MO2 Art Assets

Thread starter #1
There was some rumblings about MO/MO2 using a lot of store bought assets. I know these assets let developers quickly hack together a prototype and build systems so I'm not super worried. I'm just wondering that if there are store bought assets in MO2, how many are placeholders and how many will be permanent.
 
I was looking around and am curious what is purchased and what is made? I mean is it just props like the food and crates and stuff? Because I am pretty sure the buildings and people and armor and weapons are made by the devs.

I'm just wondering ‘cus if it’s just the small things like trees and plants and props or fences or something I would actually like them to outsource as it allows other things to be focused on by the relit I lay small sized team working on the game.
 

Malathion

Oghmium Supporter
It was mentioned somewhere ....
Quite a few assets are from AAA developers if it fit's MO. (but they still adjust to make it work performance wise and adjust a lot.)
All props manually made. Character, weapons and armour are SV. Characters etc are carefully handcrafted to fit lore and based on the old races. They spent a lot of time and effort on what they think really matters.
 

Darran

Well-Known Member
Kranesh, Fabernum, Meduli and Gaul Kor showed in pictures and combat alpha are all bought assets. They are not just bought house models that have been made into towns, but SV has used the demonstration setups made from the UE4 store assets and haven't changed anything about them. Many of the weapon models are also store bought.

While I have nothing against using the assets, I find it quite lazy to just use the demonstration setups ingame instead of creating something on your own. Using these also gives players a very false sense of progress and I'm myself a bit vary of what SV can actually accomplish in time as all the art assets seem to be just placed in the world.

Some links:

Meduli (Or at least the desert house with a horse in front of it shown in screenshots):
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/en-US/product/desert-town-01

Gaul Kor (showed in trailer and screenshots, they are using the "Demonstration scene makes use of distance fields")
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/en-US/product/ruins

Fabernum tower and Fabernum walls:
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/en-US/product/fantasy-castle-kit

Fabernum:
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/en-US/product/medieval-village

Kranesh:
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/en-US/product/fantasy-and-medieval-artchitecture-kit

Weapon models:
https://www.artstation.com/marketplace/p/LJ0/medieval-armory-ue4
 

Najwalaylah

Exalted Member
While I have nothing against using the assets, I find it quite lazy to just use the demonstration setups ingame instead of creating something on your own. Using these also gives players a very false sense of progress and I'm myself a bit vary of what SV can actually accomplish in time as all the art assets seem to be just placed in the world.
I had rather see Star Vault be diligent even if lazy and uncreative in some ways, as long as they are diligent and make the progress that will count.

 
Last edited:
Thread starter #7
I had rather see Star Vault be diligent even if lazy and uncreative in some ways, as long as they are diligent and make the progress that will count.
The devs can't afford to be lazy in this day and age. Some foilage here and there, maybe a few torches. Entire towns, armor and models being bought off of the ue store and flipped? That's where bad reputations are made and stick. From my interactions with the developers, they want MO2 to be fresh start, a reboot. If even the weapons are store bought that's worrisome. If they called it a pre-alpha, maybe that's passable. I don't want MO2 to get passed over as being another lazy asset flip, and neither should you.

Basically what I would want to know is how much of the store bought assets are here just for alpha/beta, and how much is here to stay.
 
Last edited:
I don't get the point, or maybe I just don't care idk, but to me it's like they're paying an artist who made assets regardless of whether or not it's from a setup storefront for that purpose or from someone on their payroll. I can tell you which one is a more efficient use of time and money tho, and they've went with that choice for those exact reasons. They look good, and from what I understand depending on what they're buying they can modify them to make them more unique. Another thing they could do is if they like the particular artist's work, I think they have a couple sets from the same guy at the moment, they could contract him directly to do alternate pieces specific for MO2, that's a win/win for both SV and an artist trying to make a living freelance style, and even that would come quicker and cheaper than it would be going in from scratch as well.

Personally, I don't think anyone should be worried about an "asset flip", MO2 is a sequel to a game that has been running for over 10 years, the graphics and assets weren't what got most people interested in MO, it certainly isn't what kept anyone playing after they were outdated as live strong wristbands, and while the much better looking MO2 will attract more people because it looks good, it won't keep anyone if the game itself going on behind all that isn't, and that's what this alpha is for, sorting out the basics of combat, they can sort out better more unique assets alongside building out the core features of the game.
 

Najwalaylah

Exalted Member
The devs can't afford to be lazy in this day and age. Some foilage here and there, maybe a few torches. Entire towns, armor and models being bought off of the ue store and flipped? That's where bad reputations are made and stick. From my interactions with the developers, they want MO2 to be fresh start, a reboot. If even the weapons are store bought that's worrisome. If they called it a pre-alpha, maybe that's passable. I don't want MO2 to get passed over as being another lazy asset flip, and neither should you.

Basically what I would want to know is how much of the store bought assets are here just for alpha/beta, and how much is here to stay.
I would hope, then, that they answer you if they feel like it, but I wouldn't advise them to waste their time doing so, either. You're going to take whatever they say (possibly even what they don't say) and spread complaints about what seems to some of us like a non-issue, aren't you?

