Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[Proxie]

omg the graficks are so good and the oshean looks real

[Mangley]

What's the point in showing off how detailed something is and then not uploading it in 1080p resolution?

[killermonkey]

All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.

[namajnaG]

All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.

QFT
Developers these days are putting way too much time on the visual quality of a game rather than putting this time on the game itself.

[Rodney 1.666]

remember the goldeneye4dead map for L4D2... this can show you how the source engine can still work for
Goldeneye..

This.

....just look at Dear Esther ...or maps created by the GES team

This.

All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.

And this.

[freddyk83]

hey guys,

New member! so first of all Hi all!

Secondly, I just want to say 'great work you guys are doing!' It's great to see Goldeneye getting the attention it deserves but also treated so well!!. It really succeeds in bringing back those fond N64 memories! So, keep up the very good work guys!

That said, on topic..

A game with amazing graphics does NOT necesarily make for a good game!

Having played both Crysis 1 and 2, while I enjoyed both games (2 more so),  neither beats my experience of Half-Life 2 in my opinion. They wipe the floor with it in terms of graphics of course they do but graphics are only noticed and cared about while you're playing, they don't leave you with lingering fond memories of what you've just experienced.
Let's not forget the reason THIS mod  exists in the first place is because we've all presumably spent countless hours of our childhood playing Goldeneye on the N64.  I'd hardly call Goldeneye64 a graphical beast!  But that didnt stop it being fun.
I'd argue Source already is making Goldeneye look amazing compared to where it originated from graphically!

The major issue with switching to a powerhouse engine such as CE3 is you need your users to have equally powerhouse machines just to run the thing!
Source may be old but it runs like butter! One thing i can rely on is ANY Source game will run on my machine!
lol not that I couldnt run Crysis 2 but, you notice the speed difference when you switch...source flies!
I played CS:S and it ran so fast and the action was so frenetic, after coming back from these 'modern games', it took me kinda by surprise.
Goldeneye multiplayer should be equaly fast and ferenetic because thats what it was like back in the day. If that experience starst to slow down in anyway performance wise, I feel that would do more harm than good for this mod.

The thing I really like about Source is how its been able to adapt over its long run.  You only need to compare the graphics of CS:S to L4D2 or Portal 2 and those latter games almost look like they're running on new engines! But it's still source, just upgraded.
It seems nicely versatile too.
Games like TF2, The Ship and Bloody Good Time show a nice cartoony side to the same engine.

Also, when it comes to map making, speaking as a fellow mapper with experience in both the UDK and Hammer, if you asked me which id rather map in for a project, hands down....Hammer.
Don't get me wrong, UDK is an amazing piece of kit!! Capability wise, it's miles ahead of hammer, but theres a comfortable simplicity to Hammer. You know where you are with it! When you use hammer, it's like a 'trusty friend'...I tell it what i want it to do, and it does it for me.
UDK, you almost need a PhD just to navigate the 3D window!! Let alone make a cube!

Thats not to say however its not within the capabilities of some talented UDK mapper but its a lot of work for, in my opinion, a practically worthless gain.

Goldeneye to me is not the best candidate for 'super fancy photo' graphics considering the whole POINT of this mod is to create some semblance of a true-to-the-original remake, which had highly polygonal models and blocky faces.
Goldeneye where the world is hyper real just woudlnt feel the same to me and its that 'feeling' that is all important here! Nostalgia and all that!

Summed up, basically, game play/ fun > hyper realistic graphics.
if you want realistic graphics, look at a photo, or better yet, GO OUTSIDE! lol :p
Life in all its photo-realistic glory lie just beyond your front door.
Why do we feel this strange need to stare and drool over a 'amazing waterfall' in a game like its something weve never seen in our lives before?

Can we get back to playing games for FUN again now? 

[freddyk83]

Lastly, let me just clarify...

I'm not competely averse to games developing graphicaly. lol! Despite sounding the contrary!

I will put my hands up and say while playing games like Crysis 2 and Skyrim, I DID walk round going 'ooh pretty' , I mean i get WHY its good to have improving graphics, so that we can really 'lose ourselves' in the experience, but NOT at the expense of gameplay!!
While I marvelled at the graphical spectacle that was Crysis 2, I cannot remember much of what I did while playing it besides shoot a lot of aliens in a pretty city....Half-Life 2 on the other hand has sooo many unforgettable moments that I will never forget! ravenholm, water hazard, road to city 17, nova prospekt, striders, i could go on. :p

But i won't!

