New Highpool screenshot

[sparkee666]

whenever a screen shot is shown and I read some of these comments I think the whole point of showing the work is missed. I guess there's nothing wrong with criticism though some of it starts to lean in the area of overly critical.

[shaigunjoe]

Well, that's the thing innit mate. InXile could spend more time having their environmental artists sharpening up the textures in their already finished maps, OR they could not do that, just ignore the whiners and instead tell their artists to move onto more maps, so we get a bigger game

And that becomes more and more a great concern of mine.
What is better a big sprawling game or a game with good mechanics, good to customize, with good mod suport and superb to the detail? I think the later one because: The divine and the devil lies always in the detail.
I now begin to think that inXile has taken too much on a to large game story in scale, but they will not make the game good to the detail. Small but fine, would be in my thinking better.
Its not so that i suggest that Wasteland 2 will be bad, but for a masterpiece it still has a long way to go.
In comparison i think Fallout 1 is overall better, then Fallout 2, but Fallout 2 has a superb start.

I don't think I am as upset about it as you are Dark, but I do agree with you. If you have a large game with lots of recycled textures etc, you get Dragon Age 2.

[Zombra]

If you have a large game with lots of recycled textures etc, you get Dragon Age 2.

Well let's not get hysterical here

[Ronin73]

The grass is still horrible. Oh my god how can you not see this.

Newflash. Kopi thinks the grass is horrible, so everybody else should think this as well!

[Zombra]

The grass is still horrible. Oh my god how can you not see this.

Newflash. Kopi thinks the grass is horrible, so everybody else should think this as well!

I'm looking at the grass again, and I still don't see why a few people are going blind with its supposed atrociousness. It looks fine.

Darkzone was right about the "seasick effect" in the videos, but the screenshots look fine. It's not CryEngine 4 grass, but it isn't supposed to be, and the backers universally demanded that inXile NOT spend millions on the graphics. They're perfectly functional. At least you can tell it's grass.

[Crosmando]

Well, that's the thing innit mate. InXile could spend more time having their environmental artists sharpening up the textures in their already finished maps, OR they could not do that, just ignore the whiners and instead tell their artists to move onto more maps, so we get a bigger game

And that becomes more and more a great concern of mine.
What is better a big sprawling game or a game with good mechanics, good to customize, with good mod suport and superb to the detail? I think the later one because: The divine and the devil lies always in the detail.
I now begin to think that inXile has taken too much on a to large game story in scale, but they will not make the game good to the detail. Small but fine, would be in my thinking better.
Its not so that i suggest that Wasteland 2 will be bad, but for a masterpiece it still has a long way to go.
In comparison i think Fallout 1 is overall better, then Fallout 2, but Fallout 2 has a superb start.

I don't think I am as upset about it as you are Dark, but I do agree with you. If you have a large game with lots of recycled textures etc, you get Dragon Age 2.

We are talking about the actual detail and polycount in the textures, not about reusing assets (which no-one is suggesting).

[highpoolNomad]

We are talking about the actual detail and polycount in the textures, not about reusing assets (which no-one is suggesting).

Skipping out on detail of textures for a larger game is supporting reuse of textures.

[Lazy Nomad]

Skipping out on detail of textures for a larger game is supporting reuse of textures.

It's also supporting a larger game.

[shaigunjoe]

Skipping out on detail of textures for a larger game is supporting reuse of textures.

It's also supporting a larger game.

Right, but larger does not mean better, if you are for shear quantity then you are right that skipping on details would be ok with you, but I would not be ok with a larger and more bland world.

[Crosmando]

We are talking about the actual detail and polycount in the textures, not about reusing assets (which no-one is suggesting).

Skipping out on detail of textures for a larger game is supporting reuse of textures.

How so?

[Thrin]

I'm looking at the grass again, and I still don't see why a few people are going blind with its supposed atrociousness. It looks fine.

Darkzone was right about the "seasick effect" in the videos, but the screenshots look fine. It's not CryEngine 4 grass, but it isn't supposed to be, and the backers universally demanded that inXile NOT spend millions on the graphics. They're perfectly functional. At least you can tell it's grass.

Maybe they want everything to be photo-realistic or something?

I dunno, I guess in a game I expect the game to look like a ... game. So long as there is a consistent art style that is maintained throughout the game and that style enhances the immersion and story-telling of the game then it's awesome even if it isn't photo-realistic.

