1067

submitted 11 months ago by bbpolterGAYst@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

177 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works 34 points 11 months ago

Counterpoint: I like pretty lights and don't mind having to play at a suboptimal framerate if it means more detail that I'm going to notice and enjoy.

Also, I keep seeing people confusing photorealism with a lack of style, when that's just not true. Pixar movies for example are photorealistic but stylized. You can have fancy lights and cool styles.

[-] jomoo99@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

I disagree that pixar movies are photorealistic... They're pretty solidly on the cartoon side of things

[-] Trollception@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Pixar movies have accurate lighting which makes them look great. Lighting separates a good looking game from a great looking game and is more important than textures imo.

[-] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 months ago

Main point aside, that isn't photorealism tho. Photorealism is depicting something almost identical to a real life photograph or simply what most consider realistic graphics.

[-] DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I would consider photorealism to mainly be light-based (prefix photo meaning light), but I get what you mean. I'd consider photorealism and realism to be separate. "I can see that existing" vs "I can see myself being there"

A better example probably would've been claymation, or pokemon concierge.

Edit: my definition of photorealism might be off.