this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2024
193 points (91.4% liked)

Games

38456 readers
1405 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago

Then don't, i doubt people get sad when they realize they don't have to buy another overpriced gpu to run the game they anticipated the most.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago

A lot of comments in this thread are really talking about visual design rather than graphics, strictly speaking, although the two are related.

Visual design is what gives a game a visual identity. The level of graphical fidelity and realism that's achievable plays into what the design may be, although it's not a direct correlation.

I do think there is a trend for higher and high visual fidelity to result in games with more bland visual design. That's probably because realism comes with artistic restrictions, and development time is going to be sucked away from doing creative art to supporting realism.

My subjective opinion is that for first person games, we long ago hit the point of diminishing returns with something like the Source engine. Sure there was plenty to improve on from there (even games on Source like HL2 have gotten updates so they don't look like they did back in the day), but the engine was realistic enough. Faces moved like faces and communicated emotion. Objects looked like objects.

Things should have and have improved since then, but really graphical improvements should have been the sideshow to gameplay and good visual design.

I don't need a game where I can see the individual follicles on a character's face. I don't need subsurface light diffusion on skin. I won't notice any of that in the heat of gameplay, but only in cutscenes. With such high fidelity game developers are more and more forcing me to watch cutscenes or "play" sections that may as well be cutscenes.

I don't want all that. I want good visual design. I want creatively made worlds in games. I want interesting looking characters. I want gameplay where I can read at a glance what is happening. None of that requires high fidelity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I had a lot of fun playing Romancing Saga 2 and Ara Fell recently. Sometimes games can be more immersive by not having high fidelity graphics.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago

I've seen a lot of cool indie games pop up out of heavily modified classic idTech engines like the DOOM and Quake engines. They're definitely not high fidelity, but a lot of them scratch an itch that slower paced modern games can't seem to scratch.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I have a computer from 2017. It's also a Mac. I can't play recent games and I think I've just gotten more and more turned off by the whole emphasis on better graphics and the need to spend ridiculous amounts of money on either a console or a really good graphics card for a PC has just turned me off of mainstream gaming completely.

Mostly I just go play games I played when I was a kid these days. 1980s graphics and yet I have yet to get tired of many of them...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've got an old Mac and use a cloud gaming PC to play games. It's like $50 a month and works great when you're near the data center.

Plus my laptop doesn't get really hot while playing games and the battery lasts a lot longer. All while getting 4k 60fps gaming with ray tracing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

I could not justify spending $50 a month on something like that and then buy games on top of it, but I am glad there are solutions.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I can think of many older games in dire need of facelifts, but the thing is they don't need a facelift into photo-realistic territory. Just enough to bring the vision out from developers reaching just a little further than their old tech could support. I'm thinking of a lot of early 3D games. Many of the older sprite based games still hold up great.

The AAA gaming industry has gone off the rails trying to wow us with graphics and the novelty has long worn off.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I would argue they don't even need to be updated. They were fun already in their time. I wish people would just come up with totally new ideas. I don't need the same characters in every game I play. Same with movies now too Everything is a remake or a sequel.

I love to play indie games though.

load more comments
view more: next ›