New WoT graphics in 2017


thanks to EiKarrRamba who’s at Tankfest, he sent me a link to a better version than the RUs on the the new WoT graphics that await us in 2017:


Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
New WoT graphics in 2017

51 thoughts on “New WoT graphics in 2017

  1. Afrika_Korps says:

    Deja vu

    This year’s end looks same as 2013 when WG released the Havoc video promissing things to implement in 2014 which have still not been implemented.

    Lets see, this year they have promised premium tank rebalance, tier 10 LTs, rework of artillery, MM, improved graphics, rework of the existing tank lines

    Knowing WG as well as I do they wont be able to put in place half of what they have promised.

  2. Plot twist: “this is impossible to do on PC because too many players cant afford these graphics, but because they can afford an XBOX One and XBLG subscriptions we’ll add it on console instead :D”

    Also don’t tell me they made us wait 2 years with Havok (and 2 years more where they still experimented before announcing it) just to make fancy fences destruction… Where are the big buildings collapsing and tank parts falling apart ??? Is that what you are capable of doing with 4 years of work and 2016 computers ??? WG Seriously you put more efforts into spamming premium tanks than into making the game better…

  3. platoon says:

    still worse graphics than other games made in 2011.. seriously people, go watch some gameplay from “Men of War: Assault Squad” and see how is physics supposed to be.. its not impossible thing to do..

    1. The problem is how physics are calculated… Lots of PCs are not good enough to calculate this stuff fast enough. And to calculate it on the server would be far to much too. So it’s not an easy task in a 15 vs 15 game with an older engine.

      1. they said they completely rewrited the engine so technicaly this should not really be a problem anymore. There are games out there capable of running high-end graphics and physics and there’s even people playing these games !

      2. VladCelTroll says:

        Technically, Havok would require servers double tge size the current ones are. Knowing WG and their “cheap as fuck” policy, such a server will only be made a reality in the far future.
        Personally, I’d love to see Havok being introduced the next year. But, seriously, it’s been 4 years and we haven’t heard anything about it for a long while. This leads me into thinking that they scrapped it. Graphics? Probably. I’d love to see a graphical improvement over the shit we’ve currently got. Even if it means shedding a bit of that healthy 60 fps.

        Fingers crossed. Let’s hope WG won’t screw it up (like they did this year with Rubicon). But, then again, something tells me that they made, yet again, many hollow promises. They should really invest more money into developement. Besides, I think their average wage/employee is low, hence another thing that might hinder the developement. But this is economics and this, here, is a blog about a tank game 🙂

    1. technicaly if they just replace all the old foliages with the new HD ones it shouldnt take too long. Just a texture upgrade mostly I guess, and as most maps reuse the same assets if you change it for one it should affect everything. They just need to not fuck this up somehow (I know they will).

  4. Psychopatton says:

    Looking forward to this.

    Somehow I think a lot of people with capable machines will turn down graphics because grass is too hard to handle etc…

  5. stormcrow99 says:

    So all this vigorous jerking for graphics.
    Do any of you play your games because you like them or because they look good? The latter can enhance the former, but alone it’s nothing.
    For the record I play stuff like Vrally 3, Dark Cloud and old Need For Speeds infrequently on my PS2, not top notch graphics? Who gives a flying front door. Besides you who take copious amounts of sand in the ravines located in your lower bodies.
    And yes, graphics are all cool and stuff, especially in games like Counter Strike where good looks don’t affect performance that much. But when it limits people from playing, that’s an issue alright. N
    ot only mongoloids play with potato PCs below the “poverty level” (quite a stretch to call it such but bear with me). Neither can only unicums afford high-end rigs. And no, it’s not just a matter of “lol get that money ez game”.