Lastly, Goldeneye (no offence to the game, just true really) is hardly going to 'rock the world' being made in CE3 is it? Most of Goldeneye's maps are small interior complex's, facilities and bunkers. Ok, so theres the odd jungle, sateliite dish and siberia  but again, they are small focused DM maps. CE3 is an engien designed for vast open landscapes. To use it to make  small confined DM maps look 'prettier' just seems to be a REALLY silly use for such a powerful engine.

[killermonkey]

Freddy you made my day, thanks

[Kratos]

All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.

Deep down you know its beautiful, but we know it wont come to GES anytime soon

and to comment on that quote, YES, game devs are putting excessive time on the visual quality of games, rather than focusing on the actual gameplay! (DNF)

and lastly, I think these nice visual looking games is the selling point that drives people to buy them? idk, that was just my opinion. Times have changed, and I'm guessing we won't see games like Quake, doom, quality anymore


 

[freddyk83]

game devs are putting excessive time on the visual quality of games, rather than focusing on the actual gameplay! (DNF)

lol, I must be one of the only people that actually quite enjoyed DNF!
I'll admit, it definately felt like a game that was trying to do too much. 'jack-of-all, master-of-none' type game  but for me, that diversity of gameplay was actually what kept me enjoying it from start to finish.
Do people who speak badly of DNF ever REALLY play DN3D? Because, in my opinion, they're not THAT different!
One minute you're shrinking aliens and stepping on them, the next you're controlling a remote car to solve a puzzle, the next you're driving a jeep through a desert, the next you're shrunk down and having a shoot out behind a can of frozen peas....  lol what's not to enjoy?
The only problem with all those things ive listed is they werent properly fleshed out enough to be FULLY engaging for any length of time but i'd wager a huge part of that was simply down to its hugely broken up and drawn out development process.
But even with that said, I still found the variety it presented to be enjoyable while it lasted. Something a fair few of these 'cookie cutter' shooters would do well to think about.
The ending was rubbish ill grant you that though. recycling the same boss from the beginning of the game..but..that is what you'd expect from a game thats had the development problems it had. TBH, we were lucky to even PLAY the thing! 

Anyway, way off current topic so, sorry about that (but you did bring it up lol) ...

and lastly, I think these nice visual looking games is the selling point that drives people to buy them? idk, that was just my opinion. Times have changed, and I'm guessing we won't see games like Quake, doom, quality anymore

While that may be true from mainstream devs like Rockstar, Crytek etc. there will always be indie devlopers and Mod teams like GE that will keep the quality of 'gameplay' alive.  Sounds crazy when you say it out loud but ive had more fun recently with a lot more indie & mod-based games than I have the current AAA titles.
Minecraft, Project Zomboid, PayDay, The Ship, GE:S ( ), Bloody Good Time are just a few games ive clocked more hours in than Skyrim, CoD, Crysis etc.

Graphics alone REALLY don't make a game. They may SELL a game, but it certainly won't KEEP you playing it for any length of time unless there's some SERIOUS gameplay underneath that 'make-up'. One common factor among the games I listed above are that they are all simple, easy-to-get into games that have an addictive quality to them. A huge part of that addictiveness comes from the fact they run so well.
For example, if a game like Minecraft lagged in any way, the chances of me WANTING to load it up to 'have another go' get dropped quite significantly.


I heard somewhere that Max Payne 3 probaly won't run on FULL on most peoples machines yet. I find that rediculous! I simply don't get that logic!! if you're a games developer and you know full well youve made a game too graphically advanced for your customer base to enjoy the full experience, why waste all that effort when the first thing most gamers will do when they install your game will be to down-res? 
The answer is undoubtedly 'consoles' though! Because the PS3 can handle it, there we go! PC users will just have to put up with it.

That would be like the GE:S team putting long hours and a lot of sweat and tears into an amazing looking level that only works for users of Windows 9!
Well, none of us are going to be enjoying that level for the next 3 years or so lol  so why did the GE:S even bother?
I find it all a rather flawed design logic!
Much better to design for tech thats existed for a short while (like source) than design for the very latest, or worse yet, 'soon-to-be' tech because the numbers of gamers who will be able to enjoy your game will be rediculously small.

[Kratos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpuQEmLoU-8&feature=related

This is a few months older.. but in 1080p