[HEADING=1]The full version:[/HEADING]
Now, honestly, I don't have that much of a problem with brown games, or at least the ones I've actually played. Fallout 3 had some impressive scenery, and although the gameplay didn't interest me long enough to find the screenshot button, I still remember it looking very good. My issue with brown games is when it's touted as a piece of 'realism', particularly in things that aren't supposed to be brown in the first place. Again using Fallout 3 as an example, Washington D.C. didn't have that many plants in it anyway, and besides it's meant to feel depressing. When it comes to 'realistic' games like Call of Duty, at least having some colour in there would be a good thing once in a while.
The problem with modern-day graphics engines is that having them do too much causes your processor to melt, which is why most developers restrict their colour palettes to brown and more brown. Which is also why I like the Wii: you have to do other stuff to make your game look good, like Madworld's black-and-white(-and-red) comic book appearance or Okami's inkbrush painting style (which also applies to the PS2, which had about the same amount of processing power.) That's not to say that good-looking things that don't overuse brown or kill your graphics card haven't been made this generation; Crysis (eventually), Mirror's Edge and Human Revolution all look pretty amazing, right? Photo-realistic characters and locations with hardly any of that gamer's least favourite colour. Once again, my problem is with realism being taken to mean 'brown'.
In some cases, realism can be a good thing. In defense of EA Sports (and this is ALL I'm defending it for; I'll still rip into its business practices whenever I get the chance), I'm sure there are some people who can't play proper football, etc. for one reason or another, but don't like the overly arcade-style sports games or just watching it on TV and pretending to be there. I'm all for niche games, and while FIFA or Madden NFL games don't seem very 'niche', that is a niche it fills pretty nicely. I'm all for niche games, so...
When we get realism in a game filled with aliens, monsters or guys with numbers and other, more dead guys being voiced by Gary Oldman stuck in their heads, though, that's where it becomes inappropriate to claim realism. Sure, your models, gore and application of the Havok physics engine are all photorealistic, but that's where the grounding in reality ends. Mostly, though, those claims are all played up by fans of certain games who think that graphics and imitation of real life are all that makes a game good. It's also why I'm inclined to also defend Halo up to a point: as responsible as it is for trends that are stagnating the market, it doesn't claim to mix realism and sci-fi and it isn't brown. That, more than anything, is why we're seeing less and less really interesting games. Well, we'll always have the Wii, as well as games for other systems like Dark Souls or Batman: Arkham City if you happen to not like the Wii.
[HEADING=1]Tl;dr:[/HEADING]
Gamers:
Stop claiming Call of Duty or Halo or basically anything other than Madden NFL is realistic, and stop asking for realism in games where it isn't appropriate to try and be realistic. Also, please stop claiming that brown is all anything needs to be realistic. Photorealism, though, is totally fine in most cases.
Developers:
Too much realism (or 'brown realism') and settings that aren't actually very realistic, such as sci-fi space with evil aliens, mix like bleach and ammonia.
Forumers:
Feel free to rip apart my incredibly uneducated opinion.
Inglip:
What is 'phenne' and how do I be it? ('be phenne' was my Captcha.)
[HEADING=1]Examples of games from this generation that don't try to be realistic when they shouldn't, that I didn't bring up:[/HEADING]
-The Ratchet and Clank games for the PS3 (TimeLord, although that's still not enough to get me to cough up $ludicrous for one)
Now, honestly, I don't have that much of a problem with brown games, or at least the ones I've actually played. Fallout 3 had some impressive scenery, and although the gameplay didn't interest me long enough to find the screenshot button, I still remember it looking very good. My issue with brown games is when it's touted as a piece of 'realism', particularly in things that aren't supposed to be brown in the first place. Again using Fallout 3 as an example, Washington D.C. didn't have that many plants in it anyway, and besides it's meant to feel depressing. When it comes to 'realistic' games like Call of Duty, at least having some colour in there would be a good thing once in a while.
The problem with modern-day graphics engines is that having them do too much causes your processor to melt, which is why most developers restrict their colour palettes to brown and more brown. Which is also why I like the Wii: you have to do other stuff to make your game look good, like Madworld's black-and-white(-and-red) comic book appearance or Okami's inkbrush painting style (which also applies to the PS2, which had about the same amount of processing power.) That's not to say that good-looking things that don't overuse brown or kill your graphics card haven't been made this generation; Crysis (eventually), Mirror's Edge and Human Revolution all look pretty amazing, right? Photo-realistic characters and locations with hardly any of that gamer's least favourite colour. Once again, my problem is with realism being taken to mean 'brown'.
In some cases, realism can be a good thing. In defense of EA Sports (and this is ALL I'm defending it for; I'll still rip into its business practices whenever I get the chance), I'm sure there are some people who can't play proper football, etc. for one reason or another, but don't like the overly arcade-style sports games or just watching it on TV and pretending to be there. I'm all for niche games, and while FIFA or Madden NFL games don't seem very 'niche', that is a niche it fills pretty nicely. I'm all for niche games, so...
When we get realism in a game filled with aliens, monsters or guys with numbers and other, more dead guys being voiced by Gary Oldman stuck in their heads, though, that's where it becomes inappropriate to claim realism. Sure, your models, gore and application of the Havok physics engine are all photorealistic, but that's where the grounding in reality ends. Mostly, though, those claims are all played up by fans of certain games who think that graphics and imitation of real life are all that makes a game good. It's also why I'm inclined to also defend Halo up to a point: as responsible as it is for trends that are stagnating the market, it doesn't claim to mix realism and sci-fi and it isn't brown. That, more than anything, is why we're seeing less and less really interesting games. Well, we'll always have the Wii, as well as games for other systems like Dark Souls or Batman: Arkham City if you happen to not like the Wii.
[HEADING=1]Tl;dr:[/HEADING]
Gamers:
Stop claiming Call of Duty or Halo or basically anything other than Madden NFL is realistic, and stop asking for realism in games where it isn't appropriate to try and be realistic. Also, please stop claiming that brown is all anything needs to be realistic. Photorealism, though, is totally fine in most cases.
Developers:
Too much realism (or 'brown realism') and settings that aren't actually very realistic, such as sci-fi space with evil aliens, mix like bleach and ammonia.
Forumers:
Feel free to rip apart my incredibly uneducated opinion.
Inglip:
What is 'phenne' and how do I be it? ('be phenne' was my Captcha.)
[HEADING=1]Examples of games from this generation that don't try to be realistic when they shouldn't, that I didn't bring up:[/HEADING]
-The Ratchet and Clank games for the PS3 (TimeLord, although that's still not enough to get me to cough up $ludicrous for one)
