Man, digital foundry style analyses of games are a pox on gaming discussion. The general impulse of gamers to try and become more technologically analytical of games is a fucking pox on gaming discussion.
I haven't seen a DF article or thread on the matter that hasn't devolved into a stupid series of arguments whereby people weigh the presence (or absence) of barely perceptible things against one another. It's not enough for reviewers to just say that one version of a game is the best any more, or that they are all on roughly the same level -- chodes on the internet need a fucking micro-analysis with youtube videos showing us a screen-tearing%, any evidence of momentary FPS dips, and all sorts of other crap, so they can literally CRY over the absence of 4xMSAA and shit...
I can't imagine how much more hollow and shitty the gaming experiences of my youth would have been if collective enthusiasm for the likes of GoldenEye had been hampered by autistic reviewers recounting the many ways it ran like shit.
They could have done the same with old Final Fantasy games, racing games, Syphon Filter, Gran Turismo, Zelda... games today run pretty darn well for the most part. I'm not saying some versions aren't clearly better than others, many PC gamers can attest to that, but holy fuck there's a point where such scrutiny becomes pointless and I'm more interested in what I actually do in the game, and whether I have any fun.
Playing Splinter Cell: Blacklist at the moment, and really enjoying it, incidentally.
