Quote:
Originally Posted by Xion Valkyrie
2D Graphics age really well, but 3D doesn't. Tried replaying FF7 a couple years back, and really couldn't get in to it again, whereas I'm fine with SNES games and sprite based graphics.
|
I'm not going to agree with this completely. I do agree that sprite-based games age
much better than their poly-model counterparts, but
Final Fantasy 7 is a really bad example.
Yes,
Final Fantasy VII looks fucking horrible. That's because--guess what--it looked horrible even when it was released. It wasn't the limitations of the graphics engine, it was poor art design decisions (the Popeye-armed SD figures when out of combat, for one) that made the game ugly. Square-Enix wasn't ready for 3D, even if the technology was.
Freespace 2, a 3D space sim from nine years ago, still looks amazingly impressive, even without the fan-made high-res texture pack.
There are a lot of older 3D games that still look really good, even on the Playstation. For a Square Enix example, I still think the original
Parasite Eve looks quite pretty. But
Front Mission 3 looks pretty awful compared to its only-a-few-years-newer sequel,
Front Mission 4. That's largely because FM3 had shitty graphics
even at its time and FM4 had much improved graphics, even for its time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyvedelta
There's some game that while you hate the gameplay, the graphic is so gorgeous that made you want to play it more and more. So yeah, I think it's quite important for a game. It may give us some boost so that we would play it more and more.
|
Yeah, except the amazing graphics of
Crysis don't make up for the fact that it's barely even a game, barely more than a tech demo. I'd rather play
Half-Life 2 than bother with
Crysis.