Why did video game graphics get worse over time instead of better?
What are you talking about?
HE'S TOO FAST!
>F.E.A.R
Why did video game artificial intelligence get worse over time instead of better?
>>340843470
2007 graphics look better than a lot of 2011-2016 games.
Modern games look Plasticine.
>because of technically limitations
Am I the only one who likes the low poly hi res fear had going on? I really wish games would stay like that and have effort put into other things.
Also hard shadows make me hard
>>340843821
the lighting just looks plain better.
I don't know if it's to do with the shaders modern games use or related to the models/textures but they have this fake plastic looking finish to the characters that just doesn't exist in older games even though on an objective level the never games should look better.
I hope someone else knows what I'm talking about.
Fear looks like fucking dogshit you imbecile. Half life 2 looked better and Max Payne 2 did the same office look bullshit better too. Fear just sucks.
>>340844093
>Half life 2 looked better
Fuck no, dude. Revisit the game sometime. Outdoors especially are awful.
>>340844437
It's real hit or miss. Upgraded grab gun still looks and feels 10/10 but getting facefucked by a crab looks so bad it ruins all tension in the horror sections.
>>340844437
Played HF2 nad FEAR recently.
Both games look very, very decent and don't seemed to have aged that much. I em especially impressed by HF2. That was like my third or fourth time going through it and it was still fun, still challenging, didn't feel stale and repetitive and the storyline keeps the player invested -- quite stunning achievement for a rather linear shooter to be way better then a lot of modern meme sandbox games like Fary Cry where you basically do the same shit over and over again while you roam around like an idiot, propelled by subpar plot you don't give a fuck after the first few missions.
HF2 is an extremely minimalist game by today's standards -- no stupid side-quests, no ridiculous collectibles, autistic gimmicks or fillers -- but because of that you don't feel distracted and can focus on the most important aspects (physics/shooting/plot).
Fear was linear as fuck but the physics and shooting really stood out at that time. Even today it's so fun to play this game.
Internet ruined video games.
>>340843821
no you're not the only one
it really makes the lighting and particle effects pop out, none of this modern post-processing motion blur bullshit going on to disguise the low detail
>>340843368
Consoles, specifically the RAM limiations of last gen meaning texture quality took a huge drop in quality, and to mask that they put filters everywhere, and now normies are used to thinking filters are what looks good.
I liked the old days of 2003-2005 when things would generally be low poly but extremely high texture res like Max Payne 2. I swear to god, aside from Max's model itself in MP3, MP2's textures are better than 3's.
If i have been playing alot of doom quake and the lime how easily will i adapt to this game i have it in my steam profile and have never seeioualy played it
>>340845837
>like Max Payne 2my niggaI also really liked how in the first two games, things such as bullet holes, blood, dead enemies, casings and empty magazines would stay on the world. Rarely do you ever see a game today do this.
>>340845931
It depend if you are one of those Doom/Quake purists who cannot find enjoyment in anything that isn't the original Doom or original Quake.
FEAR is no like Doom or Quake at all. You don't run at a million miles per hour, you don't bunnyhop etc. Don't expect that. You can run fast if you put slow mo on but you will still being going slow compared to Doom.
Just go in expecting a shooter with well biult level design (again, don't think this means Doom mazes, it's well built in that it's built around how they programmed the AI, so the AI can really pull wonders and surprise you because it works in conjunction with the level design) that really complements how AI works and can fool you into thinking it's fantastically good. It's also hot some spooky sections but it's all window dressing to break up the pacing between each slow motion shooty bit.
Think of FEAR as a first person Max Payne with better AI but a worse story.
I mean, F.E.A.R. still looks decent, but it's been out-done by pretty much every Triple A First Person Shooter from the 2010's forward.
>>340848154
>out-done
>>340848154
Except it hasn't, not in graphics (name me a modern game with full dynamic lighting) and certainly not in gameplay.
>>340848406
The textures in FEAR look pretty bad by today's standards, mate. I'm talking exclusively graphics wise.
>>340848976
Lighting is a major part of graphics. If you want to talk texture res only, I will concede that SOME games have surpassed it since, but considering FEAR is 11 years old it should be all games, not just some games.
I don't remember seeing any bad texture work in FEAR either, I think it holds up well enough.
>>340849124
It holds up fine, but pretty much all FPS games nowadays have better textures and models. This is just undeniable.
>>340850003
Models, yeah. That is one thing that admitted did improve. But without good textures, more poly's on a model were pretty much useless in most cases. After a certain point more polygons don't mean much.
I think now in the last year or so you might be right with the new gen finally giving us better texture quality, but your average game from 2009-2014, these did not look better. Sure there were your odd outlier like Metro 2033 and such, but your average game had muddy as fuck textures, and terrible LOD for anything any distance away too.
>>340850003
They all seem to have worse lighting and physics based interactivity.
Which makes no sense without going
>consoles
>>340845536
the lighting was cash in fear, the shadows were sharp as fuck
