By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Lollipopanon on 18 June 2012
Edit Thread
MrT-Tar said:
darkknightkryta said:
theARTIST0017 said:
darkknightkryta said:
lilbroex said:
Turkish said:
I'd rather want them to make a game for the next gen PS4/nextbox consoles tho :/


He refuses to work for Sony, so you can kiss that fantasy goodbye. Though it funny how people can show so much love and favoritism for something that doesn't even exist yet. Nintendo hate is something else.

I agree with him.  I mean it won't be nearly as bad as wii to ps3, but when you have RPGs with these huge stories and lore, graphics play an important part.  I mean; wouldn't you want the best possible graphics when watching frequent and long cutscenes? Or traveling around the world and towns?

the BEST rpgs didn't rely on graphics fyi. If we had that kind of mindset people wouldn't be playing 20+ yo classic rpgs.

Yes they did.  RPGs generally had the best graphics at the time.

Not really, only Squaresoft RPGs really pushed the graphical limits of platforms.

The Pokemon RPGs  don't push graphics at all

Dragon Quest pre-VIII didn't either (VII was probably the worst looking high profile PSX games)

Tales doesn't really (though Symphonia, minus the overworld, looked pretty good for a GC game)

The first Wild Arms was very basic looking, even by PSX standards

 

Even those RPGs which had fantastic graphics for their platform (Chrono Trigger, FFXII, etc), didn't rely on them.  To say so is completely overlooking the gameplay that made such games legendary.

Also important to note that even if the RPGs of old pushed the limit of their respective systems it would probably still be cheaper and less time consuming than pushing the limit of a current gen console.  There are just so many more minute details you can bother with on current systems as compared to a 16-bit system, for instance.