PDA

View Full Version : Why graphics are important in my opinion for RCTW



Bertje
03-06-2015, 08:20 PM
I've seen lots of people here complaining about the graphics, and I'm with you 100%. I've also seen a lot of people defending that point, saying that the graphics are not important, but gameplay is.

I partially agree with the second group op people. Graphics is not everything. Look at Minecraft for example. It does not look good and realistic (given there are no high-res texture packs used). However, that is the whole point of Minecraft, and therefore, you will hear nobody complaining about the graphics. RCTW is a different story. It's somewhat supposed to look realistic, but with a cartoonish style to it (in comparison with Minecraft for example, RCTW is realistic). If making a realistic game with realistic lighting, physics, etc, it has to look good in 2015. From what we've seen in the trailer, it looks like the game is from 10 years ago, and I even think it looks worse than RCT3, and that's unacceptable, because having graphics like this is not the intention of this RCT game in 2015.

Maybe my whole explanation sounds vague, because I just don't know where to start. I was just shocked to see this trailer after 10 years of waiting.

But my whole point is: It's supposed to look 'realistic' (not ultra-realistic), but it just isn't because of how bad it looks. It looks like they're just trying, but fail immensely, and at the same time it looks like they're not trying at all.

I'm just really hoping that what has been shown in the trailer won't be the end-product.

Nagta
03-06-2015, 08:45 PM
I'll add some points too to the people stating the graphics don't matter

- It's a cartoonish game. We know. But if they are going for a simplistic look, the textures should look less busy, instead we have a pixelized texture which does not look cartoonish or realistic

- The level of detail is disappointing. Look at the water, and the path. The path isn't even connected to the shops

- It's a simulation game, therefore it should simulate the experience of being a rollercoaster tycoon.

- If gameplay is so important, why bother purchasing RCTW? From the information given, we know that only multiplayer and coaster track making is planned for implementation. Where as RCT1 and 2 has undoubtedly unique features too.

- For example, would you be happy if the waiter in a restaurant served your food with his foot and than proceeded to take a dump on your table? "It's the taste of the food that matters". Just no. Good game = good gameplay + graphics not Good game = bad graphics + good gameplay.

- The game was anticipated for 10 years. The fans put up with the lack of information for 10 years, and having graphics like this with little to no improvement. This is desrespectful to us

- If graphics do not matter, why did they bother making textures? Can't they just add grey and purple pixels to identify the ground and coasters? Heck, let's make the peeps turquoise for visibility!

I understand you lot covering atari and saying graphics do not matter. But it does. We're complaining because we love this game, and I am just disappointed to what they have presented to us. I still have my hopes up, but my expectations are lowered.

coaster6
03-06-2015, 08:51 PM
In my latest post, I added a video about crating RCT3. The computers they're using shouldn't be creating better content than we have now.

darkhorizon
03-06-2015, 09:40 PM
Minecraft is more of an artstyle. The game still features nice smooth lighting and antialiasing, two things that were blantantly missing from the RCTW teaser.

I agree with you, though. Honestly, I don't think anyone was expecting ultra realistic graphics. If you want a simulator, there's No Limits. RollerCoaster Tycoon should have a charming, charismatic art style. RCT1 and 2 had it, some would argue that RCT3 didn't have it as much...but I think a balance between realism and cartoony styles work best for the "Tycoon" genre.