Akratus
Self-loathing fascist drunken misogynist asshole
I'm sure many relate. There's a number of very good reasons to prefer a lower level of graphical 'sophistication' and yet this goes overlooked just too often and I see people fawn over graphics even here on the codex. Take Dark Souls 3 for example. When I look at it, I'm always left thinking why it needed that level of detail, and I'm talking mainly environments here. It seems stuffed, little objects crammed into every space of every area. I much prefer the oversight I get with Dark Souls 1, and I never feel like its lacking anything, especially not a ton of performane slowing environmental clutter. But the point being that clarity and o versight and of course art style are more important than flashiness, bloom, and especially just the sheer amount of detail. I'd ask why so many hold that in such a high regard in the first place, that amount of detail, people really fawn over it with Dark Souls 3 or Skyrim modding and such but not really here on the Codex so it's not necessary to ask. But in any case it seems sometimes as though detail and graphical sophistication are conflated a lot. As though a room with no small objects lying around but good textures, in a high resolution, with decent medium sized models for walls and objects is graphically inferior to the same room with a ton of different tiny rocks and pieces of debris and corpses all with much higher polygon counts than are really necessary just so people's egos are stroked when they can run it well even though most people aren't going to build such a great pc and performance should be prioritized over these unnecessary details.
I prefer: A good artstyle, clarity, oversight, performance, readability and detail where it is important and not indiscriminate detail to let people wank over the graphics. With the level of indiscriminate detail in a ton of modern games I'm left unable to properly asses what is on the screen even. The important things need detail so that your eyes are drawn to it and yet almost all developers seem to want to put as much detail as possible *everywhere*. And really, screenspace ambient occlusion, depth of field, chromatic abberation and especially motion blur are factually absolute garbage that only a moron would defend. Thankfully turning options down sometimes helps but all too often graphics are prioritized so much that customizability and also performance are left in the dust.
it just peeves me off that all this manpower is spent on egregious bloom and retarded 'depth of field' when that time and manpower should be spent maximizing performance. John Carmack even said in a speech that making videogame graphics is quite a bit harder than rocket science, but then again it's not just graphics where games are mismanaged and full of faulty design, it's in everything.
I prefer: A good artstyle, clarity, oversight, performance, readability and detail where it is important and not indiscriminate detail to let people wank over the graphics. With the level of indiscriminate detail in a ton of modern games I'm left unable to properly asses what is on the screen even. The important things need detail so that your eyes are drawn to it and yet almost all developers seem to want to put as much detail as possible *everywhere*. And really, screenspace ambient occlusion, depth of field, chromatic abberation and especially motion blur are factually absolute garbage that only a moron would defend. Thankfully turning options down sometimes helps but all too often graphics are prioritized so much that customizability and also performance are left in the dust.
it just peeves me off that all this manpower is spent on egregious bloom and retarded 'depth of field' when that time and manpower should be spent maximizing performance. John Carmack even said in a speech that making videogame graphics is quite a bit harder than rocket science, but then again it's not just graphics where games are mismanaged and full of faulty design, it's in everything.
Last edited: