i think the only thing everyone can generally agree, is that good or bad. Reforgeds art style is just all over the place, consistency is just not to be found here.
they follow regular wc3 art in some place
they copy wow art in other
they make some sh!t up in the next place.
its just bits and pieces of things that everyone likes or has an issue with across the board.
i for one can’t have a clear mind looking at Reforged. it seems like a giant sticker of IDK WHAT OPINION I SHOULD HAVE ON THIS. is on the forehead of the game.
i think the only thing everyone can generally agree, is that good or bad. Reforgeds art style is just all over the place, consistency is just not to be found here.
Completely agree with you. There is no art direction and this leads to some sort of visual discomfort(for a lack of better term). For a spectator game this is not looking good.
3 Likes
For me its when my eye transitions from units and buildings to the terrain. Visually its not working. More shadows and transition effects might be needed?
2 Likes
It’s definitely needs more shadows and reflections. Otherwise, it’s unacceptable.
4 Likes
Hey.
Something is wrong imo. Just take a look at official screen:
Old ( Blizzcon 2018)
https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/template_resource/1DPTZ5STFVTX1541005868681.jpg
New
https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/gallery/JYDNG40FGFAE1569433074064.jpg
Look at footman shield. At “old” it look just WoW absolutly new model 100% REFORGED. New is more like 2002 Warcraft on new engine.
I want “Reforged” not old game on a new engine.
If I want to play Warcraft 3, I can always play my loved Warcraft.
Warcraft does not need a new engine.
“Old” Warcraft is 17 years old and still looks like magic for me.
I want new units models i want feel magic again just like when i run Warcraft 3 for the first time 17 years ago. For now ( i play on Beta) i dont feel it.
Reforged > Old Warcraft > Warcraft on new engine.
5 Likes
I think many people complained about footman shields on the forums etc and they changed it.
1 Like
That is because to compensate they boosted all the lights to 1.2 intensity. Due to the traditional lighting model used values above 1.0 get clipped to 1.0 and result in a direct, unshaded projection of the texture against the screen. The shading effect one gets is from the directional lighting causing attenuations. Since the attenuation maths is incorrect the shading is exaggerated, creating extreme contrast where it should be subtle. As long as one keeps most of the image near 1.0 brightness everything looks reasonable.
The washed out problem only occurs if one wants to use darkness as part of your lighting. An example would be a horror map where you want minimal lighting for atmosphere. If one places a dim light of 0.05 then the incorrect colour logic causes all colour values to be well below what they should be with such a bright light resulting in a very dark/mostly black image even where the light is strongest. Since this is not practical to play with one has to use a brighter light, e.g. 0.25, except now the light logic is not working correctly causing everything in a big area to attenuate too quickly in the sRGB range. The result is that a lot of greys start to show.
For reference the 0.05 light with correct logic could illuminate objects near by it up to sRGB 0.25. The main difference would come from how the light is attenuated, resulting in generally a much more consistently bright scene without the greys.
Let us not forget the colour shift the incorrect lighting logic causes as the perceived RGB mix of a texel changes.
2 Likes
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
To add to that. the colors in the culling demo was unsaturated because it was using a different tileset and it was raining. If you look at the original campaign the colors are just as bleak.
@Adunai
1 Like
They need to add the metal back
3 Likes
I think theyre just outright being lazy. The rest of us are saying that everything shown last year is GREAT and GORGEOUS, and they are specifically deaf about that part?
1 Like
Apparently there’s a good number of people who disagree, enough to sway Blizzard.
You do realize they don’t only pay attention to these forums for feedback, right?
Excuse me, but just what kind of person prefer downgraded graphics? That’s literally the main selling point of reforged. If you don’t like the graphics, disable them on the settings. It’s as simple as that. This is just comical at this point.
“STOP GIVING US GOOD GRAPHICS BLIZZARD!!!”
1 Like
“Downgrade” is a bit subjective in this case.
It’s an objective upgrade because the models and textures are HD and using designs closer to the concept art.
But to you it’s a downgrade because the colors are just as saturated as in Classic Warcraft 3 and not muted and washed out like in StarCraft 2 or the demo last year.
But to you it’s a downgrade because the colors are just as saturated as in Classic Warcraft 3 and not muted and washed out like in StarCraft 2 or the demo last year
Wrong. I’m pissed because we are missing quality bloom, shader and shadow from the demo. For the very last time, nothing to do with the color saturation. Jesus Christ.
1 Like
the main reason the visuals of these two video are so dramatically different is that Stratholme is dense with Smoke/Smog to represent the pestilence and the massive amount of burning buildings
Not to mention the COLORS WERE BRIGHT. Look at the trailer for Reforged.
Thank you. The original WC3 mission was just as colorless and dull as the demo shown in 2018.