To those who are telling people to move on or laughing at them or simply posting your favorite /facepalm image. What if the problem you are shouting down some issue become a problem in the future? How is that bringing any valuable content to the forum?
It is not a problem to discuss potential flaws of a game, but not when the so called "problems" are intended and integral part of the design. Slow combat? It's intended.
You find it boring? Though, but that's intended, because believe it or not there are people who prefer slow Combat to the flashy Final Fantasy style of combat, that's why you get invited to move on because what you think is a problem is actually intended and part of the game design, so there is nothing to discuss.
The developers and the Pantheon community knows already that most people hate slow combat, that's why we classify Pantheon as a niche game, because it is not for everyone. So there is no point in pointing out the obvious.
If you are running around and there's no actual game features/design elements implemented, it's not a game. There's no objective. No goal to obtain.
GAME (noun) "a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck."
Does Ashes have rules that are decided by skill, strength, or luck? No.
Does Pantheon have rules that are decided by skill, strength or luck? Yes.
If it was "real" one of their streams did show them taking down a player controlled boss, again if "real" that shows some sort of game logic going on. I just look at it this way, if something is in full blown development it's a game, it's a concept before that.
That is a bit murkier in this day and age of course. With crowd funding and this idea of securing funding as you go. The lines on full on development have been changed. Prior unless a start up most teams worked on different prototypes to secure one for full on development.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Are you serious? There is not AoC game yet, that's a pre-rendered demo made with Unreal assets. When we will see actual in-game footage of AoC we can make comparisons with the two games, but AoC has nothing to show have they? Pantheon is in Pre-Alpha, AoC is still on the drawing board, big difference.
Actually AoC has been in development for a bit now, the kickstarter was for additional funding. They have been developing prior to this on Steven's bank roll and a private investor. So yes, both games are in pre-alpha.
If that's the case they have very little to show then, not a good sign. The videos you posted aren't actually game-play but Tech Demos which is what Unreal 4 is really good at. Just browse Youtube a bit for "Unreal 4 Design Scene" and you will understand how easy is to produce something similar to what AoC did in just few hours. I am sure AoC devs spent a little more than few hours to make those videos but I am pretty sure there is no actual game as yet. In fact I recognize some of the Unreal 4 Stock assets in the AoC footage which is not a good sign either.
I give AoC the benefit of the doubt of course but comparing a game in actual full development with a Tech Demo is non sense.
Using stock models isn't really a problem as it's no different than using placeholders. I doubt that's a foreign practice in many areas of game development. In most cases the worst I can see happening is having to clear or fill a bit more land once the real asset is put in place.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Honestly, if they both release, I will probably try both. I like the sound of both and will give them both at least a bit of time. I will play the one I like or neither. Thats that for me.
To those who are telling people to move on or laughing at them or simply posting your favorite /facepalm image. What if the problem you are shouting down some issue become a problem in the future? How is that bringing any valuable content to the forum?
It is not a problem to discuss potential flaws of a game, but not when the so called "problems" are intended and integral part of the design. Slow combat? It's intended.
You find it boring? Though, but that's intended, because believe it or not there are people who prefer slow Combat to the flashy Final Fantasy style of combat, that's why you get invited to move on because what you think is a problem is actually intended and part of the game design, so there is nothing to discuss.
The developers and the Pantheon community knows already that most people hate slow combat, that's why we classify Pantheon as a niche game, because it is not for everyone. So there is no point in pointing out the obvious.
You've managed to answer a question of your own devising not pertaining to the issue I raised. You are attempting to inject your interpretation of opinions formed in other threads into this discussion and attributing them to me. As far as I recall, I've never described the Pantheon combat as seen in Streams as 'slow'.
What if 'boring' (my opinion) doesn't mean 'slow' like you've assumed? What if the opinion of 'boring' is formed by some other reason. I can't speak for @Recore, but 'boring' to me is a derivative combat mechanics that other games have used. I do not think the 6-on-1 combat is very innovative, nor progressive. @Recore's opinion may not equate 'boring' to 'slow', either. He is the world's authority on his own opinion, just like you are the authority on your opinion.
