I had fun then.

I have fun now, when I'm getting games that could not be made back then.

I see nothing to complain about.

Sorry if this wasn't clear, but I would support developpement of technology for the purpose of gameplay. A text adventure game cannot offer the same gameplay possibilities as a 3d render.

The proposition is more against higher definition, more polygons than needed, etc... 

Modern games could be played just fine in 480 p...

I agree. Nothing trumps gameplay. If a game has great gameplay, everything else becomes icing on the cake.

If you are having the same amount of fun, there's something wrong, considering dev teams are more than 10 times the size.

double-post

Good graphics do not = bad gameplay. There are games with bad graphics that have awful gameplay  

I dont know if unrelated, but I find it funny how some developers want the most powerful hardware even though they cant optimize their games on PC...

Graphical improvements are the most simple, unimpressive, and unnecessary evolution in gaming. Games look better over time, duh. Show me other cool stuff; physics engine, independence of RNG, perfectioning AI, a living world that gets affected by your actions.

I never said that. 

However, good graphics take up alot of ressources, that could be used to produce several games, or further unique concepts in the game being made.

What good graphics are is a completely relative term, we always fawn upon whatever currently is the highest standard, even if the same graphical performance could give us difficulty appreciating the game ten years later.

I believe, would progress stop in this partocular aspect of the industry, or simply develop more slowly, so that all companies would have no trouble catching up to the standards, more games would be considered to have «good graphics» by the current generation.

I see no reason to stop that aspect of gaming. 

What are you saying?  That fun is supposed to increase exponentially?  That because checkers is fun with two people, we shouldn't have team games that require ten people?  We can have both and we do have both.  I just got through playing a game made by a company which, according to Wikipedia, has 22 employees.

If I'm being honest, I wouldn't go back to 2003.  Open-world games have improved by leaps and bounds.  FPP games are so much more superior now.  Back then, they used to give me a headache so bad that I would feel sick.  Game quality has improved across the board, as even "bad" games now are still usually pretty good.  Shovelware has faded generation by generation (excepting the Wii).  Many of my favorite games now simply could not be made back then.

And this "everything has to be photo-realistic" thing isn't really true, either.  Some of my favorite games over the last several years haven't been graphical powerhouses.  Valkyria Chronicles, Borderlands, Dishonored, Portal, Fallout/Skyrim--none of those had people going crazy over the graphics but they were all well-received.

Finally, I don't understand anyone who acts like this is something new.  I remember when the NES was introduced and everyone was in awe over the "graphix".  Remember the slogan for the NES?  Now You're Playing With Power?  Remember when the biggest selling point of the PS1 was how great FF7 looked?  Yeah, if you're going to damn developers now, damn them all the way back to the NES, as well.