Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings

Irfaan

New member
Those screens actually look like the PSP because they are widescreen, unless the wii can do widescreen too?

I must say, I'm dissapointed, but at least it looks alright of PSP, but still.........
 

Indy's brother

New member
From this:
Emperor's Tomb (2003)
indianajones_040103_031_640w.jpg

To this:
Staff of Kings (2007)
indiana-jones-working-title-20060506090510772_640w.jpg

To this:
Staff of Kings (2009)
75251520090208_174740_2_big.jpg


It's hard to feel anything but let down. I'm especially pissed at myself because I know I'll buy it anyway.
 

The Tingler

New member
indyjones2131 said:
Thanks Tingler. I tried to ask the most loaded questions I could lol. You should post these on your site - you really have a nice collection of new info regarding this game over there.

Oh yes, most certainly!

And actually, I think that last screenie on the trolley could look pretty good in motion.

Where do those screenshots come from btw?
 

DocWhiskey

Well-known member
To me these screenshots look like they were taking from a video/trailer or something. They're too fuzzy and strange looking to be just a normal screenshot.

Both from ET on Xbox:

May 22, 2002
2h5pva0.jpg


Oct. 28, 2002
2uzyquo.jpg


Maybe somebody out there has a low res trailer or gameplay footage and is getting the screens that way. But there is a difference in screenshots and I hope we're getting the bad quality ones because if those are good quality...yeeesh.
 

Snakes

Member
Am I the only one who's exited by the new screens? Sure the graphics are awful, but it's a brand new Indy game with a new story, fistfights, chases and exotic locations. That's enough to get me exited.
Also,

ss_preview_7522620090206_100811_0_big.jpg.jpg


75251520090208_174741_6_big.jpg


Getting better? (a little?)
 

EvilDevo

Member
I think so. Still think the environments are the best part of the visuals in this game. But there is a definate (slight) improvement between those screens. I hope that all these screens are coming from a low res video source though... like Doc suggested.
 

DocLathropBrown

New member
I'd say the main reason they look so bad is because of an overdose of Bloom lighting. The graphics hold a good amount of detail, but the bloom makes it all fuzzy and ugly. The graphics certainly aren't great, but the bloom is making them look worse than they are.

But people who say these are equal to or worse than PSOne or N64 graphics are obviously not familiar with graphics for either of those systems. These graphics are far more detailed than what either of those systems could pull off. These graphics are more on-par with a first-generation PS2 game (at worst) than anything prior.
 

marshce

New member
Can I just add something?

Every fan forum related to Indiana Jones is passionately focusing on how terrible the graphics look in (at first) seven screen shots of the game. Many of the vocal "fans" are writing off this game instantly:

"I'm not going to buy this!" :mad:

"I'm not going to waste my money!" :mad:

"The PS1 looks better than this!" :mad:

And so on. Why write off the game before it's even been released? At this moment, we have no idea how the game is going to play, what the story is going to be like, or how fun it will be to play. So what if a few screen shots are terrible?

It might have great puzzles and a wonderful story and some fantastic Indy moments. Then again it might be a really boring, terrible game. The fact is there is no way to ascertain whether or not it's a good game at this stage.

Are the screen shots disappointing? Yes, they are, at least as they relate to quality. Does this mean the game is terrible? Well, if next gen graphics are all you care about, then, yes, I guess this game will be terrible for you. But, please, let's not write it off until we actually play the thing.


For the record, one of my favorite Indiana Jones games is Revenge of the Ancients. For me it really captures the spirit of Indiana Jones. Why did I mention that? Well, take a look at its graphics.
 

InexorableTash

Active member
Rhys135 said:
That shot of Indy on the tram is the best I've seen so far.

I'm so, so glad they're leaving that sequence in. I ride the cable cars every day in SF - we're a block away from the Powell-Mason line so it's the most convenient way to get downtown and to get my son to school. Even if the graphics will be... ahem... reduced quality (and remember: both Wii and PS2 have only 480 vertical pixels to play with; any screenshot you see that's taller than that is stretched and so of course it's going to look crappy) I'll be at least someone satisfied.

On a tangent... both the trailer and the press release lead me to suspect that the gameplay of Staff of Kings will differ radically from Infernal Machine and Emperor's Tomb. Both of those were very Tomb Raider-esque - run around for a while, find some stuff, run around for a while, flip some levers, run around for a while, climb a wall, run around for a while, fight some bad guys, rinse & repeat. The press release description of Staff of Kings makes it seem like it'll be more like a continuous series of action sequences, with little bridging between them that involves the player. The trailer certainly plays up this notion, although you certainly can't read that much into the trailer.
 

EvilDevo

Member
As long as these action sequences involve smart Wii motion gestures, like Prime 3 for example, and not WAGGLE WAGGLE WAGGLE!! With an A+B thrown in for good measure. And nothing is worse than cartoony on-screen prompts EVERY TIME you need to make a gesture.

