Wizardry 8... or is it Quake 1?
Christoph Nahr
guide which seems quite useful btw)... and my first reaction was a
graphical shell-shock similar to first booting up Arcanum. Some of
the fanboys here and in the magazines really should have their eyes
examined. Or maybe they should just take a look at any recent shooter.
Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text
font are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other
with some minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
I'm no longer surprised that Sir-Tech couldn't find a publisher. Who
would want to publish a game that looks like it was made in 1996,
except maybe as a budget title? Seeing W&W and now Wiz8, I have to
say that our beloved Cleve B. is vindicated in his decision to use a
2d engine for Grimoire. If these Quake 1 graphics are the best that
established companies could produce with several years of effort, 3d
engines are really not worth bothering with for small independents.
Now I'll pause shortly to give every reader an opportunity to foam at
the mouth, call me a troll and a graphics whore, and tell me that
graphics don't matter for RPGs. Done? Okay, then I'll go on to say
that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
a classic, much like Arcanum did...
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
Damocles
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
>
>Now I'll pause shortly to give every reader an opportunity to foam at
>the mouth, call me a troll and a graphics whore, and tell me that
>graphics don't matter for RPGs. Done? Okay, then I'll go on to say
>that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
>I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
>a classic, much like Arcanum did...
Graphics do matter, but strangely enough I have no problem at all with
Wizardry 8. I remember with Might & Magic 8 (they're all around the
same number now, the old classics) that the sub-par graphics were a
definite turn off.
Cabel Blacke
"Damocles" <phae...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sfbvvts9cd35nt0sq...@4ax.com...
tried. Played it for about a half-hour until a feeling of retching overtook
me and I almost covered my monitor with spew. I HAD to take that puppy back
to the store, before it caused any more physical harm.
Wiz 8 graphics are subpar. They use a dated 3D engine that would have been
more acceptable 3 years ago. However, how many complex 3D CRPGs have been
released since 1998 with engines superior to this one? Ultima Ascension? We
know what a piece of doggy doodee that thing was.
After about a few hours with the engine, the gameplay starts to take over,
your graphical expectations are lowered a bit, and you actually may find
yourself oohing and ahhing at a few pieces of eye-candy here and there.
Stained glass windows with shards of light coming through are a really nice
touch. In fact, the way they handle light sources in general is superior to
any other 3D RPG I can think of, new or old.
This is all coming from someone who can't pick up a lot of older 3D games
(like Riva, Daggerfall, Might and Magic) because they are eye-sores. I am
also not a "fanboy" in that I didn't particularly like the older Wizardries.
Hard to explain why this game is so good. It just is... The combat is
immensely entertaining. In my mind, the best 3D, party-based combat system
ever created.
--CB
Charles Miles
hyperbole, I present some actual Quake 1 screenshots.
http://www.denken.com/dzone/q1shots05.htm
And here are some (sadly out of date) Wizardry 8 shots:
http://www.3dgamers.com/screenshots/games/wizardry8/
Charles
Wiz 8 designer and manual guy
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:23:32 +0100, Christoph Nahr
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
KiloOhm
"Christoph Nahr" <s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote in message
news:h07vvtkgtpkoijegb...@4ax.com...
> Well, I got my copy (at the same time as Mark H. Walker's strategy
> guide which seems quite useful btw)... and my first reaction was a
> graphical shell-shock similar to first booting up Arcanum. Some of
> the fanboys here and in the magazines really should have their eyes
> examined. Or maybe they should just take a look at any recent shooter.
>
> Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
> Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
> composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
> The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text
> font are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
> The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other
> with some minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
>
> the mouth, call me a troll and a graphics whore, and tell me that
> graphics don't matter for RPGs. Done? Okay, then I'll go on to say
> that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
> I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
> a classic, much like Arcanum did...
> --
> http://www.kynosarges.de
Wow! I think the graphics are very nice for an RPG (I'm running
1600X1200X32). I do agree that the font is jaggy, but perfectly readable.
What RPG's have you played with better graphics? Surely not the infinity
engine games, nor any of the M&M games... I haven't played any of those
Japanese flavor RPG's (like Final Fantasy) so I can't comment on those
graphics. The water effects are better than I've seen in a lot of FPS's.
Quake 1 Graphics were awful, I think you are mis-remembering these..I can
remember explosions in Q1 being a bunch of yellow blocks. Maybe these
graphics compare to Q2, but certainly they are much better than Q1, and
certainly they are not as high quality as Q3 (in all it's bland brown
splendor...). But then again, in Q3, all you have to do is blow up those
nice graphics... you actually have to interract with these.
Sir-Tech has consistantly made FUN games over the years, especially the last
few with JA2 and now this one. Of course, better graphics are nicer but I'll
take this gameplay over graphics (and yes, there is a compromise to be made,
noone has an infinite budget). I can't think of a better Tactical game than
JA2 and it's graphics were certainly not up to today's standards, I still
played it more than any other.
