"Microsoft and Sony killing Inovation" says industry vet Mitch Lasky

[Tavin]

HappySqurriel said:

Personally, I think the important question is "What do you REALLY gain from these massive budget games?"

I think most people will agree that the answer is (primarily) improved graphics. I personally wonder whether this push towards better graphics, and more realistic graphics, misses the point of what a game is and why we play it. Conisder this image from Super Smash Bros. Brawl:

Certainly, if this game was produced for the XBox 360/PS3 the graphics could be enhanced quite a bit; you could increase the resolution of all of the textures, many of the items that are on the texture could actuall be modeled, you could include normal maps to increase the appearance of polygonal detail, you could use material shaders to give the shield the appearance of metal, his tunic the appearance of cloth, his belts the appearance of leather, his skin the appearnce of skin, and so on ... All of this comes at a massive cost as it increases the ammount of work necessary to complete the artistic assets.

What would you really gain from increasing thos graphics?

 

 

In my opinion most developers need to step out of the arms race and realise that there is little or no benefit to trying to one up eachother with better graphics and more advanced graphical techniques. Certainly, Konami can afford to spend $70 Million to produce Metal Gear Solid 4 because it is ensured sales to break even but most developers do not have this luxury.

Among all the opinions given on this thread, i just have to agree with the squirrel guy  :D. This graphics war sometimes gets boring,while no one fights over who makes the more "fun" games or  fun and innovative ways of playing them.