Topic: Is polygon count not important anymore when discussing tech specs?

It seems the focus of game consoles is to increase textures and output resolution, but console manufacturers rarely talk about polygon count anymore. I remember when polygon count was the main focus of consoles back in the PS1/N64 and PS2/GC/Xbox eras.

And now it seems RAM is more important than CPU speed. 10 years ago, no one talked about RAM. It was all about CPU speed. Why the sudden change?

Cause the world has changed. So has gaming. So has [insert blahblah thing here].

But you need high polygon counts to create detailed character models, in addition to high-resolution textures.

Look at the Wii
Now look at the PS3

The PS3 has a much higher polygon count, and it has higher-resolution textures. The high polygon counts combined with the textures are what make the games look good. So console manufacturers need to emphasize both of these things when discussing tech specs.

It seems console manufacturers focus more on RAM, and HD output (HD has nothing to do with how complex/detailed the graphics are, it's only for showing detailed textures).

A console needs more processing power to handle character models with higher polygon counts. Anyway, where did you pick up the idea that console manufacturers no longer talk about polygons? It's not something that's ever bothered me before.

I don't remember Sony or Microsoft ever hyping polygon counts when the PS3 and Xbox 360 launched. And Nintendo doesn't talk about specs anymore. So I figured polygon counts weren't as important as CPU speed, RAM, textures, HD output, etc.

Wasn't important to begin with. _/hipster

Well, that may change. The PC gaming era had sorta changed with Microsoft's graphics API, DirectX 11. It basically allows more polygons to be rendered while compromising less GPU processing power than normal. The process is known as tessellation, and it's bound to be in the next Xbox (the feature requires newer GPU's from 2009 and later). I'm sure PS4 will have it through Sony's own tools and even through DirectX equivalent, OpenGL (which is cross-platform). Not sure about Nintendo though: it's been announced that WiiU will use a custom version of a 2008 ATI graphics card; I don't think it supports tessellation (even if it did, ATI isn't efficient at the feature like its competitor, nVidia).

Here's an example

EDIT: I used another image to give a better example for those who read my post earlier.

more polygons does not necessarily = better looking game. its polys and textures. you can have a high poly model with low rez textures that looks bad, or you can have a low poly model with high rez textures that looks great. also, you can have a low poly model with a normal map applied that makes it look much more high poly than it actually is.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Normal_map...

Normal mapping.....I have some mixed feelings about it. They look weird when blurred (I see it on consoles). They look like an attempt to make the models more detailed in a fluid way. BUT, that's just me.

As for polygons and textures, aesthetics is a bit more important to me than graphical capability. Graphics power are just tools to help display aesthetics, and for now, lots of developers strive for realism.