8th Gen to 9th Gen: Visual Analysis Thread

[DonFerrari]

Mnementh said:

DonFerrari said:

Your two posts confused so many things.

For the regular game sure it doesn't matter that every single strand of hair was individually draw or the meshes on the cloth. But on the visual impact that will matter and he will notice without knowing what exactly had him so impressed.

And people on the team that make the graphics and the gameplay are two different groups so you don't have "hey we have to stop improving graphic to improve gameplay" that is one stance from Nintendo fans that is the most annoying.

Look at the images HollyGamer posted for R&C. The jump from PS2 to PS3 is so massive, the polygon count increased, the fur got fur texture, better lighting and much more details in the background. The difference is so noticable. Then to PS4 the difference is still there, especially details in the background, but overall less noticeable. And then again on PS5. Yes, technically the jump is still the same, but it is not anymore such a defining difference.

I think - as many people expressed - the thing that keeps people impressed is the fast transition in R&C. Which is really something. Also applying so much physics to general objects in the area. This both is a difference I think is much more important for gamers, it will make their experience much more enjoyable, interacting with the environment and fast transitions making the game spicier. The visual improvements may gommainly unnoticed.

And I am aware that different people work on different things. But for a company it means resources. If they put a different focus, you can hire more people for gameplay improvements. There is a major disproportion in the development teams. Look at the credits for really old games. I talk 90s games. Back then the team had about proportional workforce for graphics, music, programming, story and gameplay. But since then the teamsize for graphics grew disproportionally, while the other area saw only little growth in the allocated resources (aka manpower). Now the graphcis department makes often about 80% of the teamsize. Just bring it a bit more into balance.

Neither of the games that had good scores or good looks suffered on gameplay because they were pretty or had a lot of resources on it, that is just a fallacy throw for not liking the gameplay on that game. It is possible that these games that you don't like the gameplay had more resources put on gameplay than a Mario game that you like.

And I looked at the image, again the difference becomes more on the details and static images make it harder to see. But you naturally notices the differences and when getting used to it and go back to older you see that something is amiss. That happens to me all the time when I rewatch something of older gen that I found to be fantastic and now I can see the gaps.