Indeed. Today’s problem is that graphical fidelity takes so much of the development time and resources that the rest of the aspects of the game are completely left aside.
Yeah, I can count how many freckles this character has in their face, but that’s all these games offer now, and I don’t need to count freckles, I can do that in real life. I want to have a good time with the game.
I’m not really sure it’s completely like that. In the early 2000’s we had “beautiful” games (aka the most advanced graphics that technology could afford) but games were fun.
Devs invested in graphics, but they also invested in innovative formulas, in gameplay… You could tell a game was unique and beautiful.
Today, AAA games are just a checklist of things that must be included (almost none pointed at making the player have fun) with an incredible level of detail that makes every single leave of every tree move independently from the rest.
They focused so much on hyper realistic graphics that they forgot about the most important part of a game: being fun.
I’ve sunk way more hours in an “ugly” game such as space haven or balatro this year than in any ultra beautiful (and void of fun) AAA game.
Click on all the squares where you see a motorbike.
Failed! There was a fraction of motorbike behind the car in the background that you couldn’t possibly see. Try again.
Rinse and repeat, 15 more times.
Nothing, duh! Why do you think nobody has ever tried to reach the center of the earth (as if there was any,the earth is flat!)? They tell you it’s because of the pressure (lies, that is an invented term of the “roundies”), it’s because if someone ever tried, they’d fall into the hell, which is real and is where every other “roundy” goes after they die.
(Just in case: /s)