Submitted by Gay_Charlie t3_zubd3a in consoles
Gay_Charlie OP t1_j1i91dj wrote
Reply to comment by PixelBits89 in Should the Grand Theft Auto series go back to PS2-era graphics? [SERIOUS] by Gay_Charlie
Two words. Imagination interpretation.
PixelBits89 t1_j1i9dlb wrote
What? You’re asking for a graphics change because you like that era of games. Is the reason you like it really just because of the graphics? I could somewhat understand that if you didn’t pick gta as the game. The old ps2 gta graphics are basically the same as modern, just less detail. Or do you prefer to imagine detail??? I don’t understand what you mean.
Gay_Charlie OP t1_j1i9o2t wrote
High tier graphics has a tendency to compromise gameplay focused level design.
PixelBits89 t1_j1iaxly wrote
I strongly disagree with this. There’s good and bad level design for all eras of games. In fact, you could argue limited graphical possibilities limits some things in games like gta, which in each era it comes out prides itself on looking more and more like irl. It’s part of the fun if the game. You get to do insane stuff in a mirror of the real world. It also aids immersion. It’s harder to feel like you’re in the world when everything looks like play dough. Games like red dead are a lot better when the graphics make you feel you’re standing right there.
And just having lower graphics doesn’t mean better level design. You do realize it’s not the same people working on graphics and levels, especially for large game development companies. If a modern game is worse it’s just because it’s worse.
Personally I’m not huge in graphics and I’ll play anything if it’s fun, but if you’re capable of it why not have everything look a little nicer? I’ll pick ps2 era games like metal gear solid 2 over most modern games, but that doesn’t mean they should just stop improving graphics. I absolutely love the old mortal kombats and I’ve found the modern ones to be extremely lacking, but one thing I do enjoy is how nice everything looks. It just adds a little flavour.
ABXandYorg t1_j1l3yms wrote
When you have limitations it forces creative innovation. Old game development meetings were full of people being told what they couldn’t do. Having isolated departments sounds good, but has that actually made games better or worse? I do agree that there is junk games in every generation. However, there is generational shifts in those percentages. Even console-specific shifts in those percentages. When I think back to the Atari 2600 , severe limitations, massive creativity, and large amount of good games. Even the Super Nintendo library is massively packed with top top notch titles, better than the Nintendo Switch with better graphics.
PixelBits89 t1_j1lbzyq wrote
But there’s also top notch titles now. What you’re saying would only be true if modern games were bad, which they’re not. Game devs today still have limitations. Rockstar doesn’t, but that’s because they’re top in triple a titles. But if you really want limitations play some modern indie games.
What you’re describing isn’t even the same limitations anyways. The main trial faced was power, not graphics. Even if they make a game that looks like it’s ps2 era they haven’t actually added any limitations to truly effect game play.
ABXandYorg t1_j1l39ug wrote
I agree with you. The graphics became the crutch for poor game design.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments