The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
ok i admit its ace decapadating monsters in quake and bouncing attacks off links shield in zelda, and even firing a rocket off in a paked street on gta, but with the new x box nearly here and gamecube just around da corner, arnt games becoming a bit to realistic. with all these graphics that make it nearly look like normal life, but games should just remain games and not a total substitute for life altogether?
Depends realy on what they're going to concentrate on making realistic. At the end of the day you've got to be a bit dim to confuse games with real life anyway, and if you're like that then I doubt the graphics will make one bit of difference.
Ever since Doom, various morons have blamed their shooting sprees on it, and other titles, yet their graphics were poor comapred to today.
Realism is good, for most games, but they are ONLY games.
Ever since Doom, various morons have blamed their shooting sprees on it, and other titles, yet their graphics were poor comapred to today.
Realism is good, for most games, but they are ONLY games.
Does the level of realism not depend on the game? ...
Although I'm not sure how much realism will ever be required to control a monkey in a trasparent globe through a maze, its certainly nice to know the potential is there...
Graphics quality and processing power is often not developed for games development, for example, the military, the movie and television industry, medicinal and a variety of public services all beniit from application of faster, cheaper more realisitc grpahical potential, and themselves provide enough revenue for the continued development of graphical capibilities...
And although games developers may not provide the major impudus for graphics development, wouldnt we would all sorely lose out if they didnt take advantage of what was there?
Although I'm not sure how much realism will ever be required to control a monkey in a trasparent globe through a maze, its certainly nice to know the potential is there...
Graphics quality and processing power is often not developed for games development, for example, the military, the movie and television industry, medicinal and a variety of public services all beniit from application of faster, cheaper more realisitc grpahical potential, and themselves provide enough revenue for the continued development of graphical capibilities...
And although games developers may not provide the major impudus for graphics development, wouldnt we would all sorely lose out if they didnt take advantage of what was there?
Well, Rez is a perfect example of non-realistic genius. But what we REALLY need is a sequal to NiGHTS! Most original game ever!
Sonic
Sonic
Do we see elves and imps in real life?? Don't think so.
Is Hyrule a real place that can be found on Earth?? Nope.
What about the Floating Island, can you see that if you look up at the sky?? You're more likely to see a UFO!
So I don't think that ALL games are becoming too life-like. But with games like GTA3 that is a good thing. Not with Zelda though.
Is Hyrule a real place that can be found on Earth?? Nope.
What about the Floating Island, can you see that if you look up at the sky?? You're more likely to see a UFO!
So I don't think that ALL games are becoming too life-like. But with games like GTA3 that is a good thing. Not with Zelda though.
Realism is laziness. Dude.
Well, you've got Rez just out this week on PS2. I was playing the demo last night (for about 4 hours). So for me as long as the gameplay is there it doesn't matter what the graphics look like.
Quick description of Rez's graphics: Graphic Equaliser on steroids with a mannequin flying through it.
Despite that, it's very addictive.
Quick description of Rez's graphics: Graphic Equaliser on steroids with a mannequin flying through it.
Despite that, it's very addictive.
Usually I'd agree, however, GTA3 is quite realistic but yet has brilliant gameplay.
I think it just needs a balance. Realism only tends to suit certain styles of game.
I think it just needs a balance. Realism only tends to suit certain styles of game.
ok i admit its ace decapadating monsters in quake and bouncing attacks off links shield in zelda, and even firing a rocket off in a paked street on gta, but with the new x box nearly here and gamecube just around da corner, arnt games becoming a bit to realistic. with all these graphics that make it nearly look like normal life, but games should just remain games and not a total substitute for life altogether?