1? Only, over a mountain range.
The Pantheon picture I originally commented on appears to have a near vertical boundary along the entire transition to the plains. That's what looks unnatural to me. The impassible mountains are a cheat to easily draw a horizon instead of crunching the terrain graphics. Using these type of boundaries force players to cross from one area to another through an artificial 'door'.
The explorer in me would prefer to not have artificial barriers saying 'not this way'. I'd much rather make the way difficult and dangerous, and leave it to the players to choose the 'as the crow flies' paths or the surer and safer 'stick to the road' approach.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
The difference in these mountains is that a person could walk most of the way up the mountain before requiring specialized climbing gear. In the first picture, a person could hike all the way to the summit. In the second picture, basic hiking could access the saddle area (left side, skyline) before meeting anything close to a vertical climb. Depending on the back side, a hiker could probably walk over both of these mountain ranges. These probably aren't examples of impassible terrain, like the game art seems to be.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
But we are not talking about attempting "difficult cross-country journeys" we are talking about the need to have "something happen at the end of the world".
As you said, at some point one would need specialized gear (in the photos I included). Now they "could" make it so that there was a climbing mechanic, that wouldn't be so hard, but that's not what they are trying to achieve here.
They need an end.
So how does that manifest? There can either be a "hard barrier" such as a mountain, a large water area where the farther you swim the more tired you get and you drown, a more relaxed mountain barrier where the higher/farther you get the colder you get and you die (of course cue the players' screams about allowing cold weather equipment but then that defeats the purpose of having an end) having the world wrap around itself (as I mentioned). Invisible wall? yeah that never goes well.
My thought is that they could either spend a lot of development time coming up with something clever or they can put a mountain and be done with it.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
The difference in these mountains is that a person could walk most of the way up the mountain before requiring specialized climbing gear. In the first picture, a person could hike all the way to the summit. In the second picture, basic hiking could access the saddle area (left side, skyline) before meeting anything close to a vertical climb. Depending on the back side, a hiker could probably walk over both of these mountain ranges. These probably aren't examples of impassible terrain, like the game art seems to be.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
But we are not talking about attempting "difficult cross-country journeys" we are talking about the need to have "something happen at the end of the world".
As you said, at some point one would need specialized gear (in the photos I included). Now they "could" make it so that there was a climbing mechanic, that wouldn't be so hard, but that's not what they are trying to achieve here.
They need an end.
So how does that manifest? There can either be a "hard barrier" such as a mountain, a large water area where the farther you swim the more tired you get and you drown, a more relaxed mountain barrier where the higher/farther you get the colder you get and you die (of course cue the players' screams about allowing cold weather equipment but then that defeats the purpose of having an end) having the world wrap around itself (as I mentioned). Invisible wall? yeah that never goes well.
My thought is that they could either spend a lot of development time coming up with something clever or they can put a mountain and be done with it.
If there's absolutely nothing on the other side, i.e., it is truly the end of the world, then mountains or an ocean or lava or some kind of abyss is fine. I'll give you that, @Sovrath.
But using a mountain range for some impassible barrier between two zones, like a wall dividing one area from another, that just doesn't work for me. Using a pre-rendered horizon instead of rendering the topology is a shortcut from the days when on-the-fly rendering wasn't possible. (ESO seems to do quite well without visible borders). My idea for graphics improvements is a bit more than a rehash of techniques used in Might & Magic. Pardon me for wanting the genre to evolve.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Well, then by all means come up with something better. I suppose they could have the world "wrap around itself, not sure if there are any technical issues with that.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
The difference in these mountains is that a person could walk most of the way up the mountain before requiring specialized climbing gear. In the first picture, a person could hike all the way to the summit. In the second picture, basic hiking could access the saddle area (left side, skyline) before meeting anything close to a vertical climb. Depending on the back side, a hiker could probably walk over both of these mountain ranges. These probably aren't examples of impassible terrain, like the game art seems to be.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
But we are not talking about attempting "difficult cross-country journeys" we are talking about the need to have "something happen at the end of the world".
As you said, at some point one would need specialized gear (in the photos I included). Now they "could" make it so that there was a climbing mechanic, that wouldn't be so hard, but that's not what they are trying to achieve here.
They need an end.
So how does that manifest? There can either be a "hard barrier" such as a mountain, a large water area where the farther you swim the more tired you get and you drown, a more relaxed mountain barrier where the higher/farther you get the colder you get and you die (of course cue the players' screams about allowing cold weather equipment but then that defeats the purpose of having an end) having the world wrap around itself (as I mentioned). Invisible wall? yeah that never goes well.
My thought is that they could either spend a lot of development time coming up with something clever or they can put a mountain and be done with it.