    TL;DR go ahead and make good graphics as long as I can turn them down for fps thanks

    1. HD_Bread says:

      TL;DR My computer can’t run any games made after 2010 at >5 fps and I’m better than the rest of you for playing old games with worse gameplay than the newer games purely because they have worse graphics.*
      Fixed for ya.
      Also, this quote is gold, “But when it limits people from playing, that’s an issue alright”. So according to you, we should be designing every new game to run on DOS so that EVERY person will be able to play it regardless of hardware.
      Finally, I love how when you think of good graphics running decently, you think of Counter Strike. CS:GO released in 2012 and was already eclipsed by CoD:WaW’s (released 2008) graphics. No wonder you have such a vendetta against good graphics, you’re still 8 years behind the rest of us…

      1. stormcrow99 says:

        Your post gives off your elitism and lack of sympathy towards anyone with sub-par equipment and ability to improve the situation.
        Let me fix your fix: Let me turn down the graphics. It’s not so hard to not force the next-level-beyond-reality graphics on everyone, nearly every game today has it, and since it’s WG after all, I don’t think for a second that they won’t allow that.
        My loadout is an off-the-shelf Acer Whatever for what 300€, with how PC is always up for more adjustments than consoles, it sounds ridiculous that any more would be required to play most games coming out today.

        My vendetta is not against good graphics, obviously not. It’s against people who keep complaining that high-grade photorealistic graphics are not enough (and for the record, can and will not be enough, ever) and push developers to go bigger and bigger, with a complete disregard on how large an audience such high quality can cater towards.

  6. robertgoedicke says:

    I seriously don’t know how people can still say that many can’t afford a PC which can run WoT decently so instead they buy a console. Even in countries with lower salaries.

    To give a perspective on this:
    I am running WoT in FullHD and maxed out graphics (everything which you can turn on is on except for motion blur and grass in sniper mode for competitiveness) on a computer I bought in January 2009. The only thing I had to upgrade over the last 8 (!!!) years was the graphics card once for 270 € (From a GTX285 to a GTX770). That’s less than 3 € per month I had to invest so this system can still play most games at high settings.

    Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz @ 3.6GHz
    6GB DDR3-1600 RAM
    nVidia GTX770 2GB

    That system is, by today’s standards, VERY outdated. But it runs WoT at maximum settings and the FPS never dip below 60, usually they are around 90 or 100 during a match (I am very sensitive to low FPS, even running a 120 Hz monitor). This super old processor with a low amount of RAM is bored by WoT. So to me it seems more than reasonable to upgrade the graphics to a higher standard. We are not talking about a crappy browsergame here which should run on a 99 € netbook. Just NO!

    So, a computer you can buy these days, even midrange at a very reasonable price, should perform just as good as a super old machine like mine which was high end 8 years ago. I can build a new system for the price of a current generation console which should run WoT quite decently.

    Are consoles that much cheaper than PC parts in some countries? I really doubt that.

    1. stormcrow99 says:

      Consoles aren’t cheaper than PC parts, but they aren’t being made obsolete nearly as enough by it’s own industry as PC parts, which seem to be out dated when they reach the rig, the next better thing was already made.
      Not to mention the people who urge developers to take full advantage of every piece as soon as they’re out there, to ensure nobody is up to date at any stage.
      No seriously, if one could transfer their PC WoT account and progress to console, and the console stopped being a cartoony turd, I would transfer in a h e a r t b e a t.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Graphics improvement its ok(RIP potato pcs) but doesn’t Wot have more important problems now, you know, gameplay problems to fix?

  8. New graphics are always welcomed. I play mostly at minimum graphics because it just takes a great deal less out of my gear but you do tend to see little things trickle down like the HD models or the detail in their latest maps. That said, wargaming should probably go a little easy on the hype train. They already have a mountain of things to do just to keep up with reworking the auto-penetration mechanic , getting a less hostile sandbox up, new tank lines, reworking maps like Pilsen and creating new ones, implementing tier X light tanks, keeping pace with making HD models for tanks, Arty rework, mm rework, and now new graphics with arguably little change for the majority of players.

    Might be biting off a little more than they can chew here.

  9. I really miss these teaser videos. I don`t care if the game don’t look like this or will be like this for a couple years but the fact that WG has this beautiful vision for the game and will work towards it even if it take long as or longer than havoc is awesome. Knowing that the game will look like that at some point is something to look forward to, beside eye candy is always welcomed.

Leave a Reply