I have the impression that a majority don't care. Not really a connoisseur of complaints about "lazy asset flips". Don't know if I've ever heard the phrase before. If you had examples to show of other games, actual games, comparable to this, re-using the same images I could be more impressed with the potential of a problem, but I don't think it's gonna be a problem. We'll see.

So far they seem to be spending their time on "just sequel things". If all else fails, I'll agree with Muloch.

MO2 is a sequel to a game that has been running for over 10 years, the graphics and assets weren't what got most people interested in MO, it certainly isn't what kept anyone playing after they were outdated as live strong wristbands, and while the much better looking MO2 will attract more people because it looks good, it won't keep anyone if the game itself going on behind all that isn't, and that's what this alpha is for, sorting out the basics of combat, they can sort out better more unique assets alongside building out the core features of the game.
 
I would hope, then, that they answer you if they feel like it, but I wouldn't advise them to waste their time doing so, either. You're going to take whatever they say (possibly even what they don't say) and spread complaints about what seems to some of us like a non-issue, aren't you?

I have the impression that a majority don't care. Not really a connoisseur of complaints about "lazy asset flips". Don't know if I've ever heard the phrase before. If you had examples to show of other games, actual games, comparable to this, re-using the same images I could be more impressed with the potential of a problem, but I don't think it's gonna be a problem. We'll see.

So far they seem to be spending their time on "just sequel things". If all else fails, I'll agree with Muloch.
I agree, most big companies outsource for assets and models, everyone from BioWare to Bethesda and all the rest, that’s normal, the only issue I see is possibly some one else purchasing the same assets and then publishing a game, but here’s the thing, even if they do so that’s only one asset(one city) and it would have to be intentional to make a world exactly like Myrland as there are multiple cities in the world in specific locations.

At the end of the day if it looks good, and saves them development time that they can use on other more important things than I have no issue with it tbh.
 
Thread starter #11
I would hope, then, that they answer you if they feel like it, but I wouldn't advise them to waste their time doing so, either. You're going to take whatever they say (possibly even what they don't say) and spread complaints about what seems to some of us like a non-issue, aren't you?

I have the impression that a majority don't care. Not really a connoisseur of complaints about "lazy asset flips". Don't know if I've ever heard the phrase before. If you had examples to show of other games, actual games, comparable to this, re-using the same images I could be more impressed with the potential of a problem, but I don't think it's gonna be a problem. We'll see.

So far they seem to be spending their time on "just sequel things". If all else fails, I'll agree with Muloch.
There's a lot of assumptions coming from you, when the reality is that steam has a history of "lazy asset flips" that have gotten bad press and promptly removed. If your impression is that the majority don't care, i.e. the small player base that has been playing the game off and on (more off) for the past 10 years, you're probably right. If you're talking about new customers who have never played the game and are being asked to buy in at a certain price AND pay a subscription, you're most likely dead wrong. Imagine if you want to mcdonalds, ordered a hamburger, but instead of getting a "new" hamburger, they just took parts of a pre-existing hamburger that was laying around for awhile, or worse yet, went to burger king bought a hamburger for $5 passed it off as mcdonalds and then charged you a premium. You might not care, but I can insure you people DO care.

I already bought in, so they have my money and I don't have any regrets because I understand if the community doesn't support developers that want to make games like these, they will never get made. Not by triple A studios. However I don't think we should be complacent and just accept whatever they give us like a horse who is happy to eat slop out of a trough. We should definitely hold the studio to higher standards. I'd rather MO2 be a shining beacon of what an indie company can do, and not get brigaded into mediocrity by negative steam reviews like other titles have and accused of being "a lazy asset flip".
 
Last edited:
Imagine if you want to mcdonalds, ordered a hamburger, but instead of getting a "new" hamburger, they just took parts of a pre-existing hamburger that was laying around for awhile, or worse yet, went to burger king bought a hamburger for $5 passed it off as mcdonalds and then charged you a premium. You might not care, but I can insure you people DO care.

However I don't think we should be complacent and just accept whatever they give us like a horse who is happy to eat slop out of a trough. We should definitely hold the studio to higher standards. I'd rather MO2 be a shining beacon of what an indie company can do, and not get brigaded into mediocrity by negative steam reviews like other titles have and accused of being "a lazy asset flip".
This is a terrible analogy bud, and is nothing at all like buying Assets from artists on a storefront designed for that purpose. It's actually kinda messed up you're comparing the artist who designed those assets work as being something you wouldn't want to eat at all in this weird food dream you made.
 