If there's absolutely nothing on the other side, i.e., it is truly the end of the world, then mountains or an ocean or lava or some kind of abyss is fine. I'll give you that, @Sovrath.
But using a mountain range for some impassible barrier between two zones, like a wall dividing one area from another, that just doesn't work for me. Using a pre-rendered horizon instead of rendering the topology is a shortcut from the days when on-the-fly rendering wasn't possible. (ESO seems to do quite well without visible borders). My idea for graphics improvements is a bit more than a rehash of techniques used in Might & Magic. Pardon me for wanting the genre to evolve.
Well, that I can give you. If you are just talking about zones (and perhaps I missed that) then sure that makes sense. I mean, even in Skyrim one can get up most mountains (albeit in a ridiculous fashion at times).
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
What is 100x more important is the gameplay, VR will have to deliver here for Pantheon to stand a chance.
So arguing over graphics in Pantheon is a bit of a wasted effort
99 times out of a 100, if someone wants to talk about something in Pantheon, there will be someone else who says "that doesn't matter - something else matters more."
Is it not possible to talk about more than one thing? Or should we just have one thread called "The most important thing" and limit all discussion to that?
Since we currently have no game to test, much less play, talking about whatever comes to mind is pretty much all there is to do here.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Comments
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/newsletter/2017_june_devdiary/
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Graphics are way better than any of the other games I play or enjoy.
My concern is the opposite, that the graphics requirements will be higher than my current computers can handle.
The odds of my dropping $1000/computer just to play one game are pretty much non-existent. If it comes to that I, my wife, and my two daughters will most likely just stick with EQ/EQII/Rift.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
That 'mountain wall' looks like it is going to function as a zone barrier. We saw that in 1st gen MMORPGs. I had hoped for something different instead of impassible terrain to shape the visible horizon. Real mountains don't have an 80+ degree slope running all the way to a plain. Vertical and near-vertical slopes are the exception, not the rule.
Pretty trees, but the fundamental landscape ignores basic geology.
I had hoped for something more.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I'm not a geologist but googling mountain ranges does show quite a few with "vertical slopes". So even if they are "not the rule" there are enough examples to at least make this design have merit.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
This is art not game play. Every mmo company does this as a place holder for the wait.
Why analyze this ?...... Besides it's a fantasy world anyway, anything goes.
I would give it a fast glance and say "nice", then move on..... Lets wait for the game or more footage of game play.
If it's "A fantasy world, anything goes" as @delete5230 said, why do they bother making natural looking trees as opposed to fluorescent orange and purple trees, grass and rocks? There's clearly an effort to adapt familiar real world colors and shapes. I'm just saying extend it to include the transition between plains, hills and mountains, too.
The artwork posted by @Nanfoodle appears to be using mountains as a "wall" or "curtain" to block / restrict travel. Real mountains do that by being tall and require effort to cross. It's also very easy to get lost while trying to get over a mountain. Where's the spirit of adventure and exploring if you can't attempt difficult cross-country journeys?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The Pantheon picture I originally commented on appears to have a near vertical boundary along the entire transition to the plains. That's what looks unnatural to me. The impassible mountains are a cheat to easily draw a horizon instead of crunching the terrain graphics. Using these type of boundaries force players to cross from one area to another through an artificial 'door'.
The explorer in me would prefer to not have artificial barriers saying 'not this way'. I'd much rather make the way difficult and dangerous, and leave it to the players to choose the 'as the crow flies' paths or the surer and safer 'stick to the road' approach.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
As you said, at some point one would need specialized gear (in the photos I included). Now they "could" make it so that there was a climbing mechanic, that wouldn't be so hard, but that's not what they are trying to achieve here.
They need an end.
So how does that manifest? There can either be a "hard barrier" such as a mountain, a large water area where the farther you swim the more tired you get and you drown, a more relaxed mountain barrier where the higher/farther you get the colder you get and you die (of course cue the players' screams about allowing cold weather equipment but then that defeats the purpose of having an end) having the world wrap around itself (as I mentioned). Invisible wall? yeah that never goes well.
My thought is that they could either spend a lot of development time coming up with something clever or they can put a mountain and be done with it.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
But using a mountain range for some impassible barrier between two zones, like a wall dividing one area from another, that just doesn't work for me. Using a pre-rendered horizon instead of rendering the topology is a shortcut from the days when on-the-fly rendering wasn't possible. (ESO seems to do quite well without visible borders). My idea for graphics improvements is a bit more than a rehash of techniques used in Might & Magic. Pardon me for wanting the genre to evolve.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Is it not possible to talk about more than one thing? Or should we just have one thread called "The most important thing" and limit all discussion to that?
Since we currently have no game to test, much less play, talking about whatever comes to mind is pretty much all there is to do here.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests