Winter Veil 2015, Legion - Increased View Distance, Tweets, Overwatch Teaser

[Deleted]

Is that supposed to look better?

It does but you have to take your Blizzard blinkers off first.

[Downwithopp]

FF XIV doesn't even have an open world, loads of loading screens. Besides having a character creation that is a joke compared to games like Aion that came out in 2008 and having a 2.5 seconds clobal cooldown that makes the whole fighting feel sluggish and boring.
If you want to compare graphics, you should compare Black Desert with its open world to WoW but comparing a 10 year old game to a new one would still be unfair.

Merely making a statement that WoW's technology is showing it's age. I would be willing to bet if they gave it any sort of real attention we could have "next gen" view distance as well.

[tehpwner]

If that's all the increased viewing distance we are getting, meh. At least it's a bit more I so I'll take it.

[Sentynel]

Meanwhile, in other games:

http://www.hellandheavennet.com/file...reenshot-2.jpg

Yeah, those graphics will look like shit in ~5 years, while WoW will still be WoW with its cartoon-ish style.

Also: still no words on full-sized loading screens?!

[Downwithopp]

Yeah, those graphics will look like shit in ~5 years, while WoW will still be WoW with its cartoon-ish style.

Also: still no words on full-sized loading screens?!

View distance has nothing to do with style, I'm merely stating it would be nice to get the same distance and clarity other games have.

[Gadzooks]

Sad, Winter Veil was my favorite in-game holiday - now I just don't care. And I find it amusing you have to buy decorations for your garrison - they should have been free like any other zone in the game that gets them. It's this kind of decision making on their part that just adds up to a big old "nope" when it comes to returning with Legion. It's not just one big thing, it's lots of little and medium sized things that add up to disinterest for me.

But boy will I miss the 12 hours of people standing on presents in Ironforge and Orgrimmar with the biggest mounts they could, 'cause that was so much fun.

Edited to add - I haven't paid much attention to Overwatch, it's not a game I'm interested in playing - nothing against it, it looks great, the graphics look great, it's just not my kind of game. But the trailer is kind of disconnected to what's actually going on in the game. It's just a deathmatch in a box - there's no "saving" people, or any of the things they're showing. It doesn't make sense to me, unless I'm missing something? You don't get any kind of idea what kind of game it is from that trailer - if I had never seen it before, like a lot of the movie viewers, what are they supposed to make of it? That they're going to play a game saving people from rubble, or from bandits, or launching rockets? Seriously, what's the intent here? To rook players in with pretty cut scenes, of things that won't ever happen in the game?

[Alopex Major]

Yeah the trailer for Overwatch for good, but it doesn't really tell you anything about the game.

My theater also had Hearthstone and movie trailers and, well, those were... something. The WoW movie trailer doesn't look any better on a big screen.

[Kaleredar]

I think it does personally and that's not me fanboying it. I just don't agree with the concept of graphics>gameplay I think both are equally important.

It does but you have to take your Blizzard blinkers off first.

Really? The grass stands out horribly against the ground. The plateau off in the distance is a solid divided line from the cliff face. The terrain texture has less design than you'd see in redridge in WoW. Most of the models in the background look untextured. If you want to talk about draw-distance... the cliffs in the background aren't "faded out" like things in the distance do in real life do to the atmosphere, they're blown out... like, when you take an overexposed photograph.

Compare that screenshot with what a desert vista actually looks like:

Does that background in the distance of the photograph look anything like the screenshot? Look how glaringly white and bleached the rocks are in the screenshot versus the muted colors of the photograph.

