Mar 5, 2013
SerB explains why the game doesn't "look better"
Source: http://world-of-kwg.livejournal.com/167750.html#comments
Recently, a player posted a question on the developer's blog (well, more like an article), basically complaining that the game doesn't look as good as modern AAA titles. SerB replied this:
"It's simple. When you work on a project, you have certain resources. When it comes to the available money and work, you can spend them on graphics, or on the network part. We spent most of it on the network part - the money on acquisitions (purchase of the BigWorld license) and the work on polishing the networking code. Practically all online games have similiar priorities, that's why all online projects are behind with the graphics. If the project is successful, you can allocate your resources to graphics as a second step (with online projects it's the render), which is being done.
That's why you can't just "make a crossbreed between BigWorld and Crysis", because there are format differences in object handling, both in the network and in the client parts. Therefore, it's usually better to polish the already existing solution, which - again - is being done.
A player then asked, why doesn't WG simply make a MMO with the best possible graphics and then focus on the networking part?
SerB answers: "That can be done, but it's very expensive (and the worst part is: not expensive as in money, but in manhours of qualified employees). It's so expensive that noone found it worth doing for now.
The player then suggested giving the "graphics polishing" to an external developer, so it doesn't cost the employee manhours, just money.
SerB answers: "That would be possible, but it would take a long time, as the developer would have to understand the part of the game engine he'd work on. Unless the company in question is the BigWorld, which knows a lot about the part of the engine. But Bigworld needs to get some skill in rendering. So it's the same either way."
SerB also mentioned the new graphic mechanism that already is in WoWp will be implemented into WoT - a scraped off paint on tanks, the metal under it "shining through".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The game on maximum settings already looks pretty splendid IMO. Smooth beautiful vivid graphics.
ReplyDeleteTake a look at Battlefield 3. It's a fucking show full of blue tint, pitch black shadows, fucked up lens flares everywhere, etc. If you google every word i mentioned, it will lead you to a BF3 complain thread.
bf3 looks fine
Deletetho i agree that blue tint is overused
To be honest I have zero complaints regarding the visual side - it really looks good enough, and if anything, i'd like a more convenient way to disable certain effects that just get in the way when shooting opponents (smoke etc).
ReplyDeleteWho the hell complains about the graphics in a game like this. They don't want to increase the view range because customers in eastern European countries can barely handle the graphics as is.
ReplyDeleteI was waiting for huge Trolling by SerB, tho what we got is a smooth answer.
ReplyDeleteNice, but in fact everyone knows why we dont have the Graphics of a 20gig Game...
Imo, the graphics part is good. Not extraordinary, but for a MMO it's quite good.
ReplyDeleteActually, i'd rather prefer they concentrate on the sturdiness of the "world of wot", by using the physic engine further more.
Indeed this game doesn't need the advanced graphics of the competition(is there any?) but that is still very important factor, new generations of MMO players are coming and their criteria will be much higher than mine for example as I started with most basic games like Super Mario and Kid Icarus on GB. It's not smart to leave visual effect aside. Players(myself first) need small stuff, like scratches on tanks, real grenade effects on armor, tanks being realtime detracked(since in this moment we have tracks always breaking in same spot and in the same way). So there are my two cents.
ReplyDeletePijacMali
An honest answer would be that they started with the crappy big world engine because that's what they could afford, and once they started making lots of money they can't be bothered to spend it on getting a better engine and porting the game to it (which they could if they wanted to). And don't give any of this crap about making it run on crappy computers, WoT is as demanding hardware wise as many other games that look 10 times better. Sure graphics are not important but I would gladly see the money I spent on WoT being used to improve them.
ReplyDeleteYou can't just simply ''port the game to a new engine''. Doing so would result in an absolutely insane amounts of new, possibly game-breaking bugs, and bog down the game's development for a pretty long time. Which would delay things like the much-anticipated second German TD line, the multi-turret system, the European tech tree... Basically everything which is in development at the moment.
DeleteGraphics in WoT is totally OK IMO. But I started playing on ZX Spectrum and Atari 65XE, so I do not need much to be satisfied with graphics. And I totally agree that network is much more important.
ReplyDeleteAlso the better graphics game has, the more players have to download. For many people even current 4GB is hard to download in reasonable time.
I think its better to invest time in graphical optimization rather than fidelity. It looks pretty good in high settings but can get a bit choppy in tense moments. So I just play in medium settings in order to insure that I don't get that annoying choppiness in a critical time.
ReplyDeleteserb needs to really look out there and see the other MMOs
ReplyDeletetake EVE for example, thy're updating the shaders and network code every time they get the chance
or look at Gaijin's StarConflict or WarThunder
Sony's PlanetSide2
WoT client ~8Gb
WT client ~7.5Gb
EVE client 10-11Gb
PlanetSide 2 - 10.5Gb
StarConflict - 1.5Gb
also, the WoWp screens that overlord posted a while back on his blog were doctored
WoT download - 4GB, WT download - 7 GB, I prefer the first one.
Deletefollowing your broken logic, should prefer StarConflict
DeleteNot my problem that you do not understand that downloading 4GB is for millions of people faster then 7GB. Much lesser problem is how much GB you have after installing software. And I prefer WoT graphics with 4GN download then downloading much more to have better graphics. Games on Atari and ZC Spectrum where funny too, while they had very simple graphics.
DeleteIf only SerB answered all questions like this and not just childish trolling....imo graphic is just fine....my PC is mediocre so i'm playing with low settings and i don't care if it doesn't look super awesome bcs in battle you don't have time to look at graphics etc. Your focus is on the enemies and battle. For me they could easily leave the graphics as they are now and focus completely on polishing othe aspects of the game that are neccesary....i much more appreciate good fps(frames per second) than texture quality...make the game's fps more stable and reduce the high fps drops and i'm happy...
ReplyDeleteThe game has great graphics, but it's not optimised and therefore some players (including me) are forced to play on low-medium graphics with not so bad PCs.
ReplyDeleteas a developer i can attest that this is the right approach in real-live. no company has unlimited resources (maybe except google). Battlefield & co are focusing on graphic as first priority, then net service. but in order to make net game work, net part should work to handle massive connections, handle scale etc... this part should be addressed.
ReplyDeleteactually if it was the other way around, we would not sit here and read this game blog...
Serb is the responsible adult here.
Didnt know someone is even looking at graphics in online competitive games. Tbh im still playing every game with lowest special effects and maxed crucial ones. I don't like distraction.
ReplyDeleteI bought a new Icore5 pentium and I'm forced to play on low settings to get 60 fps. The engine sucks!
ReplyDeleteBecause the game is running on a single core.No matter if you have an i5-7 it'll work only on one core.If you have an i7 3ghz it'll work like an i5 with 3 ghz and like an i3 with 3ghz, so..the game engine needs multi-core support badly.
DeleteI too got a brand new Cpu which is damn good, but have to run the game on low settings to have decent fps-es
WoT started as unreliable project in financial terms. Limited resources and we got what we have. All whiners should remember how it was 2 years ago and compare it with what we have now. Nice progress, I think.
ReplyDeleteimho, graphics should take a back seat to gameplay, every time, no exceptions.
ReplyDelete