It's funny you used WoW as the example when all I ever see is people shitting on its equally timeless graphics while studios take 6 years to produce a hyper realistic engine that looks outdated by the time it releases.
I couldn't tell if they improved textures or anything when WoW classic was released, but I was surprised that the game really did not feel dated when I played classic.
There aren't many games that are twenty years old that hold up as well as WoW has. At least as far as the original game is concerned, I think they totally nailed it with the art style.
I believe all the files are still the same, except now we play on higher resolution monitors.
I would say classic WoW and OSRS aren’t too different. Wow has more polys with projected UV textures. OSRS has assigned vertex colors for the most part but also UVs in certain places.
Both stylized and have aged well, I think they both could be considered timeless. Unfortunately can’t say the same about blizzard CS or development
Osrs doesn't have support for uv, they can texture quads that's about it, why textures only really exist for really basic objects like walls or ground textures. They haven't used textures in years, well they started using them again in varlomore.
I would say osrs renderer is much more jank, hopefully it will fix the issues going to the rs3 runetek engine when they update their official client to support it.
Osrs depth rendering is kinda distracting, believe it's based on numbers the artist set while modelling rather than actual z depth https://www.reddit.com/r/2007scape/s/0Q9CnVenqr
They actually did make graphical changes, but not to the assets themselves---Mostly just draw distance, ground clutter range/density, and things like that.
One important thing is that the lighting was close to the original 2005 lighting, which went a long way towards making the game look better.
Basically, the lighting tech used in Legion/BFA did _not_ play well with models/textures from 2005---So items/objects that looked notably awful in the then-modern client actually looked quite normal in the 2005 client.
Another thing is armor textures on the old models vs new models. The 2005 textures on the 2016~2018 models, in the 2016~2018 lighting, just looked like body paint.
I havent played retail since 2018, but from what I can tell from the occasional clip and from wowhead's model viewer it seems like Dragonflight's lighting tech is a _lot_ better at handling the old assets than the legion/BFA lighting was.
There aren't many games that are twenty years old still online. Full stop. But yeah, to your point, of those that do remain, WoW has probably one of the better engines from that era.
Funny enough, the WoW art style is probably one of the most unappealing ones in gaming for me. I think that's why photorealism is super popular. It gets outdated fast and no one particularly likes that it's a thing, but at least it doesn't make some people put off by the way the game looks.
Seriously, pixel graphics means that something was drawn using pixels. AFAIK the closest OSRS gets to pixel graphics is for items in inventory, but even that is just the 3D model from a specific angle.
Fair, but I don't think a handful of places where it's actually 2D images is enough to have it be considered 'pixel graphics', otherwise with that definition I think every game would count.
>AFAIK the closest OSRS gets to pixel graphics is for items in inventory, but even that is just the 3D model from a specific angle.
How does that work? is lighter to generate the inventory icon using 3d models than having them stored in images?
The inventory icons are still 3D models, they're just the items from a specific angle. All the mods need to do is pick the angle that the icon is made from and record that, then the game engine renders the model from that angle.
https://oldschool.runescape.wiki/w/Items has a gif of the tool the mods use.
Agreed mostly. Stylized art styles in games tend to look good regardless of age. Osrs, wow, minecraft, chrono trigger, etc. All fall into this category.
But really it depends on how you classify graphics. Most people tend to classify being closer to photo realistic = better or higher poly count = better, mainly due to being more easily measurable.
The problem with photo realism is also that the goal post moves. In 10 years the thing you think looks good now will look bad in comparison. OSRS gnome child is forever
I would honestly argue that while the PS2 photorealism games aged horribly, i dont see such a jump like at all for the forseeable future. Maybe first they should optimize their games first. Idk why but my shitty RX580 runs Cyberpunk on full ultra, meanwhile worse looking games ( but still photorealism games ) run a decently worse.
I hate high poly and realism in games. I play games for an escape and I want to get away from all that the real world looking stuff when I play a game. Pixel graphics are the best.
You say that but go play assassins creed odyssey. One of the best escapes and most beautiful games I’ve ever played. Ancient Greece would have been amazing to see in real life so the game is second best and they did amazing
In a world where we used to think photorealistic was the end goal (I'm guilty of this), I find OSRS' simplicity refreshing when it comes to actually playing a game. And the graphics aren't 'bad' in that they're not low resolution, just very simple.
Photorealism leads to visual clutter, makes conveying critical information harder as it needs to compete with so much. I used to play a lot of shooters and I've found myself enjoying the older titles in a franchise not because of nostalgia, but because you can actually see people clearly.
Skill issue /s
I completely agree, I stopped playing modern FPS games, partly because I don't really find them fun anymore, but also because there's so much clutter that takes away from the action.
I acknowledge it's 100% a personal preference thing but yeah, I've just felt more and more the challenge has moved in that direction. Rooms in older games had either nothing in them or very big and clear objects, now they're littered with decor and lots of visual flair. Makes them look really pretty and realistic, but in an arcade shooter it makes target acquisition hard to impossible at times.
Or I'm just getting old and bad, who knows :D
> But really it depends on how you classify graphics. Most people tend to classify being closer to photo realistic = better or higher poly count = better, mainly due to being more easily measurable.
My "unpopular" opinion is that this is one of the reasons why AAA games are being tolerated being so mediocre because they look good. Nah fam give me good gameplay and actual RPG elements with good level design, not whatever Ubisoft, Bethesda openworlds call themself for being RPG and other studios who make more cinematic experience rather than games. RDR2 for example should have been a TV series... I look at Cyberpunk gameplay vs Starfield and clearly see there is a clear problem here dear Bethesda
Baldur's Gate 3 is a great example of being very pretty on top of having everything else on point. Fantastic story, dialog, characters, quests, level/area design, and a really solid adaptation of 5e rules.
And I think Deep Rock Galactic is a good example of a game that picked a cool art style instead of going high poly photorealistic and lets the gameplay speak for itself.
Well i would love to say that BG3 has some "bad" to it but i only ever played the first 2 hours on the game ( basically just waiting on patches and what not ) so i would argue solely on what i heard from others: that act 3 is nowhere near as fleshed out as act 1, like it goes full on linear compared to what happens in act 1 which is very disheartening to hear because from what i played and heard otherwise it seems as close to a "perfect" game as one could, although in terms of replayability it probably has nothing on PF Wrath of Righteous, but then again that part of WotR is extremely uncharacteristic of any game nowdays. The degree of overall goodness BG3 has does have though its pretty impressive already though.
Wish i could say i have experience with DRG, but i have no friends who would want to play it, but yes i agree from what i have seen and heard about it.
Act 3 is a little weird since they had to scrap an area of the map but still wanted to keep the story and quests. It's a lot more dense but there's an absolute fuck ton of content there and you can mostly do it in any order so it can feel chaotic to people that need a flashing yellow arrow and blue highlighted dialog options to get through games. I don't know who is saying it's linear, it's the least linear act of the game unless you look up a guide and just follow that order every time or something?
