Assassin's Creed 2

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

And they all sucked.

Because they were based on realism in their games? That's some sorry ass logic, Phos.

Edited May 3, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SuperLink]

That's funny, if it's not brown it's suddenly a primary colours palette? Is there really nothing in between? Since when was it brown or primary colours or nothing?

At what point has anyone suggested AC2 should look like Mario Galaxy?

Looks at some pictures of Venice. Look at Assassins' Creed 2. Which looks more exciting and rich? Venice. And Venice isn't made up of primary colours either! Or just go here if you can't be bothered to find shots. It's no wonder games will never look as good as real life. Some developers have this weird idea that brown = realism, where even the most barren warzones have more contrast than that.

[Patticus]

From earlier in the thread...

Bear in mind that people did shit in the canals back then, not to mention wash in them and stuff, so it's going to be a dirtier colour than today. Plus there's a day/night system which should hopefully ensure a greater variety of colours. Looking at the shots near the top of the page, that hope seems to be bearing fruit.

[Paul Str337]

The different cities in the first game all had a different hue to separate them. Maybe the same thing applies here. Venice has the ‘brown’ hue. Somewhere else might have the blue hue. It’s possible.

[Phos]

Killzone 2, Gears 2 and GTA III/IV are all excellent examples of their genres.

I'm sorry, but the idea behind Killzone 2 seemed to be, "How can we rip off both Halo AND Call of Duty at the same time?"

This is coming from a PS3 owner.

Because they were based on realism in their games? That's some sorry ass logic, Phos.

I've been all over the world, I've never seen anywhere with that much dirt brown. Some games have an excuse for this (The world has been nuked to shit in Gears 2).

Sorry, but that's just not what the world actually looks like. You want my idea of a realistic looking color pallet?

http://www.amitbhawani.com/blog/Images/N/N...en-II-Games.jpg

http://www.primotechnology.com/2008/04/25/...fia-ii-screens/

http://www.swotti.com/tmp/swotti/cacheZHJH...%20Fortune2.jpg

And for the lulz, compare Windmill Island Act 3 to this.

E: Ashurbanipal, I love how that screen shot comparison does more to prove my point. And Venice is among the places I've been.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Phos

[Patticus]

The first game's hue differentiation annoyed the piss out of me, I want that gone, I just hope that with the day/night cycle comes clouds and clear skies in the same cities. Venice must surely get its share of grey days, but I'd like some blue sky while I'm there.

I'm sorry, but the idea behind Killzone 2 seemed to be, "How can we rip off both Halo AND Call of Duty at the same time?"

This is coming from a PS3 owner.

The fact remains, however, that it is an excellent example of the FPS genre, original or no.

E: Ashurbanipal, I love how that screen shot comparison does more to prove my point. And Venice is among the places I've been.

In all likelihood, Venice will have had a few clean-ups in the past couple of centuries, plus some buildings and such will be there today that weren't back then (like the bridge in the shot comparison). 14th-15th century Venetian canals probably would have been significantly dirtier looking than today, at least at times, due to the human waste that inevitably made its way in there.

Anyway as I've said, with the day/night cycle in place it's hardly going to be brown all the time - I've seen plenty of blues already.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I've been all over the world, I've never seen anywhere with that much dirt brown. Some games have an excuse for this (The world has been nuked to shit in Gears 2).

You've been all over the world in the 14th Century? Do enlighten me.

I'll ask you, how does the massive amount of brown you see in the games make the games or the developers behind them suck? Based on what you said by your last two comments, that's exactly what you're telling me, and that makes absolutely no sense...

Sorry, but that's just not what the world actually looks like. You want my idea of a realistic looking color pallet?

Try going to the 14th century, and then tell me your experience of how it looked back then.

[Phos]

You've been all over the world in the 14th Century? Do enlighten me.

It's not like the nature of light changed. There isn't a brown or gray cast over everything you see, unless you're in the middle of a dust storm, which is exactly what appears to be taking place in many of these games.

I'll ask you, how does the massive amount of brown you see in the games make the games or the developers behind them suck? Based on what you said by your last two comments, that's exactly what you're telling me, and that makes absolutely no sense...

