Chazore said:
No, not really. I just give praise to developed engines and software, that is factually greater than software designed to act like something akin to GIMP.
I dunno about accessible, not everyone will know how to use it, just like not everyone knows how to use UE, but there are a lot that seemingly know how to use RPG makers (hence why we see a load of RPG maker games these days). Why should I give more, if not the same praise for something that does half of what something else does better or more detailed?. Are you telling me to be like those kind of "special" parents that wants every kid to receive a medal, even for non wins or last place?. |
I didn't mean elitist as an insult because you don't see thing my way. It's the best word to describe your way of thinking in my opinion.
You don't care about the work or the innovation put by the devs in their software to decide if it's praiseworthy or not, you care about the "pure power" of the tool. With the same thinking, we could say that the Xbox One X is way more praiseworthy than the Switch, because it's a lot more powerful and can play more games thanks to that. But innovation is not about "more power" or "doing more things, more detailed". Creating something new, more easily accessible and open to more people, can easily be considered more innovative than just updating the usual tools with more power.
That's why for me, Dreams is potentially (we'll see the final product) more praiseworthy than the latest UE. It does things differently, and surely required way more thinking about how to make it right than for UE, because creating accessible software can be a lot harder than professional one.
