Isn't it strange that the release of GTA Vice City is was over 16 years ago and most of us still remember the time they played it.
While on the other hand, GTA Vice City was representing a fictional Miami set in 1985 which we never experienced and was rather alien to us, but it was in fact, also just 17 years in the past back then.
I can't even imagine how people feel whose first GTA was GTA V, and they look back to Vice City today.
My younger brother is going through the 'if the game doesn't have realistic as possible graphics, then the game is objectively shit' phase. He was baffled when I tried to explain that games like Vice City and San Andreas were once considered cutting edge for their time, but I guess it's just how things like that work out.
show him this
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/327883/dc46daaf-e7d4-4aaa-9a1a-714a0d0be774/image.png
Shit, I forgot what a star-studded cast Vice City had.
Funny seeing that concept art in the video, you can tell those are the same people who worked on Bully.
I have a guy at work whos' around the same age as me, about 26-27 ish and I was talking about GTAV and RDR2 and he goes on about how gtav and rdr2 don't look good graphicaly, I was just confused and just agreed with him
Lots of memories attached to all three titles. I was 13 when GTA III was out, and seeing how well the series transitioned from top-down to full 3D open world just floored me. It felt very similar to when I played Mario 64 for the first time. Then VC and SA felt like they both improved upon III's formula in nearly every way. Truly amazing games, especially for that time period.
I love those old 3Ds Max screenshots.
I wish there was a behind the scenes look at Bully. Easily one of my favorite Rockstar games.
It's pretty funny that they used actual mo-cap, so the animations are genuinely high quality, but because of the low poly character models/less sophistication in limbs, the animations looks dated anyway.
I can get maybe get behind Vice City being "cutting edge", but San Andreas had obviously dated looks, because of it's PS2 origins. I love the game, don't get me wrong (second most played game on my Steam account) - but it wasn't a looker even in 2004.
I guess the world size and streaming was impressive though
The UI of 3ds max has barely changed over the past 16 years.
gg Autodesk.
IMO graphics are the least important part of making a good game.
I don't know if it's just because I'm growing accustomed to them, but I feel as if there's been a lot less progress in terms of graphics these last few years anyway.
I disagree. A good UI and art-style can go a long-way.
Better have some good talk with him or he can hold this opinion till the end of life
I think lighting is the biggest thing we'll see improving in the coming years. Just gotta wait for those RTX cards to not cost a fortune.
Hey, why fix what isn't bro-- oh... oh right...
https://i.imgur.com/3sB1IHA.jpg
I did recently play through VC and then SA and though I admit I am somewhat biased based on the hundreds of hours I spent in SA, vice city felt technically incomplete. Like there wasn't really the story stitching things together, and the missions were not really scripted so much as a few set pieces plopped in. In its day it was impressive still but GTA:SA came out just over a year later and it is quite technically impressive even today with all the side missions, the scripting on missions, the interiors, the random side systems like clothing and stores, the variety of weapons and vehicles.
Vice city plays like an old game. SA plays like a recent game and they are from the same time period.
not only that, but despite the obvious clunk of the controls and such, AI and gameplay seems to not have progressed much apart from convenience and iteration. I guess a perk of being born in the early 90's or late 80's is that you never really stop being able to go back to earlier era's. I can play Civ 1, Battle chess and cannon fodder to casually pass the time, no problem. I can still get immersed in late 90's narrative games and simulators. Theme Hospital and Dungeon Keeper 2 still have solid gameplay. Rollercoaster Tycoon 2 of course never got a sequel. Common knowledge. There was never a third, no sir! MGS and FF6-9 have aged, sure. But you can get in there and follow what's going on. I was a kid when they came out, but i didn't care about FF until well after 2012.
I dunno. Those of us who were born between 87-93. We're lucky fucks in that regard, tbh. We can easily adapt to any era of gaming and that's honestly a kind of awesome perk of being around during the 2d-3d transition and the past 15 years of streamlining. but the sad flipside of it is that we can accurately and sceptically assert that AI and gameplay hasn't evolved technically as much as the artists and designers have gotten more adept at hiding and adapting around self-imposed limitations. I can't help but imagine a world where drawcalls were fewer to the benefit of more immersive, reactive, improvisational and conversational AI. Imagine having Colonel Campbell call in asking you to turn off the console only to tell him to fuck off and eat a dick!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