Just because a feature is intended, does not make it infallible. It may be entirely possible that aspects that are intention are aspects that certain people might not find conducive to building a viable game with a stable community. That is an opinion. Stating concerns is voicing that opinion.
Defending the project by claiming the developers know what they are doing, that this feature is intended or hiding behind a shield of "it's a niche game", is more of exactly what I was pointing out -- while you've added words to this thread, your intent is merely to shut out any debate of the content.
My prior post, the one to which you responded, was totally about how to engage in discussion. I said nothing about Pantheon, except to point out that several other members had engaged in the 'shout down' strategy, apparently trying to preemptively end a discussion of differing opinions.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
think your friends forget how old EQ1 looked at release....MMO´s always looks graphical dated. and for those who talk about alpha. No it does not get to look a terrible lot better than what it is now. Maybe animations but not gfx.
Personally am looking forward to Pantheon though I "fear" I wont have time for this kind of game anymore ;/
You've managed to answer a question of your own devising not pertaining to the issue I raised. You are attempting to inject your interpretation of opinions formed in other threads into this discussion and attributing them to me. As far as I recall, I've never described the Pantheon combat as seen in Streams as 'slow'.
What if 'boring' (my opinion) doesn't mean 'slow' like you've assumed? What if the opinion of 'boring' is formed by some other reason.
It would be nice to describe what you mean by boring then, instead of leaving it out of subjective interpretation, what do you think? Even in your last post where you talk extensively about pretty much everything but specifically about how to engage in discussions, you fail to explain which part of the combat you find boring, showing that you actually don't know how to engage in a discussion.
We can't have a decent conversation if you just throw generic words like "boring" in the mix without elaborating further.
To those who are telling people to move on or laughing at them or simply posting your favorite /facepalm image. What if the problem you are shouting down some issue become a problem in the future? How is that bringing any valuable content to the forum?
It is not a problem to discuss potential flaws of a game, but not when the so called "problems" are intended and integral part of the design. Slow combat? It's intended.
You find it boring? Though, but that's intended, because believe it or not there are people who prefer slow Combat to the flashy Final Fantasy style of combat, that's why you get invited to move on because what you think is a problem is actually intended and part of the game design, so there is nothing to discuss.
The developers and the Pantheon community knows already that most people hate slow combat, that's why we classify Pantheon as a niche game, because it is not for everyone. So there is no point in pointing out the obvious.
imo, there is too much of the "I don't like this therefore the devs are doing it wrong" going on around game forums. If a game has a feature that a player doesn't like, they should just accept it.
I respect what the Patheon devs are doing even though it is niche.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Using stock models isn't really a problem as it's no different than using placeholders. I doubt that's a foreign practice in many areas of game development. In most cases the worst I can see happening is having to clear or fill a bit more land once the real asset is put in place.
I totally agree, but in this case it is actually quite relevant as AoC was brought up as an example of graphic excellence compared to Pantheon "inferior" graphics. Using stock assets from the Unreal Engine should not be used as a comparison with in-house assets created by Pantheon developers.
When AoC will show their own graphic assets then we can compare. It will also be good to see how fluid the game-play will be if they unleash the Unreal 4 full potential. We know what the Unreal Engine is capable of, the real question is, will their Net Code be able to support the high quality graphics the Unreal Engine can provide?
Star Citizen failed to optimize the Cry Engine, what make you think that the AoC team can optimize a similar engine (made essentially for FPS games) for an MMORPG without having to cut back on the graphic quality?
Using stock models isn't really a problem as it's no different than using placeholders. I doubt that's a foreign practice in many areas of game development. In most cases the worst I can see happening is having to clear or fill a bit more land once the real asset is put in place.
I totally agree, but in this case it is actually quite relevant as AoC was brought up as an example of graphic excellence compared to Pantheon "inferior" graphics. Using stock assets from the Unreal Engine should not be used as a comparison with in-house assets created by Pantheon developers.
When AoC will show their own graphic assets then we can compare. It will also be good to see how fluid the game-play will be if they unleash the Unreal 4 full potential. We know what the Unreal Engine is capable of, the real question is, will their Net Code be able to support the high quality graphics the Unreal Engine can provide?
Star Citizen failed to optimize the Cry Engine, what make you think that the AoC team can optimize a similar engine (made essentially for FPS games) for an MMORPG without having to cut back on the graphic quality?
