let me quickly get quickly get philosophical about video games.
i feel like every thing i want a game to do can be done with ps2 era tech. anything beyond that is just bloat. gta sna andreas is my prime example of this. its fully 3d o the point where it doesnt feel like a test like gta 3. it ha s afully open world. it has at least 20 hours of missions. graphics are fine for me, serviceable . i get the point that they are people, the cars looks like cars, and foliage is foliage. i think san andreas is less than 2 gigs for all of this. a few year later gta 4 is like 16 gigs for the added benefit of ragdoll physics, greatly improved character midels, and more detailed car destruction. i still remember using library wifi on my psp to look at gta 4 promos in awe a few years later gta 5 does the same stuff, slightly prettier, kinda worse everywhere else, and its near 80 gigs. are games reaching the tipping point? 5 didnt even bring anything new. im still entertained playing a game from fucking 2004 on its original hardware. i was even more mad to discover that the master chief collection is like 50 gigs for 4 full games, but halo 5 is 90 on its own.
anyway, im all but done with games at this point. vr and ar dont have enough promise. expect the industry to crash before the next console gen in 2020, if there even is one
>quickly
Stopped reading there
great blog post
>>384927039
>waaaaaahhhhhh don't talk about vidya games
You couldn't get strongly physics-based games to run on a PS2 even if you simplified the actual graphics.
>GTA3 feels like a test GTA
Fuck right off you absolute pleb
>>384926673
This is a good post, ignore the haters
In general I see what you are saying, although PS2 era tech honestly could not account for more advanced physics, better framerates, etc. The problem is that modern games are more focused on graphics and storytelling than they are on interesting mechanics or content.
It's better that we have better hardware but we don't use it to make our games run or play better even though there is so much more room for it.
>>384926673
>gta 3 is test
Nigger GTA 3 is what GTA really is. No "muh psychological problems" or "muh become the citys ruler" bullshit. Just you and your job.
>>384927739
thanks. yeah, performance was trash for most ps2 games, but everything else is all there. i havent seen many games take advantage of modern hardware for things like smarter ai, physics, farther draw distances, or more npcs on screen. its always just for better grapics which will look dated in 4 or 5 years. the case can be made for 360 era tech being the line i the sand, but i gave it to the ps2 era cause thats when the transition to 3d games was completed. some early games will have quirks, but after that gen you dont see games struggle with camera controls or character models.
Yeah I agree completely, although GTA SA isn't a great example since that game is bloated as fuck.
Working with lower res graphics gives developers so much more creative freedom, and stuff takes a lot less time to complete. I also think PS2 graphics have a lot more charm to them than photorealistic graphics. Game like FFX or GTA Vice City have way more appealing graphics to me than GTA 5 or FF13. Personal preference I guess.
>>384928320
>>384927448
i dont mean to rag on 3, or vice city, but with the benifit of hindsight thwey are noticable dated as being early 3d games. im mainly point to the right stick bring you into the first person camera on foot and not moving the camera at all in a car. san andreas was the first game to get it right. the lock on system was also a bit finnickyive been meaning to replay 3 and vice city recently and the fucking camera is keeping me away from it. the lock on i can deal with. yes i know on pc free look fixes most of this, but car camera is still non existant. i plan to play them on pc to get that experience for the first time too.