Graphics

[jbkarate9]

I honestly dont care about graphics its all about gameplay! But if the graphics are extreme bad then no i cant really play it. It needs to have some sort of good graphics.

 

[TriforceHunter]

Oh my god. if you go to YiouTube and click on a IGN or Machinima Wii video it seems like grafics are the major discussion subject. all you get is people(or New School 12 year old "Gamers" A.K.A n00bs) who always complain with such critisism like "This Grpheecks succkz ther4re this game suckz and itz gaey." or "Haloz looks better than this". and you will always see the REAL gamers telling them off and owning them in any way shape or form.And they also complain like its the wii's fault and not the fault of those lazy 3rd part developers. I mean once you look at games like Metroid Other M(Trailer) you will be inpressed of what the Wii can do.

end of line if you think grafics is all that matters you a re stupid.

 

[jlemon9721]

That is exactly what i think about sometimes! Well yeah your PS3 might have HD graphics, but are the games fun? I'm not saying anything bad about Sony, I'm saying that graphics don't make the game. i know that the 8-bit 'Zelda' graphics may seam pretty rough, but it is one of the best games ever made!

 

[Tom]

if you go to YiouTube and click on a IGN or Machinima Wii video it seems like grafics are the major discussion subject. all you get is people(or New School 12 year old "Gamers" A.K.A n00bs) who always complain with such critisism like "This Grpheecks succkz ther4re this game suckz and itz gaey." or "Haloz looks better than this"

So true. These guys are everywhere. Even on Ocarina of Time videos, posting stupid comments about how their favorite PS3/XBOX 360 videogame series kick Nintendo's butt. I hate this...graphics are the last thing I consider when deciding wheter I'll buy it or not. Sometime ago I used to play Runescape, and though many people say it sucks, most of them have never experienced the gameplay.

 

[TriforceHunter]

Yeah, I hate those people(as you can see) but half the time I think they are just Trolls that want to get in other peoples' nerves, but is kinda hard to believe that everyone of those guys is a Troll. Yet it's also IGN's fault for feeding their moronic fans their moronic Wii bashig articles.

 

[majorasmagic]

Graphics DON'T Matter?

(sorry if theres a similar thread)

HEY!!! LISTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!

alright now that i have your attention

a lot of people say graphics dont matter.But of course they do.so i think when people do this they dont me it like this.

so what do some of you guys mean when you say graphics dont matter.

Heres what i mean
graphics should never come first. it should always have gameplay come first as the graphic style you choose can easily effect the gameplay drastically.
Also graphics dont have to be hd just to be good.
depending on what type of game it is the graphics have to express the emotion givin in the game (if it has any)

so yes graphics do matter but this is what i mean when i say graphics dont matter.

 

[BlueLink57]

You're kinda right. When people say graphics don't matter, it doesn't give a company an excuse to make a game with really bad graphics that can be much better on the consoles. But if a game is old and a person newer to video games or a person who has only played newer games, they think that the game sucks because the graphics look primitive (actually, the old games that are good have great graphics for their time). A good example would be Chrono Trigger. I was playing it, and someone came and said "Those graphics suck so much..The game probably can't even compare" when actually that game's graphics are pretty good to even today's 16-bit standards, and it's a game from 1995. So to sum this all up, graphics are certainly not the most important factor in making a game, Gameplay is prominent, with Replay Value and Music behind it.

 

[Turo602]

Well now, graphics do matter depending on what the style of the game is. Only because there is no excuse in this day and age to have poor graphics. If you're playing a game like Halo Reach, and it has some crappy graphics it wouldn't be as good as it is now. That's because the visuals is what makes a game into a piece of art. That's why games like Halo Reach, Mario Galaxy 1 or 2, Sonic Colors, The Legend of Zelda Wind Waker, and many others look like master pieces and that's because gameplay has to flow with beauty to make art. As for games of the past such as Ocarina of Time, yeah compared to games of today the graphics are horrible, but then again, Ocarina of Time is better then most games out now. Reason for that is because it's gameplay, music, and design, made up for it. So very few games can be playable today without the graphics bothering you, because most games feel too outdated. GoldenEye was a very great game for it's time no doubt about it, but by the time I played Halo Combat Evolved it didn't feel the same. Yes there's the older games like Super Mario Bros, and the Legend of Zelda, that have terrible graphics compared to now days. But you had to grow up into that in order to enjoy it first and have your memories of it, then you move on into improvements, not the other way around. Some games get doomed due to getting too outdated and some don't.

Yes I enjoy older games, and I am only 15. I'm one of the few people that like the classics such as Sonic, Mario, Streets of Rage, Battle Toads, etc for my age. And that's because I grew up with an NES and a Sega Genesis in my house, then I went on forward to the N64 and the Playstation, and etc. So I can appreciate older games without complaining about graphics.

So all in all, Graphics do matter for this generation of games, only because there's no excuse to have poor graphics. And for older games, they don't really matter if you grew into them they were good for there time.

 

[TheGreen]

I pretty much agree with all of the above.

I'd like to add that there really are subjective. If you can recall a game released for the Xbox arcade called 'Limbo', you will see what I believe to be stunning graphics. Some people will think that the silhouette style of 2D graphics has no place on such a graphically powerful console, but I'd be the first to disagree.

Graphics MUST contribute to the overall gaming experience. Minecraft has a very basic graphic style. The textures upon your first glance are horrid, but after you come to terms with the goal of the game, you begin to appreciate the simplicity and the ease with which a computer can render such basic textures.

There are three factors to the graphics: The designer, the medium (the console) and the receiver or the player. A three parts have to be working in harmony. Some designers are well suited for the computer while others are better for the graphical styles of weaker consoles. The users of said consoles also must be taken into consideration. A careful balance must be met, and simply putting the most realistic graphics or the most colorful graphics possible just won't cut it today.

 

[Mikau94]

Graphics matter. I honestly think the PS3 wouldn't have sold at all if the graphic wouldn't have been very well. Butgraphics arn't the only thing that matters. Gameplay and story play a huge part in video games. Think about it, people are still consistantly buying older games, hence the reason we have the Wiishop.

 

[fredthehylian]

These are the two requirements I usually have for graphics:
1. Intelligible- I have to be able to know what I'm looking at. This is a rule often broken by 3rd party Atari 2600 games, very rarely nowadays.
2. Not in the Uncanny Valley- As much as I say how good graphics look isn't important, if I'm staring at a game that's trying to be realistic yet it looks unnatural (i.e. this) When you look at that image, doesn't something feel a bit unsettling? Having to sit through that just to have a bit of fun is what often kills a game.

Other than that, I could care less about graphics. Heck, if you actually think about it, the graphics on every FPS except for Wolfenstein, Doom, and Halo are bland; they are almost always shown through a camera with a green, blue, grey, or brown lens. That's the reason for most "graphics don't matter" comments. It's a flame to the FPS fanboys in disguise.

 

[Kybyrian]

I hate it when people say that graphics don't matter in the slightest - it's one of my biggest pet peeves - because they really do matter. They may not affect the game by a ton, but you have to admit that you'd probably enjoy a game better with decent graphics than absolutely horrible graphics. It's just the way things are. Graphics are sort of the invisible factor... If a game has excellent graphics that really appeal to you, then you enjoy the game 1.5x or so more(not actually calculated, a random guess). If the game has graphics that you believe are pretty good, but nothing special - in other words, neutral - then you enjoy the game about as much as you normally would. If a game has absolutely horrible graphics that you can hardly enjoy at all and don't appeal to you in the slightest, then you instantly dislike the game a little more.

I call graphics the "invisible factor" because they aren't the game-changing factor. They simply affect how much you enjoy the game a little bit, but not to the point - usually, that is - where you would end up not playing it. If the other aspects of a game are excellent, then you tend to ignore the graphics a bit. If, however, the other parts of a game are bad, and give you no sort of desire to play it, and the graphics are horrible, you may just put the game down. If the game is kind of bad, but the graphics are excellent to you, you may want to continue playing the game.

 

[BlueLink57]

I agree with that. Most games that were bad in my opinion had poor graphics, because as TheGreen said, it also depends on the developer, which means they didn't do a good job on the game or graphics. Good games have good graphics, not only because the graphics add enjoyment, the gameplay is already good, and the developer cared about the graphics as well.

 

[MrZach]

These are the two requirements I usually have for graphics:
1. Intelligible- I have to be able to know what I'm looking at. This is a rule often broken by 3rd party Atari 2600 games, very rarely nowadays.
2. Not in the Uncanny Valley- As much as I say how good graphics look isn't important, if I'm staring at a game that's trying to be realistic yet it looks unnatural (i.e. this) When you look at that image, doesn't something feel a bit unsettling? Having to sit through that just to have a bit of fun is what often kills a game.

Other than that, I could care less about graphics. Heck, if you actually think about it, the graphics on every FPS except for Wolfenstein, Doom, and Halo are bland; they are almost always shown through a camera with a green, blue, grey, or brown lens. That's the reason for most "graphics don't matter" comments. It's a flame to the FPS fanboys in disguise.

I agree with this 100%. The graphics aren't as important as other things, nine times out of ten.

 

[darunia]

I agree with this 100%. The graphics aren't as important as other things, nine times out of ten.

to me graphics matter not one bit.

people go on about oh that game has great graphics isnt it brilliant.

the best games ive ever played are very poor graphically.
games like salamander,jsw,midnight resistance etc.

ok it was kind of hard to make sprites out but i didnt mind.
the games where that fun and enjoyable i didnit care about graphics.

to me graphics dont make the actual game better in terms of enjoyment.

if i had a choice between a ps3 game or a spectrum,c64 game etc ill always go for the c64,speccy etc.

to me graphics are totally meaningless.
i really do not understand all this graphics carry on.
gameplay, enjoyment of a game,music,story, all important graphics to me meaningless.

and i know many people who think the same.
graphics to me are just superficial.