They all suck visually. On a somewhat related note, Killzone sucks because it feels like I've played a better version of the very same game, GTA IV sucks for just not being fun (I almost fell asleep while playing it... And I loved Vice City), Gears 2 is pretty good, though I wish it had better net code.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

It's not like the nature of light changed. There isn't a brown or gray cast over everything you see, unless you're in the middle of a dust storm, which is exactly what appears to be taking place in many of these games.

Look at them again, Phos.

There are only two images with a brown "dust storm"-like sky, in all the other images in the daytime the sky is blue or you either edging closer to the sun's light.

The only brown you're see are the buildings and other landmarks, and it's not like it's a bad thing. The ones that have a brown sky are probably in the dawn or dusk phase of the Day/Night cycle.

They all suck visually.

How about you let us know that before this kinda of stuff leads to this? Simply saying something sucks is not the same as saying something sucks visually.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SuperLink]

I think you'll find that no matter where you go IRL, the sky is blue, when in a lot of games it's either white, brown, or grey.

Uncharted is an excellent example of what realistic games should look like. The way Bethesda did Oblivion made me really disappointed in the lack of contrast in Fallout 3. Apocalyptic future or not (and despite being an overused scenario) it's almost as if you can become invisible without even TRYING to wear camouflage! In MGS4 I don't see the point in Snake even wearing camo because it probably doesn't make him any more or less brown no matter what he wears![/rant]

I basically agree with everything Phos has said. You may be "ok" with the style, but what if you had the choice? What if you had the choice between AC2 looking like it does, or looking like Uncharted? Which game makes you gasp more? It'd be Uncharted for me every single time.

Also, shit in the river doesn't mean bland sky.

[Patticus]

I think you'll find that no matter where you go IRL, the sky is blue, when in a lot of games it's either white, brown, or grey.

White = Cloudy

Grey = Cloudy

Looking out of my window right now, the sky is grey to the point of being white. As for brown, sunsets and sunrises can give the sky a distinctive brown hue, and certain types of weather/clouds can really boost that. I've known several occasions living here when it has been the middle of the afternoon and there's an odd brown hue to the sky.

Also, shit in the river doesn't mean bland sky.

But a bland, cloudy sky often does mean that waterways won't look anything other than dirty or dull.

What we should be hoping for is that the weather in the game will be shifting constantly, clouds coming in and blue sky patches opening up, the sun shining sometimes and not at others.

[SuperLink]

For games without weather systems then, I don't understand why developers would choose to make it look like a gloomy boring day over a vivid and beautiful day.

Developers must be sad people indeed.

[Patticus]

We don't know that the game won't have any sort of weather system, or that places besides Venice will be the same (different weather for each location?), and AC1 had plenty of clear blue skies and sunny weather (well, maybe not so much blue, fucking stylisation) so we know that the developers can do it.

E3 and the actual gameplayish teaser might give us more to go on than we currently have, but the non-scan shots on the last page give me hope. At the very least, the nights will give us sweet release from the golden/orange/brown of the evening/morning.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

For games without weather systems then, I don't understand why developers would choose to make it look like a gloomy boring day over a vivid and beautiful day.

Developers must be sad people indeed.

Okay, what the fuck kind of logic are you people using? I really don't mean any offense, but seriously WTF?

So they choose to make the game in a different direction from a vivid and beautiful day automatically means that the developers are sad people? Come on folks, I've heard much better criticism than that.

Just because the game's setting isn't vivid and (arguably) beautiful does not mean half a shit on how sad and gloomy the developers are. Don't know where the hell you guys get this logic, but you need to toss that thinking out of the window.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SuperLink]

I'll admit AC2 looks far better than AC1. Even if the water's green, at least it's not brown.

So they choose to make the game in a different direction from a vivid and beautiful day automatically means that the developers are sad people? Come on folks, I've heard much better criticism than that.

It's not just a different direction, it's dull and boring. Bioshock would be a good example of a different direction, because you know, it has colour. That's "artistic" pulled off well. A lot of new games look like someone made some great models and then shat on it. Of course in modern times, shitting on something decent is called "abstract", so I guess it depends on how you view abstract art (slighty hyperbole, but you get the idea)

Just because the game's setting isn't vivid and (arguably) beautiful does not mean half a shit on how sad and gloomy the developers are. Don't know where the hell you guys get this logic, but you need to toss that thinking out of the window.

No, I just get the idea that developers think we WANT boring looking games because apparantly dull means atmosphere. We're the ones buying the games, they're not making it for themselves. If they really want more people to buy it, then why settle for second best? is it really that hard to make a game that's not brown?

Uncharted/Bioshock = Best

Assassin's Creed = Second best

In terms of immersive visuals.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

It's not just a different direction, it's dull and boring. Bioshock would be a good example of a different direction, because you know, it has colour.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but Bioshock is also a good example of its own style, I.E. what isn't AC...

Bioshock leans to the sci-fi direction, and sci-fi styled games are going to have a lot more colors than other games even if it is made to be somewhat realistic.

Assassin's Creed is not sci-fi, so it's not going to have any of the amounts of colors Bioshock does.

That's "artistic" pulled off well.

No, that's "artistic" in it's own style. Assassin's Creed isn't trying to be sci-fi, it's trying to be historical.

A lot of new games look like someone made some great models and then shat on it.

And a lot of other games look like someone threw up a rainbow and thought it was good. That doesn't instantly make it good or bad, now does it?

No, I just get the idea that developers think we WANT boring looking games because apparantly dull means atmosphere. We're the ones buying the games, they're not making it for themselves. If they really want more people to buy it, then why settle for second best? is it really that hard to make a game that's not brown?

Uncharted/Bioshock = Best

Assassin's Creed = Second best

In terms of immersive visuals.

Here's what's wrong with that: Colors in games DO NOT determine a game's value. Gameplay does.

Just because a game shows very few colors does not mean that the game will be boring, and sorry if I offend you when I say this, but you'd have some pretty faulty logic if you think otherwise.

The art in the games is nothing but eyecandy for the people. It's like a cake, you have the frosting (art) and then you have the actual cake (gameplay), and it's appearance and taste varies from person to person. Pick any flavor of it if, but the results are different between person to person. Some like how the cake looks and want to try it, other's will look for something else. And it only get's deeper when you actually taste (play) it.

The art in the game caters to those who are more willing to be attrached by the style presented. In your case, it doesn't do much for you, you find it distasteful. In other's, it's like a orgasm to the eyes and they want more and more of it.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SuperLink]

Well sorry if I think a game that looks boring affects my experience of playing it. It just makes the whole thing feel depressing and dull, where it could be mindblowing.

Can anyone honestly say they LIKE brown/dullness in games, and would rather have it over any other style? Because I honestly can't see how anyone would ever think that. Dull = Fun. Sounds very much like an Oxymoron to me.

Of course graphics are just eyecandy, but it's depressing to know that I'm playing Brown's Creed when I could be playing Breathtaking's Creed. Second best.

Edited May 4, 2009 by SuperLink

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well sorry if I think a game that looks boring affects my experience of playing it.

A little overreactive, don't you think?

It just makes the whole thing feel depressing and dull, where it could be mindblowing.

To you it's depressing and dull, to other's it IS mindblowing. If it's not your type of cake, then it's not your type of cake.

Can anyone honestly say they LIKE brownness in games, and would rather have it over any other style? Because I honestly can't see how anyone would ever think that.

You could say the same for any other color, no matter how much of it you use.

Dull = Fun. Sounds very much like an Oxymoron to me.

You are seriously taking this way too far, buddy.

Of course graphics are just eyecandy, but it's depressing to know that I'm playing Brown's Creed when I could be playing Breathtaking's Creed. Second best.

You're taking it a bit too far when you judge a game by colors tho. Not every game needs to have such a variety of colors to be amazing, it could be monochrome and still deliver a great experience.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Random Rhyme]

You're taking it a bit too far when you judge a game by colors tho. Not every game needs to have such a variety of colors to be amazing, it could be monochrome and still deliver a great experience.

