MO2 Art Assets

Speznat

Senior Member
I personally give a fuck if assets are straight copied, it just doesnt matter if they are copied or not. as long as they are looking spectacular or good it dont matter at all. better a game with bought assets and smooth and fleshed out game mechanics as the fuck we had with MO1.

so all people that suggest that they should make thier own assets are just have reality loss and are shortminded what the hell do those people think sry. but are you stupid?

why wasting time, money, manpower on something that is already there. that is like if Elon musk would have ignored all nasa did before, why should he just starting from scratch. thats pointless.
 
They should focus on good core mechanics, smooth gameplay and having fun with the game. That is one of the issues with the first mortal, a lot of the time it isn’t fun to play it’s more like clocking in for work.

after everything is fleshed our and working well if they have extra time then they should change or modify the assets unless it makes them uglier lol.

everyone always talks about how ugly this game looks, or how ugly that game looks, shit man what happened to having fun? I don’t really understand this fixation on graphics, I would rather have a fun but ugly game than a boring but better looking game.

Gameplay>Graphics. Always. So they should IMO focus on the gameplay, if that means the assets are store bought then they are store bought, that is what the store is for, allowing smaller devs the ability to have a great looking game without having to have a multi million dollar budget.
 

Speznat

Senior Member
They should focus on good core mechanics, smooth gameplay and having fun with the game. That is one of the issues with the first mortal, a lot of the time it isn’t fun to play it’s more like clocking in for work.

after everything is fleshed our and working well if they have extra time then they should change or modify the assets unless it makes them uglier lol.

everyone always talks about how ugly this game looks, or how ugly that game looks, shit man what happened to having fun? I don’t really understand this fixation on graphics, I would rather have a fun but ugly game than a boring but better looking game.

Gameplay>Graphics. Always. So they should IMO focus on the gameplay, if that means the assets are store bought then they are store bought, that is what the store is for, allowing smaller devs the ability to have a great looking game without having to have a multi million dollar budget.
I can only speak for me personally so just my opinion.

An immersive game needs immersive graphic i for myself want high end graphics if it looks shit its mostly shit. its not with everygame the case but many it it.

If i look on steam and i see the next alpha crap and it looks awfull guess what. If it looks awfull it cant be good because the devs give a fuck about how it looks so they dont care.
Different is with art style if the art style difference than you cant compare like a stardew valley have on its own way good graphics.

but if i see the next rust/forest/ark/gloria victis alpha bullshit with bad graphics its mostly shit. thats like if you go into a bar and see a 38 year old women who does extreme climbing and a 22 year old women who does extreme climbing in free time. THan you want to fuck the 22year old women. Same with games. Second the 38 have more experience in Climbing maybe maybe not. you cant see that. its hard yes but you cant know it if the 38year old women have more experience so you judge on the first impression and first look. and if that is bad than you will never know if the 38 old women would have been a better choice.

same with powerpoint presentation if it looks like shit, than it must be shit. your expectations will lead you to maybe false facts. that you believe are facts if they dont. but that is like how our brain works.

Just browse at steam for 1 hour, and look maybe trailer and stuff of 30games i bet you will only try 1 or maybe 2 you judge on first impression. and thats a problem, but we cnat change it. If the Graphic quality look like shit than it must be shit thats why many game swith good concepts dotn get touched on steam.

Same for me i Played "the forest" many many hours. than I saw Green hell and if the grphics would be worse than the forests grpahics i would'nt even looked at it. because i know it would be less immersive and less fancy to explore and stuff if the fooliage would look like smarties.

I hope SV will keep the good graphics and assets and never downgrade any downgrade of texture polygones and whatever would break the good grpahic impression. now when people talk about MO2 its like yeah awesome grahics.
 

ThaBadMan

Exalted Member
Imo atleast the towns should have a more unique feeling but random outposts and tc can have w/e. It was cool in mo to have every town have its own personality and everyone had their own opinion which was the best town.

I haven’t played yet so i dont know if its like that or not.
For the moment and what we got it looks good and fits.
And its only Alpha with focus on combat and nothing else and not all of the combat is in yet.

We dont know what they have planned or anything. What we know is the bought some assets and have it currently in and we also know they have lots of assets from MO that could be used aswell.

We will without a doubt see during alpha, beta and early access before release. That is if they plan on doing it that way. Time will eventually tell, no need to get worked up already no matter what.
 
