Why are dev's not going to the limit in terms of graphic quality?

[soxsure]

Hey,

really just wondering why not? I understand that not every game needs it.. talking about fun Indie games and stuff like that.

 

Battlefield 3 (2011) still looks superior compared to alot of games of 2017/18/19.

Witcher 3 got downgraded because consoles hardware was/ is not up to the task, as fas as I know.

 

Ah well the consoles, seems like I answered my own question. Not quite I think.

Isn't it possible to create a game with top notch graphics? It wouldn't even matter if noone could run it - yet, simply turn down some settings and you should be good to go - or am I missing something here? Afterall that should be the reason for a graphics menu?

And choose a graphic preset that works for consoles - everyone happy?

 

Any thoughts?^^

 

[NotSoEpicMods]

iirc elder scrolls mod packs could make that game nearly unplayable but also look amazing. You also have to remember game devs also have a lot of other factors that determine overall quality. For example would you like to play a game that had the most stunning graphics but the mechanics were completely broken? or would you like to play a game that looked pretty decent but had amazing gameplay mechanics and an engaging story line?

[soxsure]

3 minutes ago, NotSoEpicMods said:

For example would you like to play a game that had the most stunning graphics but the mechanics were completely broken? or would you like to play a game that looked pretty decent but had amazing gameplay mechanics and an engaging story line?

Why not both?

[NotSoEpicMods]

1 minute ago, soxsure said:

Why not both?

Money. Dev companies will make compromises. If you had to spend an extra $2 million to make the game look 2 times better but it would only improve sales by $1 million would you still do it? No, probably not.

[LogicalDrm]

Ever heard of Crysis? Or the saying, "But can it run Crysis"? That was top notch game when it was released. It couldn't be run with decent fps unless you had absolutely best hardware on markets.

 

You mention Witcher 3. That had option to turn it into GPU killing game (Hairworks).

 

So I think many devs can and will make graphically heavy games. The reason why they don't is two-fold. One part is time and skills it requires to create graphically demanding or beautiful games. Other part is to what audience it goes to. If they make console game, they know that every gamer can run it at best possible experience everytime. If they make it for PC, they have gamble to make. Either audience will understand that game is not meant to be run at full graphics on every machine and rides more with superior gameplay and story. Or they don't understand and will rage about unopitimized, poor quality etc. when game doesn't run on their midrange machines.

 

That is already a case with latest Tomb Raider games. People whine when they don't run at ultra quality and 144Hz 4k on every crappy machine. So which game devs have balls (and backing) to take that gamble? Not that many. Not DICE (Battlefield games). They are so far in pocket of EA that they couldn't do massive maps like they did for older BF games (BF2 Dragon Valley is massive compared to BF4 maps for example). CD Projekt RED has balls to do it. They probably will with Cyberpunk.

 

The other thing is, what is limit of graphical quality? Meaning that it cannot be run with modern hardware when it comes out? Or just beautiful otherwise? Is it photorealism of some racing games (Forza series)? Or real-like weather effects, water effects etc.? Or just super-imposed coloring like in Trine-games? In the end, graphical quality of games is artistic choice. Most played games weren't graphically intensive when they came out. Look at Minecraft, Fortnite, CSGO, LoL, Dota2, Overwatch and so on. They were created gameplay first, graphics second. Minecraft being the front of retro-style when it was released in 2008.

[wolfxtr3m]

Imagine having to buy new hardware every year just to be able to run all recent games, not everyone is able to afford new hardware neither wants. I still play on my old mid-tier gamming laptop of 2014, sure I can't play all max graphics with 60+fps, and still I play forza horizon 3 and 4 on it.

 

Not all people that games is able to get top of the line hardware, plus some ppl just want to have fun and play the games otherwise consoles would have been dead by now, and yet they still ported games like the witcher 3 for the switch.

[JabroniBaloney]

RDR2 has graphics options that won't run amazingly on current hardware and people lost their shit over it being "unoptimized". 

I can see devs being hesitant to do this because of how people thoughtlessly react.

[Mira Yurizaki]

The amount of game developers that have the technical expertise to offer both amazing quality visuals and high performance is few and far between. Many developers just take a game engine, throw their assets on it, set a few sliders, and call it a day.