I agree it was a really bad comparison.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Using stock models isn't really a problem as it's no different than using placeholders. I doubt that's a foreign practice in many areas of game development. In most cases the worst I can see happening is having to clear or fill a bit more land once the real asset is put in place.
I totally agree, but in this case it is actually quite relevant as AoC was brought up as an example of graphic excellence compared to Pantheon "inferior" graphics. Using stock assets from the Unreal Engine should not be used as a comparison with in-house assets created by Pantheon developers.
When AoC will show their own graphic assets then we can compare. It will also be good to see how fluid the game-play will be if they unleash the Unreal 4 full potential. We know what the Unreal Engine is capable of, the real question is, will their Net Code be able to support the high quality graphics the Unreal Engine can provide?
Star Citizen failed to optimize the Cry Engine, what make you think that the AoC team can optimize a similar engine (made essentially for FPS games) for an MMORPG without having to cut back on the graphic quality?
Graphics don't necessarily have much to do with the net code, i.e. you aren't streaming the textures, animations, etc. that is all client side and simply represented by reference numbers in the net code; e.g. that attack you just did is simply animation 4B8F5A, doesn't matter how smooth and / or fancy it is, and that helmet you a wearing is simply item 97FE3C with mod 4D15, doesn't matter if it is a cardboard box or a highly detailed replica of a Roman Imperial Centurion helmet.
The performance impact with MMOs comes from the number of players in a single area at any one time, which can potential be hundreds, if not thousands, and given that each of those players is likely to be unique (i.e. different gear, doing different things, moving unpredictably, etc.) and can potentially come and go at any time (meaning dynamic loading of all their customisations), the multiplier effect of all that means that the net code for a MMO needs to optimized very differently to that of an FPS (which typically only has to deal with up to a few dozen players at once, and in most cases all those players will load in at the start of a match, allowing you to pre-load all their gear, character customisations, etc. even if they haven't seen each other yet).
Outdoor looks doable, indoor looked like they will need plenty of work, attack animations looks awful.
The problem with "its pre-alpha" so all is fine is that they should be 3.5 years into development of something that would hopefully be done before 2018 is over. If we give them a break for the projects troublesome beginning they still had 2.5 years of development time. What they show doesn't look like a game that is in its last third of development, instead it looks like something that is nearing the middle of development.
You can't say this is fine and then believe there will be a 2018 release.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Outdoor looks doable, indoor looked like they will need plenty of work, attack animations looks awful.
The problem with "its pre-alpha" so all is fine is that they should be 3.5 years into development of something that would hopefully be done before 2018 is over. If we give them a break for the projects troublesome beginning they still had 2.5 years of development time. What they show doesn't look like a game that is in its last third of development, instead it looks like something that is nearing the middle of development.
You can't say this is fine and then believe there will be a 2018 release.
It depends. Do you know what they are working on right at this moment? Animations could be place holders and when new ones are done they simply have to put them in game. This occurs over a patch or 2 within a very short time. Games develop very commonly with place holders until the core systems are in place and a game can look vastly improved over a single build update.
Most of what makes an mmo has nothing to with graphics.
Outdoor looks doable, indoor looked like they will need plenty of work, attack animations looks awful.
The problem with "its pre-alpha" so all is fine is that they should be 3.5 years into development of something that would hopefully be done before 2018 is over. If we give them a break for the projects troublesome beginning they still had 2.5 years of development time. What they show doesn't look like a game that is in its last third of development, instead it looks like something that is nearing the middle of development.
You can't say this is fine and then believe there will be a 2018 release.
I agree a 2018 full launch is stretching it, I don't know how many expect that TBH. I'd expect early testing to start around later 2018. Later if they don't take this early "alpha" testing approach of today.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Exactly... since I do not see anything wrong with the graphics or currently updated animations. In fact, I still play vanilla EQ and vanilla DAoC because they are both legendary games. In my opinion, graphics are the last thing that make MMOs a true masterpiece.