Thread starter #25
I personally give a fuck if assets are straight copied, it just doesnt matter if they are copied or not. as long as they are looking spectacular or good it dont matter at all. better a game with bought assets and smooth and fleshed out game mechanics as the fuck we had with MO1.

so all people that suggest that they should make thier own assets are just have reality loss and are shortminded what the hell do those people think sry. but are you stupid?

why wasting time, money, manpower on something that is already there. that is like if Elon musk would have ignored all nasa did before, why should he just starting from scratch. thats pointless.
How many successful games do you think on steam that utilize majority unreal marketplace bought assets? Probably right around none, and the games on steam utilizing heavy store bought assets are developed by 1 or 2 man teams and sell for around 5 bucks. I totally agree that the game play is important, but ART is what people see. Placeholders are fine in early development, but in production, that's when you drop in the real stuff. If weapon backs are placeholders that could be problematic when they use their own art because they might have to readjust everything.

Do you think if MO2 sells for 60usd on steam that people are willingly going to buy a game with the majority of it's assets bought off the unreal marketplace? Just that fact alone will discourage people. I had people interested in the game, but as soon as they heard they were using marketplace assets for weapons, armor, towns and who knows what else, they lost total interest. Wrote it off as a cheap asset flip.

Hell, someone found a final fantasy xiv world map asset in game.
 
Last edited:
How many successful games do you think on steam that utilize majority unreal marketplace bought assets? Probably right around none, and the games that do are developed by 1 or 2 man teams and sell for around 5 bucks. I totally agree that the game play is important, but ART is what people see. Placeholders are fine in early development, but in production, that's when you drop in the real stuff. If weapon backs are placeholders that could be problematic when they use their own art because they might have to readjust everything.

Do you think if MO2 sells for 60usd on steam that people are willingly going to buy a game with the majority of it's assets bought off the unreal marketplace? Just that fact alone will discourage people. I had people interested in the game, but as soon as they heard they were using marketplace assets for weapons, armor, towns and who knows what else, they lost total interest. Wrote it off as a cheap asset flip.

Hell, someone found a final fantasy xiv world map asset in game.
You're debating with someone who is extremely open about being a glorified graphics whore, the dude doesn't care as long as it looks pretty. You could paint a turd pink, then polish and he'd praise it, despite it still being a turd.

Had a similar debate with him months back, pointless tbh. I have my concerns of MO2 being a big asset flip title, but I'm just hoping they're heavily utilizing assets for pre-alpha and will add custom in-house assets to overtime. If MO2 doesn't retain that original art style of MO, just improved, it' ll lose a lot of it's charm.

Charging full price for a game heavily utilizing marketplace assets isn't a smart idea. Any developer with a brain knows this. Right now it doesn't matter too much, it's only a combat alpha, but lets hope we see MO2 be more than another failed asset flip on steam.
 
Thread starter #27
You're debating with someone who is extremely open about being a glorified graphics whore, the dude doesn't care as long as it looks pretty. You could paint a turd pink, then polish and he'd praise it, despite it still being a turd.

Had a similar debate with him months back, pointless tbh. I have my concerns of MO2 being a big asset flip title, but I'm just hoping they're heavily utilizing assets for pre-alpha and will add custom in-house assets to overtime. If MO2 doesn't retain that original art style of MO, just improved, it' ll lose a lot of it's charm.

Charging full price for a game heavily utilizing marketplace assets isn't a smart idea. Any developer with a brain knows this. Right now it doesn't matter too much, it's only a combat alpha, but lets hope we see MO2 be more than another failed asset flip on steam.
Absolutely. They don't need to reinvent the wheel, they already have the assets from MO and MO2 is more of a reboot than a sequel. Just use what you have from MO with better textures and overall engine support.
 
Anyone who says they don't care if they keep the premade stuff so long as it looks good needs to understand one thing.
Making new content down the line will be harder and, if not made correctly, will look REALLY out of place.
All I want to know is - What has starvault made artistically that is in the game already?
Knowing that will make it so we all know if they can keep up with the premade stuff in term of theme.
If they havent made anything yet, its going to be scary.
 
I can only speak for me personally so just my opinion.

An immersive game needs immersive graphic i for myself want high end graphics if it looks shit its mostly shit. its not with everygame the case but many it it.

If i look on steam and i see the next alpha crap and it looks awfull guess what. If it looks awfull it cant be good because the devs give a fuck about how it looks so they dont care.
Different is with art style if the art style difference than you cant compare like a stardew valley have on its own way good graphics.

but if i see the next rust/forest/ark/gloria victis alpha bullshit with bad graphics its mostly shit. thats like if you go into a bar and see a 38 year old women who does extreme climbing and a 22 year old women who does extreme climbing in free time. THan you want to fuck the 22year old women. Same with games. Second the 38 have more experience in Climbing maybe maybe not. you cant see that. its hard yes but you cant know it if the 38year old women have more experience so you judge on the first impression and first look. and if that is bad than you will never know if the 38 old women would have been a better choice.

same with powerpoint presentation if it looks like shit, than it must be shit. your expectations will lead you to maybe false facts. that you believe are facts if they dont. but that is like how our brain works.