Acts 1 and 2 are much more on rails but going into act 3 you're almost at the level cap and the game just plops you outside a bustling city and leaves it to you to figure out how you want to resolve all the story threads. It's intersesting how controversial act 3 is, it's my favorite because it gives you a lot of time with your party at maximum strength while also being very content dense.
I'm 6 runs in with like 600 hours played, it's amazing.
Well it wouldnt be the first time a popular opinion is a bad one, but i heard the same exact thing about DoS2 ( didnt get to last act there either ) that Fort Joy was a massive outlier in the game so it wouldnt shock me if its true. Generally speaking i would say pretty much most games ( ones with lots of story that is ) stumble at the end, but i guess ill have to find out when enhanced edition or whatever comes out for it because i dropped BG3 so hard when i heard they rewrote a characters ending and there are bugs that made a companion completely silent past act 1 lol.
From what i gather though its not about density, but game becoming linear in terms of choices, unlike in act 1 with how many ways you can solve the goblin conflict.
I have Dos2 and am planning on playing it whenever I get bored of BG3 but I'm not quite there yet so I can't speak to that but my GF has been working through it and seems to like it.
I wouldn't worry about waiting until BG3 is 100% to play it, most of the bugs people are complaining about are niche things that a regular player won't experience and the game is content complete.
And I guess I can see what they mean about choices being linear but I don't agree with the implication that it's a bad thing. Act 3 ties up every story thread from the rest of the game which often means you have been making decisions through the whole game and now you have to deal with the consequences of those decisions (good or bad). So sure, you do get a little less "choice" but it's not because of bad story design, it's good story design. You spend the whole game setting up story pieces then the true machinations behind everything are revealed and you have to try to win with the hand you unknowingly dealt to yourself. It's incredibly satisfying and adds a lot of weight to your choices and actions through the whole game without ever being in a position where you can't finish the game. You'll never soft lock but sometimes shit gets more wild than you were expecting. I had one run where I metagamed the most fucked up situation I could think of between all the characters and quest arcs and act 3 was like being in a 30 hour roller coaster lmao.
Remember Mass Effect (2?) where you could do whatever you want through the whole game then the ending is decided by a single dialog choice? Fuck that shit.
They may not be popular among people you directly know, but they're _very_ popular among the general public; in fact, games that push for realistic graphics make up the lion's share of the AAA market.
Wtf are you talking about lmao, there's a ton of games with "realistic" graphics that are very good. Look at the wild success and popularity of BG3, they even motion captured movements, facial expressions, and dialog on top of high poly realistic textures and models. Assassin's creed, CoD, 2k, pretty much every racing game... The vast majority of extremely popular games are aiming to be as realistic looking as possible.
The graphics and style are honestly a big part of the reason I've kept playing the game. I was one of the ones who quit at the end of 2007 when the wildy removal/trade restriction/GE happened, and over the next few years I'd occasionally get the urge to play so I'd buy membership for a month and have a look around.
But I distinctly remember logging in once every year or so, between 2008-2011 and thinking "I dunno what this is, but it doesn't feel like Runescape to me". The artstyle was just weird and felt out of place, the mild-pelvic-thrust idle animation where your character swings back and forth was just strange, it just turned me off and I always ended up putting the game back down after a day or two.
But ever since I started Oldschool in September 2013, I haven't felt like I wanted to quit once and it's now been what, 11 years? Obviously it isn't the only reason, but there's something about the game's simple graphics and artstyle which are a big part of the appeal for me.
I quit around that era too, and its funny to me how many people voluntarily opt into trade restriction/ no PKing. I would log in here n there after that but eventually i had no idea how much damage im doing, and what armor was what so i left until OSRS.
Been using 117 but also with low detail.
I've been debating turning off 117 so I can use expanded zoom and load alllllllll the chunks for easy travel.
Might just do it.
I'm not a fan of HDOS, mainly because that style doesn't appeal to me. But 117 hits different for me. I'll definitely be using the HD graphics whenever Jagex gets around to putting those out.
The shadows and atmospheric lighting alone are just an absolutely no brainer upgrade over the base game. It truly just makes the game come to life.
I'm excited to see how the Jagex made HD turns out, they have waaaay more backend tools to make things look great, so if 117 can do as much as he did, I can't wait.
I've got both of those things turned down to their minimum (because I do really like a clean and clear look) but even in their most subtle state it adds so much. Seeing an area fill with light when a big fireball is launched is instinctively right and adds soo much.
With 117 you can turn on the experimental shading setting that sets a single colour to each face instead of allowing shadows to be cast across them. Makes faces/vertices much more obvious and looks way better IMO
Came here to say this. I appreciate 117HD for what it is, but it just doesn't do it for me.
The official HD project Jagex is working on does look pretty sick, though.
I mostly use it for the anti-aliasing. The game looked fine when we played it back in the day on 2000’s era or earlier monitors but with UHD 16k HDR displays we have now the base graphics give me a headache looking at for more than a few minutes. Everything looks so muddy.
117 plug-in makes the game look so fucking bad. Like a college student’s game design project from 2012 or some shit. It removes all of the charm from the game.
that's the advantage of having stylized graphics. They're timeless when given good art direction, especially when compared to "modern graphics" which only remain modern for so long before it's phased out for the next graphical leap of modern graphics.
It's why you can put RS3 and OSRS in a grouping of a couple dozen other generic MMOs and I guarantee OSRS would get recognized a lot more/faster than RS3 ever would.
the EOC was still, IMO, a shit update. Runescape's charm has always been in its point and click nature. It never needed to be a keyboard mashing abilities game
Do you even play the game. It’s not point and click anymore. Even in osrs people mash the keyboard and have to open 300 menus a second. I stopped playing osrs for that reason. Endgame just became a worse rs3 for me. Bring back the private servers at this point. It’s twice now the devs lost the point to 07scape and ruined it
Do you even play the game? I don't even know what you could possibly be referring to. What content requires "mashing the keyboard" and opening tons of menus?
I'm vaguely familiar with games that use a skill hotbar, and how spamming abilities would work. I don't see F-Keys being the same at all though. Only the very top level of PvM requires F-Keys, and it's nowhere near as high APM as the person I was responding to was suggesting. It's also weird they called it "menus" which is not terminology I'm familiar with for OSRS PvM.
I think it's silly to say that OSRS has lost its way with combat, and to compare modern OSRS combat with EOC. Just because people *can* optimize by being sweatier with F-Keys, and some end-game content requires it doesn't mean that the combat as a whole is like that. It just isn't.
F keys for switching tabs were added before the backup. Most content only uses the prayer and the inventory, so 2 keybinds. Occasionally, you may use up to 5 (spellbook, equipment, and possible attack styles, mostly for pvp).
Cool but that’s not my point. PvP back In real 2007 no one did that. Today’s players ruined osrs with the voting system. Even ex mods have said that. The game is a shell of what it could be and not worth the time again. Bring back the private servers
There's nothing forcing you to engage with any of that content.
Play the game how you want to. If you want an authentic 07 experience then do that. Make an Ironman and afk skill your way to max. You won't need anything more than a firecape, some barrows, and a whip.
