Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 3:27 pm
No, YOU are the one who doesn't understand.Hyper Shadow wrote:I don't think anyone understood what i meant.
When you think about this there are 2 basic classifications of graphics.
NES & X Box
I know everyone's like WTF?????
You see X Box looks more like real life and NES looks like just some Video Game.
In one sense. X Box has better graphics than NES for looking more like real life.
In another sense NES has better graphics for looking more like some video game.
You might see someone playing X Box and think that they are just watching some sorta movie and walk past them and wish that you had some video games to play.
But let's say they're playing NES. You walk in. you look at the T.V.
and say hmmm. thats a video game alright. I can tell that it's not a movie because it looks like a video game and not real life.
So is everyone clear on that thur graphics thing?
And don't even get me started on talking about gameplay.
EVERYONE considers realistic graphics to be the "best" graphics.
Even in the days of NES they were trying to make games look real, not like games. Also, nobody is going to think that an<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/re ... 46';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> Xbox </a>game is a movie, visuals haven't come that far yet.
