zeldaring said:
People my main point was the industry mainly cares about pushing graphics instead of physics. look we are still using physics from the havoc engine something that was made during ps2 generation. The look at all the AAA games and most of the budget is clearly going into the graphics |
When you say "industry" you really start to muddy up whatever point you're trying to make. The industry of big wigs pushing for more sales? The industry of developers trying to justify their budgets? The industry of reviewers and analysts trying to create or perpetuate a narrative? Whatever your particular interpretation of industry in this case, I think the point that you're missing, especially around these parts, is that this core group of gamers oftentimes gravitates toward better gameplay experiences, with the graphics being the nice shiny bow on the package. You're not wrong that there are plenty of gamers who gravitate towards the most jaw dropping graphical experience they can find, and the developers are being rewarded handsomely for their efforts with their day one dollars.
But look to one of the best selling systems of all time, the Nintendo Switch, with an ecosystem that has generated one of the best software totals of all time, and you'll see that the Nintendo style of doing things is quite profitable as well and that your point is just one part of a larger whole. You're not wrong in chasing that graphical dragon, but you are wrong to suggest that folks who don't worry about that as much don't know what a compelling experience looks (and plays) like.
At the end of the day, we all get from a game what we want to get from a game. If it bothers you that other folks keep enjoying "subpar" graphical experiences so much, then keep doing what you're doing. Maybe one day you'll be able to convince one of them to take up your cause with you.