Looks like someone saw the original and didn’t know what it meant
The same general idea, with better wording. Not really sure what OP was trying to add. In my experience critics aren’t demanding hyperrealism, and are the first to praise unique art styles.
The original phrasing is " I want shorter games with worse graphics, made by people paid more to work less and I’m not kidding".
The point is to highlight the abuses of the games industry, while advocating for better treatment of devs. This edit adds literally nothing to the conversation
I read this meme as making fun of those people. Some people on Twitter have pointed to the recent King Kong game as an example of the original meme being bad. “See what happens when you pay workers more to make a game with worse graphics? You get this.” Those people didn’t understand the original meme. I see this post as an edited version to exasperatedly respond to those people with.
the original was better
Not a bad option, for sure
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/045/790/cover6.jpg
Dude I’m still okay with ps3 level graphics as long as it has more vibrant colors. Back then colors were always gray.
I hate to break it to everybody sharing either version of this, but… yeah, it’s not the graphics.
I mean, it’s also the graphics, but it’s not just the graphics.
Shorter helps in narrative games, though. Shorter is easier. Makes for better games, too, IMO.
it’s not about graphics, it’s about visuals.
Rain world and Hollow Knight for example, they don’t have ray tracing or whatever the fuck everyone wants now, but they look gorgeous
Great example. That Hollow Knight expansion-slash-sequel thing that was supposed to be a smaller thing has been delayed multiple times and has been in development for four years. I have no idea what’s up behind the scenes, but it sure sounds grueling.
Seriously, it’s not the graphics.
Cool, that helps a bit, if they’re both the same kind of game.
But just so we’re clear, you can have a 10 hour game that results from abhorrent crunch over several years. Or that is super buggy and unpolished.
Personally, I find that there is no perfect length for all games. If it’s a narrative game it’s easier to pace a shorter game, sometimes, and it’s often easier to at least see the end, at least.
Of course you can also make a game with no ending at all. I am less and less interested in narrative games as time goes on.
Hard agree. Especially when a no small amount of gameplay is “postgame content” so you’re basically expected to rush an 50 hour playthrough to unlock extra features just so you can play the game, at which point you might have lost interest already. I’d rather complete a full playthrough of a shorter story that holds my interest to the very end, instead of playing a game that takes so long to finish that it feels like a pointless chore towards the end.
It’s not the critics. The games are there, it’s just thap people buy AAA games.