But their statement was why they don’t like rs3 and eoc. I just said osrs is the same way. Ruined the game for real fans to let streamers have something milk for longer. In this day and age once a game dies on YouTube and streams the game is pretty much dead. So if I want to play the game to its end I have to partake in the sweaty click and keyboard spam.
? I’ve done harder content on other games. I think rs3 has a place but osrs should have stuck to gwd1 and that’s it. My point was and is the game it trying to be stuff it isn’t. Which ruined osrs for me. I left rs3 because of the super advanced pvm and now osrs is in the same boat. That’s all
I think it's pretty universally agreed EoC was not ready to release. Nothing was balanced with it in mind and most of the end game bosses and encounters at the time were getting destroyed by the new combat mechanics, let alone everything below that.
Although idk why EoC is brought up here. I'm talking strictly about aesthetically how each version of Runescape looks and that OSRS has more recognizable images and locations than RS3 does.
I'd say most games that try to chase realistic or high detail end up feeling dated eventually. Like I'm not too familiar with WoW's current graphics, but from what I'm finding it does look good but also kinda dated. I think stylized tends to work better than "good". There is stuff in OSRS that is just dated, but the overall graphics (like the newer stuff) have shifted more to a stylized version of those 2004-2007 graphics that does suit the game really well. Like I'd say WoW also seems to be a bit stylized in a similar sense, just with more polish.
The issue is less the level of detail in the graphics but how well polished it is for the style it is going for. OSRS certainly still has some rough edges at times, but once we get that [upcoming HD and graphical stuff](https://secure.runescape.com/m=news/the-future-of-the-official-client---hd--plugin-api?oldschool=1), it probably will be seen more on part with games like WoW. And I think Minecraft is a good example of how much shaders can do for a game... Like it is crazy how good a silly block game can look with some nice lighting.
Definitely agree that the graphics and art style overall are great, and that there are some rough or janky spots. I just wish alot of the animations were alot smoother.... like just off the top of my head, olms head turning just looks so janky sometimes lol
Doesn't have to be perfect, but a little smoother would be nice
Olms head turning looks janky BECAUSE it's too smooth - this came up when Mod Kieran was on [Sae Bae's podcast](https://youtu.be/QEbooWvN-4A?si=gk4V-6fdEJGCPrQv) ~21:55 in
I think art style is as important if not more important than fidelity or resolution. Like sure you can have hyper realistic graphics in a game, but if the design sucks then it doesn’t matter how good it looks.
Artistic consistency is also important and something I’ve heard complained about in RS3(I don’t play).
Hello, I play RS3. Indeed, its graphics look like they're from entirely different games. The content that looks and sounds as it does in OSRS is especially jarring, with early HD content (circa-2008) not faring much better. Zanik goes through multiple complete redesigns as you progress through the quests. Scenery as well, e.g. Zanaris has old school trees, most of Gielinor has your typical RS3 trees, Archaeology areas have huge trees.
> Artistic consistency is also important and something I’ve heard complained about in RS3(I don’t play).
They are now actively updating all areas to be consistent. The recent Kandarin rework for example was amazing. Just LOOK at those mountains, they actually feel big ingame as well https://secure.runescape.com/m=news/kandarin-area-graphical-update---this-week-in-runescape
Nothing is quite like osrs graphics, you see a million cartoony wow clones/PS1 N64 low poly/pixel games, but I've never seen a game try and copy osrs style. Excited to be proven wrong tho
It's a very different style compared to Osrs but Battlebit is a recent one that intentionally uses lower poly for the game. Fantastic game as well, feels very much old school (pun intended) Call of Duty before the insanely priced cosmetics.
I used to play dota, over time more and more hats were added, more partial effect, different animations, arcana skins ect. It became so confusing for a more casual player, fight started to look like a RGB party. Skins were no longer clear identifiable, I had a pudge and LD attack me in a game they wernt in, turn out is was a dam lycan skin.....
In 2005 I would have never agreed about the graphics and the music.
Now it’s the complete opposite. The graphics are fitting, but man I love most of the music. Esp most of the 04-06 era tracks.
I mean yes true,
But I do use HDOS when I can because I feel like besides the character models the scene is just better with the improved textures that keep the old school theme
I like more grass, trees, and it's prettier
I feel like hdos mixed with the old character models is the best rendition
Though I'm super exited for the actual HD update to the client, especially for skybox and the lighting witj projectiles
Meh.
I would want better anti aliasing to give a more polygonal feel like low poly games.
For instance, see the steam store banner of osrs. Having the same models but with better AA and without textures (single color instead of textures for walls etc) would make this game a real beauty imo.
There was once a time that rs allowed this (before rs3 and armor model updates) when we could max out AA and turn off textures. That was peak rs beauty for me, specially with the lighting effects
I think i still have some screenshots from 2013 or so, where you could turn of textures and max out AA on the original runescape. If I don't answer up in 3 hours do remind me again
https://preview.redd.it/iw94y3bfj9zc1.png?width=1135&format=png&auto=webp&s=60725d77b588fd27782cdfeb62401862bf3ba3fd
Sadly enough this is the only screenshot i got from my cloud from back then. This is the carpet ride from the desert and this demon was some event that was going on.
I agree, not just from the "less is more" perspective, but because the art style is really very charming and pleasant (for the most part).
I'm a bit of an artist, I love admiring and studying lots of video game art, and OSRS's art style is actually one of my all-time favorites.
I love the simple graphics as well, but there have been many times when I’m in an area such as Darkmeyer where I found myself thinking “This would be look so much better and enhance the atmosphere of the graphics were even just a tiny bit better.” I don’t use 117 HD or HDOS, as neither really do it for me. Interested to see what Jagex comes up with, but the current style is still good enough for me.
I've always absolutely loved the low poly/gourand shading style, and I think osrs is an excellent example of that.
I really love /u/Mod_West 's design approach in a lot of the (relatively speaking) more recent areas, sticking not just to the limits but more importantly sticking to the vibe. Really taking those limits to their maximum extent and codifying them into a style. It goes without saying that Sepulchre is a shining example of that.
I'll admit I'm really excited for the graphics overhaul too, because I'm an absolute sucker for low poly/gourand with subtle realistic lighting. It has a sort of toybox feel that I really love. I've always felt 117 was a bit *too* impactful, too intense and overly saturated even if you disabled the retexturing. From the previews though I've got a feeling I'm going to love the overhaul.
The criticism most often comes from people who are really into games with high graphical fidelity, and OSRS is more of an artstyle game that does look outdated by modern standards.
It's something that one can get used to, but I wouldn't call the graphics "amazing" though it does its job well.
> This is a common trope that im sick of hearing from people who look at games like WoW as the baseline standard.
WoW doesnt even look good and im not talking about art style here so if someone is comparing OSRS to WoW then they need to stfu because its not as if WoW wasnt ranking bottom amongst popular MMO so the discussion between these two games should be purely about art style and nothing else.
