soccerdrew17 said: Desroko said: Hyperion said: MontanaHatchet said: So far, it's a 0 for me.
After all, graphics are not important. It's all about the gameplay. |
Huh? Ok... |
You can ignore him. That's usually the best option. |
u know he's making fun of ninty fanboys right? i personally have to agree with him. graphics do matter, but its how use them that makes the dif. to me chrono trigger is beautiful, okami is absolutely gorgeous, folklore is looking mighty fine, and kz2 is jaw dropping. it ranges from basic to advanced (which will become basic eventually), but its how u use everything. i especially liked okami because the entire world fit eprfectly together. it just makes everything that much better. |
Yeah. It's just that his schtick - making pointless, often angry comments in Nintendo threads - is pretty tiresome. It's like cklmb making the same lame DQS joke in every Japanese sales update - which, to his credit, I don't think he did this week.
I agree with you on Okami, and I agree that these pics are nice, I guess. But so were Mario 64's back in the day. Okami is going to be beautiful ten years from now, while the art in Gears of War, Galaxy, Killzone, etc. is going to be outdated ten months from now. Games that strive for photorealism seem to be more vulnerable to that than others - if your goal is to be more realistic than the game that came before you, you'll inevitably be beaten by the game that comes after you. I'll be very happy when true photorealism can finally be achieved, if for no other reason than devs will be forced to think more creatively artistically.
I think Galaxy's art is going to have a longer shelf-life than most games, for just that reason (I don't think anyone can argue that they were going for a realistic approach here), but I don't know if it has that "timeless" quality.