CGI-Quality said:
Hynad said:
CGI-Quality said:
Hynad said:
CGI-Quality said:
It's never a good idea to claim "x" individual has done something and then have zero to back it up. This isn't the first time you've pulled this either, but it's, again, of no consequence.
|
What, you want me to look at your post history and post links to the comments you made when, back then, people with your newly found enthusiasm for PC tech would come in threads about Console graphics being the greatest (Like Killzone 2, God of War 3 and Uncharted 2) and you'D argue that artstyle, design and even engine tricks would make you say that they still had a shot? Hum... Sorry, I know you remember those times. So no, I'm not going to waste my time going through your post history just to pinpoint what I know you remember full well. You may have found a new bias, but I don't think it made you stupid.
|
You're making some fairly bold claims there, and not a single shred of proof. While I certainly did argue for those console titles, against PC, I have never said any console game looked better than the best from it (which was the argument in here). You say I don't "admit to being wrong", yet show me nothing to prove that I said one thing then and something different now. It's on you to provide, not I.
Anyway, if you'd like to continue this conversation, the walls work. No need to destroy the thread because of some personal distaste you have.
|
Nope. People brought tech into the mix, and you'd argue that tech isn't what makes a game beautiful or not. Your argument was basically the same as saying someone may find beauty in a shiny rock still in its raw form, while some will see beauty in its crafted form, like a perfected diamond.
I remember well. I was backing you back then.
|
Now I really don't see what your point in this is, because that doesn't contradict what I've said in here. "Beautiful" and "best looking" are very different terms, and I didn't argue aginst Halo 4 being pegged as the "most beautiful game" (which it wasn't in the first place) >.<
My sole purpose for the intial quote was simple: the best from console doesn't top the best from PC, "aesthetic or otherwise". Don't know what I said in the past that has anything to do with this, as I've never argued against it; be it art, raw power, or anything else.
|
My point is that people come in and say that they view Halo 4 as better looking than any other games they've seen, PC included. And somehow, the "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" part of your former speech is replaced with how much more technically advanced PC games are. It's like saying a girl isn't as beautidul as an other because her boobs aren't as big. ¬_¬
Beauty is a matter of opinion. Not fact. If for you, beauty lies behind the tech side of things (resolution, frame-rate, ambiant occlusion, number of polygons on screen, etc...), then good for you. For other people, games like Flower may be the best looking game ever because for them beauty lies in that sort of artstyle, or mood conveyed visually, or whatever.
You bring PC tech talk into something that is nothing but subjective. Yeah, the tech part of your argument isn't subjective. But beauty is.