EDIT: Pantheon is not trying to appease the Asian MMO market of TERA, ArcheAge and Black Desert Online style of Crouching Tiger animations. Sure, combat is invigorating in those games, if you're a 12 year old on a Mt. Dew high. EverQuest was a "relaxing" MMO and focused on group adventures and socialization. It's focal point was NOT about combat or animations. Granted Pantheon is not EQ or even it's spiritual successor ( even though I will claim it as such ), it does have pretty decent graphics. Does it need action combat? No, I'm afraid it does not.
Sorry to go off the rails but this needs to be said....What is the point in these types of statements? Outside of making am immature dig at anyone who prefers a "less relaxing" experience of course?
I prefer a more slow paced experience as well, but I'd never resort to such a statement. It's just completely uncalled for. It just prolongs exactly what you're trying to shutdown. The same goes for attempting to shutdown such complaints in anyway. You're just inviting more of what you don't wanna see.. many would simply carry said discussion further just to spite you. It's an open forum.... Learn to accept other views for pete's sake.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Exactly... since I do not see anything wrong with the graphics or currently updated animations. In fact, I still play vanilla EQ and vanilla DAoC because they are both legendary games. In my opinion, graphics are the last thing that make MMOs a true masterpiece.
EDIT: Pantheon is not trying to appease the Asian MMO market of TERA, ArcheAge and Black Desert Online style of Crouching Tiger animations. Sure, combat is invigorating in those games, if you're a 12 year old on a Mt. Dew high. EverQuest was a "relaxing" MMO and focused on group adventures and socialization. It's focal point was NOT about combat or animations. Granted Pantheon is not EQ or even it's spiritual successor ( even though I will claim it as such ), it does have pretty decent graphics. Does it need action combat? No, I'm afraid it does not.
Sorry to go off the rails but this needs to be said....What is the point in these types of statements? Outside of making am immature dig at anyone who prefers a "less relaxing" experience of course?
I prefer a more slow paced experience as well, but I'd never resort to such a statement. It's just completely uncalled for. ANd just prolongs exactly what you're trying to shutdown. The same goes for attempting to shutdown such complaints in anyway. You're just inviting more of what you don't wanna see.. many would simply carry said discussion further just to spite you. It's an open forum.... Learn to accept other views for pete's sake.
So 12 year olds on a Mt. Dew high don't enjoy action combat MMOs? Is that what you're telling me? Yes, I know. We live in a politically correct world where stereotypes are forbidden because whether they are true or not are bound to hurt someones feelings. I could also just skate across that whole argument and call this a figure of speech. In which I represent the "typical" instead of "stereotypical" person who may enjoy those games as a larger demographic than most others of the worldwide gaming audience. Point is, Pantheon is not trying to appease that particular audience and to make my point a little more vivid, I gave a visual.
I'm also glad you chose to respond to that only sentence in my post, rather than debate the entire thing, which can also be used as a ironic finger pointing argument you yourself are so valiantly trying to defend.
Because I agree the graphics and gameplay are fine, so what argument would I have against those points? I'm just saying you're inviting even more of what you're attempting to subdue. And who's offended by being called a 12 year old anyway? LOL That's about as childish and pointless as an insult can get.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If most games start out with a really low graphical fidelity while they are building the early game. Why then is Ashes graphical fidelity already so high?
I do agree the graphics arent up to date in the streams, in fact first thing I think is how much it reminds me of Vanguard. However much like the animations its probably still a work in progress and shouldnt be fully judged yet. Graphics and animations have been steadily improving in the year or so ive been following s o its obviously a WIP. Not that we should just shut up and be happy, it all definitely needs improvement.
TBH, I think they only need to add/optimize newer dx filters(?) to pretty it up. Id say its mostly the lighting making some areas look flat and dated. They are using a fairly recent pre-built engine so it should be possible. Some of the screenshots look nice already so maybe theyre just disable some settings that are causing problems for streams and what not.
IMO if youre taking anything from the streams other than a general idea of what the developers have in mind, youre doing it wrong.
Graphics are so often the focus here, but are actually of so little importance when it comes to what really matters in the end - gameplay.
hmmmm "maybe'.
I can easily understand why people want certain types of graphics or an art design that resonates with them.
I can tell you that if the game play of a particular game is amazing, friggin' fabulous, best ever, but I don't like the art design, I WILL NEVER PLAY IT.
Ever.
