Modern graphics a turn off for anyone else?

[jvalentine98]

^^ Here, here! A company can pour millions into a game to make it the "next best thing, cutting edge" and I'll just roll my eyes. All that money spent and it still isn't going to play as good as something simple, like Link to the Past or the original Silent Hill. The craftmanship of making a good game is pretty much gone, replaced by framerates and CGI cutscenes and all that jazz. It bores me to death.

I just feel like the emphasis is to make the game look top notch and appeal to those who want to play online, vs. someone making a good game that just happens to look pleasing. They're almost trying too hard.

Also I think the PS2 era pretty much emulated real human beings and their movements as good as you're going to get. The characters were as life like as possible, smooth and not jagged looking and move realistically. Where do you go after that? They are intent on making sure we can spot every zit on a character's face.

[SamuraiMegas]

^^ Here, here! A company can pour millions into a game to make it the "next best thing, cutting edge" and I'll just roll my eyes. All that money spent and it still isn't going to play as good as something simple, like Link to the Past or the original Silent Hill. The craftmanship of making a good game is pretty much gone, replaced by framerates and CGI cutscenes and all that jazz. It bores me to death.

I just feel like the emphasis is to make the game look top notch and appeal to those who want to play online, vs. someone making a good game that just happens to look pleasing. They're almost trying too hard.

Also I think the PS2 era pretty much emulated real human beings and their movements as good as you're going to get. The characters were as life like as possible, smooth and not jagged looking and move realistically. Where do you go after that? They are intent on making sure we can spot every zit on a character's face.

haha what

also have you ever heard of indie games? jeez

[TSTR]

idk bout yall but i cant get wet unless everything is in 4k running at 144hz or higher

[Exhuminator]

idk bout yall but i cant get wet unless everything is in 4k

http://www.maximumpc.com/dells_5k_monit ... iewed_2014

[TSTR]

hnngggggg

[Jmustang1968]

^^ Here, here! A company can pour millions into a game to make it the "next best thing, cutting edge" and I'll just roll my eyes. All that money spent and it still isn't going to play as good as something simple, like Link to the Past or the original Silent Hill. The craftmanship of making a good game is pretty much gone, replaced by framerates and CGI cutscenes and all that jazz. It bores me to death.

I just feel like the emphasis is to make the game look top notch and appeal to those who want to play online, vs. someone making a good game that just happens to look pleasing. They're almost trying too hard.

Also I think the PS2 era pretty much emulated real human beings and their movements as good as you're going to get. The characters were as life like as possible, smooth and not jagged looking and move realistically. Where do you go after that? They are intent on making sure we can spot every zit on a character's face.

I can respect someone's opinion of preferring various graphic styles, but the rest of your post in here is ridiculous. PS2 the best at emulating people and not jaggedly? No craftmanship in making good games anymore? Cmon Man!

[jvalentine98]

^^ Here, here! A company can pour millions into a game to make it the "next best thing, cutting edge" and I'll just roll my eyes. All that money spent and it still isn't going to play as good as something simple, like Link to the Past or the original Silent Hill. The craftmanship of making a good game is pretty much gone, replaced by framerates and CGI cutscenes and all that jazz. It bores me to death.

I just feel like the emphasis is to make the game look top notch and appeal to those who want to play online, vs. someone making a good game that just happens to look pleasing. They're almost trying too hard.

Also I think the PS2 era pretty much emulated real human beings and their movements as good as you're going to get. The characters were as life like as possible, smooth and not jagged looking and move realistically. Where do you go after that? They are intent on making sure we can spot every zit on a character's face.

I can respect someone's opinion of preferring various graphic styles, but the rest of your post in here is ridiculous. PS2 the best at emulating people and not jaggedly? No craftmanship in making good games anymore? Cmon Man!

I can't get inside the mind of a teen, but when people around my age talk classic games, they talk older games. I mean, there's not a game of Zelda, or Doom or even Resident Evil's impact being made now days. It seems like it's all been done.

There was a special note from Capcom inside the manual of the original Resident Evil game. It said the game was another step to bridge the relationship between games and movies. I'd say they have done that and then some.

Realistically, how much farther can they push the graphics? HD has been done to death. Time doesn't stop. Are we going to need a special chip implanted in our eyes to see the graphics in another 10 years? Is the ultimate goal to make it hard to differentiate between an actual human being and a computer model?

[Jmustang1968]

^^ Here, here! A company can pour millions into a game to make it the "next best thing, cutting edge" and I'll just roll my eyes. All that money spent and it still isn't going to play as good as something simple, like Link to the Past or the original Silent Hill. The craftmanship of making a good game is pretty much gone, replaced by framerates and CGI cutscenes and all that jazz. It bores me to death.

I just feel like the emphasis is to make the game look top notch and appeal to those who want to play online, vs. someone making a good game that just happens to look pleasing. They're almost trying too hard.

Also I think the PS2 era pretty much emulated real human beings and their movements as good as you're going to get. The characters were as life like as possible, smooth and not jagged looking and move realistically. Where do you go after that? They are intent on making sure we can spot every zit on a character's face.

I can respect someone's opinion of preferring various graphic styles, but the rest of your post in here is ridiculous. PS2 the best at emulating people and not jaggedly? No craftmanship in making good games anymore? Cmon Man!

I can't get inside the mind of a teen, but when people around my age talk classic games, they talk older games. I mean, there's not a game of Zelda, or Doom or even Resident Evil's impact being made now days. It seems like it's all been done.

Realistically, how much farther can they push the graphics? HD has been done to death. Time doesn't stop. Are we going to need a special chip implanted in our eyes to see the graphics in another 10 years?

Let's see...World of Warcraft, Minecraft, Halo, Guitar Hero/Rock Band, Portal are just examples right off the top of my head that made huge gaming impacts since the retro classics.

The graphics from PS2 --> PS4 are quite a step.

[dsheinem]

my eyes can not roll hard enough

newsflash: Silent Hill and Link to the Past were, at the time, all about being the most advanced/best graphics ever seen. Silent Hill's cutscenes were certainly described ad nauseum as "cinematic", for example.

jv, you have no sense of either historic or contemporary game design. I get that you think the biggest AAA games look too realistic/not abstract enough for your liking today, but the games you are citing (esp PS1/PS2 stuff) were also about pushing for greater similarity to reality/film/etc.

[jvalentine98]

So where does it come to a head? Do we ultimately have a relationship with a game console? Does it become self aware?