Hand drawn, all the way (Just much better resolution)
Instead of wasting memory and time on graphics they should spend it on units and structures to make the game larger, not prettier!

I don't think I share your worry, Blackmane.

Both AoW1 and AoW2 units look like nicely hand drawn graphics to me. And the same goes for the leaders:

(cut from this screenshot)

Merlin looks different though, I agree about that. But I'm still not worried. Quite the opposite, actually!

I rather like the new 3D design. I think it looks better than ever! It's making people drool and turning heads.

I don't think it's a waste of time or memory. Age of Wonders has been build upon detail, and despite the complaints about weak AI and such (which game doesn't have this complain?), it's still sufficiently challanging to casual players and it's still one of the best strategy games around. I'm sure AOW2 will be better than the first.

[This message has been edited by Bluecollarheaven (edited 02-03-2002 @ 03:59 AM).]

Yeah well although I really liked the original design I have to say that the samples of the new 3d-design looks great so I don´t think it´s a step in the wrong direction.

Actually, the vast majority of the units in aow1 were also rendered... and the majority of the terrain objects (trees, mountains, etc) in aow2 are also hand-drawn. So the artistic style has changed very little, we're just using 3D terrain, and allowing 3D hardware to greatly speed up the rendering process. The biggest changes from aow1 to aow2 are:

MUCH more detailed units (and other gfx), partially because of larger hex-sizes, and a higher resolution (800x600 minimum)

Much more fluid animation, because the vast majority of systems will have a greatly improved framerate over aow1, and the amount of animations and particle effects on the map has increased exponentially

Oh, and hand-drawn graphics generally take -longer- than rendered graphics to produce, especially if any animation is needed. Memory usage is exactly the same.

Ahh.. many thanks Josh for that!

Nojd: Yeah, but I'm gonna miss my little halflings.. *sniff*

Halflings werent the only cutes ones *cough* nymphs *cough*

""Halflings werent the only cutes ones *cough* nymphs *cough* ""

Well I guess you can cough up the mistresses of pain as well no??

Just a question: will 3D terrain have any influence on gameplay?
I mean: will units spend more Movement-Points when climbing up a steep hill and less MP when climbing it down?

Will overland terrain conformation show up in combat-mode?
I mean: I stand on the top of a hill and am attacked by an enemy whose troops come from an adjacent lower-terrain hex: will close-up combat window show the different army positioning?
If yes, will 3D terrain influence combat (higher positioned archers have wider firing range etc.)?

Just to know...
IMHO, 3D terrain is useful only if it has some impact on gameplay, else I prefer hand-drawn style (AoW was - is - still very beautiful nowadays)...

[This message has been edited by Lucas of Hilm (edited 02-03-2002 @ 12:26 PM).]

Although I liked the terrain in AoW, I would have to say the terrain in AoW II looks even better. Personally, I think its a smart move to make use of the extra punch in 3D cards.

Well blackmane,

Its not a big concern of mine (yet), although being a conservative, 'never change a winning team', nostalgic kind of person. As long as it's not at the expense of the surveyability (and imagination (ahum): nymph..).
It won't lead to deeper gameplay and that's where my concerns are. I would humbly like them (the developers) building, expanding and sweating on the strategic aspects, therefore I like Foodstamp's counterunit ideas and the idea of flanking bonusses (for example).

Swolte

Ackkkk *cough* *cough* *wheeeze* *hack* *cough* *die*

In really don’t understand you people….
How anyone can prefer the look of AoW compared AoW2 is a mystery to me??
Yes, AoW look good, but IMO it don’t even come close to the fantastic look of AoW2. AoW2 looks much better than any strategy game I have seen so far!
The portraits may not have been improved much, but they are still very good, and you don’t spend a lot of time looking on the portraits when you are playing anyway…
The landscape in AoW2 looks so good IMO, that every screen shot is almost a piece of art, and the unit gfx is a lot better than in AoW (units in AoW is too small and some of then look somewhat silly)
I really think you are just too conservative, I don’t think anyone will miss the graphics of AoW, when they have played AoW 2 for a few months.

Kris

[This message has been edited by Kris Lighthawk (edited 02-06-2002 @ 07:04 AM).]

You know, as long as it's not a bad thing, I don't know what is there to be negative about.

[This message has been edited by Bluecollarheaven (edited 02-06-2002 @ 08:05 AM).]

There's absolutelly nothing wrong with how AOW looks. It's just right, not too little and not too much of anything. Sure AOW2 will look better but that has zero to do with playability, which is what counts in the end. Until I have AOW2 in my hands and played it there's still nothing that beats AOW .

BM

Amen to that.

Sure, gameplay is a lot more important than graphics, but it is always nice when the game you play all the time, also look very good.
From the information about gameplay that we have got so far, I feel quite confident that the gameplay in AoW2 will also be a lot better than in AoW (and because AoW is already one of the best games ever made, that will make AoW2 unbelievable good )
But I can of course not be completely sure about anything, before I have tried the game....

Kris

[This message has been edited by Kris Lighthawk (edited 02-06-2002 @ 10:42 AM).]

Check out this animated unit from a new 2D game/Baldur's Gate clone called "Divine Divinity." It looks like it came right out of AOW2 (and personally I think it looks really cool). I'd love to see some sort of "spider rider" level 2 cavalry units. Does this scream "Dark Elves" or what?

HEY! You got that idea from my unit idea page! ( the thread called "Ideas fo AOW2"(Triumph Studios People Plz Read))

SOme of you may be familiar with the table-top strategy game Warhammer Fantasy Battles by Games Workshop. These folks let someone turn this into a computer game a few years back... I think it sucked, but anyways...

The goblin army lists from that game were astounding in their diversity, as well as some of the other army lists.

For example...

Goblin Spider Riders: Yep... the unit you "thought up" has existed for about a decade. Groovy lead miniature, too.

Goblin Glider Pilots: dropped rocks on enemies from wood-frame hang-gliders.

Goblin Fanatics: armed with a massive iron ball on a chain. When swung, the ball's momentum would fling the goblin around the table randomly, causing devastation when it eventually crashed into enemy units, although it frequently crashed into it's own side, or simply decapitated itself.

Myself, I wasn't into any of the published army lists for Warhammer, I had a Halfling army, and an Amazon Army.

Wow, I was in the dark for ten whole years about that, oh well, it is a good unit idea!

Those goblin glider pilots you're talking about were called DOOM DIVERS, and they didn't drop rocks. They dropped THEMSELVES. Yes! pure kamikaze! they also have these bulletshaped helmets!

Quoted from Lord Devon:

Um... actually I didn't read your post because it looked too long.

Your article is very meticulous and impressive to me, I hope to receive more good articles.

* URL redacted by ChowGuy - advertising *

[This message has been edited by ChowGuy (edited 08-13-2020 @ 10:35 AM).]