Darvond: Especially those two. I think what I'd prefer is multi pronged solutions. Able to reraise by hand, but also you can pay though the nose at a temple to bring your bag of dust back to life.
GameRager: As long as it's limited(to avoid overuse) it might be feasible.
Tauto: Most of it has been said but I hate the graphics being misused to put out a very cheap game and our big money for modern day graphics cards being wasted.
GameRager: Do you mean overuse of flashy graphics with no gaming substance or games that don't utilize the graphics card to their full extent(I assume the latter)?
dtgreene: Personally, I am of the reverse opinion; putting out cheap games means that more can be done with less, and that creative options can be persued that would be too risky for big budget games to persue.
Also, not everybody has a fancy graphics card, and even those that do might occasionally use computers that don't. Furthermore, there's also issues of power consumption, or systems with poor cooling that might behave poorly under heavy load.
GameRager: When able(for big devs obviously, or small devs with good teams), a game should be able to run at differing levels of graphical/etc complexity depending on a user's hardware(with obvious barebones minimums as the min a game can be run at).
Yes,I suppose I'm spoilt by Skyrim and FNV graphics but some of these games at Gog are just coloured blocks and absolutely pathetic to look at.