Originally Posted by flyingsaucers
This should be true, but it's not. My dumbass friend thinks that Black Ops looks great. The OP thinks that Oblivion looks great, FFS. Some people just don't have an eye for good graphics. There is an entire army of PC gamers who will tell you with a straight face that Crysis 2 looks as good or BETTER than Crysis. <-- I couldn't make that up
512x512 vs. 1080p is one thing, but being able to discern the finer points of graphical fidelity is not a universal trait among gamers.
I was thinking more amongst reviewers since they are the ones who cook up FPS comparisons, and those end up being used to bench hardware.
It also depends on what eyes people are using.
Half-Life and HL2 looked great back in their day...as did TES. By post-Crysis1 standards they look like crap...OTOH they had or have gameplay/plot to make up for it. They were also fairly original things back in their day. Heck, SW: Knights of the Old Republic 1 has awful graphics, and I still find it engaging to pull out.
Nowadays plot lines for most games have gotten terribly formulaic and predictable. Controls have gotten dumbed down and no longer use a 104-key keyboard like they used to. Publishers focus on making something consoles can run rather than something to show off PC hardware. Publishers prefer sequels to original content. Publishers also don't want to spend the money in a 30+hour plotline AAA title and want to nickle-and-dime you for extra hats or weapon skins or armors...heck they've gone to just reusing the same meshes over and over with a different texture file (I'm looking at YOU BioWare).