| leo-j said:
What developers are you referring to in that realism arguement you're creating..? Uncharted is a prime example of a game that doesn't have to be completely photo realistic yet still end up being one of the best looking franchises of a generation, same with GOD OF WAR III, that game looks like a painting come to life.. I don't know why you'd say SONY needs to take note from nintendo, considering SONY is the only gaming company pushing games like TEARAWAY/LAST OF US.. AND more new ip on console.. and not rehashing old franchises that are eventually going to stop selling.. in fact sony seems to be the only game company that is really supporting it's video game systems right now.. with their non stop constant flow of new ip and game releases.. |
Yeah, Sony has nothing to learn from Nintendo ... Nintendo had the market leading home console and handheld gaming system last generation, is on track to have the market leading handheld this generation, Sony lost over half of their console userbase in a generation, the PS-Vita is the worst selling system since the Dreamcast, and Sony has closed several game developers for profitability reasons.
The point with the realism argument is this ... On both my XBox 360 and my PC (which is significantly more powerful than the HD consoles) in "photorealistic" games I regularly see low polygon models, low resolution textures, and (generally) pretty crappy lighting effects that don't seem that bad based on the time the game was released but when new technology becomes available and developers stop needing this low quality filler it becomes obvious and ugly. In contrast, games that take more of a "stylish" route generally don't have these problems. For example, if rendered at 1080p Super Mario Galaxy would still be a very pretty game but few games that were pushing for photorealism on similar hardware would be considered good looking at all.