If you want a science-type definition, the muting of colors you're seeing in the photograph is the effect of the atmosphere scattering the light reflecting off of the rocks. As their distance from you increases, more and more light is scattered away before it reaches your eye, both desaturating the hue of the rocks and muting their value (read; muting, NOT "making brighter." A white object far in the distance will appear to be a darker value than a white object right next to you.) Because rocks generally aren't highly reflective, there's no reason for them to be reflecting some eye-glaring level of white into your eye, as they do in the screenshot. Hell, the rocks are almost the same tonal value as the clouds above them. Clouds are... well, very reflective. Look at the photograph. Look how much darker the hills in the distance are than the clouds above them


Here, you want some different examples? I'll give that screenshot from the game the benefit of the doubt and say they're very white rocks against a hazy sky with direct sunlight on them. Basically, the MOST light those rocks could feasibly receive.

Well, here are some very white rocks against a hazy background in direct sunlight.



Those aren't even up against white clouds and you can see how much darker they are compared to the atmosphere around them.




What, specifically, about that screenshot looks better than what WoW is putting out now? Are you confusing "straighter lines" for "more realistic" and therefore "better graphics?"




I'm not saying WoW is the best looking game out there. But at least find a game that does landscapes well and use that as an example.


Though honest to god, I think WoW does the best with Landscapes. And they certainly do a better job than the screenshot that was posted.

I mean look at spires of Arak.



Notice the detail on the ground. Not just in the objects but in the actual texture of the ground. Notice how the hills in the background aren't eye-shatteringly white.

[Deleted]

What is the drop rate on the mount from the Savage Gift? Do odds improve if our alts mail their merry supplies to our main to buy and open it?

I got my mount in the 62th box on day 4 (yeah, I am an altoholic). My buddy got his 1 day earlier, and I would guess after opening about 30 boxes or something like that (he has got fewer alts than me). (He does have better drop luck, already got his TW mount dropping with roughly the same amount of boss kills, while I am still waiting for it to drop.)

I have read rumors about a 5% drop rate, anyway.

[Kaleredar]

I got my mount in the 62th box on day 4 (yeah, I am an altoholic). My buddy got his 1 day earlier, and I would guess after opening about 30 boxes or something like that (he has got fewer alts than me). (He does have better drop luck, already got his TW mount dropping with roughly the same amount of boss kills, while I am still waiting for it to drop.)

I have read rumors about a 5% drop rate, anyway.

What I dislike is that they made it an either/or thing with the presents and decorations. They should have made it like hallows end (and every other holiday event, for that matter) and given you one savage gift per day in addition to the ability to buy the decorations with the token things.

[Eleccybubb]

Really? The grass stands out horribly against the ground. The plateau off in the distance is a solid divided line from the cliff face. The terrain texture has less design than you'd see in redridge in WoW. Most of the models in the background look untextured. If you want to talk about draw-distance... the cliffs in the background aren't "faded out" like things in the distance do in real life do to the atmosphere, they're blown out... like, when you take an overexposed photograph.

Compare that screenshot with what a desert vista actually looks like:

Does that background in the distance of the photograph look anything like the screenshot? Look how glaringly white and bleached the rocks are in the screenshot versus the muted colors of the photograph.

If you want a science-type definition, the muting of colors you're seeing in the photograph is the effect of the atmosphere scattering the light reflecting off of the rocks. As their distance from you increases, more and more light is scattered away before it reaches your eye, both desaturating the hue of the rocks and muting their value (read; muting, NOT "making brighter." A white object far in the distance will appear to be a darker value than a white object right next to you.) Because rocks generally aren't highly reflective, there's no reason for them to be reflecting some eye-glaring level of white into your eye, as they do in the screenshot. Hell, the rocks are almost the same tonal value as the clouds above them. Clouds are... well, very reflective. Look at the photograph. Look how much darker the hills in the distance are than the clouds above them


Here, you want some different examples? I'll give that screenshot from the game the benefit of the doubt and say they're very white rocks against a hazy sky with direct sunlight on them. Basically, the MOST light those rocks could feasibly receive.

Well, here are some very white rocks against a hazy background in direct sunlight.

Those aren't even up against white clouds and you can see how much darker they are compared to the atmosphere around them.




What, specifically, about that screenshot looks better than what WoW is putting out now? Are you confusing "straighter lines" for "more realistic" and therefore "better graphics?"




