Disappointed

But Praetoria might be.

That's what I get from reading the coverage too.

I'm really hoping that GR matches CoV in terms of content added - it's likely going to sell for the same price, a graphics update is being applied around the same time, it's adding new powersets and new costume pieces (we're not sure about archetypes yet) and a new starting location, plus new features (side-switching as opposed to bases), so the least it should have is as much content as CoV's L1-40 launch had - after all, content should be much easier/quicker for the Devs to create nowadays, what with the mission architect system in place (as it was designed mainly for the Devs and their new hires, but tweaked and released to us).

I'm sure I read someone saying GR is supposed to have four big zones - if each zone covers a ten-level spread that's forty levels right there, with perhaps the other ten levels following in the next issue (like they did for original CoH and CoV).

Hi we have made multiple zones with content that you can outlevel in the space of 2 hours But dont worry because the enemies there on the street cover all level ranges!

Because after all . . . . . the pistols tier 9 isnt available until at least level 32 and that "grey" clockwork didnt exactly go down quick now did it

That's not a good analogy. If we go with a game as a novel, the cover is equal to the main menu screen. What graphics are equal to is style of writing, spelling and vocabulary. You can have the most amazing story in the world, rife with interesting plot twists, engaging moral questions and great creativity, but if it feels like it was written by an illiterate first-grader on a mobile phone in-between classes, all of that doesn't matter.

Simply put, if I can't stand to look at a game, it doesn't matter what the game is actually about. By comparison, I can play a game with exceptional graphics even if it's quite bad without batting an eye much. Why would I play any of the Need For Speed games, otherwise?

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Shouldn't that be RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!! it's Maruader! -- I mean, he is one mean looking @!@#$%!!!

So how come their revamping the level 1-20 experience only ? I`m pretty sure it won`t be just the level 1-20 content (story arcs, tf`s or other trials) but they made it look like its a new concept of playing. At least thats what I thought.

As anyone can switch sides right up until 50, then that means there will be 20+ Praetorian content.

The image got a good reception at the presentation - I think Marauder will be popular

Willful jumping on slight error is willful.

By GR I meant Praetoria. GR in it's entirety will, with more likelihood than me eating chocolate (very likely) have full range of content. The Devs aren't going to take the time to make all this cool stuff, then make it 1-20. This is doomsaying.

There will be, at the very least, the stuff that will need to be done for side switching, which is guarenteed by Positron to be a fair chunk ('Not just a lightswitch')
So, patience. Everyone else has to wait too.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Unless that's what the devs mean by "shade of gray" - 50s will have to fight 20s to switch sides

As with any metaphor it is not 100% applicable.
My point is that graphics have no effect at all on gameplay, they're pure cosmetics. There's nothing "fun" about cool graphics beyond the first few hours of exposure- they get tuned out and become visual wallpaper.

Gameplay & story trump graphics every time. Half Life is still a great game, System Shock II is still a great game, heck Super Mario is still a great game...and not because of the graphics.

l337 graphics are a percieved necessity within the industry, nothing more. I'd prefer that energy be spent on other things, although I understand the rationale behind this sort of upgrade. It will placate the gaming press and flightly players and generate buzz for the expansion, which is a valuable function even though I personally won't get any direct benefit from it.

But it probably won't.

I disagree.

Graphics are passive, prose is interactive. The grammar & structure of a game are the actions you can take to advance the 'story' of whatever it is you're doing- beating up freakshow, zipping around looking for badges, whatever.

Graphics are the cover for the mechanics of the game you're playing, an inert layer of color over the meaningful content.

Goat, you are VASTLY underestimating the power of cosmetics. I know where you stand, more or less, so I can certainly see your position, but understand that "cosmetics" are pretty much the ONLY reason I play this game. Remove the cosmetics and I'd be gone without a second thought. More cosmetics are just going to get me more excited. Certainly more excited than Invasions, more task forces, more subsystems and so forth. About the only thing that could compare to cosmetics for me is story arcs, because I just enjoy the game's lore and stories.

But if I had to pick, cosmetics is the most important thing for me. Graphics, costumes, power customization, zones, enemy variety, location, location, location. That's what keeps me here. That, and the fact that "everything else" doesn't meddle in my cosmetics. The only reason I even look into this game's numbers at all is so that I can put cosmetics first and still build something that plays around them.

This is literally ALL I care about.

*edit*
This notion is part of the reason why Masters of Orion 3 is such utter garbage. It's essentially Spreadsheets: The Game. It has almost no graphics whatsoever, it's probably 95% interface windows. It's a game with almost no graphics, which is REALLY saying something in the context of the Masters of Orion games. I really, really hated that game.

I play games for the same reason I watch movies - because I like looking at something cool. Games just let me do cool things whereas movies just show me. I am not in the slightest interested in their underlying systems where knowledge of them isn't vital, and I wouldn't be bothered one bit if it weren't vital anywhere at all.

