[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by Fien

Three posters responding to me... gee, I must have touched a nerve.

Perhaps, in that it relates to how there are gamers who simply dismiss the game because the graphics are "dated" or "bad", thus missing out on a great game due to technical snobbery and confusion of raw specs with artistic accomplishment. I think we have an emotional conviction (probably mistaken) that if they would just get over their prejudice, they would come to appreciate it like we do.

People use the word graphics in different ways. By “better graphics” I simply meant more modern = more high-tech. For you, graphics include both technology and art style. Quibbling over words aside (have you read my comment on the AG review?), I agree with most of what you said.

Yes, I read your comments. Of course, we can use "better" in a purely quantitative sense, but then I don't quite see what your argument is. If we grant that low-res is a valid artistic style with its own appeal, and that (for reasons Erwin and Jason and alcoatjez touched on) it's rather well suited for this game, why shouldn't it be the right choice? (Apart from the purely commercial argument that it might sell more if it looked more modern, which is possible but not at all certain, since retro is a pretty popular style among adventure gamers; in any case, the cost of investment probably wouldn't justify any increase.)

Yes, change one of the ingredients and the end result will be different. Yes, my opinion is just an opinion. No, I certainly don’t equate high-tech with “realism”. For instance, a cut scene with real actors can be realistic and very low-tech at the same time.

That's why I asked what kind of graphic style you would prefer. To take two examples that share some similarities with this game, what about the graphics of Blade Runner or the white chamber? They are more "advanced", but are they more artistically successful? (Leaving aside the question of whether Joshua could realistically create a game the size of Gemini Rue with graphics like Blade Runner by himself.)

My point was that I am surprised that the retro-look immediately appeals to so many posters. I wonder if those are the same people whose top ten consists of Sierra and LA games, who find Mystian adventures with their pretty screens and lack of dialogues boring?

Myst is not among my personal favorites, but I respect it as a good game. I don't really like the graphic style or find it pretty, though. 3D-rendered has its own limitations, and leads to a style that I find plasticky, sterile and soulless (though it got better over time).

Like Jelena said, “old-school graphics are associated with quality”. Well, maybe I have played too many adventures because I haven’t forgotten the bad ones. I still play and love old adventures from the 80's and 90's, *in spite of* the low-tech. Take GK1. Great game. When I replayed it two years ago, I found the graphics immensely offputting at first. Annoying even: There was supposed to be a dragon symbol on this clock in granny’s attic which was totally unrecognizable thanks to the low resolution.

In my opinion, the graphics in GK1 are... variable, and the UI is pretty poor. I would not dispute that this can lead to frustration.

I agree with Orient, in many cases the retro-style is a choice born out of necessity. And it isn’t just about the graphics either. The Whispered World is not low-res, but it’s essentially a tribute to the so-called classic adventure, gameplay, interface, puzzles and all. Same goes for the other Daedalic adventures.

This sounds like a different discussion, and I'm not sure what you're saying. Freedom in choosing graphics style is certainly limited by what is technologically possible and by budget, time, and available competence. How are the rest of what you talk about "born of necessity", though?

You talk about the "cumbersome interface" in Gemini Rue, and I agree that it is inelegant in several ways (having to right-click on a hotspot to open your inventory, lack of documented keyboard shortcuts, having to combine keyboard and mouse controls...). Are those the things you are talking about, or are you referring to having four verbs instead of just a simple one-function or two-function cursor? Because that brings us back to subjective preference and what best suits the game.

Originally Posted by dekaneas297

So you wouldn't watch a remastered blu-ray movie of the 50s-60s just because "there is no alignment with the resolution of that era"?

A better example might be when they take an old movie (e.g. Disney theatrical cartoons) and filter out all the grain so the whole film is smooth as if it was done in a computer. I hate that, and would much rather watch a proper, clean print with the original film grain.