I am 34 and to some extent have become slightly jaded regarding computer/console games.  I enjoy a game for what it can offer.  For example.  I remember when Pokimon was released for the Gameboy.  I thought that it was a silly kiddies game and never would imagine myself playing it.  Anyway, I bought Pokimon yellow when I bought a Gameboy colour.  I found that at first it was great until I realised that it was nothing more than a Japanese roll playing game, but I persevered anyway and found that it was quite interesting.  I wasn’t too keen on getting all of the Pokimons, as getting to the next trainer or kicking the next idiot who would challenge me to a needless battle was more fun.

In recent years due to the increase in performance and the general capabilities of the machines available, it seems that everyone is only interested in how many channels of music is offered and how detailed the face is in a game.  The more polygons there are on the body, textures on the walls and and loads of acronyms that mean nothing to me.  It’s all good and well but I ask you one simple question?  If you have time to scrutinize the walls of a FPS game for example, are you enjoying the game?  It is true that it does add to the experience for about ten or twenty seconds.  After that it is nothing more than background.  That is what it should be. 

I remember hearing on a Podcast from PCGamer that the only time the games world would get its Citizen Kane, was when the graphics were photo realistic and I ask the question why?  The problem I have with that assumption is photo realism only works in a world that you has seen or been to.  For example, you have just purchased a fantasy roll playing game.  A dragon flies towards you, it looks very good but for some reason someone says that it doesn’t look that realistic.  You turn and ask the person the question, have you ever seen a dragon?  To which he replies no!  The point is, photo realism only works when you have an experience or something to compare it to.  Why would you want photo realism?  If that is what you want in a gaming experience, just open your eyes and pretend that you are on an adventure and are carrying an imaginary gun.  You will look stupid but I’ve just saved you a ton of money.

I enjoy games in general.  It is an expensive hobby and I find that imaginative games interests me more and don’t really care what level of detail is used as long as it adds to the game.  Here’s en example of something I consider an unnecessary high detailed game that works well without the extra detail.  Rockstar has release table tennis on the Xbox 360.  In the advert it shows the detail in the face of one of the players and I ask myself why.  If the detail wasn’t, there would It make any difference to the game.  If it was on the Playstation 1, would it be any less of and experience?  No it would not.  So why is it necessary to put something that doesn’t need this level of detail on the Xbox 360?  To get you to spend more money on the advice of someone who is too cheap to buy their own equipment and gets freebies from these companies.  I am talking about games reviewers.  They get the latest HD TVs, PCs, games consoles and everything else required to review and I bet theses devices some how make there way to the reviewers home.  They say things like, to play this game at the resolution or detail that the developer intended, you need a stupidly powerful PC or a high definition TV or more speakers than you have room for in the little flat.

I remember buying a sound blaster live 1024 value for my PC some years back for the sole purpose of using my four speaker surround sound setup.  It was a quadraphonic amp from the seventies.  So the first game I tried was unreal tournament.  I couldn’t tell where the sound was coming from.  I checked the sound setup.  I had the latest patch at that time and noticed that it didn’t use four speaker setups.  I checked another and another.  None of the games that I had used or when they did, made no difference what so ever to the game.  The only difference I noticed was when someone was talking, I could hear that the sound was directional, when I turned slowly on the spot and I could hear the sound moving around myself.  So I turned the quadraphonic amp to stereo and had two mono channels.  It made no difference to the gaming experience that I enjoyed anyway.

I then tried playing Metal gear solid 2 on my Playstation 2 with my 90” display from my projector and turned on my Dolby Digital 5.1 amp.  After twenty of thirty minutes of playing this game, I turned on my CRT TV and switched off the rest of the equipment.  It did not as the reviewers had said add to the gaming experience.  It just made it louder and bigger.  I couldn’t see any difference playing this game on the big screen anymore than when it was played on the smaller screen.  All it would have done had I not already had the required equipment, would have made me waste hundreds of pounds on equipment that I didn’t need.

With the inevitable push for photo realism, all that will happen is the gaming market will become two separate markets.  One will be a market that cares more for the graphics and how it sounds before the game play.  The other will be a market where the game play is paramount and anything else is a bonus.  I have the Xbox 360 and haven’t yet bought a game for it.  I am waiting for a game that I will enjoy playing.  Not interested in Elder scrolls IV: Oblivion.  I played Morrowind and found it boring.  I have a few car racing games that are good enough on the Playstation 2 and the Xbox.  Personally, I’m looking forward to the Nintendo Wii.  It seems to have some interesting games for it and it may only be a gimmick but and interesting one that maybe some of my friends would enjoy after going out.

What was the purpose if the rant?  None what so ever.  All I am trying to convey is that I enjoy games for what they are and not what they look like.  There will be a group of individuals who disagree with me and I say good on you.  If that is what you want, go for it.  As for myself, I will be too busy playing Super Mario on my DS Lite to notice that Supreme Commander has been released for the PC, or Grand Turismo 5 has just been released for the Playstation3.  Whilst playing Half Life 2 on my PC, I wont notice that FPS whatever has been released on the quad CPU, quad SLI graphics card PCs of the time. 

There is a phrase that I have heard.  “A fool and his money is easily parted” and I for one consider it true.  At home I have a six PC network and three of the PCs are capable of playing games of a certain specification.  It cost me thousands of pounds.  It now lies dormant, waiting for something that I would enjoy and my friends would enjoy too.  I do not like Death match games or any of the iterations that are really nothing more than a death matches.  I enjoy CO-OP games that are simple to setup and play.  I don’t want the hassle of finding out that for some reason one of the PCs just refuses to join in, even though I have gone through the same process for the third time.

I personally am sick of upgrading all the time.  All it will mean is that I won’t be able to play the latest PC games and because I have never played them, I won’t miss them and I won’t miss photo realism.