Companies need to realize that graphics are only important for certain types of games. You want a realistic driving game? Graphics and physics are extremely important. You want a realistic war game? Graphics are important here, too.
However, if you want a game that will affect someone emotionally with an amazing story/character development, you do not need the fanciest graphics. In fact, you are an idiot if you think graphics are important. People like the CEO of Crytek seem to forget that people used to read books (OHMAIGAWD BOOKS?) and experienced just as vivid an experience (if not more so) from words on a page. If game developers focused on writing an amazing story you'd find within a book, it doesn't matter if you have amazing graphics and quality voice acting to go with it or basic 3D rendering and text boxes for "voices". The audience will appreciate either one and the message will come across the same in the end.
In Crytek's case, no one cares that you have an amazing looking shooter if the other side of the coin is repetitive gameplay and a shit story. It gets the "wow" factor when you see it for the first time, but it is gradually lost as the player does the same actions over and over in different yet the same environments.
Conclusion: A company head should have 20+ years of gaming experience so they know what their target audience wants. Hiring a movie director to make pretty looking games with no substance is a mistake.
This was for Dark Souls port to PC. One problem was addressed - the resolution. It was very low even on high resolution monitors. Someone released DSFix a day after release and it looked beautiful.
The bigger problem was the locked 30 fps. Even high end computers are locked to 30fps and no one (to my knowledge) has been able to overwrite this.
I cannot wait to delve back into and explore Souls. By far, these have been some of the most enjoyable games in my 25 years of gaming. Just the right amount of challenge, that rewarding feeling of small progress, and amazingly fluid controls.
I agree with the comments below - if the story was stronger, that'd put it into the best video game of all time category for me. Either way, I am really looking forward to the next installment.
AMD had their 15 minutes of fame 10 years ago. Now they are trying to catch up to Nvidia who have clearly fixed their past weaknesses and have come out on top. It's time for AMD to learn from what Nvidia did if they want to come back on top.
Great article. However, this also explains why some developers are just rehashing old stories with improved visuals (not necessarily the ones mentioned in this article). It's a great thing to take what was done before and build on it. Not so great to "re-make" it.
@Shmiity Agreed. I don't think GTA 10 will be any different than GTA 5: get arrested, wake up in jail, break out, steal a car, shoot people, go to an objective, and be rewarded with a cutscene from a shitty storyline until the game is over when you go back to jail.
COD/Battlefield version: "realistic" shooter: Empty a clip into someone on multiplayer mode as their health drops yet they still don't die. Health in a war game...really? But lets make it better and add achievements and levels to make it cool and "power" your soldier up and kill people in 1 hit. I guess my idea of a "realistic" shooter is much different than these trash game developers.
Speranza318's comments