| JazzB1987 said:
Night and day? rofl.
ET on Atari vs Killzone Shadowfall is night and day.
This is equivalent to 480p with AA. Looks good to me.
If a game has no AA at all then it def needs a better resolution but AA helps alot and most games would be perfectly playable with lets say PAL resolution 576p (Final Fantasy13 on 360) just add AA and its fine. But I prefer high resolution with lower polycount and less effects etc. (e.g 3DS/Vita @1080p+AA)
But tbh the problem is not graphics its games. The games these days are so generic unimaginative and boring or pseudo artistic lack soul and polish that the best graphics in the world cant help. 90% of all games are simply bad these days.
Id rather play a Secret of Mana/Timesplitters etc. than FF13/Crysis3.
|
Ok, this is what started all this.
- You put up an image of a supersampled game. A very supersampled game. Say its equivalent to 480p with AA and that its ok for you. I just pointed out that if you were to really try and make a 480p image look that sharp you would either need to also use supersampling which is expensive or use an amount of AA that is more expensive than just upping teh resolution. Which means the point you were trying to make with that image is misleading or redundant.
- You dabble in this again and say most games will be ok at just 576p with AA. Again, i said all that to explain to you that adding enough AA to a low rez image to make it look as good as the image you put up is too expensive.
- Then you talking about prefering higher rez with loer poly count and use a 3ds/vita as refernce. Those platforms peak at a 5" screen. What looks ok on such a screen will look horrible if you blow it up to fit 32"+ screens. If making games for a bigger screen, that will have bigger images, you need more than what you are saying you would prefer.
- Then you talk about your opinions or how games today are crap and you prefer the older stuff, which I was saying, has nothing to do with this thread.
All I did was answer the things you talked about, and explained why they are important. But lets just agree to disagree. Maybe we don't just get eachother, nothing wrong there.
prayformojo said:
You're asking me to answer a hypothetical question that can't have a factual answer. The facts are, and my point is, that the number one factor in whether the majority of people enjoy or purchase a game is the game itself and not how many FPS it has or it's graphical merits.
That's ultimately all that matters to the majority of consumers.
|
You are evading the question while throwing absolutons around. My question has an actual answer. You just can't answer it cause it will make the point you are trying make void.
Yet you are throwing around generalizations like "majority of people"" ultimately all that matters" "no one"...etc. But when presented with situations that dispute your claims you just dismiss them.
Personally, I tend to think that what makes a game sell is marketing and graphics. At least initially, what makes people keep playing it is if its fun, which in turn will spur word of mouth and then more sales. Then the next game from that IP would be bought cause people believe the last one was good.
And again with your minecraft and mobile game reference; every heard the saying "in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king"?
