When 360 came out you had people saying the jump wasn't big enough, it doesn't look much better then then xbox/gamecube/ps2 best games
To be fair, when people were saying that, they were mostly referring to super early 360 games which were mostly PS2/Xbox games boosted to HD (which would've been lost on many as most people in 2005 were playing on SDTVs) with maybe a few extra effects thrown in, and stuff like Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo which both originally started development on Gamecube/Xbox and rather ugly art styles that didn't best showcase the power of the 360.
Once Gears of War rolled around in 2006 the leap over even the best of PS2/Xbox/Gamecube was absolutely gargantuan, and it only grew as the gen progressed and games looked better and better.
Pretty the much same thing with PS4. Once the order 1886, second son, horizon, and god of war came, pretty much The majority was in agreement that the leap was huge, and sufficient. With the PS2 this was not the case at all, it was being compared to dreamcast, Not ps1/n64 just to show how big the gap was. People online were saying it wasn't a big enough leap over dreamcast. That all ended with the MGS2 trailer which blew every dreamcast game away graphically at the time, kinda the same with order 1886, Everyone jaw dropped saying it was CGI level.
You're not easily impressed, are you?
Heh, maybe. It might be that I'm impressed by different things though.
Part of the diminishing returns in generation 8 is that higher resolution can make things look worse. Like I played Spider-Man last year, and the city looked beautiful but the people looked terrible. The people were more detailed and such, but the higher resolution pushed the people into an Uncanny Valley and so they looked kinda creepy. On the other hand Breath of the Wild went with a more cartoony style and I never had any issues with the people. On top of that one of the few advantages the Switch has is draw distance. Things look exceptionally crisp and clear at a distance on the Switch. In Breath of the Wild this means that I could see Mount Doom on the other side of the map, but then later I could actually visit and interact with that place. I had never had an experience like that before, and in this case the graphics were an enhancement to the exploration of the game and not just eye candy alone.
Breath of the Wild used better design instead of better horsepower. I am impressed by the better design, because it actually created a better game. More CPU/GPU power can ironically make a game worse, because of the Uncanny Valley.
You can't have a serious conversation about graphics when you say higher resolution makes things worse, its's honestly the first time i have heard a opinion like that. You seem not to be into realistic graphics, which most games that push the envelope are aiming for realistic graphics so i guess it makes sense. It is impressive being able to that in zelda, but we have seen that before on 360/ps3, and most games are doing that now.
Last edited by linkink - on 06 May 2019