Arcanum left me cold... I just couldn't get into it and I loved the Fallout
series (from Wasteland on through F2). I think the combat really turned me
off, it was sooooo bad (I like RPG's more for the tactical combat than the
stories).
KiloOhm
Cabel Blacke
"Charles Miles" <charlesm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f5cvvtoie6eeb2dvg...@4ax.com...
> For those unfamilar with the ancient Usenet tradition of hysterical
> hyperbole, I present some actual Quake 1 screenshots.
>
> http://www.denken.com/dzone/q1shots05.htm
>
> And here are some (sadly out of date) Wizardry 8 shots:
>
> http://www.3dgamers.com/screenshots/games/wizardry8/
>
> Charles
> Wiz 8 designer and manual guy
>
Invader Zim
Are we playing the same game?
Have you actually played quake 1 lately? If not, I suggest you do.
Also, take a look at king pin, which uses the quake 2 engine.
Then try playing wizardry 8 again.
The graphics aren't unreal grapics, no. They're not ultima 9, nor elder
scrolls 3 graphics either.
But I'd say they're at least quake 2 standard graphics, or possibly half
life.
The font does suck, however.
-Invader Zim
np: Ministry - I Prefer
imp
<stuff about graphics>
Beauty is very obviously in the eye of the beholder.
I was astonished at the quality of the 3d graphics, myself, in a
positive way. They are certainly *far* better than Wizards & Warriors,
IMO. Bright, smooth, gorgeous.
Of course, I haven't played shooters since Hexen II, but having seen
Quake III's efforts, I found them far less pleasing to the eye than Wiz
8's demo.
I'm currently playing Jedi Knight, since Wiz 8 won't hit the UK for some
time, which I believe was released in about '97 - and Wiz 8's graphics
are better than even these, IMO.
imp
>:)
who...@wherever.com
: Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
: Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
: composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
Christoph... smoking is bad for you, and what are those little stamp sized
pieces of drying paper you've been licking?
It's closer to truth to say Wizardry 8 has the best graphics in any RPG *ever*.
Besides, WTF is up with people measuring graphics quality in "Quake"-s?
Quake 1 was a technical milestone, but the graphics were also *butt* ugly
browns and greens, and weapons consisted of about a dozen polygons each.
Doom actually looked better than Q1 because of superior artwork.
Quake 2 brought us colored lighting and not-as-crappy-but-still-boring mostly
metallic color palette. Weapons consist of about 100 polygons. Yay. Regard-
less, I can't possibly figure out how Wizardry 8 can be worse looking than
Q2. Someone give me some screenshots of Q2 that look better than Wiz8 please.
Quake 3. OHHH WOWEEE WE HAVE DETAIL TEXTURES AND 3 CURVED SURFACES PER MAP,
THIS IS THE 1337EST GRAPHICS EVER!!!1 AND WOWWWWOWOW COUNT THOSE POLYGONS
ON PLAYER MODELS THERE ARE MORE THAN 2000 EACH!! (No matter you never see
more than a handful of models on screen ever)
Fine, but what about ARTWORK? Weapons, and especially ammo "crates" look
MUCH worse than eg Half-Life, and more childish than even in Q2. The game
is beyond any normal review criteria because the artwork is simply missing
any theme to it! Hence you can have skeletons, babes with melon-sized
breasts and walking eyeballs running around and that's that. You have
totally random characters running around randomly in totally randomly
designed and pointless maps, neither with no resemblance with any reality
whatsoever, in any real or fictional fantasy world.
If a game like Wiz8 uses even 3 times more polygons on screen than to
create a monastery, or a city, or a cave, people can point fingers and say,
"look, that fire hydrant and that barrel and that building over there look
totally fake". Most of Quake 3 scenes, however, consist of some rectangular
badly textured platforms over some pools of lava - totally unimpressive in
terms of artwork and design - and noone seems to complain?!
In conclusion, IMHO graphics engine capabilities are comparable to the size
of the penis or the breasts of your Significant One. It's fun if they're
large, but how important is it in considering if you're going to MARRY them?
Jochen Heistermann
not too bad to hear some critical words about Wiz8. Besides of
the graphics, are the combat sessions really as tedious as I fear? ....
Jochen, who hopes that the Wiz8 graphics are better than MM8.
"Christoph Nahr" <s...@reply-to.invalid> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:h07vvtkgtpkoijegb...@4ax.com...
Christoph Nahr
>Wow! I think the graphics are very nice for an RPG (I'm running
>1600X1200X32). I do agree that the font is jaggy, but perfectly readable.
>What RPG's have you played with better graphics?
Well yes, that's a good point... not many, unfortunately. One might
name Deus Ex, System Shock 2, or Anachronox if one doesn't mind
including hybrid or console-style games. Otherwise, the only RPGs
with good 3d graphics were RPGs that sucked (Ultima 9, Vampire, and
Gothic -- which I found terribly boring). So in terms of total
quality (graphics plus gameplay) Wiz8 will probably pull up ahead.
