Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Graphics and mechanics vs Crowfall
arcundo
Member UncommonPosts: 88
While I like the graphics style in CU a lot better then Crowfall, CU has been standing still for quite a while now graphicswise, while Crowfall is advancing nicely, and almost seems like something they could use at launch. Is that because Crowfall is closer to launch than CU? Or can we expect that CU will not make a leap graphicswise?
The released footage of Ranger in Crowfall reminds me a lot of the mechanics seen in GW2 minus the pet. Is that you impression too?
In Cu you can make your own abilities etc. While Crowfall seems to simplistic, I "worry" that the game mechanics in CU will to to complex and hard to comprehend or define for possible buyers of a copy.
The released footage of Ranger in Crowfall reminds me a lot of the mechanics seen in GW2 minus the pet. Is that you impression too?
In Cu you can make your own abilities etc. While Crowfall seems to simplistic, I "worry" that the game mechanics in CU will to to complex and hard to comprehend or define for possible buyers of a copy.
Comments
Both games will probably improve somewhat until launch and probably a bit after as well (for after mainly performance and some effects though).
The real question is if they will be fun to play long term.
I was/am a huge supporter of CU. I just recently starting looking into and testing Crowfall. I have tested both games but due to the NDA with CU I cannot comment on what I have seen/played/tested.
GRAPHICS
- Neither game's actual graphics will likely improve at all from here on out. What can change is shadows and animations. So it comes down to which style do you like more. Art styles that tend to go for more realism happen to not look as good as the years progress. Look at games like Age of Conan where it was once considered the prettiest of all the MMOs when it comes to graphics and now it is not as impressive. They don't age well. The more artsy style like World of Warcraft can withstand the test of time.
- More realistic art styles also tend to require higher end computers to play at their max or even attempt large battles.
COMBAT- Both games are shooting for a non-tab targeting system.
- Camelot allows for extra advanced play by creating your own skills, each with their own pros and cons, at the cost of creating a character that could totally suck long term.
- Crowfall does not allow you to create your own skills but the skill system is actually pretty fun from the handful of tests I have been able to be a part of. You can press one of your 1-0 keys on the keyboard to activate a skill and that could be the start and finish to that skill. But, there are skills where I press 3 to activate an ability and then once that has been cast I can press 3 or E for it to branch out to two separate chain attacks, and from that there could be another keypress and this does allow for some advanced plays.
PAYMENT MODELS- Camelot is going to charge a monthly fee on top of your initial box price.
- Crowfall will be buy to play like Guild Wars 2 and require no subscription fee. Once you buy the game you have access to all of its features.
LONG TERM GOALS- It is hard for me, as a lover of Camelot, DaoC, Warhammer, Mythic Entertainment and Marc Jacobs in general to say that it is hard for me to see what the long term play is here. On my server there is a 1 in 3 shot that my realm will be better than the other sides. There will be buffs to players on the realms that aren't as good but that can take fair play away from PvP. So I could end up on a server where the enemy doesn't provide much of a fight for me, or I could even be on the crappy end of the stick. When it comes to expansion content, they stated they didn't want to add dungeons and such so I am not sure what they could add to the game three years from now to keep things fresh for the players other than new zones while you still fight the same enemy teams. I feel like this "PvP Only" game will eventually have to turn to adding a few PVE dungeons to keep the player base strong.
- In Crowfall, you get a long term pro that is also a con. Campaigns that you play on only last a few months, so every few months you will be fighting new players, new enemies, and have different rulesets. And while this seems like a great way to keep the game from getting stale, it also doesn't really allow for rivalries to be created or any sort of server or realm pride. But I do like the fact that the maps will change and get tougher as they go and there are different rings within a campaign that add difficulty to it at the potential possibility of better rewards and you also have the knowledge of if you are your guild are getting rocked this campaign you should still hang in there until the end so you can get rewards you could possibly bring to your eternal kingdom or even the next campaign.
These are the topics that are important to me when it comes to PvP games and as I said I will play both but I was blown away with the testing in Crowfall that I went from trying it to appease two of my friends who were in the tests, to pledging myself because of how much fun I had. I will pay to play Camelot and i will buy and then play Crowfall for free so I can have the best of both worlds.Looking forward to playing both games also.
I think @Loke666 really brought up the best point in whether the games will be fun for long term. I'm looking more for CU personally but the fun is the real question.
DAOC Live (inactive): R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R6 Healer
Honestly you guys arguing which looks better , both look like hot garbage compared to Korean MMO's.
Both games look like PS3/360 games.
DAOC Live (inactive): R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R6 Healer
But even if that wasn't the case, I prefer CU/CF visuals to anything Korean, by far.
A model doesn't matter one bit once you cover it in gear.Trees and brush are nothing any decent engine not from 1980-1990 can't pull off.
So what's left for graphics??The assets that's what,water,trees,brush.rocks are near meaningless as EVERY game has them.
Like in that screenshot,the graphics look awful because all i see is the same structure like castle,it looks more like a Starcraft or CnC module game rather than some believable world.Devs need to do a better job of bringing their worlds to life and feeling like a world and not looking like some computer game.
Again in that screenshot,you wouldn't even need a skilled designer to pull off that entire screen with about 4 hours of work,from creating the few textures to the similar walls and a flag.I could actually d/l for free those brick textures,this is NOT what i would pay any money to play,matter of fact not even good enough to play for free.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
If there is any one thing CU has really going for it is the fact that it was designed from the ground up to run good with a massive amount of players on the screen actively doing stuff.
And, as usual, there's the rub. The consumer doesn't seem to grasp that kind of stuff. They don't know about game engines and polygons and all that jazz. All the base consumer knows is that the graphics and pictures look like something from 10-20 years ago, so it must be a low-budget, school-project type game.
Sadly, it most certainly will cost both of the aforementioned games a ton of players.
Of course, on the flip side, the Korean games draw in tons of players just because pretty graphics is what they are. Granted, those people may not stick around when they find out how the gameplay in most of them is, but they always climb over each other to try them.
I think there are many players who would love the concept of massive open battlefield sieges with hundreds/thousands of players, but even more won't make it that far because of the graphics.
Sometimes in daoc i would be out swimming around in the water at Jord boat drop just completely immersed in my surroundings. This game is going to provide that total immersion. Its huge and open and realistic and beautiful.
I personally think korean games look fake.
But i also think that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
The animations do look awful but that is certainly going to change. It has been said in just about every live stream that the animations are placeholders. Someone just whipped out some quick animations just so that they could test core mechanics and obviously they will be greatly improved.
It seems to me as though the type of person who will be interested in the type of game that this is, will be more inclined to prefer a realistic over a cartoony art style. Marc Jacobs, from everything i have heard him say or write is not aiming at the masses.