How important are graphics to you.

[minimacker]

To a certain degree. But still very minimum.
I am a fan of shadows in games, but you don't need 4096x4096 textures on ANYTHING.

I hate games that could've been in traditional 2D, but is in 3D because it's modern. I look at a game like Knights of Honor and compare it to Total War. Despite Knights of Honor being more of a budget title, with 2D graphics. Detailed 2D graphics, but 2D nonetheless.

Knights of Honour has ten time the pacing and is far easier for newcomers.


In short, 3D pathfinding sucks.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I thought this might be a nice straightforward topic for my first thread.

Actually, it isn't. Define "graphics" for instance. I really can't answer your question as it is.

I suppose that's fair, I mean graphic's as in the actual way the game is presented. This includes art style, resolution, fluidity, color, sharpness, everything.

That's a very general description, like, incredibly. A useless one even. It's impossible to not find graphics described like that that important, if only to use the game. The eyes are one of our most important sensory organs afterall.

 

[Freechoice]

Hey look, it's this thread again!

I'm sorry that this topic has been done before, but I think its safe to say that its pretty unreasonable to expect that 1)I have the time to read through every thread to make my topic hasn't been done, and 2) that every thread is going to be completely original topic.

No, but there is a search function. Ignorantia juris non excusat. Or in this case, forum etiquette.

There is also the fact that peoples opinions change over time, so even if i did go and read all of the similar threads on this subject the opinions of people who posted before may differ, and I can look at the opinions of people who may not have commented in the past. Hell even you must have some modicum of interest in the topic if you took the time to post on "this thread again." If you were interested in the topic then why did you waste not only your time, but the time of everyone else on this thread.

But does it matter more whose opinion it is rather than what the opinion is? It'd be one thing if this was a forum of game programmers whose jobs were to come up with novel graphic-based mechanics or discussing the feasibility of high end graphics within a budget or current technologies, but it isn't. This a forum of gamers, largely without formal training or experience in the field and as such, will not have opinions beyond "Gameplay>Graphics, except when".

The broadness of the topic also leaves much to the imagination. What do you define as graphics? Is it the aesthetic? Is it the polygon count or the texture quality or model animations? Specificity helps remove the "oh hey, it's this thread again" mentality. Having posted this without regard to the myriad number of clones that preceded it is showing disrespect to the community and fostering a cynical outlook on the character of the forums as a whole.

 

[sgt. soap mctavish]

To me graphics are not a major factor. If you get too carried away with them, you might forget a few things like: The Story. Case in point, Battlefield 3.

 

[Savagezion]

Graphics need to be able to communicate what they represent. Dwarf Fortress, I cannot play because the graphics suck. I don't want to have to have a map key for what things are in a game in a time when photo-realism is being practiced. Make trees look like a green triangle or something. I should be able to look at a screenshot of a game and see what everything is there for or at least have a good guess.

Otherwise, I don't mind about graphics. If I can tell what you are trying to represent, I am good. However, I will say that I WANT to like a game with better graphics when I see it. graphics can influence my purchasing habits in hopes that there is a good game in there. However, they never completely sell me.

-snip-

I gotta agree with the OP. Why do you care? What is the difference between this thread and the ones that equate to "What was the last video game you played and a random type of sandwich"? The fact that this thread is so vague offers an opportunity for deeper discussion to come up accidentally, although is tough without focus.
As well, whenever I see an actual good solid fresh topic with thought behind it, it dies before reaching page 2 (sometimes it strecthes 1.5 pages.) on these forums as if all the users are standing around picking their butts. Unless of course someone is boldly wrong in the OP and then EVERYONE must shout how they are wrong and it could stretch into the teens.

"You are never the only one" is seen as "witty" on these forums, when it is actually just pedantic. This community is a bit too pedantic in general for my tastes. Many people on this board would correct a seven-year-old for saying Harvest Moon is the "greatest game ever" with counter-points as to how to structure that phrase more correctly and proceed to point out why the kid is wrong. I would think people who play games as a main hobby would know how to lighten up as well as be able to recognize patterns.

 

[IlikeLolis]

Graphics and Looking Nice are 2 Completely different Topics in my book.

Anyone who has modded textures for the Fallout 3/Vegas can tell you "It doesn't have to look detailed, It just has to look Cool!"

So yes, give me a beautiful cliff and I won't give it two looks unless I can either jump it or dangle a man off it.

