nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksM to Games@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · edit-21 年前Video Games can't afford to look this goodwww.nytimes.comexternal-linkmessage-square42fedilinkarrow-up163arrow-down15file-textcross-posted to: gaming@beehaw.org
arrow-up158arrow-down1external-linkVideo Games can't afford to look this goodwww.nytimes.comnanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksM to Games@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · edit-21 年前message-square42fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: gaming@beehaw.org
minus-squarebrsrklf@jlai.lulinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 年前 In the early 2000’s we had “beautiful” games (aka the most advanced graphics that technology could afford) but games were fun. You only remember the good ones. There has always been a lot of games that look good or even impressive, but play like crap. Today there are still critically acclaimed games that happen to look good too. They’re a tiny minority, but it’s always been like that.
You only remember the good ones. There has always been a lot of games that look good or even impressive, but play like crap.
Today there are still critically acclaimed games that happen to look good too. They’re a tiny minority, but it’s always been like that.