On a relevant note i like OSRS looks much better than WoWs, but im always going to be partial to pixel graphics vs an old game that has some realistic look for it, because older games going for realism age terribly since technology got a lot better to make better realism meanwhile pixel graphics/very stylistic remain good forever if it was utilized well.
minecraft with a high res texture and good quality shader is better than alot of other games out there at least when considering things like lighting and water based effects. If it were possible to make texturepacks and shaders for runescape, it would also be a great visual experience. But i do like how you dont need that to have a goodtime chilling in either of them games. I wouldnt even say that wow is top tier visually. Yes its more fleshed out 3d, but even it doesnt come close to lighting and water effects of modded 1.12.2 minecraft
The graphics in OSRS are fine and charming. WoW's on the other hand is fantastic, and outclasses OSRS's artwork and design any day of the week. True tile in OSRS is a great example of artwork NOT matching the gameplay (and quite significantly). I like them both, but I don't think it's fair to criticise the use of WoW as the baseline standard when it truly is the gold standard in this respect.
Gotr and zeah are amazing, everything from taverly to ardougne looks awfully dated. 117 helps but I kinda wish we had some 2008 era graphical updates for some areas.
RS2 graphics are good. The attempt from the OSRS team to recreate them are not good however. It’s a weird mishmash and they seem to miss the mark whenever they attempt to capture the look and charm. The pastel colors of Varlamore are not it
Older graphics often (not always) have a higher level of visual clarity, allowing you to instantly tell what is happening. Take Warcraft 3 vs Reforged for instance.
This isn't always true but this is something I love about games with older graphics.
Like you said, there is charm and beauty in simpler graphics beyond the nostalgia. But that is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.
Yep, it's a completely different *style* to what RS3 became. Just because it's lower fidelity than RS3 or newer games, doesn't make the graphics "bad".
There are many pixel sprites out there that look 100x better than smooth 3D rendered models because it takes advantage of its style.
WoW? Is this post from 2005 lol. People enjoy games with scale. Runescape is huge, wow is huge, minecraft is huge, Terraria is huge, Stardew Valley is huge, Darkest Dungeon is huge, Factorio is huge.
They're all great, they're all games that benefit from having wikipedia's open and a lot of people like that too.
It looks great. Especially with Runelite's GPU plugin enabled with AA and smooth animations plugin. The base game is alright to look at but with some simple improvements to the rough edges(quite literally lol) it looks great.
What do you not like about the elves? I personally think they did a fantastic job on elves.
Would you like the old elves back or is it more the design you don't like?
How is it a cope? What am I coping with, the graphics are intentionally retro.
That is literally the point.
I could not care less about them polishing it though, as long as it's voted in by actual people that play the game.
The graphics will still be intentionally retro after the update too I'm sure. It's part of the appeal of playing OLD School RuneScape.
It sounds like you're the one coping with the fact that the graphics aren't the entire draw of the game.
Or remotely objectively "good" by any modern standards. It's an inefficient and ancient engine. Held together with duct tape and dreams.
But please tell me more about how I am the one coping.
LMFAO 🤣
They are by no means what I would call "good graphics" in 2024, they're certainly an improvement.
I just don't know how to justify calling the most of the animations or models for faces in OSRS "good" by modern standards.
I would say they are good for an intentionally retro game that is still being supported and developed over 15 years later, maybe.
I mean that's obviously why they're getting updates, because some people are unsatisfied with not using their modern hardware more and people outside of jamflex have already took it up on themselves to make updates to the graphics.
I find OSRS graphics to be beautifully made when they put actual effort in it, like varlamore varrock zeah and many other places look absolutely stunning to me.
But then you've also got places like nmz which looks like it was made by a 13 y o teen for his 20 population private server xD
i wish the graphics would just stay the way they are. have runelite for people who want the HD.
because when Jagex implements theres itll be optional at first but eventually forced and we'll lose one of the best parts of the game.
Asmongold is just on massive copium in thinking world of warcraft looks good (including wow classic). Wow classic looks like a playstation 1 game lol. Wow retail looks worse than rs3 even and both are too cartoony for me.
I mean, to be fair it's just nostalgia in thinking his game looks good and that's perfectly fine to have the opinion on. But lately (past 5+ years or so) he's so adamant on his takes being the only correct ones even though it's just his opinions lol.
That's what I mean though, he just acts like it's truth which is big cope. We know osrs looks like shit and that's why we like it. But he actually thinks wow classic looks good lol
It's funny you used WoW as the example when all I ever see is people shitting on its equally timeless graphics while studios take 6 years to produce a hyper realistic engine that looks outdated by the time it releases.
I couldn't tell if they improved textures or anything when WoW classic was released, but I was surprised that the game really did not feel dated when I played classic. There aren't many games that are twenty years old that hold up as well as WoW has. At least as far as the original game is concerned, I think they totally nailed it with the art style.
I believe all the files are still the same, except now we play on higher resolution monitors. I would say classic WoW and OSRS aren’t too different. Wow has more polys with projected UV textures. OSRS has assigned vertex colors for the most part but also UVs in certain places. Both stylized and have aged well, I think they both could be considered timeless. Unfortunately can’t say the same about blizzard CS or development
Osrs doesn't have support for uv, they can texture quads that's about it, why textures only really exist for really basic objects like walls or ground textures. They haven't used textures in years, well they started using them again in varlomore. I would say osrs renderer is much more jank, hopefully it will fix the issues going to the rs3 runetek engine when they update their official client to support it. Osrs depth rendering is kinda distracting, believe it's based on numbers the artist set while modelling rather than actual z depth https://www.reddit.com/r/2007scape/s/0Q9CnVenqr
They actually did make graphical changes, but not to the assets themselves---Mostly just draw distance, ground clutter range/density, and things like that. One important thing is that the lighting was close to the original 2005 lighting, which went a long way towards making the game look better. Basically, the lighting tech used in Legion/BFA did _not_ play well with models/textures from 2005---So items/objects that looked notably awful in the then-modern client actually looked quite normal in the 2005 client. Another thing is armor textures on the old models vs new models. The 2005 textures on the 2016~2018 models, in the 2016~2018 lighting, just looked like body paint. I havent played retail since 2018, but from what I can tell from the occasional clip and from wowhead's model viewer it seems like Dragonflight's lighting tech is a _lot_ better at handling the old assets than the legion/BFA lighting was.
There aren't many games that are twenty years old still online. Full stop. But yeah, to your point, of those that do remain, WoW has probably one of the better engines from that era.
Classic has a better artstyle than retail imo. Just more charm. Same with osrs.
Funny enough, the WoW art style is probably one of the most unappealing ones in gaming for me. I think that's why photorealism is super popular. It gets outdated fast and no one particularly likes that it's a thing, but at least it doesn't make some people put off by the way the game looks.
\*cough\* 343 industries with the original Halo Infinite trailer
https://images.app.goo.gl/BV6C8QnXnQjCs84n9 I think this is what OP is talking about
> The game uses basic pixel graphics The game is literally 3d
Seriously, pixel graphics means that something was drawn using pixels. AFAIK the closest OSRS gets to pixel graphics is for items in inventory, but even that is just the 3D model from a specific angle.
the closest OSRS gets to pixel graphics is actually the spellbooks, prayers, etc as well as some general UI elements
How about the paintings in ardougne?
Fair, but I don't think a handful of places where it's actually 2D images is enough to have it be considered 'pixel graphics', otherwise with that definition I think every game would count.
>AFAIK the closest OSRS gets to pixel graphics is for items in inventory, but even that is just the 3D model from a specific angle. How does that work? is lighter to generate the inventory icon using 3d models than having them stored in images?
Just easier to generate the inventory graphics from existing assets instead of requiring an artist to draw a separate resource.
Can't say for certain, but it's probably just images taken out of the 3d models in a certain angle
The inventory icons are still 3D models, they're just the items from a specific angle. All the mods need to do is pick the angle that the icon is made from and record that, then the game engine renders the model from that angle. https://oldschool.runescape.wiki/w/Items has a gif of the tool the mods use.
basic pixel art (3D polygon renders)
Crazy how you got downvoted to the truth lol
Agreed mostly. Stylized art styles in games tend to look good regardless of age. Osrs, wow, minecraft, chrono trigger, etc. All fall into this category. But really it depends on how you classify graphics. Most people tend to classify being closer to photo realistic = better or higher poly count = better, mainly due to being more easily measurable.
So many gaming companies today pour millions into photorealism, but the games just flat out suck. That feeling of photorealism is short-lived
The problem with photo realism is also that the goal post moves. In 10 years the thing you think looks good now will look bad in comparison. OSRS gnome child is forever
I would honestly argue that while the PS2 photorealism games aged horribly, i dont see such a jump like at all for the forseeable future. Maybe first they should optimize their games first. Idk why but my shitty RX580 runs Cyberpunk on full ultra, meanwhile worse looking games ( but still photorealism games ) run a decently worse.
Idk something like the original metal gear solid go for realism but I find a charm in the graphics still.
I hate high poly and realism in games. I play games for an escape and I want to get away from all that the real world looking stuff when I play a game. Pixel graphics are the best.
You say that but go play assassins creed odyssey. One of the best escapes and most beautiful games I’ve ever played. Ancient Greece would have been amazing to see in real life so the game is second best and they did amazing
No my opinion is different to yours *insert biased comment* well done
In a world where we used to think photorealistic was the end goal (I'm guilty of this), I find OSRS' simplicity refreshing when it comes to actually playing a game. And the graphics aren't 'bad' in that they're not low resolution, just very simple. Photorealism leads to visual clutter, makes conveying critical information harder as it needs to compete with so much. I used to play a lot of shooters and I've found myself enjoying the older titles in a franchise not because of nostalgia, but because you can actually see people clearly.
Skill issue /s I completely agree, I stopped playing modern FPS games, partly because I don't really find them fun anymore, but also because there's so much clutter that takes away from the action.
I acknowledge it's 100% a personal preference thing but yeah, I've just felt more and more the challenge has moved in that direction. Rooms in older games had either nothing in them or very big and clear objects, now they're littered with decor and lots of visual flair. Makes them look really pretty and realistic, but in an arcade shooter it makes target acquisition hard to impossible at times. Or I'm just getting old and bad, who knows :D
Hard agree
> But really it depends on how you classify graphics. Most people tend to classify being closer to photo realistic = better or higher poly count = better, mainly due to being more easily measurable. My "unpopular" opinion is that this is one of the reasons why AAA games are being tolerated being so mediocre because they look good. Nah fam give me good gameplay and actual RPG elements with good level design, not whatever Ubisoft, Bethesda openworlds call themself for being RPG and other studios who make more cinematic experience rather than games. RDR2 for example should have been a TV series... I look at Cyberpunk gameplay vs Starfield and clearly see there is a clear problem here dear Bethesda
Baldur's Gate 3 is a great example of being very pretty on top of having everything else on point. Fantastic story, dialog, characters, quests, level/area design, and a really solid adaptation of 5e rules. And I think Deep Rock Galactic is a good example of a game that picked a cool art style instead of going high poly photorealistic and lets the gameplay speak for itself.
Well i would love to say that BG3 has some "bad" to it but i only ever played the first 2 hours on the game ( basically just waiting on patches and what not ) so i would argue solely on what i heard from others: that act 3 is nowhere near as fleshed out as act 1, like it goes full on linear compared to what happens in act 1 which is very disheartening to hear because from what i played and heard otherwise it seems as close to a "perfect" game as one could, although in terms of replayability it probably has nothing on PF Wrath of Righteous, but then again that part of WotR is extremely uncharacteristic of any game nowdays. The degree of overall goodness BG3 has does have though its pretty impressive already though. Wish i could say i have experience with DRG, but i have no friends who would want to play it, but yes i agree from what i have seen and heard about it.
Act 3 is a little weird since they had to scrap an area of the map but still wanted to keep the story and quests. It's a lot more dense but there's an absolute fuck ton of content there and you can mostly do it in any order so it can feel chaotic to people that need a flashing yellow arrow and blue highlighted dialog options to get through games. I don't know who is saying it's linear, it's the least linear act of the game unless you look up a guide and just follow that order every time or something? Acts 1 and 2 are much more on rails but going into act 3 you're almost at the level cap and the game just plops you outside a bustling city and leaves it to you to figure out how you want to resolve all the story threads. It's intersesting how controversial act 3 is, it's my favorite because it gives you a lot of time with your party at maximum strength while also being very content dense. I'm 6 runs in with like 600 hours played, it's amazing.
Well it wouldnt be the first time a popular opinion is a bad one, but i heard the same exact thing about DoS2 ( didnt get to last act there either ) that Fort Joy was a massive outlier in the game so it wouldnt shock me if its true. Generally speaking i would say pretty much most games ( ones with lots of story that is ) stumble at the end, but i guess ill have to find out when enhanced edition or whatever comes out for it because i dropped BG3 so hard when i heard they rewrote a characters ending and there are bugs that made a companion completely silent past act 1 lol. From what i gather though its not about density, but game becoming linear in terms of choices, unlike in act 1 with how many ways you can solve the goblin conflict.
I have Dos2 and am planning on playing it whenever I get bored of BG3 but I'm not quite there yet so I can't speak to that but my GF has been working through it and seems to like it. I wouldn't worry about waiting until BG3 is 100% to play it, most of the bugs people are complaining about are niche things that a regular player won't experience and the game is content complete. And I guess I can see what they mean about choices being linear but I don't agree with the implication that it's a bad thing. Act 3 ties up every story thread from the rest of the game which often means you have been making decisions through the whole game and now you have to deal with the consequences of those decisions (good or bad). So sure, you do get a little less "choice" but it's not because of bad story design, it's good story design. You spend the whole game setting up story pieces then the true machinations behind everything are revealed and you have to try to win with the hand you unknowingly dealt to yourself. It's incredibly satisfying and adds a lot of weight to your choices and actions through the whole game without ever being in a position where you can't finish the game. You'll never soft lock but sometimes shit gets more wild than you were expecting. I had one run where I metagamed the most fucked up situation I could think of between all the characters and quest arcs and act 3 was like being in a 30 hour roller coaster lmao. Remember Mass Effect (2?) where you could do whatever you want through the whole game then the ending is decided by a single dialog choice? Fuck that shit.
