I see your point, but by "using your imagination" I meant creating mental images of things and events described in the book, not just filling in the parts that are not described. In a way, you are following an author's instructions to create an image in your mind (at least by combining memories of things you have seen before) but you still have to do it yourself, no matter how detailed the instructions are. In a movie, images and events are there on the screen created for you, not inside your mind.
I believe there are big differences in how detailed and realistic images people can create in their minds. Because the computer game graphics are better than 20 years ago, there are now much more people who can feel like they really were in the game world than there used to be. For those who already could imagine the surroundings in detail themselves the advancement in graphics has been just eye candy.
It is like comparing a book and a movie telling the same story. Some people always prefer books because they force you to use your imagination. The same applies to old games. However, sometimes the makers of a movie or a game have a better imagination than you do or they can visualize something better. I admit that some, perhaps even most, new movies and games are just eye candy or special effects but sometimes they really make you feel something that was not possible 20 years ago, and that is just the visual part. Don't forget the sounds.
And then there's the nostalgy. If you played some game as a kid, you can't play a new game 20 years later and have the same feelings because _you_ are not a kid anymore. That has nothing to do with the quality or playability of the game. It is very hard to be objective in this matter.
Too bad that SearchSpell doesn't suggest correction from "then" to "than". I've noticed that many posters would sometimes need help getting that right.
If you didn't get the point, consider text "Coca-Cola is better then Pepsi."
Slashdot Mirror
I see your point, but by "using your imagination" I meant creating mental images of things and events described in the book, not just filling in the parts that are not described. In a way, you are following an author's instructions to create an image in your mind (at least by combining memories of things you have seen before) but you still have to do it yourself, no matter how detailed the instructions are. In a movie, images and events are there on the screen created for you, not inside your mind.
I believe there are big differences in how detailed and realistic images people can create in their minds. Because the computer game graphics are better than 20 years ago, there are now much more people who can feel like they really were in the game world than there used to be. For those who already could imagine the surroundings in detail themselves the advancement in graphics has been just eye candy.
It is like comparing a book and a movie telling the same story. Some people always prefer books because they force you to use your imagination. The same applies to old games. However, sometimes the makers of a movie or a game have a better imagination than you do or they can visualize something better. I admit that some, perhaps even most, new movies and games are just eye candy or special effects but sometimes they really make you feel something that was not possible 20 years ago, and that is just the visual part. Don't forget the sounds.
And then there's the nostalgy. If you played some game as a kid, you can't play a new game 20 years later and have the same feelings because _you_ are not a kid anymore. That has nothing to do with the quality or playability of the game. It is very hard to be objective in this matter.
Too bad that SearchSpell doesn't suggest correction from "then" to "than". I've noticed that many posters would sometimes need help getting that right.
If you didn't get the point, consider text "Coca-Cola is better then Pepsi."