Support NeoGAF

[UncleSporky]

We went through all this about a year ago.

The answer is still Dragon's Lair, which came out in 1983.

We didn't start getting anything close to that until CD-based consoles more than a decade later. Which makes sense, because Dragon's Lair was based on laserdisc.

 

[nkarafo]

Guys....

DL is just a video : /

 

[BBQMan]

We went through all this about a year ago.

The answer is still Dragon's Lair, which came out in 1983.

We didn't start getting anything close to that until CD-based consoles more than a decade later. Which makes sense, because Dragon's Lair was based on laserdisc.

I don't know if that qualifies its essentially a movie.

 

[mclem]

It's obscure, but I Robot was producing fast-rendering filled 3D polygonal environments:

in 1983.

This game is contemporary with Mario Bros.

 

[Cucurbitacée]

Shadow of the Beast, the Amiga version, of course.

 

[UncleSporky]

Guys....

That's just a video : /

That doesn't matter, it's still a video game. It was released as a video game in arcade cabinets and people talked about how amazing this video game looked for ages.

It's not "just a video," you proceed through rooms semi-randomly, and they can be mirrored too. There's an actual game engine running, taking note of the timing of your actions, like countless other games with QTEs or rhythm-based games.

There was even a lot of custom work done to make Dragon's Lair functional as an arcade cabinet. Laserdiscs were bleeding edge tech at the time, just as Crysis took advantage of bleeding edge tech.

There are lots of games with significant elements that are hand animated. Where's the dividing line? It's got to have something that moves independently from the video, like a sprite, in order to qualify as a game?

Seems like you just want Crysis to be the answer and want Dragon's Lair eliminated on a technicality.

 

[omonimo]

That doesn't matter, it's still a video game. It was released as a video game in arcade cabinets and people talked about how amazing this video game looked for ages.

There was even a lot of custom work done to make Dragon's Lair functional as an arcade cabinet. Laserdiscs were bleeding edge tech at the time, just as Crysis took advantage of bleeding edge tech.

There are lots of games with significant elements that are hand animated. Where's the dividing line? It's got to have something that moves independently from the video, like a sprite, in order to qualify as a game?

Seems like you just want Crysis to be the answer and want Dragon's Lair eliminated on a technicality.

I disagree. It's just an interactive video, not exactly a vg. I don't know how fair it's talk of graphic rendering here.

 

[LordRaptor]

I don't know if that qualifies its essentially a movie.

The problem with starting to exclude things like that is that most modern games consist heavily of "just photos" applied as textures.

 

[UncleSporky]

I disagree. It's just an interactive video, not exactly a vg. I don't know how fair it's talk of graphic rendering here.

OP says 'most graphically impressive game,' not 'most impressive rendered 3D graphics.'

If you would've asked anyone back in the day what the most impressive looking game was, the answer was Dragon's Lair.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Dragon's Lair

The End.

 

[nephilimdj]

Killer instinct arcade is only real one I can think of that's not Crysis, wasn't really wowd again til gauntlet and other dreamcast branded machines came out 4 years later

 

[Graphics Horse]

I disagree. It's just an interactive video, not exactly a vg. I don't know how fair it's talk of graphic rendering here.

If other people bring up SF3 because of the animation of its sprite frames rather than anything that pushes technology, it's only fair to include Dragon's Lair.

 

[mclem]

I think Sporky's got a fair point - where exactly do you draw the line? Tons of things in gaming aren't generated on the fly, but are a set of predrawn images pulled and rendered in sequence once per frame; that's basically the exact notion of a sprite, after all. And you can go further with that - if something has that's fully 3D but has say, prebaked lighting, should we disqualify it on those grounds? What about a hand-animated texture? What about a lens flare, which is often simply a predefined lens flare texture overlaid onto the scene? Is any precalculation a no-go? Well, if you go to extremes in that direction, suddenly you're asking if you're also obliged to disqualify predesigned models, or skeletal animations that have pregenerated tween frames.


So in short, I think the only valid answer is .kkrieger

Dragon's Lair

Although, that defence of Sporky aside, given the exact terms of the thread title, Space Ace looks just as good as Dragon's Lair and was also released in 1983.

 

[Übermatik]

I'm really struggling to think of an example other than Crysis...

 

[LostDonkey]

Crysis. No contender. You could re release that today and it would still look amazing.

 

[davidbloop]

Rogue Leader

 

[a.wd]

PC - Crysis
Console - Gears

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Actually, if you read the OP, Dragon's Lair is the best answer. Nothing was even close 5 years later.

