4 ms·
While I more or less agree with you, and there's nothing wrong with graphical fidelity in itself, I think the argument is more one of priorities. If you have 6
by Tiksi 10y ago
While I more or less agree with you, and there's nothing wrong with graphical fidelity in itself, I think the argument is more one of priorities.
If you have 6 months to build a game, do you spend 3 on graphics and 3 on gameplay or do you spend 5 on graphics and 1 on gameplay.
Personally, I have no insight into the game industry, so it's very possible that it's not a zero sum tradeoff, and crappy games would just be crappy games with crappy graphics if they focused on graphics less, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if gameplay was at least somewhat scarified for graphics.
- mohaine 10y agoThe argument is NOT one of priorities. It is that if you go for too much realism, then you have have to start making things real instead of fun. Example from the article: Run speed in Doom is stupid high which is fun and seems normal, but would look silly and off-putting in a photorealist game.