>>718959535 (OP)
I think we've hit an "uncanny valley" in visual fidelity in the field of computer graphics, especially that in video games, because using tricks and artistry to imitate reality was something people got very good at over time, but now we have engines that come with lighting and atmosphere simulations which means less ingenuity and innovation and a less visually interesting product
you can get an engine to simulate lighting and shadows sure, and it'll be accurate and adequeate, but look at this fucking god ray dude
you know that's a cone with an alpha layer to make the texture semi-transparent with a gradient that someone at Nintendo actually had to figure out how to make, and you hardly even question it
simulating the sun is very interesting on a technical level but it's artistically pretty underwhelming
the stuff that guy did for this cone of light on Mario 64 eventually became the fundamentals that people used in games such as Most Wanted, in this example, and they got really good at it too, it looked good, they got good at making it look good
it's just not the same of the technology people are using today unless a dev wants to personally create his own lighting engine
