this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
272 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30545 readers
159 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I am probably unqualified to speak about this, as I am using an RX 550 low profile and a 768P monitor and almost never play newer titles, but I want to kickstart a discussion, so hear me out.

The push for more realistic graphics was ongoing for longer than most of us can remember, and it made sense for most of its lifespan, as anyone who looked at an older game can confirm - I am a person who has fun making fun of weird looking 3D people.

But I feel games' graphics have reached the point of diminishing returns, AAA studios of today spend millions of dollars just to match the graphics' level of their previous titles - often sacrificing other, more important things on the way, and that people are unnecessarily spending lots of money on electricity consuming heat generating GPUs.

I understand getting an expensive GPU for high resolution, high refresh rate gaming but for 1080P? you shouldn't need anything more powerful than a 1080 TI for years. I think game studios should just slow down their graphical improvements, as they are unnecessary - in my opinion - and just prevent people with lower end systems from enjoying games, and who knows, maybe we will start seeing 50 watt gaming GPUs being viable and capable of running games at medium/high settings, going for cheap - even iGPUs render good graphics now.

TLDR: why pay for more and hurt the environment with higher power consumption when what we have is enough - and possibly overkill.

Note: it would be insane of me to claim that there is not a big difference between both pictures - Tomb Raider 2013 Vs Shadow of the Tomb raider 2018 - but can you really call either of them bad, especially the right picture (5 years old)?

Note 2: this is not much more that a discussion starter that is unlikely to evolve into something larger.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago (9 children)

I like seeing advances in graphics technology but if the cost is 10 year dev cycle and still comes out s-s-s-stuttering on high end PCs and current gen consoles then scale back some.

I think we hit a point where it's just not feasible enough to do it anymore.

[–] dillekant@slrpnk.net 39 points 1 year ago (8 children)

"I want shorter games with worse graphics made by people who are paid more to work less and I'm not kidding"

[–] The_Terrible_Humbaba@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

EDIT: Never mind, I thought that was a sarcastic comment mocking the other user.


And what's wrong with that, exactly? Would you prefer broken games made by under paid and overworked people?

As for "worse graphics", AC: Unity came out in 2014, The Witcher 3 came out in 2015, and the Arkham Knight is also from 2015. All of those have technically worse graphics, but they don't look much different from modern games that need much beefier systems to run.

And here's AC: Unity compared to a much more modern game.

[–] metaridley@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure that's in support of the concept.

Ah, by bad. I didn't even realize it was a known quote, I just thought it was a sarcastic reply making fun of the other user.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)