Thread starter #13
This is a terrible analogy bud, and is nothing at all like buying Assets from artists on a storefront designed for that purpose. It's actually kinda messed up you're comparing the artist who designed those assets work as being something you wouldn't want to eat at all in this weird food dream you made.
Most store bought is used for:
  1. Prototyping game features. The way assets are used right now in MO2 in alpha state is probably fine. If they go into a "live" service and the majority of their assets are store bought, there's likely going to be some negative feedback. You're looking at the analogy all wrong. I wasn't comparing the quality of the work, but the methodology behind it. Buying an asset on the UE store front, calling it something else, not changing it, and hoping no one will really put 1 and 1 together is going to piss people off. Exclusivity does matter, and it gives projects a a lot of authenticity. When studios outsource other studios for art, at the end of the day that's their art. No one else can use it.
  2. Middleware solutions. Something that's actually not apparent to the customer and will likely not care about.
  3. Small passion projects that might never see the light of day and if they do, usually go for budget pin prices. Steam is littered with them.
If we're talking about a few small props, I wouldn't really see a problem. We're talking about entire armor sets and towns tho. Like I said right now it's probably not an issue, a year or two from now if they're still using store bought assets, well, that's going to be a tough sell.

A good example is Ashes of Creation. Their first few snap shots of the game utilize store bought assets and they got a ton of shit for it.
 
Last edited:
If SV were to handcraft everything from scratch it would probably take them another 4-5 years at least before the closed combat alpha would even begin.

They would have to hire artists to draw concept art, then revise multiple times to get it looking just like their vision. Then they'd have to handcraft every blade of grass, dirt, tree, leaves, rock, cloud, sun, moon, water, building, horse, etc. Not to mention the terrain crafting, backend systems, AI, and so forth.

The whole point of the Epic Marketplace is to allow developers to considerably shorten that timeframe by providing assets that could be progressively customised over time as they see fit. This is so that they can put together a game first and worry about how it looks later. I know from years of playing MO1 that textures have been reworked and improved over time, so to say that SV is being lazy or complacent isn't exactly accurate, in my opinion.

What is most important is that the core systems, features and mechanics work properly and according to SV's (and ours, the players) exact specifications. How the game assets and textures look can be taken care of later through progressive patches, when everyone is enjoying how the game plays, as it should be.
 

Speznat

Senior Member
The devs can't afford to be lazy in this day and age. Some foilage here and there, maybe a few torches. Entire towns, armor and models being bought off of the ue store and flipped? That's where bad reputations are made and stick. From my interactions with the developers, they want MO2 to be fresh start, a reboot. If even the weapons are store bought that's worrisome. If they called it a pre-alpha, maybe that's passable. I don't want MO2 to get passed over as being another lazy asset flip, and neither should you.

Basically what I would want to know is how much of the store bought assets are here just for alpha/beta, and how much is here to stay.
it looks good so its good, doesnt matte rif its 1 to 1 copy noone gives a fuck. why should copied stuff be shit. its good they can focus on other stuff like combat and perforamnce in combat and stuff not wasting time on assets that looks worse than bought ones. so sv doing everythign right here.
 
Thread starter #17
If SV were to handcraft everything from scratch it would probably take them another 4-5 years at least before the closed combat alpha would even begin.

They would have to hire artists to draw concept art, then revise multiple times to get it looking just like their vision. Then they'd have to handcraft every blade of grass, dirt, tree, leaves, rock, cloud, sun, moon, water, building, horse, etc. Not to mention the terrain crafting, backend systems, AI, and so forth.
You don't think SV has in house concept artists? Maybe not an army of them, but I'm sure they have at least one. The whole point of establish an art pipe line with one of these companies in Indonesia, Malaysia or Singapore is that it's generally cheaper to hire them than hiring and paying someone(s) a local fair living rage.

it looks good so its good, doesnt matte rif its 1 to 1 copy noone gives a fuck. why should copied stuff be shit. its good they can focus on other stuff like combat and perforamnce in combat and stuff not wasting time on assets that looks worse than bought ones. so sv doing everythign right here.
For alpha/pre-alpha it doesn't matter. For a live service which is going to scrutinized by paying customers, it definitely matters. You think MO2 is a thing because they want just the old customers back? They're making changes so they can bring in new players as well. I don't want MO2 to be written off as an "asset flip".

That's why it's good to be open now about it. How much of the current assets are here to stay, and how much are just placeholders.
 

ThaBadMan

Exalted Member
Also to note is the fact they have their made assets from MO.

For alpha and beta testing its fine to exclusively make use of store bought assets, for the finished game I would hope to see the good old MO styled assets.
As several have said here it does free up loads of important time to be used in more important parts like combat.
 
You don't think SV has in house concept artists? Maybe not an army of them, but I'm sure they have at least one. The whole point of establish an art pipe line with one of these companies in Indonesia, Malaysia or Singapore is that it's generally cheaper to hire them than hiring and paying someone(s) a local fair living rage.
It's not about whether or not they have the artists or the money to hire them, it's the time it takes to build every asset from scratch.
 
Also to note is the fact they have their made assets from MO.

For alpha and beta testing its fine to exclusively make use of store bought assets, for the finished game I would hope to see the good old MO styled assets.
As several have said here it does free up loads of important time to be used in more important parts like combat.
Imo atleast the towns should have a more unique feeling but random outposts and tc can have w/e. It was cool in mo to have every town have its own personality and everyone had their own opinion which was the best town.

I haven’t played yet so i dont know if its like that or not.
 
Top