I'm not saying WoW is the best looking game out there. But at least find a game that does landscapes well and use that as an example.


Though honest to god, I think WoW does the best with Landscapes. And they certainly do a better job than the screenshot that was posted.

I mean look at spires of Arak.

Notice the detail on the ground. Not just in the objects but in the actual texture of the ground. Notice how the hills in the background aren't eye-shatteringly white.

I'm not saying I disagree with you. Tbh WoW and FF14 are both beautiful games in their own rights but if you put a gun to my head and said pick I'd say FF14. The thing is I don't know much about the whole graphics thing like Draw Distance and what have you but tbh both games appeal to me in different ways. I find FF14 appealing to my eyes as much as WoW but the thing is appeal or not is a matter of opinions. Also ignore the people saying "take your Blizz goggles off" dude. They will have a go at you for anything along the lines of comparing wow to other mmos as it is like a family member to them.

[Deleted]

"Long Post"

I agree with you.

When I started WoW there was the question whether I go for it or Everquest 2 which was considered to have the better graphics at that time. There were more things that made me go for WoW but I did also like the look better. I'm saying this not liking a cartoonish look too much overall. But there's a difference between having "good" technology (aka another approach on the graphics engine that is more resource consuming) and just a good look. It's like the difference between a good cocktail and a bad cocktail (or let's say one that I would not prefer). I like the ingredients being thought out and reduced.
That being said I want to mention that the higher view distance is not a core feature of the game but just one of some technology improvements. At blizzcon they didn't even put too much attention to this and it was just mentioned shortly when showing a screenshot that was there to show something else. So don't judge this news like "look, we have the best view distance in the world right now!" As a WoW player that loves the world and loves the looks of it I LOVE it to have the possibility to have even greater views

[Kaleredar]

I'm not saying I disagree with you. Tbh WoW and FF14 are both beautiful games in their own rights but if you put a gun to my head and said pick I'd say FF14. The thing is I don't know much about the whole graphics thing like Draw Distance and what have you but tbh both games appeal to me in different ways. I find FF14 appealing to my eyes as much as WoW but the thing is appeal or not is a matter of opinions. Also ignore the people saying "take your Blizz goggles off" dude. They will have a go at you for anything along the lines of comparing wow to other mmos as it is like a family member to them.

Honestly that one screenshot from that game... really didn't look good to me. Like I said, they're doing the "glare" thing that lots of video games are doing. Maybe it's to up the contrast, maybe it's to make the textures look better, but honestly, it just saps the color out of whatever you're looking at and makes it look cheap and plasticky.


Any artist worth their salt will tell you you only use white in painting when you absolutely need it. I really don't see why video game developers who are artists and were trained as artists lose touch with that. Maybe it's a disconnect with the lighting engine that's more or less out of their hands. But all of this glare being tossed around makes it look... well, like I said... blown out and overexposed.

As much as I loved the hell out of Skyrim and thought it was a pretty good looking game to boot (they didn't have the draw distance blowout problem) a lot of textures in that game had that glare-like sheen on them... especially the rocks and other things made of stone and wood... i.e, things you would expect to be weathered and beaten, especially in a harsh land like skyrim.
(And that's on top of other artistic nit-picks like long distance rendering being too detailed and ground textures being exceptionally repetitive)

What in the hell kind of rocks are people looking at that are so shiny?

[Eleccybubb]

Honestly that one screenshot from that game... really didn't look good to me. Like I said, they're doing the "glare" thing that lots of video games are doing. Maybe it's to up the contrast, maybe it's to make the textures look better, but honestly, it just saps the color out of whatever you're looking at and makes it look cheap and plasticky.


Any artist worth their salt will tell you you only use white in painting when you absolutely need it. I really don't see why video game developers who are artists and were trained as artists lose touch with that. Maybe it's a disconnect with the engine. But all of this glare being tossed around makes it look... well, like I said... blown out and overexposed.