 

[JBwB]

Uh Crysis obviously

"But can it run Crysis?"

 

[LordRaptor]

So in short, I think the only valid answer is .kkrieger

But thats just mathematical formulas applied procedurally...

 

[Guardian Monkey]

Yeah space ace was out a year later.. So that kills the dragons lair talk.

 

[nkarafo]

That doesn't matter, it's still a video game. It was released as a video game in arcade cabinets and people talked about how amazing this video game looked for ages.

It's not "just a video," you proceed through rooms semi-randomly, and they can be mirrored too. There's an actual game engine running, taking note of the timing of your actions, like countless other games with QTEs or rhythm-based games.

There was even a lot of custom work done to make Dragon's Lair functional as an arcade cabinet. Laserdiscs were bleeding edge tech at the time, just as Crysis took advantage of bleeding edge tech.

There are lots of games with significant elements that are hand animated. Where's the dividing line? It's got to have something that moves independently from the video, like a sprite, in order to qualify as a game?


Seems like you just want Crysis to be the answer and want Dragon's Lair eliminated on a technicality.

So you are saying that a CDI game with real actors is basically photorealistic graphics?

They look more real than anyone in the Order.

I think Sporky's got a fair point - where exactly do you draw the line?

If we don't draw a line then anything can count. From FMV games to pre-rendered cutscenes.

 

[CivRab]

Crysis obviously but excluding that

 

[UncleSporky]

So you are saying that a CDI game with real actors is basically photorealistic graphics?

They look more real than anyone in the Order.

It would be in the running like any other video game, sure. I would question how good you could say it looks, the videos were small and grainy and badly shot.

We're not talking about how close a game got to photorealism. It's specifically what's graphically impressive. Do you find those CDI games more graphically impressive than Dragon's Lair?

 

[Xumbrega]

Crysis for sure.

 

[AP90]

Crysis.

Crysis

PERIOD.

 

[nkarafo]

We're not talking about how close a game got to photorealism. It's specifically what's graphically impressive. Do you find those CDI games more graphically impressive than Dragon's Lair?

Yeah because, personally, i like photorealism more in my graphics.

However, since these aren't really graphics, i prefer Dragon's Lair in the same way i would prefer a nicely animated Disney cartoon over a cheap, made for TV movie.

 

[The1Ski]

Donkey Kong country

 

[Skux]

Gotta hand it to Crysis. Not only does it still hold up today, it's even competitive with modern titles. You could mistake it for Far Cry 4 or Battlefield 4 at a glance.

 

[Unai]

I'm on the team that pre-rendered videos don't count and I'm baffled that this isn't obvious given the context of the thread. So, Crysis.

 

[beril]

If the word is 'impressive', then it's really not Dragons Lair. It might have been the prettiest for a long time, but I'd imagine that most people stopped being impressed when they realiserad it was basically just playing a video.

Also it was not the only laserdisc FMV game from that era.

 

[Gurish]

Crysis obviously but excluding that

Horrible picture of a stunning game, MGS2 without a doubt deserves to be on this list, still one of the best looking PS2 games if not THE, and it came out at the start of the gen.

I think it looks better than MGS3 as well, and MGS4 was very disappointing visually compared to what MGS2 did back than, I swear that sometimes it's even ugly and the tanker level in MGS2 can look more pleasing to the eye than some of the ugly moments in MGS4.

 

[RibMan]

Crysis 1. It held the title for like 4 years, which is bonkers when you think about it.

Besides Crysis, I would say Riddick on the original Xbox.

 

[c0Zm1c]

Uh Crysis obviously

"But can it run Crysis?"

Dragon's Lair

"But can it play a video?"

 

[Prophet Steve]

Yup, also going for Crysis.

 

[mushrambio]

The Order: 1886. 1886 was 130 years ago now.

lol i laughed way too hard at this

 

[mavericktopgun]

Crysis of course.
And Donkey Kong Country.

 

[erpg]

I'm still shocked that Crysis is almost ten years old now.

 

[BigTnaples]

Crysis. And it ain't even close. Games 9 years old and still holds up great.

 

[Strax]

The Curse of Monkey Island

 

[Dictator93]

Crysis 1. It held the title for like 4 years, which is bonkers when you think about it.

And it was only beaten by its sequel. lol

 

[jeemer]

It's crysis.

 

[Thraktor]

Nothing even comes close to Crysis.
Before that, technology was simply progressing far too rapidly, and afterwards no one ever created something comparable.

It sat right on the cusp of the general reduction in yearly hardware performance gains too.

