So what's up with the super ugly rivers?

[Raider]

Am I the only one here that thinks rivers in Civ 5 just hit with the ugly stick...repeatedly? The game as a whole is far less impressive graphically than I thought it should be after seeing Civ IV, but for the most part it's bearable. Rivers though....omg halp, so bad. And in places where they hit the ocean, it just gets obnoxious. Seriously Firaxis, how could something so hideous make it out in the final release?

 

[Guardian_PL]

Nope, you're not the only one. My friend noticed it while watching streamplay, and I was "don't worry, it's a video, in the actual game it'll be much better". Oh how wrong I was...

 

[Viatrix]

Rivers indeed are ugly sobs. They are like painted with an MS Paint. I hope they will change them eventually.

 

[Raider]

Discovered something interesting. Normally the rivers are just these ugly blue strips. BUT for some reason in bottom right corner of my screen they start having some white artifacts on them. Not sure WHY it happens only in that particular portion of the screen, but there they actually look more like water, though I am not sure if that is intentional.

You can see in the screen below how river in top left of screen is the typical ugly blue ribbon, but on bottom right it has white blotches on it. Well in game those blotches move and create fairly decent effect (which I am sure is a bug lol).

 

[krunsh]

I like them, they fit in the ''painting'' look of the game.

 

[Raider]

I like them, they fit in the ''painting'' look of the game.

if you mean ugly paining then sure...

 

[Maniacal]

I agree they look ugly, hopefully that should be fixable.

 

[Kamamura]

I could not care less. I care about the gameplay balance and complexity, about the AI quality, about the variations in strategies the game provides.

As far as I am concerned, I could play the game in the iconic strategic view.

Players of Dwarf Fortress surely understand

 

[ilmonstre]

I could not care less. I care about the gameplay balance and complexity, about the AI quality, about the variations in strategies the game provides.

As far as I am concerned, I could play the game in the iconic strategic view.

Players of Dwarf Fortress surely understand

dwarf fortress has indeed allot to offer and its all ASCII

you should see how many hours people pour into that game

 

[dustlined]

Discovered something interesting. Normally the rivers are just these ugly blue strips. BUT for some reason in bottom right corner of my screen they start having some white artifacts on them. Not sure WHY it happens only in that particular portion of the screen, but there they actually look more like water, though I am not sure if that is intentional.

You can see in the screen below how river in top left of screen is the typical ugly blue ribbon, but on bottom right it has white blotches on it. Well in game those blotches move and create fairly decent effect (which I am sure is a bug lol).

That looks like the sunlight effect to me (more obvious on oceans).

 

[Multiball]

That looks like the sunlight effect to me (more obvious on oceans).

Everything is lit from the front, to get specular light bouncing off things you it lit from the back as it's being deflected.

They just need a back light that affects water stuff only and their detail should always show up.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Yup, it's the sun. And tinted like that the river looks acceptable, even pretty. Shame it's only in the lower down corner, no?

 

[krzysp]

I don't have problems with rivers. And they're not ugly. Civ2 is ugly in comparison. This - it's just different to what people got used to with civ4.

And one more thing: when did a game of civilization begame a quest for graphics As long as we don't have to play in the strategic view - it's ok.

 

[PinkRose]

Not the only one, but also, not the only opinion.
Where they merge with the ocean, could use some work, but the rivers look fine. zoom in and you see currents and the sun reflects off them.

 

[Doppleganger]

It's only when the river empty into the sea that there's a real problem. It looks crap, for lack of a better word.

 

[Mr_V]

I think that Socrates, Plato and Aristotle together would find it hard to convince me how these smudgy, floating rivers that cast shadow over their own bank in Civ V look better than rivers in Civ IV or Colonization.

I mean, look at this. It looks like a bad Photoshop job.

And in contrast, this is the river from Colonization. Sharp, crystal water through which you can actually see the rocky river bottom, and you half-expect a fish to pop out of the water if you zoom close enough.

Hell, I'm no high-detail graphics whore. I actually prefer simpler graphics in Civ V than in Civ IV, I find it rather stylish. I don't miss animated trees, mills or anything, in fact graphics on the ground is a lot better here. And in the game like Civ, graphics should be secondary to gameplay. It really should. What's bad about this is that it simply sticks out so much, you can't help but see the hideous ugliness of the river that looks like it's been drawn by a 10-year-old in Paintbrush. Hell, rivers in Civ 1 from 1992 had more life that these.

I can only explain (and hope, hope and pray) that this was an overlook by developers, although I can't see that being the case. This is so awful that it makes it impossible to miss on the very first look upon the world, or to ignore subsequently. How the hell can ocean be so gorgeous that you want to make a dive into the monitor thinking you'll end up swimming in crisp azure-blue fluffy waves, and yet the river and their deltas look like sewage overflows?

 

[SMA333M]

I think they made rivers better but there must be a problem with rendering or something. I'm sure they will fix it with a patch.

 

[Guardian_PL]

wow Mr_V, that's some nice comparizon sreenshot

 

[City Builder]

What's bad about this is that it simply sticks out so much, you can't help but see the hideous ugliness of the river that looks like it's been drawn by a 10-year-old in Paintbrush.

Am I the only one here that thinks rivers in Civ 5 just hit with the ugly stick...repeatedly?

No, the rivers made a run through the whole damn ugly forest to get in the shape they are in coming out the other side.

When I know that I can do better than the artist on the development team then I know something is a miss, and apparently there is, asI know for quite certain that I could create a better looking river than that and my photo shop skills are lacking terribly.

I'm not ashamed to admit that I am a graphics moar and civ V does now look the way that I had always wished that 4 would have looked with the exception of:
Rivers
Trees that all blend in together and start to look like giant blobs of dull grayish green paint.
A lack of contrast adjustment which might make the game world look slightly more vibrant but certainly more crisp.

Other than that, it looks pretty nice thus far for me, the graphics moar. I'm always surprised at people that feel the need to put graphics on the sideline. Yes, gameplay is of prime importance, however there shouldn't be anything that says we can't have excellent gameplay and eye candy to look at too. We're not in the stone ages of ASCII games any longer and theres nothing wrong with making an excellent game even more excellent by having pretty visuals to go along with it.

I'm starting to think that Colonization looks prettier overall than Civlization 5, however I really didn't like the gameplay in Colonization so kind of pointless if it looks 1000% better or not for me.

 

[Caesar Victor]

The look of the rivers struck me immediately on playing the demo. The graphics as a whole feel very unfamiliar, as does the game, so I can't really judge the whole now - not until I've gotten my head around it. But the weirdness of the rivers strike me immediately ...

And for the record, I really don't like the hex look - (I like them for game play though) - they don't make anything look better than it did. I mean, it's just a square look replaced with a hex look!