As much as I loved the hell out of Skyrim and thought it was a pretty good looking game (they didn't have the draw distance blowout problem, but they could have stood to reduce the contrast on long-distance objects,) a lot of textures in that game had that glare-like sheen on them... especially the rocks and other things made of stone and wood... i.e, things you would expect to be weathered and beaten, especially in a harsh land like skyrim.

What in the hell kind of rocks are people looking at that are so shiny?

Not a clue tbh also some of those screenshots were from 1.0 which if I recall used the same but a really crappy version of the engine. One thing I hated about skyrim was the snow textures. As you walk up to them you can see some weird ass textures that disappear the closer you get. Probably my pc but who knows.

[Myah]

Being alliance and having to go to Frostfire Ridge to do the dailies bugs my inner lazyness

[Deleted]

They could not have made the Overwatch more cheesy even if they tried yeesh.

[Kaleredar]

They could not have made the Overwatch more cheesy even if they tried yeesh.

I see a lot of people complaining about it, and I don't know why... sure, it isn't Machiavelli, but considering that Overwatch effectively has no plot, I don't see how the trailer is some sort of letdown. It frames the characters shown in their little archetypes.

[Xuvial]

I see a lot of people complaining about it, and I don't know why... sure, it isn't Machiavelli, but considering that Overwatch effectively has no plot, I don't see how the trailer is some sort of letdown. It frames the characters shown in their little archetypes.

It's one of those trailers that give absolutely no clue what kind of game it is, and for all people know it might be a 2D mobile game. Especially with all the characters saying one word.

I will agree with the other guy, it was quite high in

Could've done with a bit less and a second or two of gameplay footage

[Deleted]

Really? The grass stands out horribly against the ground. The plateau off in the distance is a solid divided line from the cliff face. The terrain texture has less design than you'd see in redridge in WoW. Most of the models in the background look untextured. If you want to talk about draw-distance... the cliffs in the background aren't "faded out" like things in the distance do in real life do to the atmosphere, they're blown out... like, when you take an overexposed photograph.

Compare that screenshot with what a desert vista actually looks like:

Does that background in the distance of the photograph look anything like the screenshot? Look how glaringly white and bleached the rocks are in the screenshot versus the muted colors of the photograph.

If you want a science-type definition, the muting of colors you're seeing in the photograph is the effect of the atmosphere scattering the light reflecting off of the rocks. As their distance from you increases, more and more light is scattered away before it reaches your eye, both desaturating the hue of the rocks and muting their value (read; muting, NOT "making brighter." A white object far in the distance will appear to be a darker value than a white object right next to you.) Because rocks generally aren't highly reflective, there's no reason for them to be reflecting some eye-glaring level of white into your eye, as they do in the screenshot. Hell, the rocks are almost the same tonal value as the clouds above them. Clouds are... well, very reflective. Look at the photograph. Look how much darker the hills in the distance are than the clouds above them


Here, you want some different examples? I'll give that screenshot from the game the benefit of the doubt and say they're very white rocks against a hazy sky with direct sunlight on them. Basically, the MOST light those rocks could feasibly receive.

Well, here are some very white rocks against a hazy background in direct sunlight.



Those aren't even up against white clouds and you can see how much darker they are compared to the atmosphere around them.




What, specifically, about that screenshot looks better than what WoW is putting out now? Are you confusing "straighter lines" for "more realistic" and therefore "better graphics?"




I'm not saying WoW is the best looking game out there. But at least find a game that does landscapes well and use that as an example.


Though honest to god, I think WoW does the best with Landscapes. And they certainly do a better job than the screenshot that was posted.

I mean look at spires of Arak.



Notice the detail on the ground. Not just in the objects but in the actual texture of the ground. Notice how the hills in the background aren't eye-shatteringly white.

Regardless it looks better than WoW, its a more modern game - deal with it.

[Bugsy]

That was a very ineffective way of displaying the difference in view distance. Recommend doing a video or at least use a video from someone who did, like Bellular Gaming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVSvGSx5sg (no commentary)