Quote:
Originally Posted by Monolith
Exactly my point.
|
I apologize, I thought your point was that the graphics were scarce for the time.
I only now understand you meant that they were scarce for
an adventure game of the time. I'm pretty sure we can agree that end-90s graphics were good enough to bring about perfectly good FPS games, though. Or perhaps back in '99 you didn't like HL because you considered its graphics to be subpar?
With no point of reference, people are usually pretty content with the current status of development. Back in '99, I had never seen Crysis-quality graphics. So I was content with HL-quality. Of course, had GK3 had DooM-quality graphics, well in that cas I wouldn't have been happy at all.
My point is that only relative comparisons of contemporary games retain a certain objectivity. Therefore instead of saying "GK3's 3D graphics were AWESOME", I will limit myself to "considering that GK3's 3D graphics were en-par to what the times had to offer, and that therefore the game's developers did the best they could with the 3D tools they had, GK3 turned out to be a pretty awesome game".
