View Single Post


July 24th, 2007, 19:21
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
I'm a bit puzzled by what is an interpretation here. I indicate the timing of the criticism, the early lack of it, and provide quotes for it. Interpretation would be giving a motivation for it, but I don't. The existence of this phenomenon and its timing are objective facts, not interpretation.
If it was not clear to you, I didn't mean they are an interpretation but your conclusion drawn from them. Also, graphics can wane quite quickly nowadays. Naturally, I cannot but wonder why you picked up graphic issues to point out "contradictions" of the older and newer reviews since comparing technology with newer games with older ones produces rather obvious result. Really, didn't anybody notice this? I'd rather pick them as how the larger media companies praise plastic aspects of games continuously.

Why do you think I quoted Rolston in the first place? Maybe, with the second try?
As teams have grown larger, schedules longer, and production budgets titanic, computer games have become almost as slick and polished as television and cinema — and often as dull and formulaic. I preferred working in small teams with short schedules and smaller budgets, and I don't prefer the slick, polished products of today to the rougher, simpler products of a decade ago. Clearly the mass market prefers the slicker games, but I prefer, for example, the original Pirates and Civilization to the various later editions.
Of course, above is just my humble interpretations, though.
Dusk is offline




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 278