Elemental makes use of a brand new 3D engine developed specifically for PC strategy games. Its multithreaded design along with dynamic LOD (level of detail) allows for it to look great on a wide range of hardware.
To see and understand why Elemental can look good on low end hardware and yet benefit further from higher end hardware see for yourself how the dynamic LOD works:
Look very very closely here. This isn’t one 3D object. This is dozens of 3D objects. The engine determines how powerful your hardware is and based on that can choose to display objects based on that.
As more objects come into view, certain “less important” objects start to fade away:
Did something change?
Look closely. Did something change?
How about now?
As a result of the object-based system that Kumquat provides, the graphics look identical at a casual glance and yet, the polygon count is dramatically less in the third image.
And users with very low end hardware can simply play using the sprite based output (cloth map mode):
Because Kumquat is a PC-only graphics engine, it can make a different set of trade offs than the traditional cross-platform engine. Namely, it can assume players have a considerable amount of memory (1 gigabyte is the minimum total system memory to play a Kumquat based game – very little on a PC but twice what a current generation console has). Thus, a given game object can be made up of many sub-objects (which use more memory) but can be dynamically turned on or off based on 3D hardware instead of having to load up lower-quality 3D models.
I guess at the end of the day, what matters (to us) is that we (the guys making the game) like the art style. It's what we chose. We're happy with it. If people have a big problem with it they're certainly free to purchase a different game.
I didn't criticize the style, on the contrary, I said I really like the style. I just stated my opinion on what I think is the reason for the perception of 'detached' visuals and that an improvement easy & cost-efficient. Using shadows is not a style, but a necessity for perception of 3d.
At the end of the day, you make a creative product, you put money, time and soul into it, and as with all creative products, you want as many people as possible to be happy with it, not just you. The fact that some people might criticize some things about the game, before even the game is out, means that these people are interested in the game (or they just don't have better things to do).
I'd hope that someone could state an opinion without the need of having pre-ordered, or displaying extreme fanboyism.
Until things are more finalized (finished shadowing system, per environment lighting, distance fog tweaks, etc) it's probably something not worth discussing (you've seen the name calling thoughtout the debate). But yeah, when I saw those shots and people were bringing up 'detachment' between the objects and terrain, the lack of shadows for many of the objects caught my eye as well. We'll have to figure out why those tiles weren't placing there shadow decals.
Perhaps the timing for the comment was bad indeed.. If the shadows are to be taken care of, then yes, ignore that comment section please
Sorry esrever, I wasn't meaning to address you quite so specifically. What I am trying to address is the general question of the graphical style. We don't like the tendancy of these types of games to be littered with "stuff". We prefer having a cleaner look both from a game play point of view as well as aesthetically.
No problem, I understand the frustration coming from everybody being "do this, do that" & I can definitely agree on the "littered with stuff" anti-pattern. You (or somebody else, can't remember) criticized HOMM V about it, I've been playing those games from the original Kings Bounty, and I can't agree more for that iteration in specific.
You can definitely judge the sweet spot between barren & littered, but the NPR graphical style and the object design looks great. As the former is tweakable & the latter isn't, that's cool.
I like tons of shit on my maps.
I'm not whining because I'm mean, I just want this game to be perfect. I have pre-ordered long ago and I'm really excited about it. I also want to voice my opinion now during the betas because it seems completely pointless to do so after release... If the current screenshots are not representative of the final game, then fine.
I have a question: Will it be possible to mod the standard "empty" tiles so that we can get a different look on generated maps?
It really looks absolutely fantastic, frogboy. I love how it keeps the sense of fantasy and story through its kind of "ethereal" look but always reminds you that this a real world that exists somewhere by having those grand open spaces, unlike HoMM or warcraft which obnoxiously remind you every step of the way "this is a game, collect all the random treasure strewn on the ground that you can!" or civ that says "look at how three cavemen tower over a city of millions!" Elemental's style is fantasy yet realistic and looks great.
