RPGWatch Forums

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Shroud of the Avatar - Editorial @ RPS (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22348)

Couchpotato November 7th, 2013 11:35

Shroud of the Avatar - Editorial @ RPS
 
Rock, Paper, Shotgun has a short article on the reaction to the new six month progress video released earlier this week.

Quote:

The combat system is a first draft, so to speak, but even with that knowledge it’s not particularly inspiring. Killings things is always the worst part of this sort of game though, I find, so perhaps it was wise to concentrate on housing before moving on to the tedium of hitpoint-reduction systems.

I’ll admit to being surprised that a lightning strike only did two damage to a bear. That was probably the most unexpected part of the hacky-slashy part of the video.

Comments that the game looks ‘dated’ and suchlike are entirely expected, however, and they’ve been spattered across the internet like the contents of a Saints Row septic truck. Next to The Witcher 3, Shroud looks like the product of a union between two ugly sticks that have been bopping each other and bumping uglies all night, but so does every other game. Shroud’s goals are different and if it can offer a world that responds to the presence of players in meaningful ways, backed up by a variety of possible virtual lifestyles, I won’t give a hoot what it looks like. Well, to a point. If every NPC was replaced by a crude 3d model of Danny DeVito, the game might well suffer. Then again, it’d certainly grab some headlines.

More information.

Sacred_Path November 7th, 2013 11:35

"btw I find all combat horrible" That person is totally qualified to talk about CRPG's.

azarhal November 7th, 2013 13:39

You know, reading the article and the comments over there, I think people can't make the difference between art style, animations and actual aging graphics. SOA graphics are not dated, the art style is not realistic. Texture, models, cloth physic and particles looks great in fact.

The game does have poor animations though (like 90% of all 3D games).

jhwisner November 7th, 2013 14:06

I'm wondering just how empty and ugly the game will be for those who choose to play offline; the flythrough of the city in the video makes it seem like many towns will be downright desolate if you play solo.

rune_74 November 7th, 2013 14:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhwisner (Post 1061225566)
I'm wondering just how empty and ugly the game will be for those who choose to play offline; the flythrough of the city in the video makes it seem like many towns will be downright desolate if you play solo.

Like I have said before, I believe the plan is they will have the game fill in areas if you are offline.

Sacred_Path November 7th, 2013 14:47

——-

vurt November 7th, 2013 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by azarhal (Post 1061225555)
You know, reading the article and the comments over there, I think people can't make the difference between art style, animations and actual aging graphics. SOA graphics are not dated, the art style is not realistic. Texture, models, cloth physic and particles looks great in fact.

The graphics looks like most indie games where they can't afford art direction more than "it should be slightly more colorful and cartoony than real life". If i show you a wall, a tree, a face etc from this game i'm 100% sure you could not really distinguish it from the hundreds of other generic looking games (or from any random stock 3D models site) out there from 2005-now.

with a budget of $1,919,275 i'd say it's disapointing that it doesnt look far better than some $0 indies or even school projects.

rune_74 November 7th, 2013 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by vurt (Post 1061225594)
The graphics looks like most indie games where they can't afford art direction more than "it should be slightly more colorful and cartoony than real life". If i show you a wall, a tree, a face etc from this game i'm 100% sure you could not really distinguish it from the hundreds of other generic looking games (or from any random stock 3D models site) out there from 2005-now.

with a budget of $1,919,275 i'd say it's disapointing that it doesnt look far better than some $0 indies or even school projects.


I don't see it that way at all, but this isn't the first time you have said this. Keep going.

SpoonFULL November 7th, 2013 23:57

I thought that the graphics are very good actually, and is perfectly suited for an interactive and changing game environment. I don't expect Crytek style graphics (with limited or no interactivity) for such type of a game.

In any case, i don't enjoy mount and blade and the gothics for the graphics (even though I think they are excellent as well).

Regarding progress, they have just released their early access schedule starting in December this year.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:52.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch