796 replies to this topic

[Best for Hire]

Very true. I love every second of it. I watched it so many times that I lost count.

I respectfully disagree, as I said it didn't fit the Hitman style to me, (I know you'll get pissed at me for making a Conviction comparsion but hear me out) It's sort of like how Conviction looked different visually from Chao's Theory. I can make a similar comparison with Blood Money and Absolution. As I said, my main problem is visual and not a gameplay issue.

Edited by Best for Hire, 10 January 2012 - 03:26 PM.

[Sean Rubin]

I respectfully disagree, as I said it didn't fit the Hitman style to me, (I know you'll get pissed at me for making a Conviction comparsion but hear me out) It's sort of like how Conviction looked different visually from Chao's Theory. I can make a similar comparison with Blood Money and Absolution. As I said, my main problem is visual and not a gameplay issue.

It's okay that you disagree. You have a right to your opinion.

Just kind of confused about the "visual" part that your mentioning. Do you mean the way the graphics look?

[Best for Hire]

It's okay that you disagree. You have a right to your opinion.

Just kind of confused about the "visual" part that your mentioning. Do you mean the way the graphics look?

No the graphics are fantastic, it's just by look I mean the tone and art style. While Blood Money didn't have the overly theatrical look that Absolution has. Absolution tries to look remenescent of a Crime Mystery film with it's strange blue-ish tint and dramatic effects (like the convenient lightning strike when you enter a room). The other ones looked more natural, I just don't like the way Absolution presents itself. Although I'm just being picky about the art style thing. I also don't enjoy the video for reasons I don't fully understand, that's why I need to play the game before I can confirm them.

[Sean Rubin]

No the graphics are fantastic, it's just by look I mean the tone and art style. While Blood Money didn't have the overly theatrical look that Absolution has. Absolution tries to look remenescent of a Crime Mystery film with it's strange blue-ish tint and dramatic effects (like the convenient lightning strike when you enter a room). The other ones looked more natural, I just don't like the way Absolution presents itself.

I see.

I guess the reason for that is because IOI has stated that they are making, Absolution to be a cinematic game.

[sgg847]

I need to play the game

Yeah, Yeah.

[Habit]

I see.

I guess the reason for that is because IOI has stated that they are making, Absolution to be a cinematic game.

I don't think they meant the game is cinematic, but that it has elements that are cinematic, Like how when 47 makes a kill the screen darkens a little or how when you use Instinct to disguise yourself the motion slows down. Just all game's of this generation.

I respectfully disagree, as I said it didn't fit the Hitman style to me, (I know you'll get pissed at me for making a Conviction comparsion but hear me out) It's sort of like how Conviction looked different visually from Chao's Theory. I can make a similar comparison with Blood Money and Absolution. As I said, my main problem is visual and not a gameplay issue.

as far as Absolution not looking like BM that's ridicules to say after seeing one mission. If you watch RFYL with the commentary both directors point out that environment and feel of the levels change through the game based on how his story is progressing. RFYL is bad time in 47's life so it has a dreary dark feel to it. Personally RFYL reminds me a lot of the Contracts environment. i feel that absolution will fit right in with the other Hitman games it's just better cause it's newer and there is more that can be done with the game.

Edited by Habit, 10 January 2012 - 05:11 PM.

[sgg847]

as far as Absolution not looking like BM

I am happy as long as possible.

[Best for Hire]

Yeah, Yeah.

I meant I need to play it before I can form a full opinion on the game.

Edited by Best for Hire, 10 January 2012 - 09:55 PM.

[Cold Shadow]

Just a thought. Visuals will obviously be different. Because guess what? It's a ps3 game now not ps2. So the graphics will obviously be much better. Some lighting wasn't possible on ps2, because that machine couldn't render shadows as effectively. What we're seeing with Absolution is how visuals would have been if the other games were on ps3/360.

Absolution looks like it'll have contracts style environments in HD.

Edited by Cold Shadow, 10 January 2012 - 10:25 PM.

[abeg]

I assume Best for Hire is talking about the visual art style, not the graphics per se. Just a thought.

Edited by abeg, 11 January 2012 - 01:50 AM.

[Choronzon]

I assume Best for Hire is talking about the visual art style, not the graphics per se. Just a thought.

I assumed the same thing, yes. Visual style and graphics are two different things. Visual style can still be kick ass with subpar graphics, the same as high end graphics can lack visual style.

This, by the way, has nothing to do with what hardware is being used, Cold Shadow. Visual style has more to do with game design, in my opinion. Remember those point-and-click graphic adventure games (from Sierra, etc) of old? They had moderate to subpar graphics, but visual style in abundance.

Look at these, for example. "Crappy" to "subpar" graphics by today's standards, but atmosphere and a visual style unmatched. (I'm probably showing my age here)

(The Secret Of) Monkey Island (1990)


Indiana Jones and the fate of Atlantis (1992)


Police Quest: Open Season (1993)


Burn: Cycle (1994)

No the graphics are fantastic, it's just by look I mean the tone and art style. While Blood Money didn't have the overly theatrical look that Absolution has. Absolution tries to look remenescent of a Crime Mystery film with it's strange blue-ish tint and dramatic effects (like the convenient lightning strike when you enter a room). The other ones looked more natural, I just don't like the way Absolution presents itself. Although I'm just being picky about the art style thing. I also don't enjoy the video for reasons I don't fully understand, that's why I need to play the game before I can confirm them.

Yes, I actually agree with you on that. This reminds me strangely of those overrated Frank Miller neo-noir adaptations. All style no substance. Everything is exaggerated to such an extent, the old games were more "natural" in a way. The visuals are striking, I'll give them that. But when there's synthetics, spooky tints and filters everywhere (ex: the average Michael Bay movie) they kind of negate the entire point of their usage. A blue-ish filter, a noir tint, some slow-motion, etc are good things when used sparsely, to emphasize a certain happening, atmosphere or event. Absolution appears to use them everywhere. It wears you out and negates its intended effect. It appears IO is trying really hard to be "cool" and "edgy". In the past they didn't need to lower themselves to those kind of practices. This rubs me the wrong way with Absolution. Style should never prevail over substance. As I'm saying, modern effects can add a lot to a thing, but they shouldn't be overused.

Edited by Choronzon, 11 January 2012 - 03:08 AM.

[Cold Shadow]

I know the difference between the visual style/ atmosphere and graphics. However, you also have to understand that this is a different hardware we're talking about here. No matter what, the ps2 couldn't render quality shadows, while the ps3 can. It looks like that IO have taken advantage of this. All I said was that the game will obviously look different since IO have more graphic memory to work with.

Now as for the visual styles and atmosphere. That's up to IO to deliver.
Yes Absolution looks different to Blood money, judging by visuals and atmosphere. But what about Contracts? Contracts had the best atmosphere for a hitman game hands down. Absolution sure looks like it's going the contracts dark style atmosphere.

Yes, I agree that Absolution's visuals may be a bit over the top with the emphasis on the lighting, making it looks like a film. But what I said was that all this lighting wouldn't have been possible before and maybe this was always what IO wanted with the visuals and weren't possible before.

I don't see this as a change. I see it as an upgrade. Hitman needs this visual upgrade as atmosphere in Hitman is definitely 1 one of the important factors. Will it work though?
It's up to IO to make it work.

BTW, Red dead redemption used slow down time everytime you want. You can use it in any gun fight and it was never boring. It was one of my most played games ever and it never felt repetitive even though I used slow down time alot.
Soem gameplay features may sound boring, but when you play the game, IF INTEGRATED CORRECTLY, they can enhance the experience even if they are oversued.

I agree with you on substance over style, but what if they could have both style and substance? There's no evidence that shows that Asolution has no substance.

Edited by Cold Shadow, 11 January 2012 - 03:17 AM.

[Watson]

Good post Choronzon.

I miss Sierra. Many of their games were just brilliant, atmospherically and gameplay wise. The SWAT series (particularly Sierra's last game, SWAT 4) is still one of my favourite games.

[Choronzon]

Good post Choronzon.

Thank you.

I miss Sierra. Many of their games were just brilliant, atmospherically and gameplay wise.

I miss them (Sierra) too. They just don't produce that sort games anymore. To think that I grew up on Monkey Island, Police/Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry. Oh, the nostalgia of old game memories. Today's everything about graphics and useless gimmickry, something which I never understood the appeal of. A game is more than shiny graphics. The core design/gameplay is key, all else is just... decoration.

Edited by Choronzon, 11 January 2012 - 03:18 AM.

[Pew Pew]

Here is the thing what ever we may think about todays standards of video games and whether theyre becoming too streamlined and commercial,one thing is for sure and thats graphics will evolve and continue to evolve,ever since the old days of gaming developers are constantly trying to create more believable worlds and better atmosphere. Those games that Chorozon mentioned wouldve probably used better visuals if they had the technology,now i agree with Chorozon in that style should never prevail over substance but will it hurt if a game had both,there are alot of games that push the boundries of graphics technology and still retain excellent gameplay,half Life 2 ,Max Payne 2,and Read Dead Redmption to name a few,as for the style of Absolution,personally i like it and wouldnt mind if the whole game had this dark tone to it,like Cold Shadow i also loved Contracts dark moody atmosphere,although IO did say that the tone will change throughout the games levels so who knows how the overall feel of the game will end up like.

All in all i hope Absolution will be game that i can look back on and remember fondly for gameplay and graphics alike.

Edited by Pew Pew, 11 January 2012 - 05:52 AM.

[daniel.ben-noon]

Look at these, for example. "Crappy" to "subpar" graphics by today's standards, but atmosphere and a visual style unmatched. (I'm probably showing my age here)

(The Secret Of) Monkey Island (1990)

you got the screen mixed up being from monkey island 2 (dec 91) and not the first game. but your point is still very valid.

i love the lucasarts and sierra classics and have played through pretty much all their games, except for police quest 3 and open season. my favourites are probably larry 3, kings quest 5, monkey 2 and day of the tentacle.

regarding graphic capabilities it can be as much a curse as a blessing. with simple graphics you are forced to convey a mood and a setting and much like a novel your mind will fill in the blanks to improve the experience. old sierra games in particular, but also games like manic mansion, looked really bad even for their time but i still remember how heros quest 1 was amazing.

as soon as you get higher specs, high resolutions and so on you are forced to up the quality of the assets as suddenly you can see guybrush only has 8 colours and a texture that doesnt map well to polygons on a 3d model which in turn leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth. just look at monkey island 4. and while chasing the little details to make amazing graphics you forget that the animations are much easier to do and look much better in 2d anyway.

so the more you work your ass off to achive amazing graphics the more the details become even more important, since high resolution textures require a higher resolution world with more detail. and if characters look "nearly" human, but not quite, we will discard them as "bad" as the fall in the uncanny valley, while we easily accept cartoony or low detail human models as we will add the details in our minds. there are also contradictions in that a super detailed world might work against gameplay. stuff lying around doesnt make for very good cover, character might get stuck in it and so forth. so you want a simple world with simple mechanics for gameplay but details for graphics fidelity which can be difficult.

thats one area where i think kl2 did rather well. the artistic look and feel was unique and managed to convey a mood and a gritty setting despite the somewhat low graphical capabilities.

making the super realistic games has its place and purpose, but its not in itself "better" than the toony looks of day of the tentacle.

/daniel

Edited by daniel.ben-noon, 13 January 2012 - 03:28 PM.

[Johnny Drama]

Hey Daniel!

Are you the man who can clarify how the checkpoint system works, and how it does not affect the replayability? Many people - including me - thinks it will be more linear and damage the replayability without the manual saves.

Hope you can answer this

[daniel.ben-noon]

Hey Daniel!

Are you the man who can clarify how the checkpoint system works, and how it does not affect the replayability? Many people - including me - thinks it will be more linear and damage the replayability without the manual saves.

Hope you can answer this

i dont see how checkpoints negatively affect re-playability. quite the opposite, if you can choose to start playing from a specific checkpoint that will indeed increase replayability.

but what directly influences replayability and linarity are the options presented to the player by the game design, features, choice of diguises, routes, props and even weapons. and im certain h5 will be the by far most replayable game of the series.

a checkpoint can be as large as console memory allows. only when we cant stuff more gameplay and level into memory will we have to either change level or checkpoint to progress and load the next part. but a checkpoint can also be artificial and doesnt have to mean loading but just a safe spot where game state is saved. a level can even be one big checkpoint which would equal a full level in say bloodmoney, everything loaded at once. its all down to design, layout and storytelling, so basically its up to the game team on how they will use the system and not so much that the system indicate anything about one or the other.

/daniel

[Choronzon]

regarding graphic capabilities it can be as much a curse as a blessing. with simple graphics you are forced to convey a mood and a setting and much like a novel your mind will fill in the blanks to improve the experience. old sierra games in particular, but also games like manic mansion, looked really bad even for their time but i still remember how heros quest 1 was amazing.

I get the gist of what you're saying. "with simple graphics you are forced to convey a mood and a setting" - doesn't that imply that with shinier, high fidelity graphics a designer can just rest on their laurels and excuse dubious choices in level design and gameplay mechanics with that argument? Maybe I misinterpret what you wrote. Please clarify that statement a bit more. A game is more than just graphics, no? Shouldn't a game studio always to strive to create a sort of consistent style for whatever franchise they're working on?

Even with high resolution graphics a developer should still strive to create/uphold a certain mood. Just take a look at the past Hitman games, to name something out of your own vaults. Sure, today the graphics might be "outdated", but there were a ton of things (great and small) that added to the realism of these levels/locations. Yes, level design and construction has a lot to do with that as well, but level design and visual style are two means to the same end. These shouldn't ever be mutually exclusive, right? Shiny graphics might be nice to look at, but they should never mask questionable level design. I doubt a lot of gamers cling to games because of their graphics, gameplay and narrative are ultimately what keeps a player coming back for more. In my opinion, graphics are merely a tool, one part of a greater whole to create an engaging game experience. All these tools should work in unison to create an engrossing game experience, be it graphics, level design, audio (sound/music) or overall creative direction.

so the more you work your ass off to achive amazing graphics the more the details become even more important, since high resolution textures require a higher resolution world with more detail. and if characters look "nearly" human, but not quite, we will discard them as "bad" as the fall in the uncanny valley, while we easily accept cartoony or low detail human models as we will add the details in our minds. there are also contradictions in that a super detailed world might work against gameplay. stuff lying around doesnt make for very good cover, character might get stuck in it and so forth. so you want a simple world with simple mechanics for gameplay but details for graphics fidelity which can be difficult.

I like to point to Dead Space, Bioshock, Ratchet & Clank and the Uncharted series for examples of how (insanely) detailed worlds/locations can, in fact, be very effective and thoroughly believable, without ever "working against gameplay". Whether it's the sci-fi/horror of Dead Space, the retro-future of Bioshock, the cartoony style of Rachet & Clank or the semi-realistic Uncharted. All these games I mentioned contain tons of props, weapons, character models/animations and levels created with such insane amount of detail and gameplay never suffers from it. It comes down to various development departments working closely together. As I stated earlier, graphics and expert level construction shouldn't be mutually exclusive, correct? My concern as a gamer (consumer) is that I get my money's worth when I choose to buy one of your titles/products.

How exactly does a "super detailed world" work against gameplay? Isn't it the developer's/game studio's job to tweak these things to a satisfactory degree? If there's props lying around and "stuff lying around doesnt make for very good cover" or "the character might get stuck in it" - it is clear (to me, at least) the level designers aren't doing their job well enough and/or that communication between departments could be better. Isn't there a lead designer in charge to notice these things? Who's keeping the holistic overview on the product? There's plenty of games that come to mind that are filled to the brim with props, intricate level construction and artistic design where gameplay never suffers in any respect.

I'm not advocating one specific style over another (which wasn't my point), but visual style and graphics should work together towards the same objective: creating a believable game environment. A environment that both aesthetically pleasing (from a design/artistic point) while being highly functional (from a technical/gameplay point) and using the hardware available to most effective extent (coding).

making the super realistic games has its place and purpose, but its not in itself "better" than the toony looks of day of the tentacle.

As I said above, that was not the point of my above post regarding visual style. I was merely pointing out that graphics (no matter what individual style) should work together with level design to set a certain mood or atmosphere, in lieu with the chosen visual style.

Edited by Choronzon, 14 January 2012 - 03:24 AM.

[Black glasses]

a checkpoint can be as large as console memory allows. only when we cant stuff more gameplay and level into memory will we have to either change level or checkpoint to progress and load the next part. but a checkpoint can also be artificial and doesnt have to mean loading but just a safe spot where game state is saved. a level can even be one big checkpoint which would equal a full level in say bloodmoney, everything loaded at once. its all down to design, layout and storytelling, so basically its up to the game team on how they will use the system and not so much that the system indicate anything about one or the other.

/daniel

Ok, so when there is almost too much stuff in a level, you have to divide the level to checkpoint-separated areas or smaller levels. And probably you cannot go from a level to the previous one via in-game means (that would break the laws of physics and logic, going from the future to the past in many cases). Of course you can go there from a level select screen, but not by, for example, going through a door.
But what about checkpoint-divided areas? Can you go back once you have crossed a checkpoint? Or will the checkpoint-separated areas act as their own levels? Can NPC's go through the checkpoints?