What was CoH's style?

[Lightslinger]

DCUO - "Jim Lee style", probably because he was a senior producer/director at DCUO  . I personally love DCUO's style and think they did a pretty good job. Not nearly as flexible as CoH and the game definitely has other problems, but they did a good job with style. Of course this is hampered by the worst character creator in the genre. From the UI to the limited available options...awful.

CO - "Cartoony comic book style", probably one of the most common complaints I've heard about the game. I can see the direction they wanted to go with it, a cell shaded comic book come to life, but in the end it all looks...plasticy and goofy.

CoH - I'm having trouble defining this, "Realistic" fits in some ways but not others. Right now I'm saying "Alex Ross Style". CoH definitely leans toward the realistic as opposed to the stylized, like the works of Alex Ross.

CoH's character builder was definitely showing its age toward the end, the lack of animated body parts, static faces, low res pieces, fingers, the feet (really those feet were terrible) all were detriments, but overall the style our developers had landed on was a really, really great part of our game.

[Arachnion]

CoH's character builder was definitely showing its age toward the end, the lack of animated body parts, static faces, low res pieces, fingers, the feet (really those feet were terrible) all were detriments, but overall the style our developers had landed on was a really, really great part of our game.

I disagree. If we're gonna discuss style, the builder is a huge part of the game.

The character creator is timeless, as are all the costume parts.

CoH had the best customization I've ever seen, for any MMO, or game.

Animated body parts? Not a huge issue, and might've caused lag if tons of people used them.

Static faces? Part of the charm. They serve their purpose, IMO.

Low res pieces? Graphics aren't a big point of what makes a game, you know, despite the state of the gaming industry atm.

Fingers? I believe if the game had stayed alive, we would've eventually got them. Wasn't a big issue for me personally.

Feet... I assume you mean bare feet. All of my characters wore shoes,

I blame the lack of actual fingers, static faces, and "showing age" on the actual engine itself, as it was originally created in 2004, for release.

[Lightslinger]

I disagree. If we're gonna discuss style, the builder is a huge part of the game.

The character creator is timeless, as are all the costume parts.

CoH had the best customization I've ever seen, for any MMO, or game.

Animated body parts? Not a huge issue, and might've caused lag if tons of people used them.

Static faces? Part of the charm. They serve their purpose, IMO.

Low res pieces? Graphics aren't a big point of what makes a game, you know, despite the state of the gaming industry atm.

Fingers? I believe if the game had stayed alive, we would've eventually got them. Wasn't a big issue for me personally.

Feet... I assume you mean bare feet. All of my characters wore shoes,

I blame the lack of actual fingers, static faces, and "showing age" on the actual engine itself, as it was originally created in 2004, for release.

I'm not clear on what we disagreed on there at the beginning? I did ding DCUO because the builder is awful. Seriously, that alien UI is one of the worst interfaces ever designed PERIOD.

And I do agree that all the things I cited as "bad" were products of being a circa 2004 game. What was fine in 04 is a long way off in 2013.

And by feet I mean...I dunno, even in some shoes something about below the knees was off on CoH's models. It actually caused me to use the chunkier style feet options way too much to hide it (seems like every other alt of mine used Valkyrie or Olympian boots).

[dwturducken]

I kind of liked the idea behind the UI, but the implementation is buggy, laggy, and clumsy. I have a decently kick-@$$ machine, and it has trouble with the refresh and transition on that. Also true in high traffic areas of the game, but not nearly as bad as in some other games.

[JaguarX]

Intersting question. I always thought cox style as a video game style. Not really realistic but nothing to me stood out. Co look like some comic book, recent nba 2k series looked realistic, WoW like something out of a fantasy magazine, B&S look like some japanese anime. Cox was just cox. Nothing special about the graphics but graphics are only a very small part of enjoyment of game to me.

[Captain Electric]

Noble Savage was a big Alex Ross fan.

But more on point, CoH's style can be referred to as cinematic realism. I believe any of the designers would back me up on this. Anyone's welcome to prove me wrong.

They pushed this design aesthetic not only graphically but thematically. Their motion capture was superb, especially in later years. Sword play, gun play, fighting, sports and dance emotes and so on. Even the walking emote wasn't like you were a video game character, it had umph to it. It was made to make your character look cool, like in the movies. And in their story arcs as the years went on, the material became modern-era-dramatic but laced with well-paced and well-timed humor. A tragic Champions Online or DC Universe story won't bring tears to your eyes, but some people who hated Statesman admitted to tearing up during his death scene. You weren't a meta human in a comic book. You were a meta human in a movie-like and comic book-like universe. There were some costumes slated for Issue 24 that were very much inspired by recent Marvel Studios movies.

They pushed cinematic realism as hard as they could on the old engine--and they did well at it. The game easily had several more years left it in. And they didn't want to stop there.

