Do you care about graphics?
- Thread starter pulse2
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It depends on how good the rest of the game is; for me, the need for excellent graphics decreases proportionally to how good the story, characters and overall gameplay are. Of course, I prefer beautiful graphics, but if the other main pillars are solid enough to carry the game then graphics become less important.
Can we please define what "bad graphics" mean? Imo Minecraft has EXCELLENT graphics. why? It may be blockish, and low res, but A) It is crystal clear and not at all murky and B)It fits perfectly for the theme and tone of the game.
Contrast that with GTA4, say for example. Muddy browns and grays that make it hard to distinguish features; every road looks the same so you just stare at a mini-map all the time while driving. and most importantly the style barely ever portrays Liberty City as the vibrant energetic metropolis that it claims to be. In short, it had BAD graphics.
So yeah, i don't like bad graphics, because it kills immersion. Only when i say bad graphics I don't mean particle effects and frame-rates. I mean graphics that is not appropriate for the game.
Contrast that with GTA4, say for example. Muddy browns and grays that make it hard to distinguish features; every road looks the same so you just stare at a mini-map all the time while driving. and most importantly the style barely ever portrays Liberty City as the vibrant energetic metropolis that it claims to be. In short, it had BAD graphics.
So yeah, i don't like bad graphics, because it kills immersion. Only when i say bad graphics I don't mean particle effects and frame-rates. I mean graphics that is not appropriate for the game.
I don't care about resolutions or how detailed it is. But I do care about art style. I think Crysis just looks mediocer, but I love de style of red death redemption and super mario galaxy 2. And it only bothers me if bad grapihcs have a bad effect on de gameplay, for example if I can't identify something.
Graphics are important...but not in the way most people imagine them to be. The important thing about graphics isn't how preety they are or how many effects they have. It is whether or not they are functional for that specific game. By that, I mean if they are potraying all the visual information the player needs in a clear manner and are not detrimental to the gameplay or the player's enjoyment in general.
Of course, the catch is that graphics do not need to be top-of-the-line in order to fulfill such a task...heck, even games on very old systems like the Famicom/NES or Commodore 64 were quite capable of having sufficiently functional graphics. Yet, very often, developers become so infatuated with technology that they end up focusing too much on that aspect, which results in the gamer being overserved in that aspect and underserved in others.
This isn't to say that it hurts if developers dedicate at least a bit of time to making the graphics pleasant to look at. However, nowadays, developers invest way more time, money and manpower into that aspect than it is truly necessary.
If I was a head of a game company, I would do what Iwata did to the developers of Brain Age and give them at least one project which would have to be ready for demonstration in 90 days (well, more or less; it would depend on what kind of game). Not only would they not have the time to argue with me, it would force them to strip down graphics to the most essential components and focus on other elements in order to have it ready.
...That example makes me sound really mean, doesn't it?
But then again, being able to work under limitations is what seperates a good developer from a great developer. And afterall, Brain Age would go on to sell millions.
Of course, the catch is that graphics do not need to be top-of-the-line in order to fulfill such a task...heck, even games on very old systems like the Famicom/NES or Commodore 64 were quite capable of having sufficiently functional graphics. Yet, very often, developers become so infatuated with technology that they end up focusing too much on that aspect, which results in the gamer being overserved in that aspect and underserved in others.
This isn't to say that it hurts if developers dedicate at least a bit of time to making the graphics pleasant to look at. However, nowadays, developers invest way more time, money and manpower into that aspect than it is truly necessary.
If I was a head of a game company, I would do what Iwata did to the developers of Brain Age and give them at least one project which would have to be ready for demonstration in 90 days (well, more or less; it would depend on what kind of game). Not only would they not have the time to argue with me, it would force them to strip down graphics to the most essential components and focus on other elements in order to have it ready.
...That example makes me sound really mean, doesn't it?
But then again, being able to work under limitations is what seperates a good developer from a great developer. And afterall, Brain Age would go on to sell millions.
As long as the graphics are functional and clear any amount of prettiness thrown on top is just a bonus really.
I care about graphics. They need to be appealing, and need to efficiently represent the gameplay elements.
On the other hand I don't care how high definition the graphics are, GoW3 looks just as good as Megaman 9, while on the other hand I thought Borderlands was a bit of an eye sore.
On the other hand I don't care how high definition the graphics are, GoW3 looks just as good as Megaman 9, while on the other hand I thought Borderlands was a bit of an eye sore.
I find games with good gameplay, if the graphics are awful so be it, also the games that suposedly have good graphics are often just grey & brown, things that are more colourful are nicer/easier to look at, my favorite game is probably Twilight Princess, the graphics on it aren't that great but it's fun so who cares.
Graphics matter. If there are 2 games that are exactly the same, but one has better graphics, I'm going for that one. And I don't mean necessarily more pixels or realism, but a better look (e.g.: Windwaker had good graphics, but not realistic). The visual art behind a game is a huge part of what makes it good. Of course it isn't all the matters, there is no single element of a game that is.
As long as I can tell what is going on I do not care about graphics. The two aspects of games that I care about are good gameplay and story, if the story is the focus of the game.
Whatever you want to make of it mate, I suppose there are games that have a different interpretation of good graphics and those known to just have BETTER graphics, but I don't think many games have bad graphics per say unless there is clear flaws that impede vision and objectives, making gameplay frustrating.GrizzlerBorno said:
That would mean graphics are preventing the gameplay from somehow being fun, or certain graphics are lazy implementations.
One might say that having a 3d audience in a WWE game is a statement of good graphics as opposed to cardboard ones with a focus on how realistic the main wrestlers are for example.
But say, if one had obviously weaker graphics but it felt easier to play because of an element, it could be the controller, or more fun to play because of another element, like multiplayer or extra DLC, would you still be interested in the prettier looking one?Skoosh said:
I'm not trying to convince you, you're entitled to you opinion, just keen to know what you would do in a situation like that one
Minecraft and urban terror are two of my favorite games. You've all seen the first one, and the second one is a quake 3 mod (ya,seriously).
The way i see it, game have 4 things: graphics, gameplay, story and music. If a game has all 4, it is a really excellent one. If one of them is missing, say, graphics, the others have to make up for it. Graphics can modify your view of the music, the gameplay and even the story. However, lack of graphic doesn't kill a game.
So, yeah, graphic are a part of a whole.
The way i see it, game have 4 things: graphics, gameplay, story and music. If a game has all 4, it is a really excellent one. If one of them is missing, say, graphics, the others have to make up for it. Graphics can modify your view of the music, the gameplay and even the story. However, lack of graphic doesn't kill a game.
So, yeah, graphic are a part of a whole.