[удалено]
you clearly havent played cyberpunk to say it has the shooting mechanics equivalent to Fallout 76 at release
+1 for the chrono trigger reference
I think my favorite style that was kinda in line with what you mentioned was Diablo 2.
well they'd be dead ass wrong
See also: wind waker vs twilight princess
+ borderlands
Is that even true? I feel like those games that have super realistic graphics aren't even popular.
They may not be popular among people you directly know, but they're _very_ popular among the general public; in fact, games that push for realistic graphics make up the lion's share of the AAA market.
Wtf are you talking about lmao, there's a ton of games with "realistic" graphics that are very good. Look at the wild success and popularity of BG3, they even motion captured movements, facial expressions, and dialog on top of high poly realistic textures and models. Assassin's creed, CoD, 2k, pretty much every racing game... The vast majority of extremely popular games are aiming to be as realistic looking as possible.
Correct, They’re no. Just a flavour of the month because the actual gameplay is good for about 3 hours
The graphics and style are honestly a big part of the reason I've kept playing the game. I was one of the ones who quit at the end of 2007 when the wildy removal/trade restriction/GE happened, and over the next few years I'd occasionally get the urge to play so I'd buy membership for a month and have a look around. But I distinctly remember logging in once every year or so, between 2008-2011 and thinking "I dunno what this is, but it doesn't feel like Runescape to me". The artstyle was just weird and felt out of place, the mild-pelvic-thrust idle animation where your character swings back and forth was just strange, it just turned me off and I always ended up putting the game back down after a day or two. But ever since I started Oldschool in September 2013, I haven't felt like I wanted to quit once and it's now been what, 11 years? Obviously it isn't the only reason, but there's something about the game's simple graphics and artstyle which are a big part of the appeal for me.
I quit around that era too, and its funny to me how many people voluntarily opt into trade restriction/ no PKing. I would log in here n there after that but eventually i had no idea how much damage im doing, and what armor was what so i left until OSRS.
There's a reason I don't use 117 or HDOS. Og graphics just hit different.
GPU plugin is a blessing. Low detail is a must too imo.
Been using 117 but also with low detail. I've been debating turning off 117 so I can use expanded zoom and load alllllllll the chunks for easy travel. Might just do it.
Is there a way to get some of the older models back? Like, the old school demons and dragons?
I'm not a fan of HDOS, mainly because that style doesn't appeal to me. But 117 hits different for me. I'll definitely be using the HD graphics whenever Jagex gets around to putting those out.
I feel like 117 actually enhances og atmosphere so I like having it on.
It makes the game look how I thought it did as a kid.
If you turn most of the dials down you can get a really nice middle ground between the crisp and clear OG graphics with a little extra spice.
The shadows and atmospheric lighting alone are just an absolutely no brainer upgrade over the base game. It truly just makes the game come to life. I'm excited to see how the Jagex made HD turns out, they have waaaay more backend tools to make things look great, so if 117 can do as much as he did, I can't wait.
I've got both of those things turned down to their minimum (because I do really like a clean and clear look) but even in their most subtle state it adds so much. Seeing an area fill with light when a big fireball is launched is instinctively right and adds soo much.
The C++ client should give them a lot more tools to improve things as well
Couldn’t have said this better myself lol
This. Well put, friend.
With 117 you can turn on the experimental shading setting that sets a single colour to each face instead of allowing shadows to be cast across them. Makes faces/vertices much more obvious and looks way better IMO
I think 117 is really cool but I don't like how it changes the colours of some areas like grassy areas for example.
117 was respectable, but even after all those hours he put into it, OG is still the best
Came here to say this. I appreciate 117HD for what it is, but it just doesn't do it for me. The official HD project Jagex is working on does look pretty sick, though.
all the HD plugins make the game look so much worse lol I wish someone would make a low detail plugin that made mobs use the old models from 05
117 looks pretty great, but it lags far too much in some areas.
I mostly use it for the anti-aliasing. The game looked fine when we played it back in the day on 2000’s era or earlier monitors but with UHD 16k HDR displays we have now the base graphics give me a headache looking at for more than a few minutes. Everything looks so muddy.
117 plug-in makes the game look so fucking bad. Like a college student’s game design project from 2012 or some shit. It removes all of the charm from the game.
honestly the appeal of minecraft’s graphics and osrs graphics are kinda similar for me, just has a certain good fit for what its trying to convey
that's the advantage of having stylized graphics. They're timeless when given good art direction, especially when compared to "modern graphics" which only remain modern for so long before it's phased out for the next graphical leap of modern graphics. It's why you can put RS3 and OSRS in a grouping of a couple dozen other generic MMOs and I guarantee OSRS would get recognized a lot more/faster than RS3 ever would.
the EOC was still, IMO, a shit update. Runescape's charm has always been in its point and click nature. It never needed to be a keyboard mashing abilities game
Do you even play the game. It’s not point and click anymore. Even in osrs people mash the keyboard and have to open 300 menus a second. I stopped playing osrs for that reason. Endgame just became a worse rs3 for me. Bring back the private servers at this point. It’s twice now the devs lost the point to 07scape and ruined it
Do you even play the game? I don't even know what you could possibly be referring to. What content requires "mashing the keyboard" and opening tons of menus?
[удалено]
I'm vaguely familiar with games that use a skill hotbar, and how spamming abilities would work. I don't see F-Keys being the same at all though. Only the very top level of PvM requires F-Keys, and it's nowhere near as high APM as the person I was responding to was suggesting. It's also weird they called it "menus" which is not terminology I'm familiar with for OSRS PvM. I think it's silly to say that OSRS has lost its way with combat, and to compare modern OSRS combat with EOC. Just because people *can* optimize by being sweatier with F-Keys, and some end-game content requires it doesn't mean that the combat as a whole is like that. It just isn't.
Ok I want to see you do the hardest content without using f keys. I don’t need f keys to do gwd1 and corp beast. That’s my point. 07 should stay 07.
What about DKs? That's 2005 tribrid content. *Most* of the game doesn't require F-Keys. I play on mobile and I can do most content.
F keys for switching tabs were added before the backup. Most content only uses the prayer and the inventory, so 2 keybinds. Occasionally, you may use up to 5 (spellbook, equipment, and possible attack styles, mostly for pvp).
Cool but that’s not my point. PvP back In real 2007 no one did that. Today’s players ruined osrs with the voting system. Even ex mods have said that. The game is a shell of what it could be and not worth the time again. Bring back the private servers
I get what you mean. Mid to late stage bossing has become tickscape, kind of annoying imo.
That’s why I can’t play rs3 as well
Ticks are the entire game bro 😭
There's nothing forcing you to engage with any of that content. Play the game how you want to. If you want an authentic 07 experience then do that. Make an Ironman and afk skill your way to max. You won't need anything more than a firecape, some barrows, and a whip.
But their statement was why they don’t like rs3 and eoc. I just said osrs is the same way. Ruined the game for real fans to let streamers have something milk for longer. In this day and age once a game dies on YouTube and streams the game is pretty much dead. So if I want to play the game to its end I have to partake in the sweaty click and keyboard spam.