[Lightslinger]

Does it make me vain that graphics are very important to me? Sure, I'm not saying everything has to be top notch, not all games can get that (especially lower budget titles), but a good sense of style is very important to me.

CO's graphics definitely hold me back in game, there are a lot of times I find myself wishing my avatar could look better.

Video games are a visual medium and for me graphics rank highly. Of course gameplay is extremely important as well. Basically without both good graphics and gameplay, for me, a game suffers.

[Electric-Knight]

I don't know that I'd go with "Alex Ross style", but I don't know if I can come up with one either...
I've always just felt it was generic style... but I mean that in the best way possible.
It had a generic video game graphic style that really didn't taint your perception or visual intake of the game.
I guess its style was "no style" style... which is perfect for something that wants you to customize it and make it your own.
I've never been a fan of Alex Ross... maybe because I don't necessarily find it to look realistic... it just looks more like slightly realistic paintings - as opposed to realistic reality, if you catch my drift.

No style... the perfect style for unimpeded imagination and immersion.

[JaguarX]

Does it make me vain that graphics are very important to me? Sure, I'm not saying everything has to be top notch, not all games can get that (especially lower budget titles), but a good sense of style is very important to me.

CO's graphics definitely hold me back in game, there are a lot of times I find myself wishing my avatar could look better.

Video games are a visual medium and for me graphics rank highly. Of course gameplay is extremely important as well. Basically without both good graphics and gameplay, for me, a game suffers.

No not vain. Its was is important to you. You are not the only one or else the console market wouldn't be flooded right now with games that loik awesome graphics but gameplay thrown in there ad after thought but sell like hotcakes. Graphics is most important to many and nothing wrong with in my eyes. Different people different things of importance. Its only natural. We are only human not assembly.line made with the exact same brain programming....yet.

[Captain Electric]

generic style... No style...

You know you're one of my favorite super heroes pal, but on this topic we disagree like night and day. Being out there and playing with a few other MMOs has really brought it home for me. The City of Heroes universe felt more believable--and this was no accident. It wasn't just coincidentally easier for many of us to remain immersed in that universe for years on end, it wasn't just some quirk. From the tiny details on buildings or litter in back alleys, to extreme care and attention in motion capture which I have only seen in big budget single player games, Paragon Studios weren't making a video game, they were making a virtual multiverse. They wanted to make it feel alive. All of that was by design.

They were that good.

[Electric-Knight]

You know you're one of my favorite super heroes pal, but on this topic we disagree like night and day. Being out there and playing with a few other MMOs has really brought it home for me. The City of Heroes universe felt more believable. It wasn't just coincidentally easier for many of us to remain immersed in that universe for years on end, it wasn't just some quirk. From the tiny details on buildings or litter in back alleys, to extreme care and attention in motion capture which I have only seen in big budget single player games, Paragon Studios weren't making a video game, they were making a virtual multiverse. They tried to make it feel alive. All of that was by design.

They were that good.

Oh, my friend, I think you're misunderstanding my use of those descriptions. And I can understand that, even though I attempted to supply explanations and disclaimers about it.
In this case, "no style" style is possibly one of the most difficult and skillful results of craftsmanship.
Most obvious "styles" are often covering up for their lack of quality, craftsmanship or integrity (certainly NOT always!! I am also an avid fan of extreme artistic style, so that is not a general blanket shot against extreme style in entirety). For my video games, however, I do prefer less extreme styles... at least for things that I am intended to become immersed within as a somewhat realistic participant.

For "no style" I was coming more from the ways of no-mindedness... which is not the lack of intelligence, but is actually a philosophical state of mindedness that leaves the mind free and agile, to observe, recognize, accept what truly is occurring in the stream of the present.
Something I learned from Bruce Lee's writings and something from ancient teachings.

So, again, when I say "'no style' style", I mean it as a style that does not impede the visual delivery.

While I was typing my response, you referred to it as cinematic realism... And I can understand that. We're seeing the same thing, but explaining it in very different ways.

[Captain Electric]

Ah!!!

"In this case, "no style" style is possibly one of the most difficult and skillful results of craftsmanship."

For some reason when I read that, everything else you'd been trying to say clicked. And while I disagree that stylizing is itself a cover-up in most big budget titles (for which talented artists were sought and hired), I am wholeheartedly with you in your non-preference for it. Yes, I recognize their talent, blah blah blah. But, no thanks. Instead, give me something which must slip over my own form before it can become truly defined (I know that sounds vague--more below).

This is why I prefer game designers who speak in terms of art direction and not those who speak of stylism. And there is a non-subtle difference. If you want to meet some artists who will talk about stylism, see Blade & Soul. The only use for realism in a stylist's world is "knowing the rules before you break them". Art direction, on the other hand, is the way in which you present a world that seems as if it must have already existed.