For me I need that other axis.
But to the point, when playing a game like Pantheon, one must understand it's an indy game, it's not going to be super beautiful and slick like a 200 million behemoth of a game.
As long as one can make peace with that and they like the game it shouldn't be a problem.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
You've managed to answer a question of your own devising not pertaining to the issue I raised. You are attempting to inject your interpretation of opinions formed in other threads into this discussion and attributing them to me. As far as I recall, I've never described the Pantheon combat as seen in Streams as 'slow'.
What if 'boring' (my opinion) doesn't mean 'slow' like you've assumed? What if the opinion of 'boring' is formed by some other reason.
It would be nice to describe what you mean by boring then, instead of leaving it out of subjective interpretation, what do you think? Even in your last post where you talk extensively about pretty much everything but specifically about how to engage in discussions, you fail to explain which part of the combat you find boring, showing that you actually don't know how to engage in a discussion.
We can't have a decent conversation if you just throw generic words like "boring" in the mix without elaborating further.
If you hadn't bothered to truncate my post. I pretty much advanced my position in the paragraph you snipped.
I do not think the 6-on-1 combat is very innovative, nor progressive.
That's my opinion on why the combat looked uninteresting. Show me something other than 6-on-1 with CC. Show me 4x 1-on-1 fights with 1xDPS for making one fight a 2-on-1, and a healer trying to keep 4 tank roles healed. Show me 1 character tanking 3 mobs in a defensive stance, with 4-on-1, and a healer. Show me a different style of play, not the same things I did in 1999. I'd welcome seeing that.
Maybe focus a bit more on what is actually said before you lash out to defend Pantheon.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
And that's okay. People have different priorities. Games make decisions based on their own priorities. FF14: ARR actually downgraded their graphics in favor of performance when they did the reboot.
Graphics are so often the focus here, but are actually of so little importance when it comes to what really matters in the end - gameplay.
hmmmm "maybe'.
I can easily understand why people want certain types of graphics or an art design that resonates with them.
I can tell you that if the game play of a particular game is amazing, friggin' fabulous, best ever, but I don't like the art design, I WILL NEVER PLAY IT.
Ever.
For me I need that other axis.
But to the point, when playing a game like Pantheon, one must understand it's an indy game, it's not going to be super beautiful and slick like a 200 million behemoth of a game.
As long as one can make peace with that and they like the game it shouldn't be a problem.
I hate the character models in DDO. The rest of the game looks okay. I enjoyed the gameplay, but I hated how the characters look. They're all hideous with horrible skin tones and color palettes. I've tried a couple of times but it drives me crazy after a while. That makes all the other flaws I would have overlooked stand out that much more.
I agree. The game play is fine but the setting and especially the character models, are horrid.
Turbine just isn't good at that.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
Slow combat?
It's intended.
You find it boring?
Though, but that's intended, because believe it or not there are people who prefer slow Combat to the flashy Final Fantasy style of combat, that's why you get invited to move on because what you think is a problem is actually intended and part of the game design, so there is nothing to discuss.
The developers and the Pantheon community knows already that most people hate slow combat, that's why we classify Pantheon as a niche game, because it is not for everyone.
So there is no point in pointing out the obvious.
That is a bit murkier in this day and age of course. With crowd funding and this idea of securing funding as you go. The lines on full on development have been changed. Prior unless a start up most teams worked on different prototypes to secure one for full on development.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
What if 'boring' (my opinion) doesn't mean 'slow' like you've assumed? What if the opinion of 'boring' is formed by some other reason. I can't speak for @Recore, but 'boring' to me is a derivative combat mechanics that other games have used. I do not think the 6-on-1 combat is very innovative, nor progressive. @Recore's opinion may not equate 'boring' to 'slow', either. He is the world's authority on his own opinion, just like you are the authority on your opinion.
Just because a feature is intended, does not make it infallible. It may be entirely possible that aspects that are intention are aspects that certain people might not find conducive to building a viable game with a stable community. That is an opinion. Stating concerns is voicing that opinion.
Defending the project by claiming the developers know what they are doing, that this feature is intended or hiding behind a shield of "it's a niche game", is more of exactly what I was pointing out -- while you've added words to this thread, your intent is merely to shut out any debate of the content.