Madworld is a perfect example of this.

[SuperLink]

Black and white is different, it's genuinly stylised, but brown is just boring/lazy.

I am overreacting, and AC is still a good game.

I'm just saying that I would probably be enjoying this gen a lot more if half of the games released weren't brown = realistic.

I don't see how diluting a game with shit can be mindblowing. If a game looked like the cutscenes from Sonic and the Black Knight, THAT would be stylised and mindblowing. Otherwise it's just like putting opaque brown foil over your TV and suddenly making a game realistic.

EDIT: Ooh ooh, I bet we can make live TV realistic too! All those unrealistic underwater documentaries can suddenly be made stylised and immersive by putting a brown filter into your TV. It's genius![/overreaction]

Edited May 4, 2009 by SuperLink

[Patticus]

Taken to the MadWorld extreme, its constant repetition makes the game a slog and fit only for short bursts of play.

I think AC1 was a beautiful game at times, marred significantly at others by a couple of very poor choices of colour overlays in certain places. Hopefully in AC2 the developers will not make the same mistake, hopefully we won't be forced to play through a fog of blue haze (as in Acre), or any other colour for that matter.

What I'm seeing so far tells me that, at the very least, that sort of thing has been massively curtailed in the sequel, although there are inevitably going to be browny-orangey times in the cities and villages between, what with lanterns and torches being the only way to light up the streets at night in those days (though even then we can see that the moon does a grand job of providing other colours!), and there will be sunsets to cast a golden glow all around.

But I think we will see blue skies, I think that's inevitable, we'll also see the verdant Tuscany countryside with its (hopefully not stylised-away) many shades of green (and yellow crops), and there will also be the terracotta skylines of Florence to look forward to, along with the lush gardens of its (and the other cities') palatial estates belonging to the city elite.

And of course we must remember the flamboyant costumes worn in Italy during the Renaissance, the colourful dance sequence shown in the behind-closed-doors trailer last year.

No, there will be colour, or so help me I won't enjoy the game as much as I otherwise would!

[SuperLink]

But I think we will see blue skies, I think that's inevitable, we'll also see the verdant Tuscany countryside with its (hopefully not stylised-away) many shades of green (and yellow crops), and there will also be the terracotta skylines of Florence to look forward to, along with the lush gardens of its (and the other cities') palatial estates belonging to the city elite.

And of course we must remember the flamboyant costumes worn in Italy during the Renaissance, the colourful dance sequence shown in the behind-closed-doors trailer last year.

No, there will be colour, or so help me I won't enjoy the game as much as I otherwise would!

Thank you thank you thank you. That is all I set out to prove; that more colour and contrast can sometimes go a long way in making a game more enjoyable. As I said before, AC2 is already looking far more colourful than the first AC, and I have to admit that when I first saw the screenshots I was impressed, (even though I kinda hate Ubisoft)

One thing that's worth pointing out is that the present time in AC1 looked fine; so all along it was brown to make it look like a flashback/a different period in time.

All I'm saying is I wish they could have made more contrast, or chosen a better colour for the job D=

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Black and white is different, it's genuinly stylised, but brown is just boring/lazy.

I still don't see much of a difference, but anywho...

I'm just saying that I would probably be enjoying this gen a lot more if half of the games released weren't brown = realistic.

I wasn't saying that you wouldn't, I'm just saying that there are more to things than meets the eye to a lot of people. Catch my drift?

I don't see how diluting a game with shit can be mindblowing.

Well if one finds it mindblowing, then it isn't diluting.

People have different tastes, and some people happen to be a fan of such earth-based colors.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SuperLink]

Earth = Rich

Shit = Dirty horrible ugly

If only they looked rich >.<

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Earth = Rich

Shit = Dirty horrible ugly

If only they looked rich >.<

That's doesn't follow with everyone tho.

Different people, different appeal.

Some people don't even think of the it as "shit". Then again, who am I to talk. I'm still skeptical on whether this game'll be good in the first place.

Edited May 4, 2009 by ChaosSupremeSonic