Graphic Departament Feedback: CTS vs RTS

[Cain]

Cartoon Time Strategy vs. Real Time Strategy

 

The games looks excellent - My feedback is only against the graphic departament that has not risen on all game aspects and details up to my standard expectations.

 

(I do have minor comments about bugs and general game design elements that are not fully interactive - but I will post them later)

 

It's a short review since I am very busy - maybe later I will edit it or reply in it:

 

1.Were are the original eaw E3 realistic pictures of units and ships and humans and such ?! The ones displayed in the menus. Who approved those screens after 3D units that are not even fully reworked on after the resize? They need manual pixel work. And the unit icons and character icons too. Even I can do them much better in 2-3 days.

 

2.Give the impression of realism: All over the forums people scream for realism and here is one place were realistic photos from the movies and such could have helped them. Or realistic drawings and they get cartoons like pictures ?!

 

3.Also who make the animations for humans? They are silly - make them like in Jedi Academy !

 

4.All the humans walk like they have a wood thing in their a** and this is upsetting them.

 

5.What are those fire damage hit animations? What are they defending from with their hands? Stones ? How come this aspect was overlooked?

 

6.If the troop models were designed at a different scale originally (much smaller) put them back or make new ones!

 

7.Why are not the ships turrets animated ? (*On ships were is possible to have turrets)

 

8.Why are the ship models so simple ? I can admire Warlords ships but this ones ... (at least some of them) just look plain simple. There is no greatness in them.

 

9.Why is the galaxy texture so unrealistic. I don't see and depth perception in it ... make the stars flicker and glow and the space more black.

 

The key to a perfect RTS is the perfect balance between gameplay/fun/realism. From what I see the results are 9/9/-2. Why -2 since even simple "features" that would have not affected the other two are not implemented.

 

I will post later when I will play more since I can't comment too much - I need the whole game to get the full picture. So for now I am mainly commenting about the art departament who has been overlooking minor aspects that help the overall picture of perfection.

 

Btw. Great Designed Maps and Great Programming! As well as all the aspects that are not mentioned above. It's just me ... I am a perfectionist and maybe upset that an EA representatives once stated:

 

...I can see where anticipation is high. After numerous mediocre Star Wars RTS attempts, when you finally have a team with some experience, then one would be more hopeful...

 

http://cncden.com/index.php?action=fullnews&showcomments=1&id=42

 

Some experience ?!?!

 

It’s actually the best experience in the world ! And I consider my aspects mentioned above as being just overlooked and replaced in a hurry with what was already on hand ... easily ... all in the big effort that is making such a great game. This happens all the time - the development twists your fan perception of the game.

Edited January 20, 2006 by Cain

[lordstorm88]

4.All the humans walk like they have a wood thing in their a** and this is upsetting them.

 

lololol. well I didn't really notice that, but I noticed how they shoot. its as is they are lego-made.

[Ghostly_Substance]

Told you they're Lego people, Didn't you see me comment on one of the pictures, They're LEGO PEOPLE  ;D

[Saracen]

I'm really beginning to question this communities knowledge and perception of what game programming is about. Why are graphics, realism, and every single minature aspect so damn important to everybody, in a Demo?

 

While I respect what you have to say here Cain, What you are asking for may be in the full game. People need to realise this, this game is off an earlier build so certain animations, sounds Graphical improvements might not yet have been added..

 

Realism in RTS games is never an easy thing to do. Make it too mechanically realistic, you have problems with the game being too hard, and not that much fun. Don't put enough in, the game feels like C&C: Red Alert 2  ;D

 

It's similar to Graphical Realism, Put too much in, you raise the poly count and therefore the minimum system specification, don't put enough in you get C&C: Red Alert 2

 

Similar lines go for Game Features. You put too many in, the game only gets bought by purists cos the game is too complicated, make too little like a terrible map generator and no game speed slider, everyone seems to buy it and you call it C&C: Red Alert 2.

 

And on further similar lines, if you get a small company trying to give the game their best shot, and you have a huge publishing company demanding it be released by a certain date, you get things left out and a game that the purists are not happy about. Like C&C: Red Alert 2.

 

My point apart from hating Red Alert 2? Quite simply put, and I'll summarise here. You can't ask for everything in this world. The Demo's an earlier version of the game. Time put on developers to create a game puts the pressure on. Therefore sacrifices have to be made. Somewhere in the middle of all this Demo and the final product are the extra features and elements that have been put into the game since that demo. The community fails to take on board that these extra features are in the game and count the demo as the final product!

[Jmaster3265]

Why do you all only think of graphics, sure it could be better but graphics aren't everything this is a RTS by the way. Yes i do agree with you it would be nice if the graphics AND details as i said were better but gameplay is MORE important. And if you think it is so easy you try it, don't critize the people who developed the game if you haven't tried it yourself, or been in there shoes.  :

[Guest JediIgor]

I'm really beginning to question this communities knowledge and perception of what game programming is about. Why are graphics, realism, and every single minature aspect so damn important to everybody, in a Demo?

 

While I respect what you have to say here Cain, What you are asking for may be in the full game. People need to realise this, this game is off an earlier build so certain animations, sounds Graphical improvements might not yet have been added..

 

Cain is emphasizing the poor graphics in Empire at War. As you may not know, let me enlighten you. Nowadays, games are all marketed for having the latest gee-whiz graphic-effects such as occlusion culling, normal mapping, and any other buzzwords you can throw in there. To have a game that is poor at gameplay is commonplace, and yet to have one that doubly fails at the graphics is quite sad. At the very least they could be improving their graphics since it for sure will help their marketing.

 

It's similar to Graphical Realism, Put too much in, you raise the poly count and therefore the minimum system specification, don't put enough in you get C&C: Red Alert 2

 

Similar lines go for Game Features. You put too many in, the game only gets bought by purists cos the game is too complicated, make too little like a terrible map generator and no game speed slider, everyone seems to buy it and you call it C&C: Red Alert 2.

 

Cain doesn't address the gameplay, so why even talk about it?