The graphical jump from RE3 (1998/1999), to Code Veronica (2000), and then REmake (2002) from the almost photo-realistic pre-rendered backgrounds to the rounded, high-polygon characters doesn't get talked about enough
>>11984618Yes it does. Come up with a OP that doesn't read like some faggot baiting for engagement.
>>11984618All thanks to the raw power of the Nintendo GameCube.
i didnt like the way code veronica looked (i only ever played the dreamcast version although i doubt it matters). REmake however i thought looked amazing
What's the point of talking about it? Technology improves.
>>11985841How did it improve so quickly?
>>11985841>>11986447One of Naught Dog devs talked about this and it was really interesting. Basically its because of the art style + tech you use.Older games typically use gimmicks to represent light, newer ones use more realistic simulators but that loses the artistic flare and personalization you got from older games.I can't remember the exact example but it was something to do with walls, where they had just baked the lighting in as a texture over the top of an existing texture. Whereas the remaster had used a lighting engine which was fine, but lost the personal style he had put into it.
>>11984618It is hard to grasp for the zoomer mind but that's all games from this time, basically. Six years instead of five but look at Majora's Mask (2000) to Twilight Princess (2006), despite Nintendo being absolute retards graphics-wise. Or Final Doom (1996) to Doom 3 (2004).
>>11985193Is that GC sucking on an inhaler?