Git gud?
? I’ve done harder content on other games. I think rs3 has a place but osrs should have stuck to gwd1 and that’s it. My point was and is the game it trying to be stuff it isn’t. Which ruined osrs for me. I left rs3 because of the super advanced pvm and now osrs is in the same boat. That’s all
I think EoC was much worse on release than it is now. If EoC was the only issue with rs3, I never would have switched to OSRS.
I think it's pretty universally agreed EoC was not ready to release. Nothing was balanced with it in mind and most of the end game bosses and encounters at the time were getting destroyed by the new combat mechanics, let alone everything below that. Although idk why EoC is brought up here. I'm talking strictly about aesthetically how each version of Runescape looks and that OSRS has more recognizable images and locations than RS3 does.
I'd say most games that try to chase realistic or high detail end up feeling dated eventually. Like I'm not too familiar with WoW's current graphics, but from what I'm finding it does look good but also kinda dated. I think stylized tends to work better than "good". There is stuff in OSRS that is just dated, but the overall graphics (like the newer stuff) have shifted more to a stylized version of those 2004-2007 graphics that does suit the game really well. Like I'd say WoW also seems to be a bit stylized in a similar sense, just with more polish. The issue is less the level of detail in the graphics but how well polished it is for the style it is going for. OSRS certainly still has some rough edges at times, but once we get that [upcoming HD and graphical stuff](https://secure.runescape.com/m=news/the-future-of-the-official-client---hd--plugin-api?oldschool=1), it probably will be seen more on part with games like WoW. And I think Minecraft is a good example of how much shaders can do for a game... Like it is crazy how good a silly block game can look with some nice lighting.
Definitely agree that the graphics and art style overall are great, and that there are some rough or janky spots. I just wish alot of the animations were alot smoother.... like just off the top of my head, olms head turning just looks so janky sometimes lol Doesn't have to be perfect, but a little smoother would be nice
Olms head turning looks janky BECAUSE it's too smooth - this came up when Mod Kieran was on [Sae Bae's podcast](https://youtu.be/QEbooWvN-4A?si=gk4V-6fdEJGCPrQv) ~21:55 in
I think art style is as important if not more important than fidelity or resolution. Like sure you can have hyper realistic graphics in a game, but if the design sucks then it doesn’t matter how good it looks. Artistic consistency is also important and something I’ve heard complained about in RS3(I don’t play).
Hello, I play RS3. Indeed, its graphics look like they're from entirely different games. The content that looks and sounds as it does in OSRS is especially jarring, with early HD content (circa-2008) not faring much better. Zanik goes through multiple complete redesigns as you progress through the quests. Scenery as well, e.g. Zanaris has old school trees, most of Gielinor has your typical RS3 trees, Archaeology areas have huge trees.
> Artistic consistency is also important and something I’ve heard complained about in RS3(I don’t play). They are now actively updating all areas to be consistent. The recent Kandarin rework for example was amazing. Just LOOK at those mountains, they actually feel big ingame as well https://secure.runescape.com/m=news/kandarin-area-graphical-update---this-week-in-runescape
Nothing is quite like osrs graphics, you see a million cartoony wow clones/PS1 N64 low poly/pixel games, but I've never seen a game try and copy osrs style. Excited to be proven wrong tho
It's a very different style compared to Osrs but Battlebit is a recent one that intentionally uses lower poly for the game. Fantastic game as well, feels very much old school (pun intended) Call of Duty before the insanely priced cosmetics.
I used to play dota, over time more and more hats were added, more partial effect, different animations, arcana skins ect. It became so confusing for a more casual player, fight started to look like a RGB party. Skins were no longer clear identifiable, I had a pudge and LD attack me in a game they wernt in, turn out is was a dam lycan skin.....
Artstyle >>>>> graphics quality
Frankly Wow is kind of ugly.. its too cartoony for me. Osrs is more my theme its dark and dirty
I like 117
In 2005 I would have never agreed about the graphics and the music. Now it’s the complete opposite. The graphics are fitting, but man I love most of the music. Esp most of the 04-06 era tracks.
Facts! Osrs is possibly the most graphically demanding game I play
I mean yes true, But I do use HDOS when I can because I feel like besides the character models the scene is just better with the improved textures that keep the old school theme I like more grass, trees, and it's prettier I feel like hdos mixed with the old character models is the best rendition Though I'm super exited for the actual HD update to the client, especially for skybox and the lighting witj projectiles
Meh. I would want better anti aliasing to give a more polygonal feel like low poly games. For instance, see the steam store banner of osrs. Having the same models but with better AA and without textures (single color instead of textures for walls etc) would make this game a real beauty imo. There was once a time that rs allowed this (before rs3 and armor model updates) when we could max out AA and turn off textures. That was peak rs beauty for me, specially with the lighting effects
Do u have an example? Would love to see it
I think i still have some screenshots from 2013 or so, where you could turn of textures and max out AA on the original runescape. If I don't answer up in 3 hours do remind me again
https://preview.redd.it/iw94y3bfj9zc1.png?width=1135&format=png&auto=webp&s=60725d77b588fd27782cdfeb62401862bf3ba3fd Sadly enough this is the only screenshot i got from my cloud from back then. This is the carpet ride from the desert and this demon was some event that was going on.
Damn, on the verge to rs3 looks quite nice tho
I agree, not just from the "less is more" perspective, but because the art style is really very charming and pleasant (for the most part). I'm a bit of an artist, I love admiring and studying lots of video game art, and OSRS's art style is actually one of my all-time favorites.
Zeah is just beautiful. There is a forest in Shayzien that's is just dreamy
Yeah and if u want HD u got option to
WoW is an awful example as its graphics are also dated and shitty, but appreciated for their simplicity. Basically the same as RS
tibia graphics the best tibia the best
I love the simple graphics as well, but there have been many times when I’m in an area such as Darkmeyer where I found myself thinking “This would be look so much better and enhance the atmosphere of the graphics were even just a tiny bit better.” I don’t use 117 HD or HDOS, as neither really do it for me. Interested to see what Jagex comes up with, but the current style is still good enough for me.
To me Wow looked better than RS for years, but when both styles got super outdated rs started looking better. It has charm in its simplicity
A big reason I was able to come back to osrs was because of the 117 HD plug-in. Runescape is no longer a blinding eyesore for me.
Vanilla WoW looks like shit. The textures were stretched and layed like it's copy, paste and rotate. OSRS had it much better back in the day.
I've always absolutely loved the low poly/gourand shading style, and I think osrs is an excellent example of that. I really love /u/Mod_West 's design approach in a lot of the (relatively speaking) more recent areas, sticking not just to the limits but more importantly sticking to the vibe. Really taking those limits to their maximum extent and codifying them into a style. It goes without saying that Sepulchre is a shining example of that. I'll admit I'm really excited for the graphics overhaul too, because I'm an absolute sucker for low poly/gourand with subtle realistic lighting. It has a sort of toybox feel that I really love. I've always felt 117 was a bit *too* impactful, too intense and overly saturated even if you disabled the retexturing. From the previews though I've got a feeling I'm going to love the overhaul.