 

[Brown Cap]

I haved mixed feelings.
I love Morrowind- great game. The graphics are awful at best, but that's because it was made in the mid-late 90s. It was pretty phenominal for its time. I can dig the crappy grahpics because it's an old game.

But when I pick up a triple A game this year, it damn well better be the most flawless and cutting edge graphics, otherwise, the game lacks a certain essence that is necessary for my experience.

 

[stvncpr236]

Hey look, it's this thread again!

I'm sorry that this topic has been done before, but I think its safe to say that its pretty unreasonable to expect that 1)I have the time to read through every thread to make my topic hasn't been done, and 2) that every thread is going to be completely original topic.

No, but there is a search function. Ignorantia juris non excusat. Or in this case, forum etiquette.

There is also the fact that peoples opinions change over time, so even if i did go and read all of the similar threads on this subject the opinions of people who posted before may differ, and I can look at the opinions of people who may not have commented in the past. Hell even you must have some modicum of interest in the topic if you took the time to post on "this thread again." If you were interested in the topic then why did you waste not only your time, but the time of everyone else on this thread.

But does it matter more whose opinion it is rather than what the opinion is? It'd be one thing if this was a forum of game programmers whose jobs were to come up with novel graphic-based mechanics or discussing the feasibility of high end graphics within a budget or current technologies, but it isn't. This a forum of gamers, largely without formal training or experience in the field and as such, will not have opinions beyond "Gameplay>Graphics, except when".

The broadness of the topic also leaves much to the imagination. What do you define as graphics? Is it the aesthetic? Is it the polygon count or the texture quality or model animations? Specificity helps remove the "oh hey, it's this thread again" mentality. Having posted this without regard to the myriad number of clones that preceded it is showing disrespect to the community and fostering a cynical outlook on the character of the forums as a whole.

Well the other people who have replied seemed to have no problem figuring out what "graphics" means. I'm sorry that you seem to have difficulty with that. And exactly how am I showing disrespect to the community, I have said anything to disrespect them as a whole. Whats showing disrespect to the community is people like you who go to threads they don't like simply to complain about them. All I was trying to accomplish was ask the communities opinion on a subject, you did not have to take part in the discussion at all, but you chose to. And what was it that you had to contribute? You talk about me fostering a cynical attitude in the forums, when that is exactly what you are doing by taking part in discussions solely to complain about them and making this a very hostile environment for those of us who wish to actually contribute. Sure my first thread may not have been completely original or groundbreaking, but at least I was able to spark discussion with out being hostile. So please if you have nothing to actually contribute please go be a miserable cynic somewhere else.

 

[Freechoice]

snip

I see what you are trying to say, but I disagree on the grounds that you are willfully agreeing with my point on the forum being 90% asspickers. We can see this in many circumstances.

As for everything else, well, the OP was probably ignorant of the pedantry this gamer community has long since become infamous for. I myself sometimes indulge in picking apart certain arguments purely out of thoughtless boredom, but I also do it to discourage such mindless thought. If people are really going to come onto this board to try and act smart, you had best be ready to defend your own point without having to rely on "well you need to think of it like this" arguments that act like copouts more than anything else. I believe that if people want to talk about one thing or another, they need to be listening most of the time. And that's the problem here. I've had my arguments taken out of context and it's like they read wherever they wanted just to prove a point I was countering. Fair enough, maybe it's my fault for being unclear, using pompous latin quotes or just using diction people aren't familiar with and are too lazy to just google, but I think it's not too much to ask for people to just imagine the idea that "hey, maybe it's not worth looking at so harshly. Maybe the other guy has an opinion that is better than mine." I know this'll never happen, but it's not entirely unreasonable, is it? All I asked of the OP was to search for previous threads of this nature. Would I be wrong guessing that if a moderator had told him to not post threads that have been done before and to use the handy dandy search function some lucky bastard had the pleasure of scripting, he wouldn't have been defensive about it? Sadly, we don't live in a meritocracy where a valid point or fact has relevance. In this day and age, we can plainly see how arguments are just wars of who can ***** the longest without going to the lavatory.

 

[TheRussian]

Pretty simple:
Graphics can be as simple as possible as long as they do not hinder your ability to play the game.

 

[AwesomeNinjaPowers]

I like the pretties but I'd rather have a compelling story and decent gameplay before awesome amazing masterpiece graphics

 

[Popeman]

The aesthetic is important but overall the graphical quality means little to nothing.

