Enjay
ASK ME ABOUT FOOTBALL / STEAM / DEAD CELEBRITIES / THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT
Posts: 5595
Registered: 12-00 |
Sodaholic said:
I'm curious though, since I wasn't around in gaming in the late 90's, can you describe what the experience was like using accelerated rendering for the first time? I can imagine the framerates would be far improved, but why did people seem to like the blurring back then? Was it just a thing of the time that people were getting so sick of pixelation that they'd rather just have blurriness?
For me, the real revelation was all the extra colouring (coloured lighting). There were, of course, other things too (eg the improvement in the way dynamic lights behaved). When I first fired up Quake II in hardware accelerated mode (bearing in mind that I had already played the game extensively) it almost felt like a new game and I replayed the whole thing just to see how different various areas in the game looked. I think my main reaction could be summarised by I couldn't believe how much I had been missing by not having an accelerated graphics card. I felt like I was seeing the game properly for the first time. To me it was a massive leap in the visual quality of the game. The before hardware acceleration and after hardware acceleration gaming worlds, for me, were totally different environments. I had a similar but much, much smaller experience when I first used a proper surround-sound system with a game designed for it.
As for the blurring, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. In fact, I prefer it to grainy pixelation. Anyway, it's not the whole thing that is blurred. The edges of structures and models still seem sharp enough. It's the textures and skins that are "blurred" and I find that, in many cases, that the averaging of colours in particular area of a texture/skin makes them look much better than loads of individually identifiable square blocks.
|
12-23-11 14:45 
