360
Insiders say cutting-edge graphics are too costly for AAA games (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
159 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Graphics are not everything, for me it's game-play first. I'm playing Carrier Command 2 now for a month straight and it has mediocre pixel and low-poly graphics, but the immersion is fantastic. It's a time sink and I forget when I should quit playing it. Hyper realistic graphics have their audience, but now they're at the point where a little improvement in graphics has diminishing returns, hence the high cost.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I used to play carrier command back in the day. It had low poly graphics, but it was great for the time. I used to love flying a Manta to escort a walrus to hit a long distance target. Did you play the original? How does it compare?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago

    Unfortunately I haven't played the original but the sequel is fine for me. I just beat for Christmas 4 AI enemy carriers and it was fun. Sure, the game feels unfinished because it was cut out mid production due to time constrains, but according to me, the game devs are sitting on a golden goose. They simply have to finish the game and make it more popular. I'm pretty sure the game would rock. Up until now it's fine as a RTS in first person perspective, but definitively it needs QOL improvements that the community behind it are desperately asking for. It can get stale and boring after a while. More variety of play is needed and definitely more complex islands to invade and conquer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent