I dislike the excessive colour, bloom and such that thrive in many recent RPG's.
name 5 that aren't fable
Well it's kinda WoW-ish. Not much but it has some minor similarities like "fat" weapons and unrealistic coluors. Not that it looks bad but DD and BD have very dark and somehow mysterious graphics so I expected something like The Witcher (it would add to the athmosphere).
It's far from looking bad but I just expected something similar to prequels. Or is it maybe difficult to make 3D look like that?
I found that DD was a very "light" games (the green acres) only the dungeons were dark (sq thay should be). And one of my disappointments of BD was the absence of green acres. In the witcher the atmosphere fit, but if the sun was set right it was also a bright game (remember act 4 with all the green fields).
I follow Arik on this.
As seems to be common with the current generation, "realism" means the graphics look like I'm viewing them through a used coffee filter. What isn't brown is grey, and what isn't grey is too dark to make out.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/10/23/the-color-of-next-gen-gaming-is-brown/image I rather play the right game then the left game.
What it comes down to is: In what season is the game taking place. If it is summer you need to have heavy bloom, en vibrant colours. In winter or cloudy days it can be more greyish and dull.
Personally I like this approach. Start the game heavy with colours but as the game progresses and the enemy comes closer the colours dull out. (or a lot of sun in the beginning of the game, and the enemy moves more greyish colours -> burning houses cloud the sun?). That way you have the feeling that the enemy is really going to town on the villages.
realism has a gray/brown bias!
