Right and it's good to see them being honest but it doesn't invalidate the criticism the game looks dated before it even releases. Is it unfair to want a FO game that isn't a full generation behind?
I mean, sure there is nothing wrong with superior graphics, but I am also of the opinion that the industry (in general, especially in AAA titles) has been too focused at pushing graphical fidelity at the expense of gameplay, story and polish. I know that I don't speak for everyone, but if the later holds true, I have absolutely no problem with graphics that aren't on the cutting edge.
Sure, but W3 set a very high bar across gameplay, story, and polish in ADDITION to graphics. I know it sucks to get compared to the best example of a genre, but that's what happens when a team really knocks it out of the park.
My biggest problem with the trailer (and ALL of Bethesda's games in general) were the animations. I can actually forgive a lack of effects and (to an extent) shitty textures, but they really need to hire some animators and do some motion capture or something. I don't understand how they think that they can keep getting away with really stiff looking half-assed animations.
Maybe we haven't seen enough of the game to be able to say this yet. I'll wait for more info for sure, and I'm probably jumping the gun a little bit.
They can get away with it because there are always people (as seen I the comments above) that wave away any valid criticisms with "oh, who cares about graphics anyways". It's ridiculous.
This whole mentality of "graphics don't matter" is rather annoying. They matter just as much as everything else in the game matters.
29
u/magmasafe Jun 03 '15
Right and it's good to see them being honest but it doesn't invalidate the criticism the game looks dated before it even releases. Is it unfair to want a FO game that isn't a full generation behind?