It's sad, though. Compare Wiz8 (or W&W) to a shooter based on the
cheap LithTech engine like the recent Alien vs Predator 2. Most
action fans will tell you that Lithtech looks pretty ugly compared to
the current Quake or Unreal engines. But the graphics in AvP2 are
still light years ahead of Wizardry 8! Yeah, yeah, shooters vs RPGs
and the difficulty of rendering open spaces and the more complex game
system etc. etc. BUT STILL!! Damn, I want a good- looking RPGs that
doesn't suck... Morrowind or NWN maybe?
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
Christoph Nahr
<Jochen.He...@t-online.de> wrote:
>Hi Christoph,
>
>not too bad to hear some critical words about Wiz8. Besides of
>the graphics, are the combat sessions really as tedious as I fear? ....
So far I've only mopped up a few giant crabs (nice change from the
usual giant rats...), and combat was actually pretty fast and
straightforward. Combat went by about as fast as in Arcanum, and
that's without surrendering control of most of your party to some
braindead AI. There's a lot of detail to the combat system, and it's
indeed slower than Might & Magic's machine gun fights (hold down A key
until everyone is dead), but it's nowhere near as drawn-out and
tedious as Pool of Radiance 2. No complaints here.
>Jochen, who hopes that the Wiz8 graphics are better than MM8.
Oh, absolutely. You don't have to worry about that. :-)
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
Christoph Nahr
<charlesm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>For those unfamilar with the ancient Usenet tradition of hysterical
>hyperbole, I present some actual Quake 1 screenshots.
>
>http://www.denken.com/dzone/q1shots05.htm
>
>And here are some (sadly out of date) Wizardry 8 shots:
>
>http://www.3dgamers.com/screenshots/games/wizardry8/
>
>Charles
>Wiz 8 designer and manual guy
Hey, Quake 1 looked MUCH better than that on MY system! :-p
Hrmph. Well, after perusing those screen shots I have to admit that
the graphics of Wizardry 8 are probably actually a teeny tiny bit
closer to Quake 2 than Quake. Okay, they are about as good as Quake 2.
Sheesh, you really had to ruin my nice piece of hyperbole, didn't you?
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
saint
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
>Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
>Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
>composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
>The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text
>font are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
>The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other
>with some minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
The graphics do suck but nowhere near as bad as the latest Might and
Magic games. Might and Magic 8 was painful to play due to the graphics
but I liked the game better than M&M 6 which is the worse RPG I've
ever played. Wiz 8 has Giants:Citizen Kabuto graphics compared to
M&M8. I'll play Wiz 8 and wait for the next generation graphics in
games like Morrowind, Dungeon Siege, and Neverwinter Nights to come
out next year. It will probably make me appreciate the graphics more.
If you play five Quake 3 caliber graphics games in a row it is hard to
get wowed by the 6th one.
>
>I'm no longer surprised that Sir-Tech couldn't find a publisher. Who
>would want to publish a game that looks like it was made in 1996,
>except maybe as a budget title? Seeing W&W and now Wiz8, I have to
>say that our beloved Cleve B. is vindicated in his decision to use a
>2d engine for Grimoire. If these Quake 1 graphics are the best that
>established companies could produce with several years of effort, 3d
>engines are really not worth bothering with for small independents.
Cleve B. will only be vindicated if his game comes out and it kicks
Wiz 8's ass. Id was a small independent when they made the graphic
benchmark Doom. They had about ten guys working on that game. Also
Croteam didn't too shabby of a job creating their own 3d engine. If
you put five to ten talented guys in a room with one vision lookout. I
know these engines are really simple compared to the demands an RPG
engine requires but Wiz 8 is the best looking traditional FPRPG out
right now. I hope and believe Morrowind, DS, and NN will set new
benchmarks on graphics but I don't want the quality of gameplay
sacrificed one bit.
>
>Now I'll pause shortly to give every reader an opportunity to foam at
>the mouth, call me a troll and a graphics whore, and tell me that
>graphics don't matter for RPGs. Done? Okay, then I'll go on to say
>that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
>I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
>a classic, much like Arcanum did...
You are not a troll or a graphics whore. So far the gameplay is sweet.
Much better than M&M and I consider myself a hardcore fan of those
games. The best thing I really like is the increase in skills with
usage of those skills.
saint
<dapolicema...@heads.fuk> wrote:
>np: Ministry - I Prefer
What album is this off of? I laugh everytime I here Work for Love.
George Michael watch out!!
Memnoch
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:51:37 GMT, Charles Miles
<charlesm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
debaser
> Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
> composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
> The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text
> font are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
> The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other
> with some minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
For someone with a website full of Might & Magic info (which has
been very useful, thanks! Just bought Millennium edition and have been
playing the hell outta M&M7), you should be ashamed.