My hat's off to the directors of the art style. It's incredible and I can't wait to see it alive and in-game.
dsk2293: There is literally a "More Shit on Map"(tm) option where empty tiles get 2x, 5x, or 10x more groudcover. I accidentally turned it up and it very quickly did away with the barren stretches Enjoy!
esrever: Yeah, the conversation gets difficult when people start asking for more 'stuff'...part of the reason we picked the style we did was the contrast between the wide swatches of color with spots of detail where necessary.
http://marinacorreia.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/mucha3.jpg
Which, in my mind, is perfect for a game where you want to immediatly know where the important parts of the map are. You see a huge, spwawlying town and it feels important, opposed to it just being another busy spot on an already busy composition.
I do think we can push the fantastic further, however. We'll keep chipping away and will continue to push out screens that show where we're headded. Hopefully we can sway some of the non-beleivers by next month.
YAY!
Yes, that's a very valid concern, opposite to HOMM mentality as said before. Again (as with the zoom levels), data gathering of time spent on each "More Shit on Map"(tm) setting would be a great insight of what people like, and I can imagine a nice bell curve with the default value being a potential outlier. But the data logger in me starts to take control so I'll stop here ..
I love the art style (Mucha-inspired). But I do think the comments on the objects are right: they look a bit too separate from the rest of the world. It makes it feel, to draw it to the extreme, like a cheap computer game instead of a work of art. As a curiosity: as I write this I have four huge paintings of Mucha behind me on the wall, and they don't look anything like that (i.e. they have no such sharp, pointy objects).
NB I did not say it has to look realistic. You don't need to go for realism, you can keep to the style and make it like a work of art, but it should still look nice and pleasant and get you involved in the game. Fantasy should not feel modern, it should feel old and full of mood. The problem with the pointy objects now is that they make you think of the numbers behind those objects, instead of making you dream of a fictional world.
Also, since you can zoom in so easily I don't think it's a big problem that you would not recognize or find elements on a map.
Personally, I would prefer to have some more texture on the bare lands, it would not be confusing. Also, I think the trees still look a bit weird, they turn out a bit like mushrooms in some zooms ...
If you keep perfecting the shadows, adding some texture and details I think it will look great.
My earlier comments weren't meant as criticism of the style either. I not only like it in other contexts, I think it's great you guys are bold enough to use it and I really hope you're inspiring other developers to try different things too.
Anyway, having thought on it some more... I think my problem is a side effect of the zoom. A lot of the appeal, at least to me, is the combination of sharp contrasts, soft curves and how the colours flow into each other. Zoomed out a fair bit, it sort of does happen in Elemental now. Not quite enough, I think, but it does sort of happen. Zoomed in, though, it doesn't really happen at all.
- But I'll cease my raving. I only made my earlier comments because I thought you wanted feedback. As long as the graphics are functional & don't get in the way of windowed/weird res playing, I'll be content with anything.
One thing that we have yet to see is the animations in tactical battles. To me the animaitons are the most important part of immersion, though many people here seem to be immersed by the strategic maps style. What really engages me in a battle is being able to find new and sadistic ways of watching the little ants down there die. I imagine expolsions, electricutions, vaporizations, and of course flattening by giant stone. The strategic map to me is just great because it presents the everyday life of the world and from what I've seen, incorporates all the desired animation to give the player a feeling that those little ants are alive, just waiting to be squisheed.
So beta 2 next week?
Well, let's be honest. This was one your very early concept screens:
Know what? It was clean too, but far better looking than the actual game now, after almost 2 years. It was smoother, cool-looking, very inspired and unusual. Look at the landscape, look at the caster. All very clean, detailed, simple but cool, very appealing.
I know, people, I know... you don't care at all about graphics, you are not graphic whores. In fact, maybe you even love bad graphics, for what it can matter. To me? Frankly it sounds just like an apologethic way to look away from a flaw.
What can I say? I just can't deny to myself how disappointed I am with the aesthetic of the game so far, and to be honest I'm concerned it may be even worse when tactical battles will come, considering how human models and animations are simply the worst part of the game appareance so far.
