Games Graphics

imo games were way better when i was a kid even the graphs were worse

ELDER SCROLLS ARENA STILL MUCH BETTER IMO

graphics are overrated
and probably game 2 > game 1

Well as a former SC1 player i am aware that gameplay always > graphics.

Still its nice how games can look nowadays

It does, but gameplay is improved by good graphics imo. Skyrim is amazing.

fuck graphics

still nothing comes close to warcraft III, quake 3, cs, etc

test out some BF4 bro, max dat shit out

Yeah I'm gonna be upgrading pretty soon so I can max out BF4. What exactly did you get?

On November 01 2013 16:34 dnagardi wrote: fuck graphics still nothing comes close to warcraft III, quake 3, cs, etc

Q2 played during class>>>>>Q3 man

My favorite old games that I played when I was younger were: Galaga (Arcade + various systems), Warlords (Apple computer), and Starcraft 1 (PC).

The graphics weren't the best with these games, however, the game-play is what made them all-time classics.

could still fap to the pixelated red bikini girls

Yea skyrim is a beautiful game...should get a new monitor the resolution difference will be huge.

Try Metro: last light...awesome game. And currently one of the few games if not the only one with 8 threads...it's pretty insane how CPU/GPU intensive this game can get. My buddy has best intel i5 core and nvidea m770 and the game still lags on highest settings on 1180 resolution (whatever resolution is higher than 1920x1080). The attention to detail on the game is quite amazing.

Not to mention the gameplay is pretty fun. Currently on my second play through on ranger hardcore mode. Can be challenging on some parts.

Games in the past had shit graphics because they were severely limited by the technology back then. Before GPUs the CPU had to process both graphics calculations and everything else, not to mention they were much slower. Now that we have faster gpus, and more memory bandwidth you can render models with higher polygon counts in real time, perform reflection calculations faster and do ray tracing faster. Graphics will just continue to get better as long as the technology gets better. Which i guess is obvious, but we've actually knew how to render fully 3d scenes in the 80s, its just it couldn't be done in real time because of the tech we had back then. I'm sure there's been new algorithms developed as well though .

It's really interesting to go back and see the games that went for "more realistic" graphics vs. the games with cell shading and cartoon stuff. I remember playing Perfect Dark 64 for the first time and thinking it looked really good and now, going back, it looks terrible. But then you play something like Yoshi's Island on a CRT and it still looks amazing.

On November 03 2013 17:58 egood wrote: Now that we have faster gpus, and more memory bandwidth you can render models with higher polygon counts in real time, perform reflection calculations faster and do ray tracing faster.

I can remember generating a ray traced image at I guess 800 x 600 res back in the day on my 386 SX33. Only took 20 hours or so.

The first time I saw the graphics on an Atari ST I can remember being blown away. Similar thing happened years later when games started coming out on CD. I think it was 7th Guest in PC Format that I saw and thought something like, "This is it, the pinnacle of graphics in gaming".