Comparison to Wizards and Warriors is weak. Those graphics were
muddy, you could always see the skybox and it ran like crap on my rig.
Wiz8 on the other hand is nice on a low end machine in high res.
Preference and opinion is preference and opinion, but damn Chris...
Dust your monitor off. Turn on 4xAA. Hell, I don't know... Those
graphics are more than fine.
Jason McCullough
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
Arcanum's a classic? Yech. Bugs, tedious overland travel, wierd
character development.....
Jason McCullough
blortkar...@yahoo.com
Remove "blort" from the front of my email address to contact me.
R. Cohen
So give us an example of a good RPG with great graphics? I think a
lot depends on whether you want a 3-d engine or not. For example,
what did you think of BG2 and it's graphics? or are you looking at a
Summoner type of "graphic" experience? I think I'm somewhere in the
middle, I can't handle "butt-ugly" graphics, but if the story and
gameplay are good enough, I can live with adequate graphics. In fact,
if the game is good enough I'll almost end up "liking" the graphics of
these games... So I love Arcanum and somehow the graphics seem to fit
the tone of the game quite well. I ended up liking the "retro"
graphics of Wizards and Warriors too because the game turned out to be
a decent one.
Invader Zim
"saint" <sa...@home.com> wrote in message news:3c02efa8.3514019@news...
it's on the land of rape and honey :)
heh i thought ministry's cover of olivia newton-john's let get physical was
pretty funny too
-Invader Zim
np: Nothing at all.
LHeilb8013
>hyperbole, I present some actual Quake 1 screenshots.
>
>http://www.denken.com/dzone/q1shots05.htm
>
>And here are some (sadly out of date) Wizardry 8 shots:
>
>http://www.3dgamers.com/screenshots/games/wizardry8/
>
>Charles
>Wiz 8 designer and manual guy
>
>
So far I like both the graphics and the game a lot, but I don't play shooters
and could not care less about comparing the two. Nice work, Charles........
Lloyd Heilbrunn
hoy.Don...@hawaii.edu
: On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:00:16 -0500, "KiloOhm" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
:>Wow! I think the graphics are very nice for an RPG (I'm running
:>1600X1200X32). I do agree that the font is jaggy, but perfectly readable.
:>What RPG's have you played with better graphics?
: Well yes, that's a good point... not many, unfortunately. One might
: name Deus Ex, System Shock 2, or Anachronox if one doesn't mind
: including hybrid or console-style games. Otherwise, the only RPGs
: with good 3d graphics were RPGs that sucked (Ultima 9, Vampire, and
: Gothic -- which I found terribly boring). So in terms of total
: quality (graphics plus gameplay) Wiz8 will probably pull up ahead.
Well, one good thing about Wiz8's tame graphics is that my friend on
a p266, voodoo2 setup can still play it. Hell, sales for
underpowered computers could offset some sales lost from those
looking for good graphics.
The only problem I have with Wiz8 is the low draw distance limit.
If only there's an option to increase it.
: It's sad, though. Compare Wiz8 (or W&W) to a shooter based on the
: cheap LithTech engine like the recent Alien vs Predator 2. Most
: action fans will tell you that Lithtech looks pretty ugly compared to
: the current Quake or Unreal engines. But the graphics in AvP2 are
: still light years ahead of Wizardry 8! Yeah, yeah, shooters vs RPGs
: and the difficulty of rendering open spaces and the more complex game
: system etc. etc. BUT STILL!! Damn, I want a good- looking RPGs that
: doesn't suck... Morrowind or NWN maybe?
From what I've seen of Morrowind's gfx, I'll need to run everything
at minimum to play!
--
hoy xatx hawaii xdotx education
Stefan Renzewitz aka Amarok
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
I wonder what you did say about one of the latest C&C's or Diablo...
they have been really dated even in their genre. Tell me one 3rd RPG
which is better AND out yet. UIX was indeed better, but not a lot. But
beside that one?
Anyway, one serious question as you are a reviewer: How much do you
complain in shooters that their interaction, NPC dialogs etc. is much
worse than in, lets say U7?
Just curious, as you compare apple with pineapples.
Amarok
Stefan Renzewitz aka Amarok
I still want a good Shooter which is even game play wise at least
close to RPGs, still nothing. I think RPGs are graphic wise much
closer to Shooters than Shooters to RPGs in matters of game play. I
mean, how much really changed since Doom?
Amarok
Stefan Renzewitz aka Amarok
>
>In conclusion, IMHO graphics engine capabilities are comparable to the size
>of the penis or the breasts of your Significant One. It's fun if they're
>large, but how important is it in considering if you're going to MARRY them?
>
That was a good one. Like the beauty of a women, it only has to be
about average, because after a while they look all the same no matter
how beautiful they are, if you love them. Then only the content
counts. Same for games - at least if you are a serious player.
Amarok
Jeffrey Bergers
Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as Quake
1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it).
HAHAHAHAHA, Quake 1
> Snip <
The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text font
are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
> Snip <
Seems the fanboys aren't the only ones needing their eyes examined eh?
