Totk is your classic AAA game it just was programmed for older hardware.
>more detail doesn't make a game better
Have you played red dead redemption 2? The detail elevates the game to one of the greatest masterpieces of all time.
> Have you played red dead redemption 2? The detail elevates the game to one of the greatest masterpieces of all time.
Absolutely. Graphics do have their place, but most games don’t need to be that extreme level of detail. For one, I played RDR2 on a stock PS4 and the level of detail and immersion was incredible, despite the hardware already being underpowered by the time RDR2 was released. Ie you can achieve the level of immersion and masterpiece without pushing the limits of graphics.
And the most successful game ever is still minecraft.
Rockstar knows their community. They spent around $1 in marketing for every $1 spent on the development of the game itself, totalling around $500mil, and the game paid for itself opening weekend with over $700mil in sales.
The studio has managed to master this sort of high-fidelity development while fully recuperating all costs, and fostering an incredibly loyal fan base. (Personal data point; replayed every single Rockstar title last year)
You cannot criticize such a company for delivering high-fidelity projects and pushing the edge. (You can criticize their working environment, however)
And without such companies blazing ahead, we wouldn't be currently undergoing a revolutionary phase in tech history as we explore the power of massively-parallel, computationally-intensive AI algorithms.
But I am saying that it’s unnecessary for a deep immersive experience. I was equally immersed 20 years ago playing Gothic and Oblivion as I am playing recent games, graphically speaking. IMHO the differences only become apparent if you play the same game with different visuals, as you did playing RDR2 on PS4 and again on PC.
It’s also worth remembering that the vast majority of players also don’t have access to a maxed out PC.
But you wouldn't be immersed on Gothic now. By playing gothic you set a new bar for yourself and that's how the industry works. Audiences everywhere get more and more sophisticated so much so that what worked back then won't work today and what works today won't work tomorrow. Can't wait until the time RDR2 becomes an "old" game with shitty graphics.
Saints Row 4 is better than GTA 5, change my mind.
I felt the actual game flowed better, GTA is all about playing in a sandbox and seeing all the various things you can do.
Saints Row is more of a straight up action game.
The only control stuff I don't like is fabricating arrows, notching ammo, cooking food, etc. But that's not clunky, it's just time consuming. It's also optional, so I just don't bother.
It turns off people who want instantaneous responsiveness, but there's another style of action game genre your missing out on if you don't develop the patience to master those controls.
Aiming and shooting is far more precise in red dead. Combat controls are instantaneous. You fire your gun, the bullet comes out and goes in a straight line towards an enemy on every click. You can headshot an entire gang of people no issue in red dead if you used PC controls.
Dark souls has delay. Not precision at all. Every movement is unresponsive and the point of those games is to get used to the delays and imprecision. You rapidly press hit 3 times in dark souls your character hits maybe once. In red dead that's 3 shots with the pistol.
Rdr2 movement outside of combat is built for immersion. As in the delays are variable based realistically off the environment. The combat however is by far significantly more precise then any dark souls game and as a result is actually the easier game.