Graphics

If this game has realistic turn times late game then these will be my favourite ever civ graphics. Me and most of my friends play civ on fairly low end machines. For some of us, civ v only exists as the strategic view anyway. More inclusiveness is great in my book.

Cartoony may be a little disappointing, but it's a better way of doing low end graphics than just less detail, which would just look cheap, while still making the game actually more fun.

 

I just went back and looked again more closely and I'm just face palming.

Look at the swords on the swordsmen! They're like something out of a Disney cartoon Does Firaxis not know the demographic of its own fans yet? I mean, I know that there's over 8 million copies of Civ V sold - but what percentage of those copies are owned by the under twelves?

The cliffs along the shore are a throw back to Pirates - in fact the whole visual style reminds me a lot of Pirates - which was a fun game but graphics for kiddies

The farm houses and the mine look like they've been ripped straight out of Warcraft - Maybe Orc is a new civ

The wonders? Who cares about the scale...the pyramids are something from Disney's Aladin! I mean they don't have to be exact copies of the pyramids of Giza but they should be similar - who the heck dreamt up that portico? If you're building the Collosus of Rhodes - it should look something similar to way the Collosus allegedly looked - astride the harbour entrance - not a Disneyfied bronze version of the statue of liberty - unless that's not supposed to be the Collosus ?

The whole thing feels more like a fantasy world rather than a real world.

I'll be buying this one on sale for sure if the screenies don't improve over the next few months.

I really loved the way CiV V edged towards a more "realistic" representation of the world after III and IV. What I'm seeing here isn't a step back but a step beyond backwards. Firaxis - I am not ten years old and most of your customers aren't! Wake up!

 

It looks better than Civ 4, which is nice, in fact. Really pleasant and fun to play. I cannot wait

 

I do like the new graphics.

 

Seriously, why do a separate thread for graphics, screenshots are screenshots we judge anything from them, and everything has already been told in the screenshots thread, so that now my moved comment have no sense and I wouldn't have done it in this thread.

Moderator Action: This post is PDMA. If you have a question about, or disagree with, a moderator action, PM a moderator. Do not post in the public forums.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

Have to say I agree about the awful cartoony graphics. Surely Firaxis knew this would be the general response. Can't help thinking they have shot themselves in the foot big time with these ridiculous graphics.

 

It only seems jarring because Civ 5 tried to look more realistic. If you're just coming off Civ 4 with its cartoony tanks and leader portraits, Civ 6 would seem more like a natural progression and in keeping with some other Firaxis releases like Gettysburg or Pirates.

 

I think the flak is really overblown. My initial impression was it looked a bit 'mobile gamey' but I like the look and i liked Civ5 before that but didn't like Civ4 graphics.

Its the gameplay i care about, I'm hoping it at least has the depth of civ5 and that the AI can actually compete this time.

 

The style looks bad and the contrast with the tone of the promotional art is particularly conspicuous, I don't think it's really fitting the tone of the game at all. It definitely looks like they're going to be trying to pull in people from the mobile market. I don't really agree with people who say this is a natural evolution of IV's visuals, the contrast between IV and V's visuals are not nearly this jarring.

 

I just realized something. So many people think it looks like a mobile game (and they're right), but there's something else about the terrain.
It looks like a boardgame. Firaxis likes boardgames and that's probably what they were going for.
It's not working for me. Of course it's not a dealbraker if the gameplay is really good, but already there's something I really dislike about Civ 6.
Maybe the screenshots are very zoomed in and it will look better in motion.

I'm awaiting the first leader screenshots with dread and trepidation. My fear is that they went back to 4's huge headed caricatures.

 

I fear for the day i see the leader screenshots as well. This might just be a big dissapointment if they keep with this art style. Hope it is at least not to simplified.
Just loved civ 5 leader screenshots so much. I rarely skipped them.

 

I think the most glaring issue with the graphics are the colours. I'm comforted to see that the game looks much better when saturation is turned down like this post for instance. The art style in itself looks ok to me, there are some parts I don't really like (mostly the trees), and the scaling does seem a bit extreme, but I guess that might also partially be because this is so zoomed in, so I think that might look better on normal view.

