There has been much anticipation for Vulkan in DCS. I've compared DirectX and Vulkan in other games and discerned little to no difference. Guessing Vulkan has better support for VR which isn't a factor for me. Maybe.
Well, even for 2D, if you can jack up performance, that is just more visual quality you can pump in for the same FPS. Better filters, more advanced effects, higher resolution textures, etc.
I think graphics are very important. Perhaps not in keeping committed players, but certainly in providing "curb appeal" to a prospective customer.
The graphics they see in the trailers, review videos, screenshots, etc, form the initial emotional reaction they have to a product. That sorta sets the tone of how they emotionally approach their evaluation. Great graphics already have them excited and they approach the eval like, "Oh man this is going to be awesome!" At that point the sell is yours to lose. You still have to have a good game behind that, but you have set the initial conditions favorable to your argument. Before they have even downloaded the game, you already have them half won.
If the graphics they see in the trailers, review videos, screenshots, etc, suck, they may not even give the game a chance at all. Or if they do, they have already formed an initial negative emotional reaction to a product. That sorta sets the tone of how they emotionally approach their evaluation. Sucky graphics already have them skeptical and they approach the eval like, "I start it up to see if it is maybe better in RL than how it looked in the videos." At that point you are having to work against friction. The sell is going to be doubly hard now that you have to first overcome the initial impression. Even if you have a good game behind that, you have set the initial conditions unfavorable to your argument. Before they have even downloaded the game, they are already thinking this is going to suck.
And frankly, why wouldn't you want great graphics? Really great graphics do increase emersion. The more realistic it looks, the easier it is to suspend your disbelief and forget you are looking at a computer screen. That is a legitimate factor. If AH dumped texturing and just changed to wire-frame rendering, I can't believe the vast majority of players wouldn't say that makes the game worse. So that is your proof that graphics are important, if they can have that level of effect.
What I think is that great graphics are a necessary, but not sufficient condition to success.
It is necessary that you have great graphics to lure in more players to try your game and start the evaluation excited and in a positive frame of mind, and to give the player a pleasant first impression with the UI design on the landing page. But graphics aren't sufficient on their own, the mechanics of the game also have to be at the same high level to seal the deal.
I think it is hilarious that there was a big enough problem they had to release a public note about people using DCS to fake videos of air combat that looked so real they were passing it off as live witnessed iphone captures, and for a while people couldn't tell. I mean that is sort of the visual equivalent of a Turing Test, right?
