This is my response to a recent Slashdot Games post concerning this article on the increasing level of realism in game graphics. In the post I was replying to the person stated Combat Mission was a great game, which I completely agree with, but that its graphics pretty much sucked, which I partially took issue with. The following is my reply: True, but relative to other excellent wargames out there Combat Mission has damn good graphics. Another good example in Medieval: Total War. Compared to Max Payne 2, Medieval's graphics suck. Compare it all the other wargames out there with bland graphics, it sucks.I believe the problem is not super-realistic graphics detracting from the gameplay but rather the resources which are diverted toward the graphics seriously diminish the gameplay and replayability of the game.Additionally, when going only for realism the artistic merit of the graphics wanes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that a games sole purpose is to be art -- its to be a game thats fun and enjoyable to play, at least as far as I care. Its the art which visually separates one game from another. Take a look at World of Warcraft. The graphics are very stylized and it is recognizable "Warcraft" and not Warhammer. I hope that improved hardware capability will allow artists to push their vision of the world they are creating rather than be required to make a photographic replica of the latest and hottest movie.