Graphics, a big deal?

[SomeLameStuff]

Gameplay and story ranks higher than graphics on my list, though I do expect more recent games to come out with good graphics.

 

[CmdrGoob]

For instance, I also found the graphics in Crysis to be pretty bad. It's a terribly boring game to look at and does nothing to justify the huge hardware requirements.

(watch in HD)

Crysis is bloody amazing.

Graphics aren't everything, but they can make a good experience even better.

 

[Outright Villainy]

I don't need super Hd whatever, but decent facial animation, or character animation in general can add a LOT for a game. I find it a little silly to say graphics don't matter at all, if characters can act and move convincingly, then it adds a lot of immersion. Half life 2 and it's episodes are a great example of this, they even hold up today. I still think shadow of the collossus looks phenomenal too, or even metal gear solid 2, much better than most modern games with faces with loads of pollys thrown at them, but easily sliding into the abyss of the uncanny valley. Anything that helps expression, or a feeling of natural flow is always good.

 

[Jandau]

For instance, I also found the graphics in Crysis to be pretty bad. It's a terribly boring game to look at and does nothing to justify the huge hardware requirements.

(watch in HD)

Crysis is bloody amazing.

Graphics aren't everything, but they can make a good experience even better.

Actually, that video is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. They made a technically amazing engine, but then used it to make a boring, monotonous jungle. There was nothing of interest to see in that game, unless you have some sort of a vegetation fetish. It might be the most detailed monotonous forest ever, but it's still a monotonous forest.

 

[CmdrGoob]

For instance, I also found the graphics in Crysis to be pretty bad. It's a terribly boring game to look at and does nothing to justify the huge hardware requirements.

(watch in HD)

Crysis is bloody amazing.

Graphics aren't everything, but they can make a good experience even better.

Actually, that video is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. They made a technically amazing engine, but then used it to make a boring, monotonous jungle. There was nothing of interest to see in that game, unless you have some sort of a vegetation fetish. It might be the most detailed monotonous forest ever, but it's still a monotonous forest.

It looks like a beautiful, lush, vibrant realistic jungle. With streams, rivers and waterfalls. And beaches. And dotted with plantations and villages and military bases. And, of course, it eventually becomes a spectacular, surreal frozen wasteland. If that's monotony, I wish more games were that monotonous....

 

[Axolotl]

I don't need graphics better than this

However if you're going to have good graphics at least use them to showsomething interesting, visual flair and art direction are far more important than sheer power when it comes to visuals.

 

[Spiner909]

Graphics are always important but never enough so to sacrifice the gameplay or other elements.

 

[Irridium]

So long as you don't try to overload the hardware.

Ever play a console game and have it lag a lot?

There should be no god damn reason for it. With PC's, its hard to say what will run smooth and what won't, since everyone's rig is different, but with say the 360, everyone has the same hardware, so they should know exactly what it can handle and what it can't.

If the 360 can't handle what your doing, then tone down the graphics! I'm sick and goddamn tired of all the focus on freaking graphics. Instead of that, they should push most of that budget into hiring an actual writer.

 

[D.L.390]

Graphics are part of the experience, and can greatly compliment gameplay - but it doesn't work the other way round. Good graphics can't save bad gameplay.

I found Test Drive Unlimited to be a great game, but marred by the bad graphics - not marred enough to stop me putting hundreds of hours into it! Battlefield 2 also didn't have AMAZING graphics, but even today I still love to play it regularly, and same for Rainbow Six Vegas 1&2.

Then, there are games with great graphics, but which have bad gameplay... Gran Turismo (4, 5 Prologue) is brought to mind here. People can say it's a "realistic" simulator (It isn't, by the way. I drive in real life and it is NOTHING like the real thing), but it's just not fun at all and its only purpose is to look (sort of) pretty and to make your ego bigger. Army of Two had ok graphics but I felt like a robot because the gameplay was so trivial and mundane. Turok had ok graphics too, but WOEFUL gameplay.


Then you have your CoD 4 and 6s. Bad graphics, bad gameplay and shunning us PC gamers. Makes you feel that the game is saying to you "You couldn't possibly be good enough, so I'll make you feel and look like you are".

Wow, I just dumped my opinion here didn't I... Also, someone mentioned Crysis - I loved it. If you aren't sour about not being able to run it on very high and wait to afford the PC to do so, then it's an incredible game with great stealth and shooter gameplay and graphics that will make you so immersed in the experience that you feel like you're there.