It was also at the tail end of big-budget PC exclusives being a thing, so they could get away with targeting extremely high-end hardware. Compared to today, you get games like AC Unity which try to push the graphical envelope, but are hamstrung by attempting (and largely failing) to make the game playable on consoles.

I'd also argue that Rogue Leader deserves a look-in. It was arguably one of the most impressive games of its generation, and came out day one on the Gamecube. I can't think of any other console launch game which held up as well.

 

[nOoblet16]

Horrible picture of a stunning game, MGS2 without a doubt deserves to be on this list, still one of the best looking PS2 games if not THE, and it came out at the start of the gen.

I think it looks better than MGS3 as well, and MGS4 was very disappointing visually compared to what MGS2 did back than, I swear that sometimes it's even ugly and the tanker level in MGS2 can look more pleasing to the eye than some of the ugly moments in MGS4.

MGS3 is considerably more complex and superior graphically from MGS2. It's undetectable actually

 

[Greg_le_Casual]

Soul Calibur for the DreamCast.
From 1999 to a few years later, was the "most impressive" for home consoles.
Of course more expensive PCs were already doing better. But as for consoles...

 

[oni-link]

It was also at the tail end of big-budget PC exclusives being a thing, so they could get away with targeting extremely high-end hardware. Compared to today, you get games like AC Unity which try to push the graphical envelope, but are hamstrung by attempting (and largely failing) to make the game playable on consoles.

I'd also argue that Rogue Leader deserves a look-in. It was arguably one of the most impressive games of its generation, and came out day one on the Gamecube. I can't think of any other console launch game which held up as well.

That is a great call, it must have been a few years before we saw a game that looked that good that generation

 

[Tacitus_]

That doesn't matter, it's still a video game. It was released as a video game in arcade cabinets and people talked about how amazing this video game looked for ages.

It's not "just a video," you proceed through rooms semi-randomly, and they can be mirrored too. There's an actual game engine running, taking note of the timing of your actions, like countless other games with QTEs or rhythm-based games.

There was even a lot of custom work done to make Dragon's Lair functional as an arcade cabinet. Laserdiscs were bleeding edge tech at the time, just as Crysis took advantage of bleeding edge tech.

There are lots of games with significant elements that are hand animated. Where's the dividing line? It's got to have something that moves independently from the video, like a sprite, in order to qualify as a game?

Seems like you just want Crysis to be the answer and want Dragon's Lair eliminated on a technicality.

Next up, Tex Murphy having the best graphics

Just look at the detail on the chair and his face!

 

[mclem]

If we don't draw a line then anything can count. From FMV games to pre-rendered cutscenes.

Well, yes, that's rather the point! You need to draw a line, because 'most graphically impressive game' is going to mean different things to different people.

If the word is 'impressive', then it's really not Dragons Lair. It might have been the prettiest for a long time, but I'd imagine that most people stopped being impressed when they realiserad it was basically just playing a video.

Well, yes, that's another fair point. If the word is 'impressive'... should we also take the hardware it's running on into account? Because, after all, there's a reason people throw around this line:

Uh Crysis obviously

"But can it run Crysis?"

I find it more impressive if a game can do a lot with very little power than if it requires a lot of power to look stunning. I've seen Carrier Command run on a 128k Spectrum - now that impresses me.

(The other side of that discussion, too: If something looks phenomenal but renders one frame per second... it's graphically impressive, sure, and when the hardware catches up it'll run it well, but should it really be included at that point? And when you start following that train of thought - well, games that run at 30fps have twice as long to do stuff as games that run at 60fps, so should we factor that in? Are we judging based on a single static scene - in which case you may as well nominate Myst as a viable candidate - or based on continuous performance, in which case framerate on identical hardware should be factored in.)

My point is: There's a shitload of metrics and discussions that would naturally surround a topic of this nature, and the hardware is inherently a component of it. I have a sneaking suspicion that the answer would be different depending on what system and settings you're using for each user!

 

[UncleSporky]

Next up, Tex Murphy having the best graphics

Just look at the detail on the chair and his face!

Sure, if that's what you find most graphically impressive. I'm more impressed by high quality hand drawn animation, personally.

Similar to how Wind Waker's art style is timeless and the Cube version still holds up to this day. Or the clean look of Paper Mario games.

 

[Aztechnology]

Crysis was used as a benchmark for PC builds for an inordinate amount of time. It still holds up by today's standards too. There's no contest on this one. Like 90% of the thread before me I do declare Crysis is THE game.