Games peaked in 2001, graphics peaked in 2014

[rusty_shackleford]

High polycount and high resolution texures of characters and surroundings help creates better visuals, animations, improve narrative delivery and avoid shitsow like this:

FF7 remake looks like that because it contains work outsourced to contractors who don't care.

Real time lightning, shadows and reflections improved significantly significantly with years, especially with ray and path tracing and we finally can use them in gameplay and they look like real shadows and reflections, not a pixelated mess that was in old games.

It looks like ****, it won't look anywhere near as good as baked GI for decades.

What's the last game you've played that let you do this, btw?


That's from 2005.

[J1M]

"Graphics peaked" because… well, yes. With regards to the assets themselves, all that has really happened between 2014 and 2024 is an increasing use of high poly/resolution textures/models for increasingly irrelevant parts of the game(hint: this is where the filesize bloat is coming from) rather than just the main character and set-pieces. There is a diminishing return here such that doubling the poly-count of a character no longer provides any noticeable improvements.

High polycount and high resolution texures of characters and surroundings help creates better visuals, animations, improve narrative delivery and avoid shitsow like this:

► Show Spoiler

A large amount of the reduction in performance has been (imo failed) attempts at increasing the "realisticness"(for lack of a better word) of global illumination, reflections, etc., These are, of course, just approximations and I don't particularly care for any real-time GI solution as they still look significantly worse than baked GI did years ago. When graphics "peaked", games were using baked GI with hacks to mix in real-time lighting, so of course entirely real time solutions don't look much better and perform worse, they're just easier for the designers.

Real time lightning, shadows and reflections improved significantly significantly with years, especially with ray and path tracing and we finally can use them in gameplay and they look like real shadows and reflections, not a pixelated mess that was in old games.

Game was more fun when his hands were each made out of 6 triangles.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

If you think games you mentioned are possible in 2D sprites, please tell me where you buy naivety pills.

One of the most popular MMORPGs did use sprites for characters in a 3D environment.

Which was outperformed by WoW, 3D game.

[J1M]

If you think games you mentioned are possible in 2D sprites, please tell me where you buy naivety pills.

You are in for a treat. RPGs existed prior to 3D engines. You have a wonderful catalog of games available to try for the first time, like Fallout. And there's no reason Bloodlines couldn't work as a top-down game built out of 2D sprites when its biggest strengths are its voice acting and setting.

I hope all realtime shooting, aiming and spellcasting will be just like in 3D. Thanks God nobody listened people like you in the industry and we get masterpieces like first two Prince of Persia.

This one?

[J1M]

If you think games you mentioned are possible in 2D sprites, please tell me where you buy naivety pills.

One of the most popular MMORPGs did use sprites for characters in a 3D environment.

Which was outperformed by WoW, 3D game.

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

[rusty_shackleford]

that came after WoW, like Everquest 2,

EQ2 predates WoW.

Yes, that means WoW is actually an EQ2 clone.

[rusty_shackleford]

Another thing nobody ever mentions: sound physics used to be significantly better, especially near any game with EAX support was head and shoulders above any single game now. They actually put in the effort due to their partnerships with Creative to advertise it as an EAX game.
If you're playing an old EAX game, do yourself a favor and take the time to install EAX emulation. Too lazy to do a writeup now so get searching.

[edit]
DSOAL should be a simple drop-in enabler

[Faceless_Sentinel]

High polycount and high resolution texures of characters and surroundings help creates better visuals, animations, improve narrative delivery and avoid shitsow like this:

FF7 remake looks like that because it contains work outsourced to contractors who don't care.

Are you saying that it is not computer graphics fault but game devs who can't use it in a right way? Like in any other situation?

Real time lightning, shadows and reflections improved significantly significantly with years, especially with ray and path tracing and we finally can use them in gameplay and they look like real shadows and reflections, not a pixelated mess that was in old games.

It looks like ****, it won't look anywhere near as good as baked GI for decades.

Disagree, but videos will provide tomorrow morning, when I will be able to use PC, it is uncomfortably to do from phone.

What's the last game you've played that let you do this, btw?


That's from 2005.

This is a bad example, lamp improperly illuminates the room, there is light in a limited radius from the lamp(the light should re-reflect off the surroundings and reach the protagonist, but he is standing in total darkness), there are no half-shadows and shading at all, unclear is there any shadows from dinamic objects. But similar effects I saw in Cyberpunk 2077 and Starfield.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

that came after WoW, like Everquest 2,

EQ2 predates WoW.

Yes, that means WoW is actually an EQ2 clone.

Wow, it's not like wow devs played EQ2, gathered together, desided "we can do better" and made a WoW classic. What a shocker

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Another thing nobody ever mentions: sound physics used to be significantly better, especially near any game with EAX support was head and shoulders above any single game now. They actually put in the effort due to their partnerships with Creative to advertise it as an EAX game.
If you're playing an old EAX game, do yourself a favor and take the time to install EAX emulation. Too lazy to do a writeup now so get searching.