To me, graphics are the tools of creation and plot/gameplay the result of it. Without graphics, you don't have a game.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Actually, I don't think I am. I understand that it's a huge selling point for the gaming press and a lot of gamers. Certainly, there are more bad games with nice graphics that become 'hits' than vice-versa. In the commercial arena cosmetics matter, however little nutritive value they deliver to the final product.

But just as a personal preference, I'd like it if they'd leave the graphics be and put all that energy into something more substantive. I realize this is a Quixotic position, akin to your desire for vast, expansive zones to explore. It's personal preference- I understand that a lot of people get super excited about graphics, and I understand why they would include an upgrade in their new expansion.


We're the gaming yin/yang of this topic Sam, because I genuinely wouldn't care if we were all still wallowing around with the graphics we had at lanuch. =D

I'm generally a "good enough" sort of person. If the graphics were good enough for me to play back in 2004, there's no reason they won't be good enough to play now. That said, I'm never going to say no to better graphics, provided my computer can run it.

When it comes to it, I can't play a game that doesn't look good. If it's an action game, I DEMAND good animations at the very least, and good graphics are important. City of Heroes is, for me, all based around how cool our characters look, so that's also incredibly important. I have to be honest, I've never been a fan of the actual underlying game system. It's certainly better than most other MMOs, but the thing I like the most about it is that I can override it for the most part and still play without too many problems.

We're probably opposites indeed. I play games solely because they look cool, with game systems only really serving to achieve that cool look. I can sustain a certain level of bad graphics for a very exciting game, but my limit is fairly low. Oni is about as far as I'd go, and even then the game is "bad" only in a purely technical sense. Between its amazing animations, decent models and well-hidden kinks in the engine, it actually LOOKS remarkably good.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat We're the gaming yin/yang of this topic Sam, because I genuinely wouldn't care if we were all still wallowing around with the graphics we had at lanuch. =D

You may not. But thousands of us who invested in high-end computers system do demand up-to-date graphics.

As a person who is currently studying in the field of Software Engineering, with focus in Game Design, I can tell you that Graphics play a very, very, VERY crucial role in VIDEO games. Sure, your opinion may differ. We all look at things differently.

However, when it comes to VIDEO games graphics play as a medium for the content to embark on. In VIDEO games, content without visual representation is meaningless. And as time passes, technology advances. As technology advances, expectations rise.

An upgrade in graphics is just as important as upgrade in content and gameplay when it comes to VIDEO games.

You cannot compare a novel or a book or even a table-top game to a VIDEO game. Because as the name suggests, a VIDEO requires VIDEO as a method of communication. If you want an analogy, however, a VIDEO game requires and is dependent on VIDEO and graphics the same way a book requires and is dependent on its paper and text. That is as close as you can get to comparing novels with VIDEO games.

In Going Rogue, we are getting quite a balanced ratio of content to graphics. CoH is a VIDEO game. It requires content as much as it requires VIDEO. If the quality of content goes up, so must the quality of graphics.

And guess what! In CoH: GR, we're getting a whole new dimension with a whole new mission system, backstory, and atmosphere (that's content). We're getting a whole new game mechanic which includes switching sides and a bunch of other QoL and other game features (that's gameplay). And we're getting a graphics upgrade (that's graphics).

What're you whining about?

That its hard to now log in to the live servers without crying for the improved graphics [joking!]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrPlayskool If you're trying to tell me mitt hands and a frozen face are okay for games in 2009, then I really don't know what to say

They actually are saying that.

But personally, I kindda like mitten hands!

It would affect my gameplay not one tiny iota if my characters woke up one day with five fully articulated fingers and an expressive, mobile face.


Maybe if they were releasing CoH in 2009 it would be a valid thing to whine about, but the game came out in 2004.

It looks great for an old gal.

/edit
and I would love to +rep whoever added the hilarious Preemptive Whining tag, if I only knew who it was!

Having seen games with fingers, I'm not terribly impressed, but I'll give you that mittens are a bad idea. But faces? Even games that have full-fledged conversations an cutscenes don't give their actual gameplay models full-range facial expression. There's no reason to have it, both because you'll never see it from the back, and because you'll never see it even if you were looking for it.

Show of hands - who among you knew that Tomb Raider had changing face expressions?

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

I didn't know anyone ever got as far as her eyes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nethergoat It would affect my gameplay not one tiny iota if my characters woke up one day with five fully articulated fingers and an expressive, mobile face. Maybe if they were releasing CoH in 2009 it would be a valid thing to whine about, but the game came out in 2004. It looks great for an old gal. /edit and I would love to +rep whoever added the hilarious Preemptive Whining tag, if I only knew who it was!

Yep. You see City of Heroes as a tool. Not a game. Either that, or you simply do not enjoy aesthetics at all as a contributing factor to your entertainment.

Is that is true, we're not talking about the same thing. Case closed.