Hmmm.... Do gamers owe devs a general apology on visuals?

Intellivision

Well-Known Member
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
7,270
998
13,029
Let's face it, the biggest (and easiest) thing to criticize games is graphics..... looks fuzzy, jaggy, crappy textures, etc....

Well, with X1X enhancing existing games automatically (NOT including devs releasing new 4k texture packs), what's happened is that the game looks much cleaner, textures are better, and the original vision of the game maker who built the game with pimped out specs now translates into a game that shows it better.

This is especially evident in those 360 enhanced games like Gears and Mirror's Edge.... games that came out 10 years ago!

However, we got gimped looking games because the console is underpowered and the devs do their work to scale back things so it runs smoothly and fits the 720p/1080p tvs we had.

So it goes to show, the original work was there the whole time. We console gamers just couldn't see it due to the system, while PC gamers with good rigs could see it right away.
 
Last edited:
It’s not like gamers didn’t know if you wanted the best experience, it was to be had on PC. So no, I don’t really see your point.
 
It’s not like gamers didn’t know if you wanted the best experience, it was to be had on PC. So no, I don’t really see your point.
I think most console gamers seeing mediocre visuals blame the devs first. Hardware second..
 
I think most console gamers seeing mediocre visuals blame the devs first. Hardware second..

Maybe. Maybe not. I think the main thing most console gamers cared about was having the better quality game than the competition.
 
I think most console gamers seeing mediocre visuals blame the devs first. Hardware second..
They do, and for good reason.

The X1X is misleading you. Its sole purpose is to enhance games made for much weaker hardware...If X1X was the base hardware it too would have games that are perceived as mediocre visually.
 
Talented devs can work with any hardware. We'll always have limitations not matter what gen or platform.

HZD had no issues looking and running great on a standard PS4. s*** it ran smoother than most linear games.
 
Interesting concept. Another interesting question is, should any of the games be reviewed again or have reviews amended? The older games mentioned may be less applicable, but what about Halo 5 and Quantum Break? Those are not that old. Both ran smooth, but both also had some graphical issues that were described by both reviewers and gamers. Both are now said to be amazing in 4K.

That's just some more food for thought.
 
Well one console in particular is offering the same advantages as PCs do. The ability to run decade old games for resolutions and settings that didn't exist back then. I don't think that games should be reviewed by what they'll be in 10 years, they should be reviewed as they are presented. That includes service games.

Its about whats there day 1. Not some raid in 3 weeks. If you want a re-review bundle the main game with the next expansion pack.

Generally speaking...there's little reason why Gears 3 and Mirrors Edge won't be made 8k when next Xbox rolls around. All I see is the revenue dropping out of lazy HD remasters.

And as long as devs promise visuals at 60fps and deliver downgraded visuals at 30fps they will always owe me their apology.
 
Last edited:
Errr... no? Devs have zero obligation to provide tip top visuals. They do it to get people to buy the game. There is no ethical component here beyond the entitlement to something not provided by someone else. Buy it or don't.

Honestly, I'm shocked they are providing all these updates at no charge, even though they would have grounds given the extra cost to make them- at least in the case of pre-existing games.They aren't doing because they are nice, though- they are doing it to add value and perhaps sell or resell copies to people who don't yet have their games. MS is doing it to draw people to their platform. Period.