Graphics

[DefiantMars]

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

From what I'm familiar with, usually the term "graphics" is used to refer to the quality and resolution of the displayed imagery. The part that everyone is griping about is more closely related to the style and color. Yes, they all fall into the "visual" part of the design spectrum.

 

[darkskies]

From what I'm familiar with, usually the term "graphics" is used to refer to the quality and resolution of the displayed imagery. The part that everyone is griping about is more closely related to the style and color. Yes, they all fall into the "visual" part of the design spectrum.

Well it's been 25 since I took a computer graphics class, but graphics was all about what you could show on the display. I wrote a nice little graphics program on an Amiga, that showed things like anti-aliasing, transforms, rotations and a lot more, it's all graphics as far as I know. Anyway in the context of this thread, I think people are talking about the style of what they are seeing as graphics so basically that's why I defined graphics as I did.

 

[rschissler]

To me, the problem with Civ V graphics is that the units are so small that it is difficult to tell some units from others, which is probably why they slapped those ugly silhouette icons to them. So, I hope this is fixed.

 

[hugojackson18]

What I'm hoping is animation in the improvements, like mines moving, lighthouse's light rotating, that kind of thing. It would be a lot cooler to mod the game if we could implement this kind of secondary animations.
If they toned down the saturation, added a few effects and have secondary animation on the map, I think I could forgive the cartoonish style.

Once again, being a cartoonish style is not what the problem is here. It's the way it's done. You can have cartoon design but realistic atmospherics. Here it just looks cheap because of suck lack of "polishness" to it... Which I hope is gonna get added afterwards.

 

[Amrunril]

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 disagree. In my mind, boardgame like graphics would be something like Civ V's strategic mode. Simple, yet elegant and easy to read. I would be very happy with such a style (in fact, I usually play in strategic mode), but this isn't it.

As much as I'd prefer not to use a description that's already been repeated so many times, cartoonish really does seem like the best description. The bright colors seem too eye catching, making it difficult to focus on any one feature instead of emphasizing the important ones. Meanwhile, although the features are in some ways more detailed than those of Civ V or BE, they don't mesh with the surroundings at all, losing the artistic sense of those games.


I would love to have graphics expanding on those of Civ V, with the ability to shift from "as close to a work of art as a computer can create" to "simple yet elegant and functional" depending on performance settings and choices about tools like the hex grid and resource icons. Instead, these graphics seem not only to move away from both these goals simultaneously, but also to be sufficiently garish as to be an active distraction from gameplay.

 

[hugojackson18]

I would love to have graphics expanding on those of Civ V, with the ability to shift from "as close to a work of art as a computer can create" to "simple yet elegant and functional" depending on performance settings and choices about tools like the hex grid and resource icons.

THIS!

Even if it seems really unlikely, this would be absolutely perfect.

 

[MosheLevi]

I expected a stunning next gen. graphics upgrade; and what we get is downgrade. Ridiculous.

I agree, I expected the same and was ready to pre-purchase Civ 6, but then I saw the cartoony screen shot and all the excitement was gone.
I am not paying $60 for a cartoony game.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I agree, I expected the same and was ready to pre-purchase Civ 6, but then I saw the cartoony screen shot and all the excitement was gone.
I am not paying $60 for a cartoony game.

Actually I was expecting to buy a new computer with Civ6. Now, I see I don't have to. It's not only a matter of "cartoony", it's really a matter of graphical complexity... or over simplicity in this case. I would have prefered Firaxis to find a way to work complex graphics without sacrificing the clarity needed for this type of game. I was pretty confident. This is a huge disappointment.

Worse yet, and from what I read about mechanics, mechanics are cartoony, just like graphics implied. Just like Civ5 and Civ4. They are so arbitrary, rigid and unfun that it's becoming pityful. I definitely won't buying this, and I'm definitely done dreaming about that series.

Not to mention evolutions are shy. They are presented like revolutions, and that is in a way, but just because it didn't existed before is not necessarily what makes it revolutionnary. People are so eager of novelty that they judge innovation within its only character of novelty, not considering any.other.aspect. Ever. "OMG it's new ! Buy buy buy..." This is so impulsive, immature and brainless.

Civ6 is really Civ5.1. I was so disgusted when I saw in the screenshots that rivers was still between tiles, making their navigation impossible. They are still rare and blocky. Absolutely no effort has been done, this is insulting. And it's what can be seen in most domains, graphics first. Firaxis people are so lazy, untalented, and arrogant.

 

[hugojackson18]

A friend just sent me a screenshot of Total War: Kingdoms, which runs on Android, and I personally think it looks better than those Civ6 screenshots. And it's on Mobile. Even if they were to port it to mobile and that this was the plan and the reason for cartoony graphics, this is proof it wouldnt have to be.