> Snip <
The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other with some
minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
> Snip <
Meh, who cares about intro's. Oh, you do
> Snip <
I'm no longer surprised that Sir-Tech couldn't find a publisher. Who would
want to publish a game that looks like it was made in 1996, except maybe as
a budget title? Seeing W&W and now Wiz8, I have to say that our beloved
Cleve B. is vindicated in his decision to use a
2d engine for Grimoire. If these Quake 1 graphics are the best that
established companies could produce with several years of effort, 3d engines
are really not worth bothering with for small independents.
< Snip >
Man, you know nothing about the reasons + know nothing about comparing
grahics obviously.
> Snip <
Okay, then I'll go on to say
that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
a classic, much like Arcanum did...
> Snip <
Why not return it right away before we must continue to hear all your
complaints in the coming weeks.
If you want to critique the game, get your facts straight first. Saying the
graphics are like quake 1 is either a lie or you are running in software
mode.
Joe Bott
to download some magic patch to get nice graphics on my ultra-high tech
voodoo 1.. :)
Memnoch <mem...@nospamforme.ntlworld..com> wrote in message
news:b4svvt0h6e5oqev0e...@4ax.com...
NUTMAN
RPG should not be compared to a 1st person shooter. Wiz8 graphics are bloody
great, better than Quake2, especially since there is much better lighting,
with alot more colours and there is also alot more different objects in Wiz8
than Quake, which the engine does a great job of displaying. Don't forget
the Wiz8 engine is giving great graphics both indoors and outdoors. Where
the Quake 1&2 where 95% indoors.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but to say the graphics suck is
way off.
cheers
Nutman
mtkafka
> Well, I got my copy (at the same time as Mark H. Walker's strategy
> guide which seems quite useful btw)... and my first reaction was a
> graphical shell-shock similar to first booting up Arcanum. Some of
> the fanboys here and in the magazines really should have their eyes
> examined. Or maybe they should just take a look at any recent shooter.
>
> Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
> Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
> composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
> The hand-drawn portraits and the pixellated, curvy, hard-to-read text
> font are the same quality as in Wizardry 7 from nearly 10 years ago.
> The intro movie consists of static drawings overlaid on each other
> with some minimal animations, also just as back in Wiz7.
>
> I'm no longer surprised that Sir-Tech couldn't find a publisher. Who
> would want to publish a game that looks like it was made in 1996,
> except maybe as a budget title? Seeing W&W and now Wiz8, I have to
> say that our beloved Cleve B. is vindicated in his decision to use a
> 2d engine for Grimoire. If these Quake 1 graphics are the best that
> established companies could produce with several years of effort, 3d
> engines are really not worth bothering with for small independents.
>
> Now I'll pause shortly to give every reader an opportunity to foam at
> the mouth, call me a troll and a graphics whore, and tell me that
> graphics don't matter for RPGs. Done? Okay, then I'll go on to say
> that the game mechanics and story setup both look very promising, and
> I rather expect Wiz8 to overcome its ugliness and establish itself as
> a classic, much like Arcanum did...
> --
> http://www.kynosarges.de
Sound slike you havent gotten far into the game. I think the graphics are
very nice for a game of its kind. Yeah, wouldnt we all like a Quake 3
engine crpg with the gameplay of Wizardry... yeah in your dreams!
Considering most Quake 3 engine games are less than one day gameplay...
you have VERY unreal expectations. I'm not saying its impossible to have
a top notch graphically rich crpg game (maybe morrowind? NWN? DS?) ...
but theres only so much time and money, and in the case of crpgs... well
graphics dont sell (or play as well) as much as the gameplay... if it did
then Vampire would have beena best seller... and everybody would have
bought
BTW, get to the Swamps or Trynton or Martens Bluff or the Umpani
settlement...and if you still believe the graphics are of the "SUCK" then
my friend, you are the SUCK! Play Quake 1 again then play WW and Wizardry
8... and tell me again that they arent better. IMO they are comparable to
the graphics done in the Quake 2 engine... not cutting edge to the fps
standards but very good for a crpg. Plus theres alot of nice monster
animation in Wiz 8 that top even the animations in Quake 3!
etc
mtkafka
Minsitry didnt do that cover... Jourgensens other band did... Revolting
Cocks... but I agree funny song....Wax Trax rocked with all the early
techno/house/metal bands!
You from Chicago btw?
etc
Mark Blunden
news:9tpd1p$9vi$1...@news.hawaii.edu...
> Christoph Nahr <s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
> : On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:00:16 -0500, "KiloOhm" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
> :>Wow! I think the graphics are very nice for an RPG (I'm running
> :>1600X1200X32). I do agree that the font is jaggy, but perfectly
readable.
> :>What RPG's have you played with better graphics?