Just browse at steam for 1 hour, and look maybe trailer and stuff of 30games i bet you will only try 1 or maybe 2 you judge on first impression. and thats a problem, but we cnat change it. If the Graphic quality look like shit than it must be shit thats why many game swith good concepts dotn get touched on steam.

Same for me i Played "the forest" many many hours. than I saw Green hell and if the grphics would be worse than the forests grpahics i would'nt even looked at it. because i know it would be less immersive and less fancy to explore and stuff if the fooliage would look like smarties.

I hope SV will keep the good graphics and assets and never downgrade any downgrade of texture polygones and whatever would break the good grpahic impression. now when people talk about MO2 its like yeah awesome grahics.
Well, to each their own i suppose, personally I am more worried about how fun and balanced the game is, for example I love Arx Fatalis, but will acknowledge it looks like shit compared to modern games, but here is the thing, it is one of the most immersive games I’ve ever played, same with system shock 2.

Graphics do help but I have always found mechanics and smart game world design to be more immersive that just plain graphics.
 
The funniest part of this debate is that if you didn't actually know the assets in question were store bought or whatever, you would have no problem with how the game looks, you'd be like, "Damn, MO2 is looking pretty good! Big improvement on the original!"

So the real issue comes down to some philosophical personal premise about how games should be designed and put together apparently, or like what company is listed on the artist's W2 or something. Assets are assets, they look good or they don't, they fit the design, or they don't.

You guys are coming across like these assholes that you invite to your house for a steak dinner and they complain that their steak isn't grass fed or some crap. Even tho my steak was delicious! I ain't inviting Terry over for dinner anymore.
 

ThaBadMan

Exalted Member
The funniest part of this debate is that if you didn't actually know the assets in question were store bought or whatever, you would have no problem with how the game looks, you'd be like, "Damn, MO2 is looking pretty good! Big improvement on the original!"

So the real issue comes down to some philosophical personal premise about how games should be designed and put together apparently, or like what company is listed on the artist's W2 or something. Assets are assets, they look good or they don't, they fit the design, or they don't.

You guys are coming across like these assholes that you invite to your house for a steak dinner and they complain that their steak isn't grass fed or some crap. Even tho my steak was delicious! I ain't inviting Terry over for dinner anymore.
I agree, also why dont these guys think of the hard work of the makers of said store bought assets ? Aint they allowed to make a living ?
 
Thread starter #32
I agree, also why dont these guys think of the hard work of the makers of said store bought assets ? Aint they allowed to make a living ?
Of course, and they do. Plenty of small time projects developed by hobbyists use those assets on production. They are not however selling those games for a premium NOR are they charging a subscription fee. I mean, if you can't tell the difference between a hobbyist team of 1 or 2 guys, and a company like starvault which supposedly has 20+ developers, I don't know what to tell ya. My expectations are generally higher with the 20+ man team in hopes they can at least push some custom artwork and not have to flip assets from a market place.
 
Thread starter #33
The funniest part of this debate is that if you didn't actually know the assets in question were store bought or whatever, you would have no problem with how the game looks, you'd be like, "Damn, MO2 is looking pretty good! Big improvement on the original!"

So the real issue comes down to some philosophical personal premise about how games should be designed and put together apparently, or like what company is listed on the artist's W2 or something. Assets are assets, they look good or they don't, they fit the design, or they don't.

You guys are coming across like these assholes that you invite to your house for a steak dinner and they complain that their steak isn't grass fed or some crap. Even tho my steak was delicious! I ain't inviting Terry over for dinner anymore.
The problem is it's not hard to look at the UE marketplace and do a simple cross comparison. Hell, when your "testers" are finding assets like the FFXIV world map on a table in one of our store bought houses, alarm bells should start go off. The developers want to reinvigorate the IP and improve on it while also releasing it on steam. Believe it or not those reviews do matter.

I might not be pissed if the steak wasn't grass fed, but I would definitely raise an eye brow if you didn't cook the steak yourself, and picked up some cooked steaks at a local truck stop dive and tried to convince me that it didn't matter.

Hell, you guys seem okay with store bought assets, makes me want to throw up a few asset flips on the steam store.
 
