It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
Master of MagicHow to improve graphics?(29 posts)(29 posts)
(29 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 30, 2010
Hmmmmm -- usually I find people who complain how 90s games looked to generally be reasonbly young.
Maybe it's that I can clearly remember the C64 and early Amiga days, but I just can't see why low res has to mean bad gfx. Whilst I find Civ I to be clearer, I still find MoM is pretty clear and reasonably good gfx. Then again, I remember the days of the early Sid Meier wargames (Conflict in Vietnam, Decision in the Desert) where the difference between light and heavy tanks are one solitary pixel. Now that's hardly usable! But usability does differ from person to person, so I can appreciate when people have problems telling units apart (I don't with MoM -- though I try not to use any shaders since I love the blockyness of old; despite our resolutions being bigger, it will look the same as if you had a similar sized monitor back in the old days -- and I find shaders can blur unit distinctions quite a bit).
When I see people complaining that games like XCom makes their eyes bleed, I just really don't get it. To me, XCom has really good graphics, being both usable and good looking. The shading works well, and there's a lot of detail in the small space. I just don't get the hate... (especially since pixel art is meant to be currently in as well!)
Posted May 05, 2010
I have fullscreen set to true, resolution at 1680x1050, aspect set to false, and scaler set to normal3x. Full screen and lovely. :)
Posted June 25, 2010
avatar
deanolium: Hmmmmm -- usually I find people who complain how 90s games looked to generally be reasonbly young.
Maybe it's that I can clearly remember the C64 and early Amiga days, but I just can't see why low res has to mean bad gfx. Whilst I find Civ I to be clearer, I still find MoM is pretty clear and reasonably good gfx. Then again, I remember the days of the early Sid Meier wargames (Conflict in Vietnam, Decision in the Desert) where the difference between light and heavy tanks are one solitary pixel. Now that's hardly usable! But usability does differ from person to person, so I can appreciate when people have problems telling units apart (I don't with MoM -- though I try not to use any shaders since I love the blockyness of old; despite our resolutions being bigger, it will look the same as if you had a similar sized monitor back in the old days -- and I find shaders can blur unit distinctions quite a bit).
When I see people complaining that games like XCom makes their eyes bleed, I just really don't get it. To me, XCom has really good graphics, being both usable and good looking. The shading works well, and there's a lot of detail in the small space. I just don't get the hate... (especially since pixel art is meant to be currently in as well!)

I'm with you on this one ,good graphics are about functionality and MoM for the most part, has very functional graphics. I can understand people not liking the graphics but I think that it may be more a matter of taste ie some of my favorite comic artists are not very realistic in style like Sergio Argones. I also kind of enjoy it when I can use my imagination to fill in what can't be seen in a games graphics.
Also just for the record I play on a wide screen TV (36" I believe).
Post edited June 25, 2010 by inferator
Posted July 17, 2010
avatar
chautemoc: I have fullscreen set to true, resolution at 1680x1050, aspect set to false, and scaler set to normal3x. Full screen and lovely. :)
normal3x is the way to go.
Chunky is the way this stuff was designed. I think it's charming.
Posted July 31, 2010
Given what GOG is all about I am surprised to see a thread about clunky graphics and such!
By the way, Darklands graphics have a beauty to them that come alive as you get immersed!
Here's an idea: Get yourself VICE and download some C64 D64 files and spend a week playing Commodore 64 8 bit games, and then either fall in love with these 8 bit games and keep playing, or go back to the GOG games you have and say 'wow! Look at those graphics!' :)
Post edited July 31, 2010 by UK_John
Posted September 24, 2010
avatar
JudasIscariot: Pffft. You think MoM's graphics are bad, wait until you meet Darklands...awesome game but the graphics...
avatar
deanolium: See, I never get why people think just because the resolution is low, that automatically makes the graphics terrible. If you really think games like MoM, Civ 1, MoO, Jagged Alliance, etc have bad graphics, then you haven't seen games with really bad graphics.
When these games came out, they were actually known to have pretty good graphics, especially for the genre. Sure, they're not hand-drawn, painted and scanned, but they're still well done.
You young 'uns...
Ahhh...You make me laugh! Yup...I'm an old gaming guy aswell. MoM graphics never bothered me! I remember it was always a "bitch" to get the game running in DOS back in the day. Something about EMS? Great epic game. Still hold it's own today!
Posted September 27, 2010
No matter what I try with the settings, the game always shrinks back to what I think looks like about 800x600. If I turn "windowresolution" up, I will see the window pop-up at the size I want, then resize itself back to 800x600.

I can get it running in fullscreen, but I don't want that, just a larger window. Anyone know what is up? Here is my config settings:

fullscreen=false
fulldouble=false
fullresolution=original
windowresolution=1280x960
output=overlay
autolock=true
sensitivity=100
waitonerror=true
priority=higher,normal
mapperfile=mapper.txt
usescancodes=true


frameskip=0
aspect=false
scaler=hq3x
Post edited September 27, 2010 by ofm
Posted September 28, 2010
@ofm

Try changing output=overlay to output=ddraw, and scaler to super2xsai

Also you can try a lower resolution.
Posted October 05, 2010
output=openglnb
aspect=true

This should make it stretch just fine to 1280x960. However IIRC openglnb won't handle the scalers so it will look authentically bad :)

I forget, does output=direct3d work in vanilla DOSBox 0.74?
Post edited October 05, 2010 by kalirion
Posted October 09, 2010
hq3x works out really nicely (I would rate them from best to least as hq3x > super2xsai > hq2x > all others). I wish there was an actual graphics mod (redone graphics in higher resolution) but I imagine that would be a problem without increasing the engine's internal resolution first in order to accommodate said graphics.

Anyways, you don't have to be young to complain about 1990s graphics, you just have to have become used to 2010 graphics.
Post edited October 09, 2010 by taltamir
Posted December 05, 2015
Is it possible a HD version?
Posted December 06, 2015
avatar
vieira171: Is it possible a HD version?
It is unlikely, at this point.
Posted December 06, 2015
An HD version with the same graphics would look kind of strange. If it would just "zoom out" and show more of the map I think it would lose some of the intimacy of the setting. Your cities and units would be tiny.
Posted December 14, 2015
It's a DOS era game, the best you could expect from a DOS game was that the graphics be "usable", in that you could tell units apart, who owns them, and their relative positions clearly. "Pretty" is simply not an option with DOS level tech. MoM's grainy graphics do a pretty good job of this (though I really wish there was more visual distinction between Dark Elf Spearmen and Warlocks, and some of the Klackon units are tough to tell apart also.)

I do wish someone would do with Master of Magic what Firaxis did with Colonization: keep essentially the same gameplay while updating it to a modern graphics engine as in Civilization 4: Colonization. Master of Magic with Civ 4 graphics would be nice, though putting in the multifigure units might be tricky.
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
Master of MagicHow to improve graphics?(29 posts)(29 posts)
(29 posts)