• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I think the idea is that it is meant to simulate a camera, when you aren’t in first person view. You don’t see the world front few feet above your shoulders after all–you’re probably used to seeing views like that through a real camera where these things actually occur

    • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Oh, I get that aspect. It’s just an objectively better experience without the artifacts of the technical limitls of a physical camera and lens.

      It’s as if it’s driven by an idiot that thinks if it looks like there are lens flares, abberation, vignette, etc. that it was look cinematographic, completely ignoring the actual art of composition, framing, lighting, depth of field, etc… the actual arts of cinematography.

      Though, given that I’m the one controlling the vital camera with my mouse or controller, apparently it should suck as much as a real camera.

        • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I used objectively literally.

          Avoiding flares, aberration etc makes an image objectively better. You might subjectively prefer either the objectively better or objectively worse image.

          • 0ops@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Lol it’s literally an “objectively better experience” and if your experience was different then you’re literally objectively wrong.

            Look sorry about the sass, I know know I’m being a pedantic ass right now. But experience is by definition subjective. If you specified that the image clarity was objectively better, well then you’d be totally right. But that’s not what you said.