The real blackpill is that, as advanced as we are, our further advances in terms of graphics don't matter.
Modern vidya has either photo-realistic graphics or stylized graphics, both of which are effectively the peak of what they can be. You can't go more realistic than photo-realistic, while stylized art (pixel art, cel shading etc.) is abstract and can't really be said to distinctly improve
Sure, we can go from 60 FPS to 120 FPS, but that difference is quite honestly minimal visually. Graphical improvements are giving us diminishing returns for the amount of money we have to invest in them. Compare the difference between the current gen consoles and the next gen console which are just coming out to the difference between the previous gen and the current gen, you'll see a much smaller difference in terms of quality.
Compare the difference between the quality of a cutting edge PC and a PC which was cutting edge 4 or 5 years ago, and the difference in terms of graphics isn't massive. Sure, the cutting edge PC has a better frame rate, will look slightly better and will be faster, but compare the cost of the parts and you'll find you're paying 3 or 4 times as much for a maybe 30% increase in quality
This is the secret AAA game companies don't want you to know. Graphics have hit their peak, and it doesn't matter. A game looking good doesn't make it fun, and the investment into making a game look as good as possible simply isn't worth it.
If you think modern video games are even close to photorealism outside a few well chosen screenshots you need your eyes checked
Andrew Kelly
who the fuck cares idiot
Charles Collins
You need to be 18 to post here OP.
John Lewis
That screenshot is bs as it's compressed to shit and doesn't show the actual difference that was present in Ground Zeroes, native 720p vs native 1080p.
We're definitely not at photorealism although I do agree that we don't really need new consoles yet given the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro are both less than 4 years old.
Henry Anderson
>Sure, we can go from 60 FPS to 120 FPS, but that difference is quite honestly minimal visually It's really not. Yes the jump from 30 to 60 is bigger but 60 to 120 is very noticeable. Smoother and more responsive is always better. Stable 60 FPS should be the absolute bare minimum, not the peak.
Jonathan Howard
OP are you blind? Those are from the same gen.
Bentley Evans
>Modern vidya has either photo-realistic graphics Are you 8 years old? No game has photo realistic graphics
Zachary Cook
I wish we could've settled on 1080p and just worked from there. In 4 years 4K memers are gonna be memeing 10K and sucking the dick of the Xbox One X2 360 Scorpio Noscope even though it's still going to be playing the same games we've been playing the last 10 years.
Landon Johnson
>the difference between 60 and 120 FPS is minimal stopped reading there, you're a retard
