3 ms·
EGA isn't better. The point is, at least in the articles at hand even if not in the Hacker News discussions, that the artists who redrew things for VGA didn't
by JdeBP 6y ago
EGA isn't better. The point is, at least in the articles at hand even if not in the Hacker News discussions, that the artists who redrew things for VGA didn't do that very well, and made lighting mistakes or overused gradient fills. The articles at hand make the point that this was in turn in part because they hadn't really learned how to draw for VGA yet. But some of the errors are just basic drawing errors and nothing to do with the medium. If the sunset is behind the tree, then the front of the tree is in shadow, for example, not filled in because EGA-to-VGA means rôte filling in every black void just because it is there.
- bzzzt 6y agoWhile it's easy to attribute that to the artists, seeing those pictures it seems they got the (thankless?) task to give the EGA pictures a new coat of paint. Sounds more like factory line work to me than 'artistic vision'. Some of the EGA graphics stand out more, but I think the VGA graphics do exactly what they are meant to do: more colourful pictures to show off your new video card in all their gradient glory ;)