Not.AI
Learned
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2019
- Messages
- 305
Is there such a thing as compensating for things? How many hot new "amazing" RPG features would a new "big" RPG need to be fun if it was fully 2D and its graphics were too abstract or too shit?
Or do we really need graphically inconsistent games instead?
I'll play BG3 whenever it comes out in full and it'll probably be good. But this whole distant future thing got me thinking of that lady who had to be 3D scanned and inserted into the game as an NPC because she probably wouldn't live long enough for next TES to be out.
Or do we really need graphically inconsistent games instead?
I'll play BG3 whenever it comes out in full and it'll probably be good. But this whole distant future thing got me thinking of that lady who had to be 3D scanned and inserted into the game as an NPC because she probably wouldn't live long enough for next TES to be out.
1. Carmack's Principle.
I love the shiny graphics. Not enough to play shitty games, true, but enough to "gosh wow appreciate" the "effort". "9/10. Really great game, I recommend it. I didn't play it."
Gothics had some of the best graphics around when they came out.
I was playing with and studying Vulkan more and something clicked.
Carmack was right. With very few exceptions, no matter how powerful the GPU becomes we'll need CPU side graphics if we want rapid development where every new game that's out, again like in the past, includes new features never seen before \emph{and} these are visual too \emph{and} that game gets made in under a year. Engines have never been better. But it's about as expensive to change even a few things drastically as to write something special purpose. Either way you will still need months on each small region the player can enter.
We need new stuff to be polished. I'm getting the feel that actually polish is now surpassing graphics as the key thing. Cyberpunk being the best example. Poll time.
Suppose a new 2D RPG came out in 2025. It was not allowed to use any 3D. No 2.5D. In some ways worse than 1999.
But had the storytelling, setting, art direction, and basic gameplay and polish.
How much in terms of new mechanics and features would that need to compensate? And not an indie but a team the size of a big 3D team but using resources otherwise?
2. Frankenstein's Principle.
What if games again just embraced inconsistency? A few parts pretty 2D. Most parts ugly 2D. Some parts photorealistic 3D.
You explore as a stick figure like in 1989, your minigames are like in 1999, PC aims and throws potatoes in Unreal Engine, the potatoes are collected inside dungeons like in 2003, when it's not unvoiced text the story is CGI, the music is LSO.
I love the shiny graphics. Not enough to play shitty games, true, but enough to "gosh wow appreciate" the "effort". "9/10. Really great game, I recommend it. I didn't play it."
Gothics had some of the best graphics around when they came out.
I was playing with and studying Vulkan more and something clicked.
Carmack was right. With very few exceptions, no matter how powerful the GPU becomes we'll need CPU side graphics if we want rapid development where every new game that's out, again like in the past, includes new features never seen before \emph{and} these are visual too \emph{and} that game gets made in under a year. Engines have never been better. But it's about as expensive to change even a few things drastically as to write something special purpose. Either way you will still need months on each small region the player can enter.
We need new stuff to be polished. I'm getting the feel that actually polish is now surpassing graphics as the key thing. Cyberpunk being the best example. Poll time.
Suppose a new 2D RPG came out in 2025. It was not allowed to use any 3D. No 2.5D. In some ways worse than 1999.
But had the storytelling, setting, art direction, and basic gameplay and polish.
How much in terms of new mechanics and features would that need to compensate? And not an indie but a team the size of a big 3D team but using resources otherwise?
2. Frankenstein's Principle.
What if games again just embraced inconsistency? A few parts pretty 2D. Most parts ugly 2D. Some parts photorealistic 3D.
You explore as a stick figure like in 1989, your minigames are like in 1999, PC aims and throws potatoes in Unreal Engine, the potatoes are collected inside dungeons like in 2003, when it's not unvoiced text the story is CGI, the music is LSO.
