Do graphics matter?

[ethaninja]

I love Minecraft. And those graphics are more ugly then Dooms. But I love the game

I hate the new age graphics where you can't see shit. Especially in Gears of War and Unreal Tournament III. Deus Ex was probably the best graphics stage got too. It was nicely colored and properly lighted.

The actual model and texture details are great on these new games, but they chose the shittiest rendering standerds.

 

[mParadox]

I don't care for the graphics as long the story/gameplay is good.

Prototype was an exception and i was disappointed with Bioshock 2's graphics since it came out this year.

 

[Peteron]

Graphics are important but are far from the most important thing in a game. In my eyes, its not about having realistic graphics or bad ones, yet, its style. For example, games like Crackdown have a cartoony look, giving a comic hero style theme. Each game has its own graphics style, and many times that alters the theme of the game. So, graphics can be very important when it comes to setting a mood or feel inside of a game. Of course, plot and game-play come first, but graphics help enhance these, if used properly. Graphics put the bun on the patty. This is only my opinion of course. Music can easily be compared to my envisionment of graphics.

 

[theSovietConnection]

They matter insofar as building atmosphere is concerned. Take, for example, the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series. They are wonderfully atospheric games. If you were to give them, say, the graphics from The Legend of Zelda original, suddenly, one of the best points of the game is gone. It's rather hard to convey atmosphere as well in 8-bit as you can now. So while they shouldn't be the primary focus, they definitely do matter.

 

[justnotcricket]

Shiny graphics are nice, and can certainly help with immersion in games, but they should never be used to replace gameplay. I'm not sure about story - that's in a league of its own, but how the game looks should always complement how it plays.

I actually like the aesthetic of older games (as a trivial example, I've never liked the new boxy 3D 'better' graphics of more recent Harvest Moon Games, preferring instead the old pixely GBA-era stuff), but then there are games like Assassin's Creed and Uncharted 2 where the beautiful graphics add a lot to the experience - in Assassin's Creed by creating open world environments you actually want to look at and climb around in, and in Uncharted by cementing the cinematographic qualities of the game.

It also depends on genre for me. I find that in my RPGs, I'll be a lot more forgiving of 'bad' graphics if the story and mechanics are engrossing, whereas in action adventure games I like my scenery to create an immersive atmosphere for me to run/jump/kill in. Having said that, I wish that Oblivion would have had a character creation screen that wasn't rendered completely moot by every possible character still looking like a potato in a wig...

But I digress. In short, I like shiny graphics as much as the next person, but they have to put a shine on an already good game, not a distracting cover on a poorly made one.

 

[Xanadu84]

Do visuals matter in a book? Yes and no. Usually, they are pretty superfluous. As time and technology advance, you do expect a certain baseline increase in readability, clarity, etc: A handwritten book these day may look immaculate years ago, but just looks sloppy these days. Certain consistent improvements are necessary. But as a general rule, as long as it doesn't look absolutely outdated, it won't make or break a book. However, certain books are made to rely more heavily on the visuals. Where other novels are made to primarily be read, a few genuinely use the visuals to display its artistry. This is simply a design choice. It doesn't have to be a technique you use, but it can be used to great effect. Or sometimes, it becomes a crutch for a poor author. It's important to remember as well that a very complicated, intricate set of pictures is one potential form of artistry, but well designed, yet simple set of visuals can potentially be just as powerful.

Apparently, I can extend that metaphor pretty far.

 

[Iron Lightning]

Well, yes and no. Graphical quality is the least important part of any videogame, while art direction is one of the most important part of any videogame.

 

[Athinira]

It's all about expectations.

If a game company comes out with an FPS in early 2011, you would expect the graphics to match the FPS standards of the year. Noone wants to buy a brand new FPS shooter that looks like the original Quake.

If you download a community made mod for a game, you don't expect the story/script/gameplay etc. to match a big grand game either, do you (although they sometimes do, which can be a neat surprise)?

In other words, the lesser your expectations of the graphics from the game (or any other element), the less it matters, and your expectations change based on who is developing the game, the genre, when it will be released (or when it was released) etc. For example, when Valve finally pumps out Half-Life 2: Episode 3, i expect it to match the standards of the previous installments obviously, but since they are still using the source engine, i don't expect the graphics to be THAT impressive, and therefore it won't matter so much to me. I do, however, expect Crysis 2 running Cryengine 3 to have great graphics (with better performance than it's predecessor), else i won't buy it.

That is also one of the reasons many people loved Portal i believe. They didn't expect the game to be the "big surprise" from the Orange Box, but the humor and gameplay exceeded expectations.

 

[natster43]

Yes and no. No because if a game does not need good graphics to be a good game. And yes because if the graphics are so bad that you can't see what is going on or hurts your eyes then it will ruin how good a game could be.

 

[SideburnsPuppy]

Yes. Yes they do. Some things matter more, but graphics definitely do matter. Here is a chart I made just now in MS Paint which I feel perfectly represents how graphics matter:

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd373/SideburnsPuppy/HowGraphicsMatter.jpg?t=1286083366

 

[Kamunt]

Eversion and Cave Story will tell you that no, intense graphics are not necessary to create an amazing game. Also my PC tends to crap itself in the presence of amazing graphics.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I would rather have 2007 graphics with an excellent story than 2010 graphics with a meh story. That's why I bought New Vegas.

...you mean pre-buy (pre order on console)? or has New Vegas been released without me knowing it?

Pre-purchasing something is still purchasing it. I bought New Vegas a month or so ago. Money left my wallet and NV is on my Steam list, waiting for pre-load and the unlock key to be transmitted.

Can't wait for the unlock.

amen to this. i got mine a good 4 months ago or so when they had a deal for FO3,Oblivion,morrowind (mind you, all game of hte year editions) on sale for 80 bucks bundled with the fallout new vegas pre order, once in a lifetime deal that i could NOT pass up

 

[DementedSheep]

Yes. Yes they do. Some things matter more, but graphics definitely do matter. Here is a chart I made just now in MS Paint which I feel perfectly represents how graphics matter:

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd373/SideburnsPuppy/HowGraphicsMatter.jpg?t=1286083366

I second this. Graphics do matter especially now that the technology is there, but they aren?t the main feature.

 

[Griphphin]

I'm a big retro gamer as a lot of other people in this thread are as well. I do not care about high polygon counts or fancy shader effects if that's not what the developer was going for. It's all about the final product and graphics are important in that respect as well. Okami wouldn't have made such a huge wave if it stressed high-end graphics, but Shadow of the Colossus wouldn't have created that sense of isolation if you couldn't immerse yourself into a believable game world where it was an entire land that was just you and the Colossi.

I swear I relearn how to spell colossus every time I reference that game *high-fives spellcheck*

 

[Sinndogg]

Not necessarily. I think people often confuse art style and graphics when they're talking about this, and the first of the two is much more important, IMO.

 

[ultrachicken]

Graphics do matter. How much? That depends.

You can't deny that pretty scenery and good character models add to a game. It's when there's the gray and brown environments with the same 8 enemies that graphics matter to me.

There are some exceptions to the gray and brown rule for me, though. Fallout 3 and New Vegas stick out.

 

[Hijax]

It really depends on what is meant by "good graphics". If good graphics means poly count, then its the last thing i consider. But if good graphics means a graphical style and feel that underlies and supports the immersion of the game, then its as important as any other aspect.

Just look at any old survival horror. Poly count was crap then, compared to what it is now, but most of them manage to create an atmosphere thats, IMHO, far more immersive than what we usually see in today's games. If that counts as good graphics, then thats just as important as any other part of the game.