Guh... lazy, untalented Wii developers are infuriating.

I'll agree... in 2009, and with the time this game has had in development, these screens should look better. Even on Wii. I'll give you naysayers that. But we can all tell what we're looking at. There is a good amount of background detail. Varied locations and enemy types.

If the gameplay is fun and unique and the story interesting, this could make for a great Indy game.

Oh yeah, and there is a co-op side story. There is FoA. There are 4 player mini games. But that's neither here nor there when you consider graphics, right?
 

agentsands77

New member
EvilDevo said:
I'll agree... in 2009, and with the time this game has had in development, these screens should look better.
Not just better. Far better. This is astonishingly poor.

EvilDevo said:
If the gameplay is fun and unique and the story interesting, this could make for a great Indy game.
Naturally. Gameplay is the most important thing, but still, the graphics are a major blow to this title. Furthermore, I'm a little skeptical that LucasArts will really knock this one out of the park on the gameplay front.
 

Grizzlor

Well-known member
marshce said:
Every fan forum related to Indiana Jones is passionately focusing on how terrible the graphics look in (at first) seven screen shots of the game. Many of the vocal "fans" are writing off this game instantly:

"I'm not going to buy this!" :mad:

"I'm not going to waste my money!" :mad:

"The PS1 looks better than this!" :mad:

And so on. Why write off the game before it's even been released? At this moment, we have no idea how the game is going to play, what the story is going to be like, or how fun it will be to play. So what if a few screen shots are terrible?
Very rarely do screen shots released this close (within a couple months) to release wind up looking all that different from the final version. If these are Wii screenshots, that is even more troubling. I don't know why the lighting is so messed up, or why everything is blurry? This is not over reaction on their part. I've followed game releases forever, and both the quality of the image and the quality of the graphics warrant reaction.
 

Nurhachi1991

Well-known member
God Indy looks so young in that picture where he has the idol do you think it takes place before the actual game begins like a prequel or something? He seriously looks like he is in his mid 20s
 

marshce

New member
Grizzlor said:
This is not over reaction on their part. I've followed game releases forever, and both the quality of the image and the quality of the graphics warrant reaction.

Many fan forum posters are working off this syllogism:

1. A good game has to have good graphics.
2. The Staff of Kings does not have good graphics.
3. Therefore, the Staff of Kings can not be a good game.

I completely agree the quality of the graphics are disappointing in those screenshots, but why condemn it on that alone? Condemn it after objectively playing it and then finding fault with its story, gameplay, AND graphics.

(By the way, I can see this thread of logic: Less than stellar graphics could be a sign that this was hastily put together, and that could lead to everything about the game being less than stellar. But my point is let's play it first and then decide. Why make your mind up that its going to be a bad day before ever walking out the door?)
 

Morning Bell

New member
marshce said:
Many fan forum posters are working off this syllogism:

1. A good game has to have good graphics.
2. The Staff of Kings does not have good graphics.
3. Therefore, the Staff of Kings can not be a good game.

I completely agree the quality of the graphics are disappointing in those screenshots, but why condemn it on that alone? Condemn it after objectively playing it and then finding fault with its story, gameplay, AND graphics.

(By the way, I can see this thread of logic: Less than stellar graphics could be a sign that this was hastily put together, and that could lead to everything about the game being less than stellar. But my point is let's play it first and then decide. Why make your mind up that its going to be a bad day before ever walking out the door?)

Well said. Yes, the graphics are very disappointing but as long as the rest of the game is good I'll be pleased.:)
 

EvilDevo

Member
marshce said:
Many fan forum posters are working off this syllogism:

1. A good game has to have good graphics.
2. The Staff of Kings does not have good graphics.
3. Therefore, the Staff of Kings can not be a good game.

I completely agree the quality of the graphics are disappointing in those screenshots, but why condemn it on that alone? Condemn it after objectively playing it and then finding fault with its story, gameplay, AND graphics.

(By the way, I can see this thread of logic: Less than stellar graphics could be a sign that this was hastily put together, and that could lead to everything about the game being less than stellar. But my point is let's play it first and then decide. Why make your mind up that its going to be a bad day before ever walking out the door?)

Sounds like a class during the first couple weeks of Logic100.

Graphics < stellar could very well = poor game. Or maybe all the money went into gameplay mechanics. Here's hoping!
 

marshce

New member
EvilDevo said:
Here's hoping!

You know, in two words, I think you made the point I was trying to make better than I ever could!

Ultimately, I love Indiana Jones and I really want a hell of a fun game. So, I'm choosing to be positive.

:D
 

EvilDevo

Member
Exactly. Even if this game is average at best, it's still Indiana Jones. Hearing that theme song playing while you're whipping Nazis as the man in the hat will automatically bring this game up 2 IGN score points in my opinion.
 
Top