>
> : Well yes, that's a good point... not many, unfortunately. One might
> : name Deus Ex, System Shock 2, or Anachronox if one doesn't mind
> : including hybrid or console-style games. Otherwise, the only RPGs
> : with good 3d graphics were RPGs that sucked (Ultima 9, Vampire, and
> : Gothic -- which I found terribly boring). So in terms of total
> : quality (graphics plus gameplay) Wiz8 will probably pull up ahead.
>
> Well, one good thing about Wiz8's tame graphics is that my friend on
> a p266, voodoo2 setup can still play it. Hell, sales for
> underpowered computers could offset some sales lost from those
> looking for good graphics.
Yep, I was nervous about whether it'd work on my Celeron 366 with TNT1 card,
but it plays like a dream.
> The only problem I have with Wiz8 is the low draw distance limit.
> If only there's an option to increase it.
I presume that's at least partly to simulate 'fog-of-war' based
viewing-distance limits, so that monsters don't seem to pop out of thin air
when they get within viewing distance. Just assume that planet Dominus has a
very moist, misty atmosphere.
--
Mark.
mar...@btinternet.com
* Ah. Mind-taxing time again.
Memnoch
Is there a way to increase the draw distance for those with machines
that can handle it?
Invader Zim
"mtkafka" <mcu...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:3C00C13B...@prodigy.net...
of course, it was the cocks, not ministry, my bad. Heheh their cover of rod
steward's do ya think i'm sexy was hilarious too heheh.
yeah wax trax was awesome!
and unfortunately no, i'm nowhere near chicago at the moment. :(
i'm still stuck in denmark for the next year or so.
can't wait to move back to the states.
stuff
-Invader Zim
np: WINNERS DON'T USE DRUGS!!!!
GuruChaz
bought it. If you pirated it then you shouldn't complain anyway.
Either way...you seem like a dumbass.
Wiz 8 is an excellent RPG.
Cpntrips
So you are at the very beginning of the game and you are complaining
about the graphics already, at least see a little more of the game
before objecting. I dont undestand how people try to compare RPGs to
first person shooters, there is so much more going on in the game in
an RPG than just the graphics engine. I like the graphics and think
they do a good job at conveying the feel of the environment of the
area you are exploring. They areas are quite varied later in the
game and look great. Give it a little more time...
Big Bad Joe
(Stefan Renzewitz aka Amarok) drank a fifth of Old Crow and wrote:
>I still want a good Shooter which is even game play wise at least
>close to RPGs, still nothing. I think RPGs are graphic wise much
>closer to Shooters than Shooters to RPGs in matters of game play. I
>mean, how much really changed since Doom?
Actually, I usually hate shooters, but I thought Unreal Tournament was
a LOT of fun. I showed it to a friend who has the same feelings about
shooters and he was also impressed. Admittedly, this is an older
game, but it still rocks.
Big Bad Joe
Jens Nober
> Christoph Nahr <s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
>: Folks, these graphics SUCK. The 3d view is about the same quality as
>: Quake 1 (or Wizards & Warriors, come to think of it). Mountains are
>: composed of a few huge triangles. Monsters don't fare much better.
>
> Christoph... smoking is bad for you, and what are those little stamp
> sized pieces of drying paper you've been licking?
>
> It's closer to truth to say Wizardry 8 has the best graphics in any RPG
> *ever*.
>
> Besides, WTF is up with people measuring graphics quality in "Quake"-s?
>
> Quake 1 was a technical milestone, but the graphics were also *butt*
> ugly browns and greens, and weapons consisted of about a dozen polygons
> each. Doom actually looked better than Q1 because of superior artwork.
>
> Quake 2 brought us colored lighting and not-as-crappy-but-still-boring
> mostly metallic color palette. Weapons consist of about 100 polygons.
> Yay. Regard- less, I can't possibly figure out how Wizardry 8 can be
> worse looking than Q2. Someone give me some screenshots of Q2 that look
> better than Wiz8 please.
>
> Quake 3. OHHH WOWEEE WE HAVE DETAIL TEXTURES AND 3 CURVED SURFACES PER
> MAP, THIS IS THE 1337EST GRAPHICS EVER!!!1 AND WOWWWWOWOW COUNT THOSE
> POLYGONS ON PLAYER MODELS THERE ARE MORE THAN 2000 EACH!! (No matter
> you never see more than a handful of models on screen ever)
>
> Fine, but what about ARTWORK? Weapons, and especially ammo "crates"
> look MUCH worse than eg Half-Life, and more childish than even in Q2.
> The game is beyond any normal review criteria because the artwork is
> simply missing any theme to it! Hence you can have skeletons, babes
> with melon-sized breasts and walking eyeballs running around and that's
> that. You have totally random characters running around randomly in
> totally randomly designed and pointless maps, neither with no
> resemblance with any reality whatsoever, in any real or fictional
> fantasy world.
>
uhm, I guess Q3 graphics are supposed to be that way (its not a bug, its a
feature ;-) ).