I might not be pissed if the steak wasn't grass fed, but I would definitely raise an eye brow if you didn't cook the steak yourself, and picked up some cooked steaks at a local truck stop dive and tried to convince me that it didn't matter.

Hell, you guys seem okay with store bought assets, makes me want to throw up a few asset flips on the steam store.
The map thing was pretty funny, and I'm glad it will be fixed asap.

But you continue to disrespect the work of the artists who are making the assets in question and trying to devalue them for some reason that I just don't understand, it's illogical really. If the steak is good, then the steak is good bro! Why would it matter to you and your raised eyebrow that I wasn't the chef if the steak was good? Or that I didn't employ the chef full time but instead bought the meals that I like from him? Marty down at the truck stock cooked up this pretty good meal, granted so far we've only tried the blooming onion, but it's not good enough for you...even tho you know it's tasty? This is such a weird argument to make, which to me is amusing because now I just want to shave your pretentious raised eyebrow and send you home hungry and instead invite some other people over for dinner who will enjoy the steak for what it is at face value. :p

But seriously, throw up as many "asset flips" that you can find...that's apples to oranges, or like steaks to salads...none of them are done by developers who are creating a sequel and update to a game they've been working on and running for over 10 years that has fairly deep and interconnected systems which are actually what makes the game a game. The game is the systems and mechanics, the lore, and the stories you can make or experiences that you can enjoy when you play it.

The way you talk and some of the suggestions you've been making makes me wonder how much you even know about what made MO1 or will hopefully make MO2 a good game, because it never was and never will be the window dressing. Let them build the house and all of its components that will keep it standing over time and be livable before you start complaining that you don't like the paint job...not because you don't like how it looks but because they bought the paint at your equivalent of Walmart or whatever.
 
Thread starter #35
The map thing was pretty funny, and I'm glad it will be fixed asap.

But you continue to disrespect the work of the artists who are making the assets in question and trying to devalue them for some reason that I just don't understand, it's illogical really. If the steak is good, then the steak is good bro! Why would it matter to you and your raised eyebrow that I wasn't the chef if the steak was good? Or that I didn't employ the chef full time but instead bought the meals that I like from him? Marty down at the truck stock cooked up this pretty good meal, granted so far we've only tried the blooming onion, but it's not good enough for you...even tho you know it's tasty? This is such a weird argument to make, which to me is amusing because now I just want to shave your pretentious raised eyebrow and send you home hungry and instead invite some other people over for dinner who will enjoy the steak for what it is at face value. :p

But seriously, throw up as many "asset flips" that you can find...that's apples to oranges, or like steaks to salads...none of them are done by developers who are creating a sequel and update to a game they've been working on and running for over 10 years that has fairly deep and interconnected systems which are actually what makes the game a game. The game is the systems and mechanics, the lore, and the stories you can make or experiences that you can enjoy when you play it.

The way you talk and some of the suggestions you've been making makes me wonder how much you even know about what made MO1 or will hopefully make MO2 a good game, because it never was and never will be the window dressing. Let them build the house and all of its components that will keep it standing over time and be livable before you start complaining that you don't like the paint job...not because you don't like how it looks but because they bought the paint at your equivalent of Walmart or whatever.
Whose devaluing and disrespect the work of the artists? There's a time, a place and use case for those assets (like I mentioned before, prototyping and feature building), but from I, as a developer, would not build my game on artwork majority bought off of a market place, and then turn around and sell it for a premium while also charging a month fee. MO had a distinctive art style, buying a bunch of assets on the store and hoping everything meshes together is not the way to go. Your first time customers aren't going to care about the lore, or the stories or any of that, and it only takes a few people looking into things before the accusations of an "asset flip" start flying around out the interwebz and steam reviews.

You have an extremely narrow view on this subject. It's not what the die hards think, because they already have your money and devotion. It's about building faith with customer and attracting a player base that can sustain your game. If I was a first time customer, and I heard the product you were selling me was full of marketplace assets (i.e. you didn't even take the time or pride to create your own assets, or at least edit the bought ones), and I had to pay a subscription, I would definitely find that a hard sale. Regardless, I've been playing MO for years now, so they've already got my money. I can still be objective and see why this would be an issue later down the line when the game is nearing release, especially since there has been a case of games being "accused" of being asset flips on steam and promptly removed, or disregarded by the public. Neither of which I would like to see happen to MO2.
 
Last edited:
I get it bro, you don't like that SV is charging for the client, you don't like that they're charging a monthly subscription, you don't like that they didn't produce every art asset in house, you don't like full loot, you think the game is too harsh, you pretty much don't like anything about MO or MO2 but you've played MO for years? ok bud, and because you consider yourself a "developer" you think you could do a much better job....ok bud. What game did you make? It must be great dude.
 