 

Really?

http://store.steampowered.com/app/341940/

Here you go. Teen angst is kinda unique, enjoy it while it lasts.

Moderator Action: Please be respectful to other members.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

I like the new graphics. They remind me of Blizzard games, but in a good way. The models and terrain are clean and easy to identify. Maybe they can tone down the saturation very slightly, but overall it looks good. I notice quite a few improvements:

- The way the ships reflect on the ocean looks amazing!
- The mountains. The way they blend into a natural looking mountain range, you can't even tell where the boundaries between hexes is. They look great.
- Roads look good, no noticeable spaghetti
- City buildings are graphically located in a logical location, such as the lighthouse being placed on a rock in the middle of the harbor. And they look great.
- The level of detail on improvements is improved noticeably. Just look at the lumber camp and compare that to Civ 5. In the new one you can actually see stacks of logs, saws, etc.
Compare this (Civ5):

Spoiler :

With this (Civ6):

Spoiler :

Two things I didn't like as much:
- The trees. They seem too thin to represent forests, and the christmas-tree-like uniform pine trees do look a bit too cartoony. I think adding variety and density to the trees would improve the overall aesthetic substantially.
- The way the river forms out of nowhere near the mountains. I would love to see more of a watershed, with many streams coming down the nearby mountains, merging to form a river. The way it forms out of the middle of a desert in the screenshot is pretty bad:

Spoiler :

 

I'm for whatever gives a clear picture of the game state and doesn't slow it to a crawl. Civ's strength lies in its gameplay. Graphics should not drag it down, and they absolutely did in Civ V (to the point where you could issue multiple orders before the game executed one, while above recommended spec. I'm not training in a clanhouse for StarCraft, I shouldn't be able to out-order the interface trivially).

@ OP: Civ IV could get away with bad zoom scaling due to having enormous stacks that couldn't possibly represented, meaning you were best off mousing over for text description regardless of what the top unit displayed appeared to be. If top-down identification is important then as you say the models should be more distinctive.

 

When talking about childish graphics, personally I find the sort of forced "mature" grim Warhammer 40k Space marines with skulls and chainswords -style more childish than this sort of crisp and cartoony style.

The realistic palette and style of Civ V is good too, but did you know they actually have four different palettes in the game, African, European, American and Asian style, with different forests and mountains etc.
You never notice it in game as its all pretty murky and earth-toned. The models and animations of the units thjemself are good but map isnt very living.

I have 2000+ hours to Civ V so after being used to it's art the new style jumped to my face, but I find it really refreshing.

After Civ IV the art and map of Civ V felt very static, in Civ IV the trees moved in the wind, crows flew from woods and units left footprints on the desert sand. Also cities show what buildings they have. In Civ V forests are this mossy palette..

Civ VI again shows what has been built and they promised more details when zooming etc. On the third screenshot, look at the lush dense jungle in the northern part of the map, looks cool.

All the features and systems in the game seem amazing so far, you should get over this artstyle and wait for the final product.

 

I don't see what's to "get over" anyhow.

It seems striking, stylized in a very "mainstream CGI movie" sort of way ( not an insult,) and some of the mechanics sound promising.

I'm cautious but very optimistic on this one.

 

Well I keep trying to see the positive in the graphics, but yuck. I still think they look like a Disney cartoon and that is not what I play Civ for. Unless they improve this it will be a steam sale game for me.

I didn't think BE graphics were very good, but they are a lot better than this. One thing I love about CivV is the alternate history aspect, but this is alternate cartoons and I never watched many cartoons even as a child. And the best part for me is exploring new worlds I don't care to explore cartoons which this would be. Hopefully things will be improved, but I have concerns since it's Oct release they should really be in the optimizing and balancing stages (and bug fixing) not just starting on the graphics.

And the trees, still remind of a really old fight sim...or maybe a 60's era Lionel train set.

 

BE's graphics were fine, it was the UI design and color palette that was the problem.

 

If you can see it on the screen it's part of the graphics.