Q3 does not want to present a "serious" environment, it just wants to create
a stage for mindless not-stop action :-)
bye
Jens
Sascha Bohnenkamp
Christoph Nahr wrote:
> >Wow! I think the graphics are very nice for an RPG (I'm running
> >1600X1200X32). I do agree that the font is jaggy, but perfectly readable.
> >What RPG's have you played with better graphics?
>
> Well yes, that's a good point... not many, unfortunately. One might
> name Deus Ex, System Shock 2, or Anachronox
R P G s ?
these are morr or less first-person-shooters, aren't they?
--
MeVis GmbH
Sascha Bohnenkamp
Universitätsallee 29
28359 Bremen
bon...@mevis.de
0421 218 90 68
rolf
This Christoph is from Germany - and the guys in Germany need to hate
something if all others like it ... It has something to do with there(/our)
minds .... It's probably just a troll post and he's laughing his ass off
about the reaction.
Christoph Nahr
wrote:
Ah, I love those replies that come two days late and don't even make
any sense. Thank you!
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
Memnoch
wrote:
>Memnoch <mem...@nospamforme.ntlworld..com> wrote:
>
>>You cheated! Those aren't accelerated but software. ;-)
>
>Quake 1 wasn't 3D-accelerated out of the box. ;^)
Does that matter in this case??
Christoph Nahr
>This Christoph is from Germany - and the guys in Germany need to hate
>something if all others like it ... It has something to do with there(/our)
>minds .... It's probably just a troll post and he's laughing his ass off
>about the reaction.
Damn, you found me out! I hate all games, it's true! Especially the
really popular ones, like Diablo 2 or Civilization 3 or Age of Kings.
Everyone on this group loves Diablo 2, and I'm the only one that hates
it! AND JUST BECAUSE I'M GERMAN!!! Ah, life is so unjust...
--
http://www.kynosarges.de
James Garvin
> Damn, you found me out! I hate all games, it's true! Especially the
> really popular ones, like Diablo 2 or Civilization 3 or Age of Kings.
> Everyone on this group loves Diablo 2, and I'm the only one that hates
> it! AND JUST BECAUSE I'M GERMAN!!! Ah, life is so unjust...
> --
> http://www.kynosarges.de
You should see what we have to say about the French!
Thomas Goebel
wrote:
>So you are at the very beginning of the game and you are complaining
>about the graphics already,
Yeah. Funny thing about graphics engines--they don't tend to upgrade
themselves in the middle of the game. ;)
saint
Hey!! At least we didn't start any World Wars. Okay, Okay. We fucked
up with Napolean but he was short and inadequte. He had to make up for
it somehow.
noman
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
Few comments.
>It's sad, though. Compare Wiz8 (or W&W)
First you should compare Wiz8 *with* W&W. The former has *much* better
graphics and gameplay and an infinitely better interface, compared to
latter.
I lost all respect for D W Bradley after W&W, for it being such a
flawed game. Wiz8 (and I have just played its demo) makes me hopeful
that the interface innovations can still happen in common genres.
> to a shooter based on the
>cheap LithTech engine like the recent Alien vs Predator 2. Most
>action fans will tell you that Lithtech looks pretty ugly compared to
>the current Quake or Unreal engines. But the graphics in AvP2 are
>still light years ahead of Wizardry 8!
Graphics in AvP2 are pretty good when compared to shooters as well. If
you haven't played the game, try downloading its latest single player
demo (the first one indeed had dull graphics). So, in other words,
AvP2 isn't ugly when compared to Quake3 or Max Payne.
> Yeah, yeah, shooters vs RPGs
>and the difficulty of rendering open spaces and the more complex game
>system etc. etc. BUT STILL!! Damn, I want a good- looking RPGs that
>doesn't suck... Morrowind or NWN maybe?
And don't forget Dungeon Seige.
--
Noman
noman
<s...@reply-to.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:21:00 +0100, "Jochen Heistermann"
><Jochen.He...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>>Hi Christoph,
>>
>>not too bad to hear some critical words about Wiz8. Besides of
>>the graphics, are the combat sessions really as tedious as I fear? ....
>
>So far I've only mopped up a few giant crabs (nice change from the
>usual giant rats...), and combat was actually pretty fast and
>straightforward. Combat went by about as fast as in Arcanum, and
>that's without surrendering control of most of your party to some
>braindead AI.
One thing I noticed in the demo is, that the AI makes pretty effective
switches between ranged and melee weapons. Equip your party characters
with both weapons, and they 'll switch between them based on the
situation. That is, if you are in continuous mode.
--
Noman
Invader Zim
"saint" <sa...@home.com> wrote in message news:3c028e93.163487@news...
i wish i was short and inadequate too
-Invader Zim
np: Einstürzende Neubauten - Ende Neu
Plissken
wrote:
>Equip your party characters
>with both weapons, and they 'll switch between them based on the
>situation. That is, if you are in continuous mode.
Does it in phased, too.