[edit]
DSOAL should be a simple drop-in enabler

Ask players why they use ****** builtin soundcards instead of buying good soundcard. Oh wait, using advanced audio features need soundcard, just like using advanced graphics features demands videocard, hm

[Faceless_Sentinel]

One of the most popular MMORPGs did use sprites for characters in a 3D environment.

Which was outperformed by WoW, 3D game.

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

[rusty_shackleford]

This is a bad example, lamp improperly illuminates the room, there is light in a limited radius from the lamp(the light should re-reflect off the surroundings and reach the protagonist, but he is standing in total darkness), there are no half-shadows and shading at all, unclear is there any shadows from dinamic objects. But similar effects I saw in Cyberpunk 2077 and Starfield.

Right, they managed to moderately improve on a game that was 15 years old by requiring hardware that costs significantly more. For what is likely just one real time bounce, for a small number of rays.

[Valter]

Upscaling has to be one of the gayest things to happen to gaming in decades.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

You are in for a treat. RPGs existed prior to 3D engines. You have a wonderful catalog of games available to try for the first time, like Fallout. And there's no reason Bloodlines couldn't work as a top-down game built out of 2D sprites when its biggest strengths are its voice acting and setting.

I hope all realtime shooting, aiming and spellcasting will be just like in 3D. Thanks God nobody listened people like you in the industry and we get masterpieces like first two Prince of Persia.

This one?

This one:

[Xenich]

Which was outperformed by WoW, 3D game.

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

Sure, but if I said you had to play a 60 hour game from start to finish and I gave you the option of:

a) Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc.... but horrible game play, boring, ********, etc....

b) Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc... but horrible graphics, etc...

Which would you choose?

For me, always B, as I can lose myself to any games graphics (I lived and played the generations of evolution of them), but with **** game play I can't "escape" no matter how "pretty" it looks.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

This is a bad example, lamp improperly illuminates the room, there is light in a limited radius from the lamp(the light should re-reflect off the surroundings and reach the protagonist, but he is standing in total darkness), there are no half-shadows and shading at all, unclear is there any shadows from dinamic objects. But similar effects I saw in Cyberpunk 2077 and Starfield.

Right, they managed to moderately improve on a game that was 15 years old by requiring hardware that costs significantly more. For what is likely just one real time bounce, for a small number of rays.

I think examples in this short video are much more than "moderatley improve"

i hate when you make me find evidence that need to be seen on PC monitor from smatphone screen

[Faceless_Sentinel]

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

Sure, but if I said you had to play a 60 hour game from start to finish and I gave you the option of:

a) Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc.... but horrible game play, boring, ********, etc....

b) Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc... but horrible graphics, etc...

Which would you choose?

For me, always B, as I can lose myself to any games graphics (I lived and played the generations of evolution of them), but with **** game play I can't "escape" no matter how "pretty" it looks.

Try to demand from devs both "Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc." and "Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc". You know , free market, supply and demand, voting with your dollar and all this fairy tales.

[rusty_shackleford]

This is a bad example, lamp improperly illuminates the room, there is light in a limited radius from the lamp(the light should re-reflect off the surroundings and reach the protagonist, but he is standing in total darkness), there are no half-shadows and shading at all, unclear is there any shadows from dinamic objects. But similar effects I saw in Cyberpunk 2077 and Starfield.

Right, they managed to moderately improve on a game that was 15 years old by requiring hardware that costs significantly more. For what is likely just one real time bounce, for a small number of rays.

I think examples in this short video are much more than "moderatley improve"

i hate when you make me find evidence that need to be seen on PC monitor from smatphone screen

"moderately improve", yeah, because it only looks moderately better. I'd rather the processing go on… oh… I dunno…

How about water?

Now, a 2010 game:

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Right, they managed to moderately improve on a game that was 15 years old by requiring hardware that costs significantly more. For what is likely just one real time bounce, for a small number of rays.

I think examples in this short video are much more than "moderatley improve"

i hate when you make me find evidence that need to be seen on PC monitor from smatphone screen

"moderately improve", yeah, because it only looks moderately better. I'd rather the processing go on… oh… I dunno…

How about water?

Now, a 2010 game:

Good job using 3 years old video, surely there wasn't any updates for this time period

I will also ask to compare games that have equal focus on water, please, because I can show any resident evil from 2010 and water will be also worse than in Hydrophobia or first Bioshock.

[Yankee Zulu]

I think examples in this short video are much more than "moderatley improve"

i hate when you make me find evidence that need to be seen on PC monitor from smatphone screen

"moderately improve", yeah, because it only looks moderately better. I'd rather the processing go on… oh… I dunno…

How about water?

