poor code would make it so people wouldn't be able to run the game on they're computers, not beautiful graphic design.
Sub-Par graphics, congrats firaxis.
- Thread starter Mr_Wonka
- Start date
poor code would make it so people wouldn't be able to run the game on they're computers, not beautiful graphic design.
Insanity_X
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 230
poor code =/= bad graphics.
The graphics you see here wont be what's included. As has been shown in previous posts in the thread, graphics change greatly as the game goes from pre alpha (now) to release (in six months). lets just enjoy the ride for now.
The graphics you see here wont be what's included. As has been shown in previous posts in the thread, graphics change greatly as the game goes from pre alpha (now) to release (in six months). lets just enjoy the ride for now.
Skyre Noktis
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 271
I like how this post originally just said "Your ignorance is bliss" and then you gradually added bits to it over about five or six edits to make it look semi-respectable. Classy.
Are you going to provide anything to back up your claims whatsoever? A single screenshot of a game with similar but better graphics, perhaps? Then we'd have something to discuss. You're pretty close to trolling at the moment.
Also, I'd like to point out that thinking the graphics are fine as they are *is* a valid opinion and the thread being called "Sub-Par graphics" doesn't mean that everyone posting in it has to hold that as some kind of self-evident truth.
croxis
Chat room op
Perfect set up for me, thank you.
It is unfair from a technical standpoint to compare the graphics of different game point of views. The requirements for a first person point of view is much different that a god view such as civ or sim city. The architecture of graphics cards has been designed for first person games.
Part of the problem is geom count (this is mostly trouble for city builders). Even older graphics cards can render millions of polygons... if they are grouped into one object. Place 2000 objects with just one polygon on them and even the most modern graphics cards will grind down to a near halt. Hardware instancing and advanced culling techniques can help allivate this problem. This is also why there seemed to be a texture switch when zooming to globe view as well as a removal of units -- to keep the geom count down.
Ahh Avatar. Loved the movie and visually stunning. Also took about a day to render one frame. Civ 5 needs to render 60 of them a second, or 30 with motion blur.
My point still stands. Show me a screenshot comparison with equivalent graphical settings. So a game that used terrain splatting, high camera view, etc. I'm a man of data, not hyperbole.
Daftpanzer
canonically ambiguous
I agree with Abaddon. All those moaning about the graphics are poor victims of capitalist hardware industry brainwashing. Help the games industry by caring about the game itself!
Gameplay first priority IMO
AI second priority
Visual detail/style third (give the user information in an easily understood way, represent what is going on in the game world, and add 'charm' and 'character')
Actual quality of the visuals / # of special effects hardly matters to me after that.
Gameplay first priority IMO
AI second priority
Visual detail/style third (give the user information in an easily understood way, represent what is going on in the game world, and add 'charm' and 'character')
Actual quality of the visuals / # of special effects hardly matters to me after that.
lemmy101
Emperor
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2006
- Messages
- 1,064
You want good graphics? Go play Crysis. This is a strategy game. Would you prefer they spend 3/4 of the development time making the graphics prettier, or making an awesome strategy game with awesome mod support? Get over yourself.
I'm frankly amazed anyone who could claim to be a Civ fan could possibly complain about such a thing. In a forum full of die hard Civ fans, no less.
Also, I think the graphics are lovely and a massive improvement over previous PC civs. God only knows how you coped with Civ 1 and 2 if you think these graphics are poor.
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
I still play Civ 3... graphics don't mean crap to me, obviously. The screenshots so far are nothing spectacular. That is what was said. I still play Alpha Centauri also, among a host of others.
But the graphics are still par; sub-par at this point of the game screen itself. Hopefully they improve at time of release. No point for you all to get a blood clot over it.
If you are too lazy to use google, I won't help that bad habit.
@Skyre Noktis: I added to my post directly after the post... Leave your crap in your mouth.
Tom
But the graphics are still par; sub-par at this point of the game screen itself. Hopefully they improve at time of release. No point for you all to get a blood clot over it.
If you are too lazy to use google, I won't help that bad habit.
@Skyre Noktis: I added to my post directly after the post... Leave your crap in your mouth.
Tom
which is Civ 5?
Golf terms do not transfer over to other terms. Sub-par means that something is below standard, and in golf that is a higher point value than is par. But, in real life, a lot of things, profit among them, result in sub-par values lower than standard.
Did that make sense?
Did that make sense?
In other words, you have no evidence of a game that is similar to Civ (e.g. tile based turn based strategy) that has "better" graphics.
I would love for you to prove me wrong. Perhaps you can recommend some search terms I could try?
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
No, if you can't use the abilities you have to look for yourself, then you can continue thinking that Civ 5 has the best graphics in the universe for all I care. I'm not going to play 'daddy' with you and spoon-feed you.
As long as there is good gameplay, 5 can have isometric and I will buy it.
Tom
It's pretty simple.
Produce the evidence, retract the remark or just admit that you were wrong.
If you can show me a game that is comparable to Civ that has outstanding graphics that will meet your tastes then just show it. I happen to like good graphics in a game as well. If you can show me a game like Civ that is head and shoulders above it graphics wise I'll agree with you about the ciV graphics. You'll convince me that I'm wrong.
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
I never stated I would compare game graphics that are Civ knock-offs. That came out of the hole in your face you call a mouth.
I won't change your diaper either, I won't retract any remark, and you can just deal with it. Everyone likes good graphics, but things like this:
look like crap. Do I care? No. But it does look like crap. Will it improve, I'm sure it will. But right now, this is what they have released. Back to your rabbit hole.
Tom
I never stated I would compare game graphics that are Civ knock-offs. That came out of the hole in your face you call a mouth.
I won't change your diaper either, I won't retract any remark, and you can just deal with it. Everyone likes good graphics, but things like this:
look like crap. Do I care? No. But it does look like crap. Will it improve, I'm sure it will. But right now, this is what they have released. Back to your rabbit hole.
Tom
A lot of smack talk for someone that can't back it up.
Thanks for showing me the pre alpha screen shot again. Now we're making progress. Now show me an equivalent game to Civ with mind blowing graphics. If you say the graphics are sub par then you are making a comparison. Please show what is par or above par. That or retract the statement and have some nappy time.
Disgustipated
Deity
I will accept the graphics aren't top of the line in 2010. But who cares? It looks good to me (assuming they fix the city overplapping issue).
Your post seems to say that people who play FPS games play civ games. While some may, I'm willing to bet most have never even heard of Civ. The company is marketing towards a different type of gamer. One who does not have a top of the line computer system and can't handle top of the line graphics.
I'd like to see data on civ's numbers, but I'm willing to bet most are casual gamers. Even the people who post here or other civ sites are the minority.
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
A lot of smack talk for someone that can't back it up.
Thanks for showing me the pre alpha screen shot again. Now we're making progress. Now show me an equivalent game to Civ with mind blowing graphics. If you say the graphics are sub par then you are making a comparison. Please show what is par or above par. That or retract the statement and have some nappy time. Someone's a little bit cranky right now and needs a time out.
It's tough to bicker with someone who doesn't listen. My comparison is overall in 3d games. I never stated a Civ knock-off or Civ equivalent game as you keep clinging to.
The graphics as par are average, nothing mind-blowing or stellar. If you don't understand what that means, then I won't waste my time with your intellectual inabilities any longer.
The thing I am impressed with is the graphic scalability... which is terrific, the game should run on almost any gig.
Tom
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
:facepalm:
Its. Called. An. Alpha.
Its. Called. An. Alpha.
Similar threads
