14 replies to this topic

[Baxterstockman]

Keep up the good work. I am currently trying to beat the game on superhuman. It is soooo hard, but I almost have my psi labs up so its alL downhill for the aliens now. BUHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

[TarenGarond]

X-com is very good but the graphics is awful, so xenocide will be very good!

[Engy]

X-com is very good but the graphics is awful, so xenocide will be very good!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...The graphics for X-COM are not awful, they never were, and never will be. X-COM has the best graphics I have ever seen in a dos game and I beg anyone to prove me incorrect. Now yes its not up to the 3d standards of today however, it did good for what it ran on.

Now if you want awful graphics play Star Command. Ah the dieing days of Text Based gaming... and the beinging of 2d graphics... By the way that game is great to provided you can deal with terible graphics and no mouse and can take getting owned on mission 2 the 1st 20 or so times around.

[ATeX]

I don't remember a lot of DOS games from the good ol' times, but for example Duke Nukem 3D and Quake 1 are not a little bit, but far more advanced at graphical quality.

What you meant to say, is that X-COM has great lowres VGA graphics. I completely agree!

[TarenGarond]

It where good graphics in x-com when it was made but now its kinda awful!

[reist]

Isn't it a bit silly to compare today's graphics to graphics of old?
The difference in technology is insane. With the advance caused by the race between nVidia and ATi you can compare games' graphics only to other games of the same year, or at most two.
Now playability is something that can be compared. On that I agree, xcom is a really great game

[TarenGarond]

Isn't it a bit silly to compare today's graphics to graphics of old?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah!

[Mad]

...The graphics for X-COM are not awful, they never were, and never will be. X-COM has the best graphics I have ever seen in a dos game and I beg anyone to prove me incorrect. Now yes its not up to the 3d standards of today however, it did good for what it ran on.
[...]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I think UFO had the best isometric craphics, but no DOS game could ever beat Extreme Assault! Awesome 3D graphics! (For that time of course - although even today it doesn't look that bad. )

[...]
Now playability is something that can be compared. On that I agree, xcom is a really great game

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Definetly! I really think it is one of the best games I ever played!

Edited by Mad, 10 October 2005 - 06:01 AM.

[shevegen]

"Isn't it a bit silly to compare today's graphics to graphics of old?"

Probably, but to be honest, I found the graphics in X-Com: Apocalypse now already very good, and when I look at today's graphics like in WoW i am very disappointed with a LOT i see there.

Also Half-life 2 seemed to not be that great, and Doom 3 is perma dark... Ah well, i think they overdo things. Its not beauty by design but by flashing effects... analogy to web, css and flash - like how flash is used instead of CSS sometimes, though there are also GREAT designed flash websites (a japanese guy comes to my mind, of course i forgot the name....)

[kafros]

Well, I think UFO had the best isometric craphics, but no DOS game could ever beat Extreme Assault! Awesome 3D graphics! (For that time of course - although even today it doesn't look that bad. )

http://www.the-under...ame.php?id=4742

Most gamers(/lamers ) do a serious mistake: They don't hesitate to sacrifice gameplay and especially REPLAYABILITY in order to get better graphics

For example, if you tell me "RPG", I will respond Castle of Winds! At simple, windows 2D tile-based game, but probably the most interesting one IMO.

Another one: Mordor : The Depths of Dejenol

Is one is strange... A NetHack+Diablo combination Slash'em

And concerning replayability: I NEVER get bored while of Moo2 (Master of Orion II). It still rules, and it will forever and ever.

[Blood Angel]

Execution is the key. XCom is a great game, not the best graphics in the world, but insane gameplay, with some truly novel ideas superbly executed. Apoc is a good enough game, better graphics than XCom, fairly good gameplay, but I don't really like it all that much because there are so many good ideas poorly executed, making the game overly complicated.

[Snakeman]

You have a point about Apocalypse Blood Angel. The main problem I ever had with it was its interface, its got more bells and whistles on it than the first one did. So in that vein, I think keeping it simple in some areas was what was best for X-COM's replayability for me.

[fux0r666]

Some of the graphics in xcom are very good, but some are downright terrible. There are a lot of games with much more consistently good artistry. Wing Commander had excellent graphics all-round. Ultima VII also had very consistently good graphics. XCom is a mixed bag, and the average of those are inferior to the two games I just mentioned.