Now, a 2010 game:

Good job using 3 years old video, surely there wasn't any updates for this time period

Dude no point in trying to convince these *******. Its the usual idiot rusty and his cronies. They gang up on you and you keep banging your head against the wall. Let it go.

[Xenich]

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

Sure, but if I said you had to play a 60 hour game from start to finish and I gave you the option of:

a) Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc.... but horrible game play, boring, ********, etc....

b) Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc... but horrible graphics, etc...

Which would you choose?

For me, always B, as I can lose myself to any games graphics (I lived and played the generations of evolution of them), but with **** game play I can't "escape" no matter how "pretty" it looks.

Try to demand from devs both "Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc." and "Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc". You know , free market, supply and demand, voting with your dollar and all this fairy tales.

Ok, let me try it this way.

You are a new development studio. You have limited budget. Your game has some fantastic ideas, but will take time to implement them, though if properly implemented, the game play will be utterly fantastic, setting a new standard of play for the industry.

The thing is, in order to do this, most of your budget will be spent on the game play implementation. You will have to settle for some behind the curve graphical implementations that some may find dated, clunky, or lacking in many qualities.

Or.. you could cut from your game play implementation, do some extremely fancy graphics, but the game play will suffer greatly and will not achieve the goals you know will be a success, at least in this area of focus.

Which do you choose?

a) Game play

b) Graphics

[Faceless_Sentinel]

"moderately improve", yeah, because it only looks moderately better. I'd rather the processing go on… oh… I dunno…

How about water?

Now, a 2010 game:

Good job using 3 years old video, surely there wasn't any updates for this time period

Dude no point in trying to convince these *******. Its the usual idiot rusty and his cronies. They gang up on you and you keep banging your head against the wall. Let it go.

You are right. For some reason I expected RPGHQ posters be better in understanding computer graphics than average sloptuber populist. Another dissapient.

[J1M]

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

Sure, but if I said you had to play a 60 hour game from start to finish and I gave you the option of:

a) Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc.... but horrible game play, boring, ********, etc....

b) Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc... but horrible graphics, etc...

Which would you choose?

For me, always B, as I can lose myself to any games graphics (I lived and played the generations of evolution of them), but with **** game play I can't "escape" no matter how "pretty" it looks.

The game takes place in my head.

When a game is too high fidelity it is actively hurting the experience (AAA games like Cyberpunk with cluttered environments).

[Nooneatall]

Which was outperformed by WoW, 3D game.

You are getting mixed up in your own arguments. By your logic all of the higher fidelity MMOs that came after WoW, like Age of Conan, were better.

► Show Spoiler

Changed example because apparently Everquest 2 and its gross bump mapping launched before WoW by a few weeks.

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

You're a goofball dude

[Tweed]

Let it go.

Why don't you both go and stay go.

[Xenich]

By my logic better graphics is as important as better gameplay.

Sure, but if I said you had to play a 60 hour game from start to finish and I gave you the option of:

a) Fantastic looking game, amazing graphics, etc.... but horrible game play, boring, ********, etc....

b) Fantastic game play, amazing systems, etc... but horrible graphics, etc...

Which would you choose?

For me, always B, as I can lose myself to any games graphics (I lived and played the generations of evolution of them), but with **** game play I can't "escape" no matter how "pretty" it looks.

The game takes place in my head.

When a game is too high fidelity it is actively hurting the experience (AAA games like Cyberpunk with cluttered environments).

You know, that does make sense.

When I think of many of my most favorite games that really drew me in over the years, none of them were super duper fancy graphics.

I guess this can be a case of less is more.

The less "realistic" it is, the more my mind seems to fill in the world in my head. It really is hard to explain, but I think I understand what you mean.

[rusty_shackleford]

"moderately improve", yeah, because it only looks moderately better. I'd rather the processing go on… oh… I dunno…

How about water?

Now, a 2010 game:

Good job using 3 years old video, surely there wasn't any updates for this time period

Dude no point in trying to convince these *******. Its the usual idiot rusty and his cronies. They gang up on you and you keep banging your head against the wall. Let it go.

"graphically impressive" games are very underrepresented in Steam's best sellers every year, the only exception is pretty much CP2077.
If good grafx was actually a major factor, this list would be full of sony moviegames.
https://store.steampowered.com/sale/BestOf2023

[Statesman]

What's the last game you've played that let you do this, btw?


That's from 2005.

This is a bad example, lamp improperly illuminates the room, there is light in a limited radius from the lamp(the light should re-reflect off the surroundings and reach the protagonist, but he is standing in total darkness), there are no half-shadows and shading at all, unclear is there any shadows from dinamic objects. But similar effects I saw in Cyberpunk 2077 and Starfield.

Care to share some actual examples?

[Oyster Sauce]

[Tweed]

Whenever I see those fancy new graphics demos it's always the same thing "What are you doing with it?" and so far the answer is: slop