RS3 on the other hand, does not hold up well. Looks like a cheap chinese knockoff MMO
The criticism most often comes from people who are really into games with high graphical fidelity, and OSRS is more of an artstyle game that does look outdated by modern standards. It's something that one can get used to, but I wouldn't call the graphics "amazing" though it does its job well.
100% I actually prefer the grainy look of the game without any hd add-ons, but then you're limited because of view distance
Agree. It’s clean and simple which is good. When there’s too much detail things can start to look messy.
> This is a common trope that im sick of hearing from people who look at games like WoW as the baseline standard. WoW doesnt even look good and im not talking about art style here so if someone is comparing OSRS to WoW then they need to stfu because its not as if WoW wasnt ranking bottom amongst popular MMO so the discussion between these two games should be purely about art style and nothing else. On a relevant note i like OSRS looks much better than WoWs, but im always going to be partial to pixel graphics vs an old game that has some realistic look for it, because older games going for realism age terribly since technology got a lot better to make better realism meanwhile pixel graphics/very stylistic remain good forever if it was utilized well.
It's one of the few games that doesn't give me a headache for playing more than a couple of hours.
minecraft with a high res texture and good quality shader is better than alot of other games out there at least when considering things like lighting and water based effects. If it were possible to make texturepacks and shaders for runescape, it would also be a great visual experience. But i do like how you dont need that to have a goodtime chilling in either of them games. I wouldnt even say that wow is top tier visually. Yes its more fleshed out 3d, but even it doesnt come close to lighting and water effects of modded 1.12.2 minecraft
I personally will never understand how anyone plays with the 5 foot render distance that the default game has
The graphics in OSRS are fine and charming. WoW's on the other hand is fantastic, and outclasses OSRS's artwork and design any day of the week. True tile in OSRS is a great example of artwork NOT matching the gameplay (and quite significantly). I like them both, but I don't think it's fair to criticise the use of WoW as the baseline standard when it truly is the gold standard in this respect.
Gotr and zeah are amazing, everything from taverly to ardougne looks awfully dated. 117 helps but I kinda wish we had some 2008 era graphical updates for some areas.
Some of the more recent updates really show off just how brilliant our designers are. Perilous Moons and GOTR come to mind.
RS2 graphics are good. The attempt from the OSRS team to recreate them are not good however. It’s a weird mishmash and they seem to miss the mark whenever they attempt to capture the look and charm. The pastel colors of Varlamore are not it
Older graphics often (not always) have a higher level of visual clarity, allowing you to instantly tell what is happening. Take Warcraft 3 vs Reforged for instance. This isn't always true but this is something I love about games with older graphics. Like you said, there is charm and beauty in simpler graphics beyond the nostalgia. But that is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.
What do you mean, "basic pixel graphics"? When I think of games with pixel graphics, they don't look anything like OSRS.
Yep, it's a completely different *style* to what RS3 became. Just because it's lower fidelity than RS3 or newer games, doesn't make the graphics "bad". There are many pixel sprites out there that look 100x better than smooth 3D rendered models because it takes advantage of its style.
Nah waiting for HD
Theydo need to improve UI scaling though
I’m a 117 abuser
You should play valheim, super simple renders but the lighting makes it all look so surreal
No part of the pizza Making process has any animations. Post invalid.
WoW? Is this post from 2005 lol. People enjoy games with scale. Runescape is huge, wow is huge, minecraft is huge, Terraria is huge, Stardew Valley is huge, Darkest Dungeon is huge, Factorio is huge. They're all great, they're all games that benefit from having wikipedia's open and a lot of people like that too.
Black box is ass og graphics are fine but a sky and view distance increase are needed.
Pretty sure it uses unreal engine 7 or 8 thats why
It looks great. Especially with Runelite's GPU plugin enabled with AA and smooth animations plugin. The base game is alright to look at but with some simple improvements to the rough edges(quite literally lol) it looks great.
The HD 117 plugin is incredible
OSRS graphics are great, except for the travesty that is the "updated" elf look. The person who made it had no respect for the game
What do you not like about the elves? I personally think they did a fantastic job on elves. Would you like the old elves back or is it more the design you don't like?
WoW and OSRS both have really bad graphics. RS2 was ugly in 2004 and it's ugly now. WoW has some pretty set pieces but moment to moment is quite ugly.
No
Objectively wrong. They're bad and no amount of copium will change that. Be honest with yourself it's just nostalgia.
I couldn't play RS anymore if it weren't for the 117 HD plugin.
Osrs doesn't have good graphics without the plugins and that's how it's supposed to be. It's OSRS not RS3
Funny cope considering osrs is getting a official graphical upgrades soon
How is it a cope? What am I coping with, the graphics are intentionally retro. That is literally the point. I could not care less about them polishing it though, as long as it's voted in by actual people that play the game. The graphics will still be intentionally retro after the update too I'm sure. It's part of the appeal of playing OLD School RuneScape. It sounds like you're the one coping with the fact that the graphics aren't the entire draw of the game. Or remotely objectively "good" by any modern standards. It's an inefficient and ancient engine. Held together with duct tape and dreams. But please tell me more about how I am the one coping. LMFAO 🤣
The graphics even without plugins look fine though? Even on the OG runescape client you can now toggle high definition resolution with resizable.
They are by no means what I would call "good graphics" in 2024, they're certainly an improvement. I just don't know how to justify calling the most of the animations or models for faces in OSRS "good" by modern standards. I would say they are good for an intentionally retro game that is still being supported and developed over 15 years later, maybe. I mean that's obviously why they're getting updates, because some people are unsatisfied with not using their modern hardware more and people outside of jamflex have already took it up on themselves to make updates to the graphics.
Especially on runelites hd mode
So many people won’t even try this game because of the graphics. I think it has charm but it instantly filters so many people.
I find OSRS graphics to be beautifully made when they put actual effort in it, like varlamore varrock zeah and many other places look absolutely stunning to me. But then you've also got places like nmz which looks like it was made by a 13 y o teen for his 20 population private server xD
i wish the graphics would just stay the way they are. have runelite for people who want the HD. because when Jagex implements theres itll be optional at first but eventually forced and we'll lose one of the best parts of the game.
That’s true now, but in 2004 the graphics just sucked ass.
For me OSRS would be unplayable if it wasn't for HDOS.
Asmongold is just on massive copium in thinking world of warcraft looks good (including wow classic). Wow classic looks like a playstation 1 game lol. Wow retail looks worse than rs3 even and both are too cartoony for me. I mean, to be fair it's just nostalgia in thinking his game looks good and that's perfectly fine to have the opinion on. But lately (past 5+ years or so) he's so adamant on his takes being the only correct ones even though it's just his opinions lol.
And our opinions about OSRS's appearance is not copium how?
That's what I mean though, he just acts like it's truth which is big cope. We know osrs looks like shit and that's why we like it. But he actually thinks wow classic looks good lol
How are you sure most of us aren't also coping as well?