I've already preordered this game months ago, I still have hopes about this game, so I'm not going with some childish whine like "I'm not buying this shit" or stuff like that... But let me be explicit: so far I'm hoping for some talented modder for a visual revamp. Maybe amazing people like these guys.
Wow, i really get your point regarding graphics and stuff... But i just think you pre-ordered the wrong game. There are enough people around that would risk diabetes considering the eye candy they need in their games, but this isn't elemental's style. As far as i saw, it's a more minimalistic aproach. Everyone remembers masters of magic not for it's top notch graphics, but it's lasting gameplay. Myself, i grit my teeth and play a game of mom once in a while, disregarding the visuals. But sure, i love me some nice graphics now and then, too bad i can't seem to find one game nowadays that looks top notch and actually have good gameplay. So when a game comes along that promises nice gameplay and a fresh look (mind you, fresh look =/= high end graphics), i go for it while drooling a bit.
Yeah, right. I'm 32 years old, I play games (every damn videogame genre, to be more specific) since i was five, and now looks like you want to teach me what game is right for me.
Oh, come on, you can just say it is not Elemental strong point. It will sound far more honest.
Yeah, but there is a problem here, and the problem is: I actually find Master of Magic far more pleasant to the sight than Elemental. At least so far. And believe me, I'm not in a nostalgic mood, I cn say it cause I just played it for a few hours, just before posting.
Plus, so far it still even more fun and compelling to play, but of course I'm suspending my judgment here, cause Elemental Beta 1 is substantially an early alpha.
P.S. I know, my english sucks. Sorry about that.
*facepalm*
Jesus Christ, it's pretty annoying trying to debate with raging fanboys.
If it's the whole 'Illustrative style' you don't like, I don't think any amount of modding will get around that unfortunately. However, if you think the concept shot you linked above is actually pretty OK? I get the impression that you won't be terribly disapointed with what people will be able to churn out; or possibly even what the game can churn out if you up the 'put-more-shit-on-map' (as it was so eloquently titled a few posts up ) option up a few notches.
We have already been told though that while their own maps and the like go for a more minimalist approach; if we want to custom build maps that have something on practically every tile of the map? We can do that.
Also; we haven't yet seen ingame what happens when the life and death sides meet up as per that concept shot. I hope they still have the water to lava transition with the steam puff! That looked neat. hehe
I think the current screenshots look better that the one posted by TucoBenedicto. Somehow I don't like the use of colors on it.
No, isn't. In fact, I love the "illustrative style". I've even just posted an early concept screenshot praising its visual style. Which isn't coming in the game anymore, sadly.
What i don't like are very bad polygonal models (starting with the Sovereigns himself), human units in the beta, and very bad animations, judging from latest videos.
And sure, I can't wait myself to see what's yet to come, but I have concerns about the game aesthetic and I don't feel like I'm doing anything wrong pointing at them.
Well, I don't. Really. In fact, to me is even hard to understand how THIS...
...can be perceived as better than this:
I regard this second one as very clean, iconic, charismatic, even cool. The first one? Just bland and mediocre, to me.
I don't like to blame other people's job, but I really can't count myself as a fan of this (those?) Stardock modeler.
Well, why don't we continue this discussion after the beta 2 launches? Because it's easy to judge the earlier pics as being 'better'... lush grassland, merging into lava and barren land. Let's be honest, the setting is far better in the newer pics out there. Right now you're not actually comparing two different art styles, but two different settings. And yes, the earlier one is cooler. And yes, i do think elemental's focus isn't the graphics department, although i actually enjoy the direction they're going.
Seems like most people are missing his point, you included. It's not really an art style problem, as the style hasn't changed much from the old screenshot to the new one. What has changed is that in the new ones, there are huge "empty" spaces.
I agree with Tuco totally on that. The older shot looks better then the newer one, simply because it looks more like a, for lack of a better word, natural environment. There's more odd individual trees poking up, little things here and there.
The newer ones have clumps of 'stuff', and clumps of empty space. It just doesn't look right, but it's something that can be fixed without changing the art style at all.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
