I did nothing to pick on your english. Didnt seem to be any mistakes in the previous post, at all.
I'm curious, you do know much about the industry, or are these guess assumptions out of thin air?
^ did you purposely completely ignore that line.No one is doing, or has done this because in most cases this doesn't make them money.
lets face it, Crysis was not a very good game, not terrible, but everyone will agree with less focus on its trying to be photo realistic and
more focus on gameplay it might could have been in a top 10 great games of all time.
Crysis is popular and sold what it did cause of its hype, no one else is going to be able to hype graphics like that and sell copies for a while.
This doesnt mean i dont like or dont respect he game for what its done, its pushed hardware and thats a great thing, but this explanation is the reason my above quoted statement is true.
You sir, are the one missing the point, the point of your post was clear. But to an extent I do agree with you, exact photo realism of life in a game
I see not happening for some time, it will come close sooner than we think, but i could be wrong. But the advancements being worked on at the current moment are looking bright.
to add, what in the world does this mean.
4kx3k, where did you even get that number, I will tell you, this subject is a specialty of mine, and theres really no such thing as a proper realistic resolution.All the modern accelerators even in multi-GPU setups struggle with Crysis with proper realistic resolution (4k x 3k).
that is based on so many things its ridiculous.









Bookmarks