Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:53 am
Yeah, Frost is kinda ugly.
The problem is that people associate good games with texture mapped polygonal 3D graphics. We need to show ZZT to people who care about the game more than the visuals - say, those roleplaying people who sit around with dice and charts.mr.bob wrote:There all X-Box fans so you just might as well expect that reaction I guess.
All true. And it is not a lie when I say ALL X-box owners, (that I know of), think good graphics are a way for a good game. Ok, good graphics is a plus, but its really the gameplay, story, and how fun it really is to play. These are the things that count the most. (It better have a semi-decent story or I will hate the game), but thats just me.Quantum P. wrote:The problem is that people associate good games with texture mapped polygonal 3D graphics. We need to show ZZT to people who care about the game more than the visuals.mr.bob wrote:There all X-Box fans so you just might as well expect that reaction I guess.
demascota wrote:jesus 2035 because that game rocks.
I feel so jealous. :(Dr. Dos wrote:The only graphics better than Frost's would be Frost 2's WHICH I HAVE AND YOU DON'T.
It's not that Frost's graphics are bad; it's just that they focus on stylization, not realism. The graphics have a cartoony feel and the shapes tend to follow the grid of tiles (for example, diagonal lines going exactly one tile up, then one to the side, then one up again, one to the side...). It's not exactly my style either, but we all have different opinions.Ryan Ferneau wrote:Yeah, Frost is kinda ugly.
Amen.Zenith Nadir wrote:if i wanted realism i'd go outside or look at photographs
Go... outside?Zenith Nadir wrote:i like stylised graphics
if i wanted realism i'd go outside or look at photographs