I'm with him on his points of contention, the wheel and fingers are a bit too simplistic and look off, which hurts the aesthetics as a whole. I'm with you that stuff doesn't need to be realistic, I'd just like them to fake it to the point where it's not noticeable :p. I have less of a problem with the wheel (which could have a motor which rotates around a fixed axle) than I do with the right hand which looks like a like something I'd expect to see at least a decade ago in order to save polygons. The wheel I think just needs some minor tweaks to the assembly to make it more interesting (currently looks like a giant caster) and an improved tire texture would be nice, the one there is pretty special.Brother None said:I'm feeling you're missing the whole point of "Science!" and retro-50s here.
Agreed, they certainly didn't do as good of a job as Beth's marketing department in picking screens that show as few flaws as possible. Clipping isn't generally something I associate with official promotional screenshots.Starwars said:To me it mainly looks like whoever took the screenshots wasn't really trying hard enough to capture a good scene so to speak.
Adamguy61 said:Who cares about graphics anyways?? I play fallout 1 and 2 (obviously) and I don't complain because there isn't super awesome 3d textures and animations complete with full dynamic lighting and high definition resolution... leave Bethesda alone! If any company was to make a fps/
"rpg" of Fallout, Bethesda would be my top choice.
P.S. I hate Oblivion, and I think it should die.
No, graphics aren't that big of a deal. None of the 2010 console games will look much better than the 2008 console games, and the most popular console of this generation is noticeably underpowered. This game has a decent existing fanbase and plenty of advertising power. It will do fine as long as Obsidian manages to release a finished product.verevoof said:The game play better be damn good if one is going to put out a game with bad graphics, especially in this day and age. Many people will skip over a game if they think it looks bad, and if Obsidian wants the opportunity to make more Fallout related games, I suggest they make all aspects of the game great. It is my experience that gamers today care a lot about graphics, and if the game doesn't sell well then that's it, Obsidian won't have a chance, and perhaps no other company will have a chance on Fallout related projects.
As for the radial menu, it's convenient for a console (specifically a gamepad), not ideal for a PC (keyboard and mouse) GUI.
No, graphics aren't that big of a deal. None of the 2010 console games will look much better than the 2008 console games, and the most popular console of this generation is noticeably underpowered.
Doesn't matter. You will have enough gaming magazines/sites claiming game's graphics is uber awesome so people will believe that.Ausdoerrt said:Most of them look better than games from 2002 though :/ Frankly, even many PS2 games look better than FO3, not to mention modern games.No, graphics aren't that big of a deal. None of the 2010 console games will look much better than the 2008 console games, and the most popular console of this generation is noticeably underpowered.
Jim Cojones said:Doesn't matter. You will have enough gaming magazines/sites claiming game's graphics is uber awesome so people will believe that.