Ron Moore spoke of this in filming CGI scenes in the Battlestar Galactica remake: most of the space shots were filmed from camera angles which would have seemed plausible--as if a real camera rested on the wing of one of the ships. The viewers were never the wiser, but somehow the camera work in those scenes seemed so darned realistic. Well, now you know.

In Marvel's movies, heroes like Captain America never come rushing down at the camera with an over-sized mouth and large, baby-like eyes, wielding an over-sized sword as the background whooshes past him faster than the foreground. Those make for great stylistic dramatic impact in other places. But instead, superb choreography is used to illustrate seriously cool fight scenes. Well okay, you can take that same choreography and put a midget like Yoda in there--now it's funny. This explains how our heroes completed the formula of art direction in City of Heroes--your "Non-style."

CoH's designers were quite open about their direction and influences when they posted on the forums though. It was one of City of Heroes designers who used the term cinematic realism, not me. I don't want to say who, for fear of misattributing.

[Electric-Knight]

I agree and also took part in some of those discussions where cinematic realism was discussed and brought up by David (I think).
Also, think of my remark about styles being clutches to cover up shortcomings (which, again, I said is far from an absolute rule) as coming from an artist that is sick and tired of a lot of the lousy work and low-integrity people calling themselves artists out there... Haha.
Van Gogh and Monet wouldn't be among my absolute favorites if I actually had anything against artistic style. 
Nor would I love Terry Gilliam and some of Tim Burton's greater work, to name a small sample, hehe.

Really, a lot of times, it's not the artists, but the graphical capabilities that hinder realism and call for a larger dose of artistic style to cover up the shortcomings.

Anyway...Yeah, when I say CoH had this generic, no-style to it... it's because I love that and appreciate the art design and work that actually went into creating that.
I think I'll stop typing now... 

[Kederren]

To answer the thread title...

<.<

>.>


um, er

...




Gangnam?




Mahna Mahna

[doc7924]

To me it would be a matter perspective.

COH was first and I got used to it for 8 years.

Then going over to Champions after COH closed  , the cartoonish look threw me off a bit, but once I found you could get rid of the outlines, it looked less like a cartoon.

But if I had played CO first, and got used to it, then went to COH, I might have thought why doesn't COH look more like CO.

Though I have to say I like DCUO. More like COH then CO as far as graphics.

[JaguarX]

To me it would be a matter perspective.

COH was first and I got used to it for 8 years.

Then going over to Champions after COH closed  , the cartoonish look threw me off a bit, but once I found you could get rid of the outlines, it looked less like a cartoon.

But if I had played CO first, and got used to it, then went to COH, I might have thought why doesn't COH look more like CO.

Though I have to say I like DCUO. More like COH then CO as far as graphics.

Basically

[GuyPerfect]

Their motion capture was superb, especially in later years.

Although it was clear that BAB had never once witnessed anyone juggling.

[SeaLily]

At launch, CoH was definitely a 'realistic' looking game.  Not top of the line in terms of graphics, but it looks about as good as you'd expect realistic games to look back in 2004 or so.  The 'cinematic realism' thing became something of a necessity as the game evolved over time- they couldn't really up the level of graphics, so stylizing things to fit in well with the existing art was the best way to go.  I think they handled it well.

I'd say that by the end of the game's lifepsan, we'd begun to trend towards a much more stylized look, with some sharper lines and contours and smoother surfaces to things overall.  Costume pieces and power animations became much less 'gritty' and much more 'clean', which makes sense- making things look dirty and grimy is easy to do when you're low-res, but crisp and clean you need some higher resolution textures and higher poly costume pieces to manage.

CoH's style is sort of a gradient over time, shifting from the realistic of 2004 to the stylized realism of 2012.

[doc7924]

When I first played COH in 2004 I had the bare minimum computing power and graphics card. 64 MB on board video card. Game looked ok but sort of flat.

Then a year or so later I finally started upgrading and got a decent Nvidia card with 256 MB and upgraded my PC ram to 1 GB. (Of course by 2011 and 2012 those specs would be a joke to run the game)

I couldn't believe the difference. Everything looked 1,000 times better, it was like a brand new game.

I had that same PC from 2004 until 2011 when it finally died. Got a new top of the line PC with a 1GB video card and had 8GB of PC ram and the game again took on a whole new look. Now I could use most of the options turned up nice and high and the city looked amazing and best of all - zero lag no matter what I did.

[MaidMercury]

It was like playing characters in a 3-D program with resolution limited to medium.
Something on the order of Blender or Anim8or.

Later we did get much improved shadows and special effects.
I think CoH wanted their game to be played over a wide range of computers. Limiting it to players with Hi-end systems would cut out a lot of potential subscribers.

I was very happy with their result.
Ultimate graphics and a terrible game do not a fun product make.
Richard Garrriot can attest to that.