Spoiler :

The trees and the water move, and it runs smoothly. I know its not of the scale of Civilization in term of map size and we haven't seen any animation yet so there's still loads to be seen, but I'm surprised of how much better this looks...

And I would have LOVED to have trully different atmosphere and ambiances in different parts of the map, like the North tundra to be more foggy and blue, and the desert part to feel hot and really sunny. A bit like the differences from kingdoms in the Games Of Thrones series, and like that.

Spoiler :

I just really hope they're not done with it yet, that they are listening but I've got a feeling that with release in 5 months, things are pretty much set in stone.... I just hope we can mod it and that the actual engine would support that kind of stuff. I really really hope....

 

[Matthew.]

The overall art style and direction won't change, not this close to release. However, there is still plenty of time to update basic models. For example those horses, which look terrible, could be updated with a better model. Same for the trees.

I also think the overall brightness needs to be toned down. I'm not talking about grim dark several different shades of brown, just a bit less... garish. Luckily I'm pretty sure we will be able to mod this change in about 5 minutes after release.

What I really want to see is a regular in-game screenshot. You know, zoomed out with the user interface, icons, etc. I think being zoomed in with no interface only highlights the... not so good parts. I mean even Civ 5 looks pretty bad if you do the same...

 

[shibumi]

Regarding graphics, I don't think there is much room for subjectivity here, them being so objectively insanely unbelievably ugly. Even with performance and readibility in mind, there can be no excuses for such a failure.

Will be interested though to know the person who has been acting as art director here, I mean someone who has followed art courses most certainly, yet was responsible for this and (which, despite everything else, deserves some respect in a strange way) manage to convince the whole chain of command at Firaxis and 2K that this was a good idea for such an important game.


Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk

 

[Gorbles]

Art is never objectively ugly, and by definition cannot be. Let's not attempt critical analysis of the art on display if we don't understand the definition of art, nor its evolution through history.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Just a thought:

In Civ V the devs noted that one of the reasons why there was only one leader per civ is that the leader screens were so labor-intensive to create. One of the reasons for that was probably the more realistic design of them. Perhaps they chose the less realistic style to decrease the resource burden of some aspect of the game.

Perhaps there will be multiple leaders per civ again. We have already seen an apparent return of different unit appearances. Perhaps less realism allowed them to facilitate this.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

In Civ V the devs noted that one of the reasons why there was only one leader per civ is that the leader screens were so labor-intensive to create. One of the reasons for that was probably the more realistic design of them. Perhaps they chose the less realistic style to decrease the resource burden of some aspect of the game.

Which makes me wonder if civ6 will simply overlay the leader over the main map like BE does.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Which makes me wonder if civ6 will simply overlay the leader over the main map like BE does.

At any rate, they will look more like caricatures than they did in V.

 

[m15a]

Worse yet, and from what I read about mechanics, mechanics are cartoony, just like graphics implied.

Off-topic, but what are cartoony mechanics? Like dropping anvils?

 

[Wh1terabit]

omg, you just got it right with the beautiful world you created in civ V. Can we have that back pleaaasse???

 

[manu-fan]

For those of you that haven't seen it yet:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/05...ne-civilizations-art-style-in-civ-6-ign-first

 

[Makenshi]

I just wish people would stop confusing graphics with aestethics, because that really confuses the developers when they try to hear our demands.

Graphics = polygons, textures, aliasing, etc. These things are probably very good in the brand new CiVI engine, but I'm no expert on the matter so I'll leave to those who are to judge this.

Aestethics = art direction, choice of pallete, general style. THAT is what some of us are attacking, since the first batch of screenshots indicate that CiVI is not in the same path of CiV.

IMO, things are looking less realistic, more simplified. I honestly hoped the seas and coasts would follow the high standard set by CivBE:RT, which was AWESOME.


@Gorbles: will we ever see you stick it to The Man? :/

 

[EulerMcE]

Just a thought:

In Civ V the devs noted that one of the reasons why there was only one leader per civ is that the leader screens were so labor-intensive to create. One of the reasons for that was probably the more realistic design of them. Perhaps they chose the less realistic style to decrease the resource burden of some aspect of the game.

Perhaps there will be multiple leaders per civ again. We have already seen an apparent return of different unit appearances. Perhaps less realism allowed them to facilitate this.

I hope they don't change the leaders too much, that was a very nice aspect of V. The way I see it more civs is preferable to more leaders anyhow. I'll be fine with something a little lower quality as long as they keep the language aspect though.