[TeMPOraL]

I'd say that the advent of 3D graphics made games look worse. Just compare StarCraft to StarCraft 2 - I honestly feel that the original, pixel-drawn game looked better. It's hard to get 3D right, it takes much more work to produce something that the brain won't find weird-looking or uncanny. SC1 had a dark tone and looked like a serious game; SC2 feels much more lightweight and comical, and I'd argue the big part of it was moving from 2D to 3D, which made all units look kind of silly.

[erikb]

While I have the opposite opinion about SC1-SC2 in some regards I can agree. There are also these games with 2D or pixely graphics which is a kind of beautiful that you can't achieve with 3D. That's why there are still hundreds of games developed with these graphics settings.

[TeMPOraL]

Yes, pixel-graphics is a different artisfic medium and I'm happy that it's not forgotten, even though hard to find outside indie and casual sector.

RE SC2, I know that the source of majority of my issues with that game is a difference in vision. Creators stated explicitly in one of the interviews that to appeal to a wider audience they wanted the game to focus less on galactic politics and explore individual characters and relationships. Which is exactly the opposite of what I wanted or expected after living through the excellent story of the first game.