Thread starter #37
I get it bro, you don't like that SV is charging for the client, you don't like that they're charging a monthly subscription, you don't like that they didn't produce every art asset in house, you don't like full loot, you think the game is too harsh, you pretty much don't like anything about MO or MO2 but you've played MO for years? ok bud, and because you consider yourself a "developer" you think you could do a much better job....ok bud. What game did you make? It must be great dude.
Text book example of a straw man argument. I can see you don't really have any points to make, you're just pulling wild assumptions out of thin air. You think because I'm willing to discuss the subject of store bought assets that I "don't like it". The abundance of store bought assets are concerning for sure, but I wouldn't say I like or dislike it, I find it a subject of discussion. I'm not sure where you're getting the hating on the subscription (further from the truth, I think the subscription is great, it keeps the riff-raff out).

I'm also a fan of full loot games, been playing games like this since ultima online; the literal archetype that henrik based this game on. You're mistaking a wiliness to discuss aspects of the game while being objective to "disliking". An asinine way of thinking bordering on neanderthal. You can like things and still objectively discuss them; or is discussing things simply not allowed on a discussion forum these days? In fact I challenge you to find any where in my posts that I openly say I dislike these things.

I'm been registered here since 2009, bought into the alpha, and have been playing MO off and on for the last 10 years. I wouldn't of donated $150 dollars to participate in the MO2 alpha if I didn't enjoy MO, BUT I'm not so blinded by my love for the game that I can't discuss things that I can see other players having issues with. I like full loot, but I understand why people don't like it. I like subscriptions, but I can see why that would definitely turn people away (especially when combined with a b2p and subscription model in a full loot pvp game), I understand the logic behind store bought assets for use in development, but would definitely understand how this can give customers pause for concern if the game was released with the same unaltered store bought assets. I encourage you to engage in open, civil and intelligent discussion without pulling things out of context.
 
Last edited:

Speznat

Senior Member
@Muloch i think @Beware is just new like 1-2months old in MO1 and just making up shit he dont understand. maybe he started dotn know 2015 played for a month and than droped because losing pixels is hard for some people.

Hey beware just shut up. and big companies also using store board assets because its making sense so just gtfo.
Why are you still here if you hate everything and want a pink fluffy unicorn game were you cant lose shit tell us we are all interrested in hearing the bullshit.
 
Thread starter #39
@Muloch i think @Beware is just new like 1-2months old in MO1 and just making up shit he dont understand. maybe he started dotn know 2015 played for a month and than droped because losing pixels is hard for some people.

Hey beware just shut up. and big companies also using store board assets because its making sense so just gtfo.
Why are you still here if you hate everything and want a pink fluffy unicorn game were you cant lose shit tell us we are all interrested in hearing the bullshit.
Another critical thinker here... :D
 

ThaBadMan

Exalted Member
Thing is MO is meant to be for a niche audience, said niche audience dont want themeparkers massing into our beloved game and ruining it with their whining like happened to MO.

Once MO started caving to whiners who couldnt handle the hardcore aspect of MO, MO started bleeding its audience and surprise surprise said whiners left in droves either way. Thats modern "gamers" for you, they want everything they want but in the end will leave for the next FOTM cocaine game.

If MO2 is to become successful with thousands upon thousands of players it should earn it by being the best it can be within its own design by making the gameplay as good and fun as possible, having the game as stable, optimized, polished and smooth as it can with as little bugs and imbalances as possible and not through going away from its original vision like MO did to cave to those not designed to play it in the first place.

You had crafters and PvE players making PvP desisions in a PvP centric game and the devs somehow listened and made poos choices that chased off its long time backers who are still here while said bad players stuck for some time and then left probably never to be seen here again.

All the while that happened we got insanely bad excuses from the devs like "we need lower foot speed cause of prediction issues" then down the road they jacked the speed up on mounts that somehow did not follow said prediction issue rules as foot speed and that change alone killed off foot combat for competitive players who had to that point stuck through thick and thin for months with game breaking imbalances and bugs because we hoped it would eventually be fixed and get better.

We dont want history to repeat itself so this time around themeparkers and whiners and easymoders should not even get the chance to whisper poison to the devs ears.

This is the time for MO2 to become what MO failed to become. We dont need retarded suggestions we know will ruin the game AGAIN.
We might seem thick headed to some but what we been through has set a wound we dont want rifted and so we beat down idiotic shit as soon as it surface.
 
Top