Videogame Graphic Advances - Not What They Used To Be?

Thanks to GamesRadar for its PC Gamer-reprinted article discussing why graphics alone aren't enough to sell a game anymore. The author explains: "During the final days of Steam, I found myself playing the original Half-Life. And, frankly, it looked perfectly acceptable. While it clearly lacks the fine polish of modern first-person shooters, the world it presented me with was entirely comparable with anything around. And, being a great game in the first place, it was more enjoyable than - say - Unreal II." He continues: "However, if you went back to 1998 when Valve's masterpiece was released, and attempted to play a game five years older than that, it would be a very different experience. To go back and play System Shock, Doom or Wolfenstein requires a whole re-arrangement of your thought processes to accept the difference in graphics quality." Do you agree that "...the days when graphics ruled videogames are rapidly drawing to a close"?

Comments

Yes

[TheDarkRogue]

Yes

Re:Yes

[Aliencow]

Don't answer the whole thing in a first post dammit, you just broke the comment flow !

Re:Yes

[radicalskeptic]

just played the point-'n' click adventure game Pleurghburg, dark ages, and despite its Commodore 64-like graphics it was lots of fun to play!

*sigh* Yet another game that isn't ported to the Mac : (

Re:None of today's games have "good" graphics

[Hythlodaeus]

Wake me when someone writes a game in assembler and it still requires a 2GHz machine

You mean from cryonic freeze? That's how long it would take to do.

Re:Good Riddance

[ConceptJunkie]

Maybe now people will actually develop good games instead of their own graphical egos.


But what then are the guys from id going to do for money?