somebody wrote:
> "scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote
> 
>> http://rigsofrods.blogspot.com/
> 
>> It's made by a guy by himself, so don't expect the interface to be
> amazing,
>> but once you remember the basic controls it's great fun.  If he tidied it
> up
>> a bit and added some missions to it then I could see it doing really well.
> 
> Interesting. However, the mesh quality is atrocious. I don't understand why
> developers bother with things like particle systems, shadows or reflections
> when the extremely low poly-count will more than negate all such attempts at
> "realism".
> 
> 


I think you missed the point of rigsofrods.

It's realism isn't in a photo realistic graphical display.


Let us take the game of pong as an example.

One version has fancy paddles that are customizable with your own 
graphic and logos.  They can morph and change into 3 different shapes 
and are even *shiny*.  The ball is round and loses energy on each 
bounce.  The background has funky colors or pictures that are really cool.

The other version is much simpler.  You can choose the solid color of 
you paddle from 1 of 16 colors.  The background is solid in color and 
you can't change it.  But you can design your own paddle shape - almost 
anything you want.  You can also change the shape of the ball - make it 
a square - or even a barbel.  The 'ball' interaction with walls and the 
paddles are now dictated by genuine physics.

The difference is:
The first game focus was on eye candy (something good in its own right)
The second game focus was on physical interaction.


It's your choice as to which game you play.
Just because you choose one does not make the other worthless.



Tom

Post a reply to this message