Of course you can turn that feature off if it's not to your tastes.
Plissken
Andy
> Well, I got my copy (at the same time as Mark H. Walker's strategy
> guide which seems quite useful btw)... and my first reaction was a
> graphical shell-shock similar to first booting up Arcanum. Some of
> the fanboys here and in the magazines really should have their eyes
> examined. Or maybe they should just take a look at any recent shooter.
I am running Wizardry 8 on a GEForce3 in 1280 x 1000 and the visuals
are very clean. In fact, from the very start of the game they have
been downright beautiful; nice translucent water, good texturing, and
some excellent use of transparency on the monsters.
Remember that PC hardware is very diverse. The game may look poor on
your machine because you have a poor 3D card or the wrong drivers.
The fact that you claim Quake I looks better makes me think that your
machine is seriously screwed up. Have you checked the Wizardry 8
screen shots that are posted on the web? HINT: compare them to Quake
I. There is no comparison. In fact, Wizardry 8 looks slightly better
than most of the Quake II engine games i have seen.
Amarok
I think they talked about graphics, not engine. Hence, its like saying
that the museum sucks, because you saw the first 3 of 10 pictures.
Amarok
Werner Arend
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Christoph Nahr wrote:
> >This Christoph is from Germany - and the guys in Germany need to hate
> >something if all others like it ... It has something to do with there(/our)
> >minds .... It's probably just a troll post and he's laughing his ass off
> >about the reaction.
>
> Damn, you found me out! I hate all games, it's true! Especially the
> really popular ones, like Diablo 2 or Civilization 3 or Age of Kings.
> Everyone on this group loves Diablo 2, and I'm the only one that hates
> it! AND JUST BECAUSE I'M GERMAN!!! Ah, life is so unjust...
No, you're not - I hate it too...
...but then, I'm a German, too. :-)
Werner
saint
<dapolicema...@heads.fuk> wrote:
>i wish i was short and inadequate too
>
>-Invader Zim
I wish I was short, inadequate, green, with big red square bulbous
eyes and have a psychotic robot to call my own.
Knight37
>> >You should see what we have to say about the French!
"saint" <sa...@home.com> wrote in message news:3c028e93.163487@news...
>> Hey!! At least we didn't start any World Wars. Okay, Okay. We fucked
>> up with Napolean but he was short and inadequte. He had to make up for
>> it somehow.
"Invader Zim" <dapolicema...@heads.fuk> had the moxy to write:
> i wish i was short and inadequate too
instead of very short and very inadequate?
--
Knight37
No SIG for JOO!
djarvinen
((small snip))
> > The only problem I have with Wiz8 is the low draw distance limit.
> > If only there's an option to increase it.
>
> I presume that's at least partly to simulate 'fog-of-war' based
> viewing-distance limits, so that monsters don't seem to pop out of thin air
> when they get within viewing distance. Just assume that planet Dominus has a
> very moist, misty atmosphere.
Say... you wouldn't be plagiarizing again now, would ye? ;)
"One Misty, Moisty Morning
When cloudy was the weather,
I chanced to meet an old man
Clothed all in leather.
He began to compliment
And I began to grin,
"How-do-you-do,"
And "how-do-you-do,"
And "how-do-you-do, again!" "
Mark Blunden
news:4c6b7a6a.01112...@posting.google.com...
> "Mark Blunden" <mark.blun...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:
>
> ((small snip))
>
> > > The only problem I have with Wiz8 is the low draw distance limit.
> > > If only there's an option to increase it.
> >
> > I presume that's at least partly to simulate 'fog-of-war' based
> > viewing-distance limits, so that monsters don't seem to pop out of thin
> > air when they get within viewing distance. Just assume that planet
> > Dominus has a very moist, misty atmosphere.
>
> Say... you wouldn't be plagiarizing again now, would ye? ;)
<Innocent look>
Who, me?
> "One Misty, Moisty Morning
> When cloudy was the weather,
> I chanced to meet an old man
> Clothed all in leather.
> He began to compliment
> And I began to grin,
> "How-do-you-do,"
> And "how-do-you-do,"
> And "how-do-you-do, again!" "
Actually, that sounds like I should know it, but I don't, or can't recall
it. Just coincidence, I guess. :)
--
Mark.
mar...@btinternet.com
* It's worse than that, it's physics, Jim!
Invader Zim
"Knight37" <knig...@email.com> wrote in message
news:Xns91666C27C...@209.155.56.82...
Yes. *cries*
-Invader Zim
np: Fee. Boo. FEEBOO!!!!
Thomas Goebel
wrote:
It was comments like...
"Seeing W&W and now Wiz8, I have to say that our beloved Cleve B. is
vindicated in his decision to use a 2d engine for Grimoire. If these
Quake 1 graphics are the best that established companies could produce
with several years of effort, 3d engines are really not worth
bothering with for small independents."
...that lead me to believe Christoph's beef with Wizardry 8 was with
its engine.