So in the end, yes, I do need graphics - but only in certain games, and in said games only enough to make them immersive. Also I play PC, 360, Wii and PS3.

 

[x0ny]

I have to say, more recently I've been picking games which look pretty but have average gameplay. Examples of this would be resident evil 5, assassins creed. Though I still buy less pretty games such as GTA4, L4D's, and I still play Counter Strike alot, when I'm buying a new game, my first concern is do the graphics look good. An example of this would be Final Fantasy 13, I've only seen screenshots and I've already pre ordered the game. I haven't read up much on the combat system or the gameplay.

 

[brainfreeze215]

I can't say it's the primary thing I look for. That being said, I just bought my first 1080p HDTV to go with my PS3, and re-playing some of my favorite games with a fancy new HDMI cable does make the experience better.

 

[Flour]

that being said, graphics do matter, super shiny state of the art graphics don't. Point in case, Majesty 1 looked better than Majesty 2. The difference? Majesty 2 was 3D

Sprites will almost never look old or ugly. The only problems will be when you want to play your NES on a wall-covering HDTV, but that's understandable when individual pixels are about as big as a finger.

Under the current gaming climate, I really want developers to stop putting all their time, money & effort into graphics.
It doesn't actually have to be any better than say, HL2: Episode 2. Better than that & they've put too much time into it.

Most developers have always tried to have the best possible graphics. There are some exceptions, but mostly those were small developers that failed simply because reviewers hated it for not being "generic realistic [genre] game #4million".

On-Topic: I only buy games that are fun to play, graphics aren't important. Of course, this means that for the PC, I haven't bought a single game since the Box and some recent console purchases include Disgaea3 and Banjo Kazooie Nuts&Bolts.
I do say that graphics aren't important, but bad graphics are important in that some recent games(Uncharted, Halo3 and Bioshock to name the 3 most recent ones I noticed it in) all have disgusting looking textures simply because they all look like everything is covered in(or made of) plastic.

 

[Random Argument Man]

I'm not saying graphics should be the no.1 thing that developpers should do. However, I strongly beleive that graphics and visual designs helps the immersion at some certain point.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

graphics is always the last thing i look for, story, gameplay, depth of game, humor, those are all things i look for before graphics, not to say i dont appreciate a game that does it good without sacrificing anything, then its nice, otherwise, FUCK OFF with the graphics, i could care less if the characters elbow is pointed corner!!

 

[Cerrax]

I think the jump to HD was premature for console games. The consoles don't have the power to render in full 1080 and without an anti-alias filter, they just look jagged as hell.

Graphics should be not necessarily "good" or "bad" but appropriate to the game. Does Modern Warfare need to be so intricately detailed? Yes, because it's trying to present a realistic scenario. Those graphics must fit that presentation? Does X-Men Origins need to be as detailed as MW? No (and it's usually doesn't) because that game has much more of a cartoon-ish feel to it. The problem becomes when games that are not aiming for realism waste power and money and time on realistic graphics. The other problem is the opposite, when games that try to present realistic settings fall short of the mark.

 

[NapalmBob]

One of my favourite games of all time is Ascendancy, which I now play for free with DOSBox. Also, Aliens Resurrection on PSOne and a few cool games on the Mega Drive/Genesis (like that Mech-Warriors/Battletech one). I still play these games fairly regularly because they are good games. Even though they may look like bit-crushed rainbow vomit now, the graphics are more than enough to achieve their primary function: which is telling me what the hell is happening. But then again, the highest selling games of yesteryear are Super Mario Bros, Pac Man and Tetris all of which look like bit-crushed rainbow vomit on a black rug of CRT goodness, but even they still get played.

Graphics won't determine whether or not a game becomes a classic, but they are a big attention grabber. Myst (the best looking game from way back) shifted over 6 million units, and all you do is wonder around a deserted island with no real goal.

 

[reg42]

It depends. If a game is obviously new, and the graphics are fine generally, but the devs were obviously lazy and just animated things badly. Graphics itself aren't very important to me, but playing some of the first 3D games are just too much sometimes.

 

[Red Bomb]

Unfortunatly graphics is abit of a big thing for me. Having a degree in Fine Art will do that to you. I almost fainted when I first saw Crysis and Uncharted 2. And although I didnt really like Borderlands as a game, the graphics made it more enjoyable for me.
However it's not all about graphics, if the story grabs me, gameplay is good I'll be more than happy. I still love to play N64 Golden Eye and that is just cuz its a good game.
Its just I find, for me, the graphics help me 'immerse' myself into it more easily, thats all.