Raithah wrote:How about incredible graphics being used in games such as Crysis ? If run at a high enough quality, camouflage used by enemy soldiers actualy works. Occasionaly you can't even see the guys standing three feet in front of you.
From what I've heard Crysis is pretty shit to play though.
Mass Effect is intresting though, cause undoubtedly its a beautifull game, but they tried to do too much with what they had so the game is full of graphical glitches to the point were the texture popping in new areas is standerd rather then an occasional glitch.
Assassins Creed would be a better example IMO because while it doesn't have the same level as visual quality in the charecter models as say Wrex has in Mass Effect, it's ability to render the entire city from a birds eye view as you stand atop a tower then being able to dive down into the streets and interact with hundreds of NPC's on screen at once is with no noticeable visual hic-ups. I think vastly more impressive then anything mass effect does graphic.
Not to say Mass Effect isn't a great game (It is, anyone who doesn't own it should buy it) Just not the best example of fantastic graphics.
The comment on the CG movies though, that is a completly diffrent issue. Pixar movies arn't technicly superior in any significant way to what dreamworks do, there animation isn't better either. The diffrence between the movies has nothing to do with the animation, Pixar movies are written well. Thats really the only thing that sets them apart from all the other ones. The charecters are likeable, the plots are good, they would be good movies if there animation was shit, they'd be good movies done in live action or 2D animation or claymation. The 3D animation is completly irrelivent.