Partly for inspiration with my obsession I have lately with storyboarding animation shorts I've been watching movies that drastically vary in quality. Lord of the rings is the most obvious one for general inspiration because overall even the 3D effects were done to an amazing standard but I couldn't help be fascinated by the drop in quality for the mission impossible movies.
They were always I think it's fair to argue B-Tier action movies so not anything to be amazed by. However even when it comes to action movies if they're long running you can see as time goes on even the omfg look at the amazing 3D vomit aspect has gone down the hill and it's so damn disappointing. The reason being is Hollywood are going to be people who can afford big render farms among other things so they should be able to churn out the most amazing special effects you've ever seen but I've seen blender users on 1080's do better jobs than the retards who do the compositing and the effects for 'modern' movies and general 3D.
What do we get instead? Tom Cruise panicking in a closed cubicle over some poorly rendered low res 3D smoke that I could have done a better job with and I have a 1660 super. Hell, it would have been more cost effective and a better job to just deploy a smoke machine and have it blow around the way you want it to which is another example of why practical effects are so much better sometimes and even take less effort to do.
Fucking Hollywood can't even get basic compositing and 3D effects right anymore, they also did this 3D scene with the Kremlin and I could instantly spot they'd done a green screen/possibly studio mockup and it was baffling how low detail the effects were for what was inevitably a pretty big budget movie.
Games as well. Tech has some real cool shit these days but with 99% of the people trying to use it being drooling retards it looks like complete ass even compared to some things that came out 10+ years ago where they had actual skilled developers that knew how to properly model & tweak things to get them to look as good as they could and not run like hot garbage then relay on scaling crap to make up for it (eat shit Remnant 2).
Doesn't have to do anything with generational decline and has everything to do with how industry works. At the start of game development, in 80s-90s, there was no internet and no silicon valley boom and so programming jobs were rather limited in scope. There wasn't as much headhunting and salaries were not diverging as drastically.
At this moment it's mirror opposite - there's always need for more programmers and, when it comes to payment, traditional gamedev is least competitive of it all. Even mobile gamedev salaries can be 2x-3x to what a PC coder earns. So it's the dregs that are developing the modern AAA titles - proficient specialists are highly unlikely to find themselves there. Unless they're fanatics but that burns out fast and they soon leave the industry for greener pastures.
This comment is in denial. When AAA hires, they have top-down mandates to diversify. If you think the talent pool for video game dev is bad because low salaries, what happens when you further dilute that pool with gender and race requirements? You end up being forced to hire barely functional (but highly diverse) retards. How many such devs do you need to throw at a AAA production? Thousands, apparently. And the end results are Diablo 4 and Starfield.