The bad thing about Games

[deject]

Something in the first description said something to me. Just imagine when in games, each blade of grass acts independently of each blade, and when each leaf on the tree will sway gently on its own, and perhaps fall off independently. Imagine when rain makes puddles. IMAGINE!!!!!!!!

Man, i'm glad i'm young.

mmmm....I dunno.
That will be nice, but spangly graphics dont really do it for me.

Taking HL2 as an example; when i first got into the game, In the section where your running away from the combine, i noticed the door with the mottled glass. I spent quite a while moving from side to side slightly, looking at the refraction and going "ooh".

I then played the rest of the game, never really noticing the fact that glass refracts light again.

My point is this: Imagine a game where every blade of grass was individually modeled and reacted independently from each other blade of grass to things such as wind, feet, shotgun rounds etc. After the initial looking at it and going "woo", would it actually improve the game any? Over a game thats just made passable looking grass that, without close inspection, looks pretty realistic, I dont think the more realistic option is that much better. How many times in a game do you pay any attention to the grass, anyway?

Dont get me wrong, im not one of these wierdos who think everything should be reduced to the graphical level of a spectrum. I just think that good graphics does not always equal good game.

As a final example, take WoW compared to EQ2. EQ2 is undoubtably more realistic, with its bump mapping and its shiney shiney. WoW looks kinda wierd and cartooney, with some really rather simple textures and models. But WoW looks, in my opinion, better.

Anyway, food is calling me...

/scarpers
/consumes

you point is entirely true, but if true realism is the goal, then that is where we need to go.