"I’m tired of the need for more 'realism' in games. I don’t want to hear about how realistic Call of Duty is while you’re cowering behind cover watching the red Kool-Aid disappear from your screen. I don’t care if Battlefield 3’s bullet drop somehow makes it a better shooter. Does it really matter if you play Forza Motorsport, Gran Turismo, or Need for Speed? They all look and feel fantastic; why does it matter if one is more realistic?
"You want to see a realistic game? Go play Operation Flashpoint on the hardest difficulty. After you’ve gotten out of the fetal position, tell me how enjoyable it was. Unless you happen to be a masochist, I’m going to bet you didn’t have a very good time. That’s realistic.
"We use video games as an escape, just like movies, literature, and music. They tell us stories, let us make our own, or let us live out an experience. I can’t drive a race car (heck, I don’t even have a license), but that doesn’t stop me from playing Need for Speed. The cor...
If you are looking for a bargain, check out the huge discounts across the entire WatchDogs series on Steam.
From Digital Foundry: "Welcome to the third part in the biggest DF Retro episode we've ever produced - a year-by-year look at how 1080p gaming fared on the PlayStation 3. Launched in 2007 touting its then-exclusive HDMI digital interface, Sony layered full HD gaming on top of its Cell processor and RSX 'Reality Synthesizer' as key selling points for its third generation console. Of course, we all know how that turned out - both Sony and Microsoft machines routinely ran the most advanced titles at sub-720p resolutions, often with questionable performance, so what happened to the 1080p dream?
In the first two parts of John Linneman's investigation, we've covered off the first four years of the Triple's lifecycle and moving into 2010, the overall fortunes of the PlayStation 3 continued to improve. The platform holder released - what was then - the most advanced motion controller in the console space, backed up by experiments with stereoscopic 3D, which turned out to be a short-lived but still formidable pairing. Combined with a strong E3 showing, PS3 was looking good.
However, it's fair to say that it was a fallow year for 1080p gaming on the system, with only Scott Pilgrim Saves The World's razor-sharp pixel art upscaling, Castle Crashers and Soldner X2's 3D/FMV stylings accommodating full HD output - alongside a wonderful Monkey Island remaster."
Just remember ladies and gentlemen, Sony never said all games would be 1080p. Only that the system would support games up to 1080p in a survey before the system was released.
https://spong.com/article/9...
And as we saw, some games did support it, some games tried their best to support it and some games didn't or never reached it.
Is a higher resolution great to have if you can do it? Sure. Is it necessary for a fun game? No
But what I find interesting is Eurogamer. Are they really talking about HD and PS3 in their article or are they really pushing their 4.50 Euros 4K video download subscription? Seems one is being used to sell the other. Just look at the bottom of the article.
thats what every company tries to do, push for people to buy their products. Are you really gonna blame them for that?
Not all articles are about selling. They're about informing or entertaining.
Maybe I'm supposed to watch the video instead of reading. But I shouldn't have to click. But the article lazily tells us some games did hit 1080p and some didn't. I didn't learn anything new as I own the console. Then, they push a Patreon subscription.
Are you saying every opinion, preview, review and rant article requires a push to buy something now? Tell me which sites are prone to do so so that I can avoid them in the future.
not everyone played during the ps3 era. I started during snes era but loved seeing articles/videos about how gaming evolved before that.
i dont think this article is trying to push you to get that patreon sub, it doesnt for me at least. I dont think theres anything wrong putting an ad at the bottom of the article. all the regular DF videos are free already.
Wipeout HD on PS3, a remake of the PS1 game was 1080p 60fps. And that released in 2007-08
This really feels like a filler article. I don't feel like I learned anything notable or substantial from this. I feel they could have reduced the unnecessary intro and over-explanation of things and put the whole series in one article for a more substantial and possibly informative piece rather than piece-mealing it out as they have.
It's more about the video. DF Retro videos are for Patreon members first, and I think the whole thing was one big video. For the youtube channel, it gets chopped up and released weekly.
Chris is actually right on this one. Something known already was just kind of washed over in the article. Unless you're supposed to get more in the video. If more is in the video, then more could have been said in the article.
Only thing I learned new was that they are selling a subscription. My point though is that you gain more viewers by having better articles and content.
With the world of information and technology, privacy and security growing every day, Watch Dogs deserves another chance in the spotlight, now more than ever.
The only Ubi title that deserves a faithful remake right now is Splinter Cell 1.
All 2014+ Ubi titles are just underwhelming. Especially ones from 2016+ are just cancer.
Seriously, are we so far removed from Ubisoft actually making good games that people now praise Watch_Dogs in retrospect?
"Watch_Dogs has remained one of my favourite games of the last ten years." Jesus Christ.
I remember being so disappointed in Watch Dogs when I played it at release. It was alright, but I think I fell for the hype and I needed a game to play on my new PS4.
This is what happens when mediocrity gets praised as good.
Standards are slipping across the whole entertainment industry.
What was once considering rubbish is now considered as OK, what once was OK is now being praised as good etc etc.
Everyone has their own likes. I liked it a lot myself. I played through it twice and liked the car chases and the open world with fairly decent environments and missions. It suffered from the whole downgrade thing where they showed graphics that weren't actually there. No game will appeal to everyone but it was still ambitious for it's time.
For certain! AC1 was brilliant at the time but with new graphics and gameplay it would be amazing! Do you prefer old combat or new though?
I'd say a reimagining of AC1.
I direct AC1 remake would be a bad idea. It'll need better story pacing and significant better world building.
Old. Let it play like how it did with AC2-Syndicate style gameplay but refine the setting and story.
It would need a lot changed for it to be enjoyable again as even back in 2007 on launch we were all complaining about it's repetitive gameplay go here perform one of three side quests repeat then assassination now do it over and over until a big battle with a unforgiving checkpoint system.
I'd prefer it didn't. Ubisoft would make it so bloated, it wouldn't be anywhere near the original
As a fan of the franchise legion was garbage and I regretted my purchase for the first time in the franchise the entire thing felt like an experiment in NPC behaviour and released without the writers input on what makes a good story.
I don't think I'm alone in that feeling though as wrench and Aiden are brought back and the campaign was rewritten to fit them.
I am tempted to buy the season pass to play it again with Aiden but fool me twice shame on me I'm waiting for a deep sale
Agreed. Despite the annoying hipness of the characters in part 2 I thought it was a really fun game. I was extremely disappointed and surprised at how many steps back they took with Legion. You'd think it was made by an entirely different team. Or was it?
It was just so devoid of fun.
Honestly one of my biggest annoyances with Legion is that they took out the camera views for the driving. I mean the behind the car view that they stuck us with is near unplayable. I always used a first person driving view. After two releases why did they take OUT features? I don't get it.
The fist watchdog game was the best by far
After that they weren't weird and annoying with that hipster stuff. Aiden was a badass.
I thought so at first too. I got used to it and it ended up being good after some play time. I just had to give it a chance.
Exactly. I love the fact that you can jump and shoot with a .50 cal sniper rifle in COD. That adds to the fun whereas realism reduces the fun and makes the gameplay boring. Games aren't suppose to be realistic, we as human beings are very limited when it comes to abilities and powers and such and having game designers implementing what we fantasize the most in terms of technology and surreal action in video games make us people happy cause we get to experience our own "world", the world of fantasies and joy in those games which brightens our imagination and give us something to think about. If I wanted realism, I would rather stick to the life outside of home and drive a real car instead of playing GT5/Forza for instance. Realism ruins the fun, fun is surreal or simply like our folks at Epic Games call it, Unreal.
Doesn't an escape from one reality into another make all the more magic though?
Operation Flashpoint on hard is BOMB! I loved it! Intense! One of the few games that was genuinely hard and not just cheap like playing COD on veteran.
Most of my favorite games this gen are unrealistic
Valkyria Chronicles
Tales of Graces F
Disgaea 4
Atelier Meruru
Mass Effect 1
Grand Theft Auto IV.