My prior post, the one to which you responded, was totally about how to engage in discussion. I said nothing about Pantheon, except to point out that several other members had engaged in the 'shout down' strategy, apparently trying to preemptively end a discussion of differing opinions.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Personally am looking forward to Pantheon though I "fear" I wont have time for this kind of game anymore ;/
Even in your last post where you talk extensively about pretty much everything but specifically about how to engage in discussions, you fail to explain which part of the combat you find boring, showing that you actually don't know how to engage in a discussion.
We can't have a decent conversation if you just throw generic words like "boring" in the mix without elaborating further.
imo, there is too much of the "I don't like this therefore the devs are doing it wrong" going on around game forums. If a game has a feature that a player doesn't like, they should just accept it.
I respect what the Patheon devs are doing even though it is niche.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
At least Patheon can deliver gameplay video not another cinematic footage.
Using stock assets from the Unreal Engine should not be used as a comparison with in-house assets created by Pantheon developers.
When AoC will show their own graphic assets then we can compare.
It will also be good to see how fluid the game-play will be if they unleash the Unreal 4 full potential.
We know what the Unreal Engine is capable of, the real question is, will their Net Code be able to support the high quality graphics the Unreal Engine can provide?
Star Citizen failed to optimize the Cry Engine, what make you think that the AoC team can optimize a similar engine (made essentially for FPS games) for an MMORPG without having to cut back on the graphic quality?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The performance impact with MMOs comes from the number of players in a single area at any one time, which can potential be hundreds, if not thousands, and given that each of those players is likely to be unique (i.e. different gear, doing different things, moving unpredictably, etc.) and can potentially come and go at any time (meaning dynamic loading of all their customisations), the multiplier effect of all that means that the net code for a MMO needs to optimized very differently to that of an FPS (which typically only has to deal with up to a few dozen players at once, and in most cases all those players will load in at the start of a match, allowing you to pre-load all their gear, character customisations, etc. even if they haven't seen each other yet).
The problem with "its pre-alpha" so all is fine is that they should be 3.5 years into development of something that would hopefully be done before 2018 is over. If we give them a break for the projects troublesome beginning they still had 2.5 years of development time. What they show doesn't look like a game that is in its last third of development, instead it looks like something that is nearing the middle of development.
You can't say this is fine and then believe there will be a 2018 release.
Most of what makes an mmo has nothing to with graphics.
You stay sassy!
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I prefer a more slow paced experience as well, but I'd never resort to such a statement. It's just completely uncalled for. It just prolongs exactly what you're trying to shutdown. The same goes for attempting to shutdown such complaints in anyway. You're just inviting more of what you don't wanna see.. many would simply carry said discussion further just to spite you. It's an open forum.... Learn to accept other views for pete's sake.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
TBH, I think they only need to add/optimize newer dx filters(?) to pretty it up. Id say its mostly the lighting making some areas look flat and dated. They are using a fairly recent pre-built engine so it should be possible. Some of the screenshots look nice already so maybe theyre just disable some settings that are causing problems for streams and what not.
IMO if youre taking anything from the streams other than a general idea of what the developers have in mind, youre doing it wrong.
I can easily understand why people want certain types of graphics or an art design that resonates with them.
I can tell you that if the game play of a particular game is amazing, friggin' fabulous, best ever, but I don't like the art design, I WILL NEVER PLAY IT.
Ever.
For me I need that other axis.
But to the point, when playing a game like Pantheon, one must understand it's an indy game, it's not going to be super beautiful and slick like a 200 million behemoth of a game.
As long as one can make peace with that and they like the game it shouldn't be a problem.
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
I do not think the 6-on-1 combat is very innovative, nor progressive.
That's my opinion on why the combat looked uninteresting. Show me something other than 6-on-1 with CC. Show me 4x 1-on-1 fights with 1xDPS for making one fight a 2-on-1, and a healer trying to keep 4 tank roles healed. Show me 1 character tanking 3 mobs in a defensive stance, with 4-on-1, and a healer. Show me a different style of play, not the same things I did in 1999. I'd welcome seeing that.
Maybe focus a bit more on what is actually said before you lash out to defend Pantheon.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Turbine just isn't good at that.
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