Do I really need more? Hell yes, you know, like actual facts.
I've checked the first two items on your list and you are badly misrepresenting the truth in both cases…
1) Halo Infinite
It's fair to say that the response to Microsoft's gameplay reveal for Halo Infinite in its July 2020 Xbox Games Showcas…
www.eurogamer.net
He does talk about the shortcomings of dynamic lighting and how that contributes to the problem but does not suggest it was 'an easy fix'. I've added direct quote below to show how misleading your take is……
"the dynamic lighting technology is core to 343's plans and it's hard to believe it would be scrapped or dramatically altered this close to launch."
"Beyond indirect lighting, the next largest point to look at is level of detail. Rocks, grass and even far-off fog billboards exhibited jarring pop-in."
"Then there are smaller things like the lack of first-person shadows on the view weapon and the Master Chief's hands. Games like Crysis 3 have been doing this since 2013."
"Also curious are some very 'solid' looking opaque effects for elements like shields - I much prefer Bungie's approach in Halo Reach."
"I'm not fully sold on some of the choice of materials: yes, the indirect lighting is a real issue in how these are rendered in this demo, but there's a lot of plastic and standard metal on display here - a far cry from the very vibrant, alien-like materials used in prior Halo games."
"I hope the message gets through that the reaction to the Halo Infinite reveal isn't down to this format - which is exactly what we want to see - but rather down to the content."
No big deal? Easy fix? The article says no such thing. You just wanted them to publish the Craig meme and call it a day.
2) Spiderman ray tracing.
www.neogaf.com
This 'evidence' is from Twitter. There was a single screenshot from the Spiderman game and Alex was asked…
"Q: what do you think Alex? Raytraced?
Alex: Low angle with post-process DOF in the background is the best way to show off SSR as the low angle means most of everything on screen can be reflected. Need a different shot to say something more definitive."
So, based on the single-screenshot Alex said, effectively, "I can't tell from this image alone".
Oh my, how damning!
What you claim in the first two points of your list is so inaccurate and, ironically, extremely biased, that I'm not going to waste my time hunting down these other 'transgressions'. I'm can only assume that there's nothing to them except for your own irrational dislike for the guy.
Note: The fact that you list Kingtrash as proof of something is not a positive sign. Sheesh.
I think, in a case like this where you attempt to damage someone's reputation based on unfounded accusations, that you should, at the very least, use
direct quotes and
actual links. If you can't find them, then don't make outrageous claims and then present them as fact.