When I look at the grass in this screenshot (which is a detail I don't normally fixate on) I still don't see how it is "horrible" or whatever. I agree with you: it looks like grass and there we go. I'd be okay if -all- of the grass in the entire game looked like that. That being written, I'd like to see some variation like brownish grass in more waste-y type locations and what not but I wouldn't be upset or bothered if that wasn't in the game.

[Crosmando]

Not photo-realistic, but InXile are definitely going for a realistic style, they want the world to look grim and what it would actually look like in a post-apocalyptic setting. No one wants bright colors and cartoony body proportions.

[Lucius]

I agree with you: it looks like grass and there we go.

Bingo. If we looked at the picture and couldn't tell it was grass, then we'd have a problem. We know it's grass. We can tell it's grass. Mission accomplished. If this game had a $50 million budget, then we can start nitpicking the grass. In a $3 million video game the grass should be one of the most innocuous things to complain about.

[Woolfe]

Not photo-realistic, but InXile are definitely going for a realistic style, they want the world to look grim and what it would actually look like in a post-apocalyptic setting. No one wants bright colors and cartoony body proportions.

I want the sort of bright colours you get in nature, as it reclaims old buildings etc

[Zombra]

No one wants bright colors and cartoony body proportions.

Uh ... when you say "No one wants", you mean "I don't want", right? You weren't around for the first year of the forum, I see; but we have had this conversation several times. I assure you that there are plenty of backers who want bright colors, including me. Long story short, bright color is a major factor in the distinction of style between Wasteland and Fallout: Fallout doesn't have color, but Wasteland does. It's OK with me if you want Fallout visuals, but don't pretend that everyone does.

Cartoony character models, no, because people in Wasteland had realistic proportions, and the portraits, although brightly colored, were reasonably realistic (for 24x24 or whatever it was ). "Super-deformed" characters are for JRPGs.

[dorkboy]

@ffordesoon
i guess i'm not entirely sure what you mean by "great graphics", but what i mean by it is that it looks good regardless of whether it's hi-fi or low-fi, that it has a consistent and somewhat unique feeling to it, and that it makes you think you are seeing more than you actually are*.

and if you have text+graphics+audio then the text effectively ceases to exist in a vacuum. this ain't zork, you know..
the graphics/art direction/animation/ui art/colour scheme and overall visual tone feeds back into how you actually experience the text (as well as the other way around, as you pointed out).

*for instance by faking variety with different clothing and skin colours on identical character models.

[Crosmando]

Bright colors meaning that overly saturated look that all MMO's seem to have, not the color palette itself.

EDIT: Also stop cherrypicking my posts, reply to all of my post or none of it.

[FiendZero]

EDIT: Also stop cherrypicking my posts, reply to all of my post or none of it.

ROFL, and how do you plan to stop people from cherry picking your posts?

[Zombra]

Bright colors meaning that overly saturated look that all MMO's seem to have, not the color palette itself.

My point stands. The original Wasteland was highly saturated as well as colorful. Those who hope for the original visual style to be preserved in the sequel do indeed want "bright colors", however you define them.

EDIT: Also stop cherrypicking my posts, reply to all of my post or none of it.

I like to trim down full post quotes, both as a courtesy to the person I am replying to (so they know exactly what point I am addressing), and to the board population in general (because big quote blocks are unnecessary, and waste screen space and reader time and cognitive effort).

If you feel that I am taking a point out of context, and thereby misinterpreting your intent, say so. I am not doing it deliberately. If I did miss your point, or omit critical context, I apologize, and am prepared to be corrected. In the post you referenced, however, I do not feel I was actually "cherry picking", merely cutting out some extra text that was unnecessary to establish the gist of the quote. I removed a little padding, nothing more.

"Brevity is wit."

Just for you, though, I will start doing full post quotes when I reply to you only. You're welcome.

[Crosmando]

Bright colors meaning that overly saturated look that all MMO's seem to have, not the color palette itself.

My point stands. The original Wasteland was highly saturated as well as colorful. Those who hope for the original visual style to be preserved in the sequel do indeed want "bright colors", however you define them.

Wasteland looked the way it did because of the limited color palette the computer systems they were designing for had. Which is why the c64 version looked so different than the pc version, and also the apple2. Who knows what Wasteland would of looked like if it was made in the 90's, it might of looked like Fallout or Dark Sun graphics wise.

Also you do not understand what the word saturation means.

And I was just making the point that InXile are obviously going for a realistic style, so with the camera zoomed out the rangers look small and their proportions look realistic in comparison to objects. This "realism" is also shown in the subdued color palette they are using. Don't believe me, just look at any of the released screenshots for WL2, they all have that subdued realistic tone.

So therefore, I win.