• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

New screenshots of character visualizer, virtual tabletop

Mistwell said:
I don't understand you guys focusing on what it looks like...it's not in itself a game guys, it's just a quick visualization of the actual game. Who cares if it's even stick figures, if it works?

Because for guys like me who don't give a hoot about online Dragon or Dungeon, the money is a bit steep for on online gaming table alone. If I pay a WoW-like online monthly subscription fee I want something that looks good considering these are inanimate renderings.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

PrinceXaxor said:
Believe it or not, but 3d modeling is trickier than 2d art. While these aren't the prettiest of graphics, they certainly aren't total crap. If you really want to know what games looked like in 1998, here is the Wikipedia list of games. I think age is making some of our posters forget just how far we've come in 10 years when it comes to graphics. ;)

Yeah, but it's not the whole story. COMPUTER games looked like that. Arcade games were better: remember, Virtua Fighter 3 was released in 1996 (and in 1998 for DreamCast).

Nowadays, good computers beat arcades (they still exist?). I don't buy your protest of "3d modeling is trickier than 2d art". The problem is obviously not the level of detail, but the fact that those graphics were not drawn by a good artist. It was the exact same problem of Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind (just look for all the "pretty faces" mods for Morrowind and you'll see).
 

[sarcasm]Now the art clearly shows why male and females can have the same Strength scores . . . because they have the same bodies! Hey, it is the tragic end result of not having separate gender max scores for Strength. *cough*[/sarcasm]
 

The character renders are less than impressive. Some thoughts:

Fantasy fonts and decor elements may look good on an interface mockup, but it can get very distracting and annoying for applications you use a lot. I would like a clean GUI for the visualizer. I don't care if it looks like a generic Windows application, and in fact I would prefer if it did.

The sepia portrait in the the third screenshot looks a bit odd, almost bloated. It is probably a close-up taken with a wide angle lens. This can probably be fixed by moving the POV back and zooming in.
 

Well, I'd like more stylized graphics, but...

my main thing is that I want this to be an application I can run on top of a number of other things. I don't want this to be a power concern at all even for a low end computer. So on that level the graphics fill me with some hope.

And the dungeon tiles and mini's look a lot better than the 2D graphics.
 

Ever since I started using DAZ Studio for PC and NPC pictures as well as to create illustrations for my campaign history, my standards regarding game art have gone up.

What I see on those screens is not good enough for 2008.
 




the models seems pretty ugly, and the resolution is lame too. IMO if something has to interfer with my imagination of the character i want to play, i need something that is good-looking (not exactly what i've seen).
I'm a little disappointed in seeing only the 8 class we know ( my hope was for a 2nd controller :( ) but i like the confirmation of weapon divided not only in group like light blade or pick but also in the three broad category ( simple, military, superior); however reading the rogue article sems that weapon proficienses have nothing to do with this category like in 3ed, but are fixed... i'm still in doubt.
In the end my interest on DDI products depend on how much they are supported in my country (i'm italian), yes many thing are appealing to me but this first sneak peek let me very disappointed.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top