 

[Breno]

i think its more how the graphics work with the game.
like in skyrim imagin playing in a blocky style without and colour its might still be fun but without all the cool animations, its just not as epic.....

 

[SycoMantis91]

I'm on your side. It's nice to have good graphics, but if the game/controls/story/characters/etc all suck, I'm not playing it. No matter how beautiful it is. It's kinda like how I look at women. I don't care how gorgeous you are, if you're not at least somewhat nice, you're dumb as a rock, you're insanely full of yourself, and you're just plain a *****, I'm not interested. Looks are one of the last things I look at either way.

I'm with you. Though with women, looks are the first things I see but one of the last things I consider when determining suitability as a partner.

That's a fair point. I think many are the same way with games though. The first thing you notice when watching a gameplay preview or a trailer is how good it looks. But when you dig deeper into the game, and you find that it controls like ass, and it can't engage you at all, you quickly lose all interest, not caring at all how good it looks. I think that also fits into my analogy.

 

[Aprilgold]

Graphics are very important to me. Essentially they are the whole game. Graphics are not just the looks, but they define the function of game-play.

AH-HA! I can safely say your wrong, at least as much my opinion is wrong for your opinion, but whatever, I think my opinion is correct and yours is incorrect. Using a Extra Credits quote here. "You won't have a survival horror game with a fluffy, happy aesthetic."

I guess I can only have one question for you is that if Graphics decide the gameplay for the game then what makes Mario's Graphical Artstyle a side scroller and not a FPS? For that matter, then how the hell did Text Adventures work. Their technically just text so why didn't Mario get the text adventure art style and why didn't the text adventure get a Mario Style? What makes a graphical art style suit a specific genre and what doesn't? Note that you can't say that a Mario Art Style makes it 2D Side-Scroller when Graphics decide the gameplay.

I don't care about graphics, anything from text-adventures to Uncharted and all else inbetween I can play. Grahpics don't exactly matter in the grand scale of things, aesthetics do.

It needs to be asked, and I find it strange that it hasn't been, (at least not on the first page) but are you talking about graphics are aesthetics?

Either way, I agree. I think I once read a developer quote along the lines of:
"Once the game is fun with black and white squares and dots, you make it look pretty."

Aesthetics. Gaming journalism totally raped the definition of Graphics for aesthetics and now stands for anything and everything related to how a game looks. Technically, graphics is the hardcore power behind what a game can look like, while aesthetics is what a game does look like.

I'm pretty sure that it is aesthetics not graphics being discussed here. At least thats what I think because not many people define it by anything else.

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

Very. The Art design must=the level of graphics.

a few examples.

Wow's art design = it's graphics. Therefore it looks good and I can play it well.
Deus EX Art Design=it's graphics. High powered graphics and high powered art design.
Playing a super nintendo game at a very high resolution is a good example of graphics capability out doing the art design of a game. It makes it hard to play, gives me headaches, and breaks the overall immersion for me. But slap that puppy on an old 19in tube TV and i'm all over it. I have that same problem with PS2 games on my super big high rez tv.

I can't play a game, no matter how good it is, if it's art design outdoes it's graphics or Graphics that out do the art. It breaks the immersion for me.

 

[Erttheking]

They're low on my top ten list but they're on it.

 

[Savagezion]

-snip-

Claiming that the community is 90% ass pickers, its only logical to know that it is a ridiculous expectation for the forum to cater to the 10% with a rule against this type of behavior. It is in Escapist's best interest to cater to the 90%. Otherwise, forum traffic would die and the site would cease.

One thing to note is that this board is guilty of the very thing you accuse this thread of. We are currently in the "Discuss video games" section. (broad, no?) The other sections of the forums are a bit more specific such as user reviews, forum games, featured content, etc. These tend to have more focus guided in their approach to the community. However, what should be noted is that the two forums that see the most activity is the two broad ones which are "Talk about video games" (Gen Disc.) and "Talk about something other than video games" (Off Topic). These are more populated by a considerable amount.
I am pointing that out to simply outline that this community is not structured in its essence. I personally traffic multiple forums digging for good discussion topics but I frequent the escapist because I am so damned opinionated and this is the forum community that loves to promote subjectivity the most. I am more likely to be taken with a grain of salt here than anywhere else... as long as I don't use a hyperbolic figure of speech, because then I must burn after I am corrected.
The thing I love about the Escapist is that it is filled with teenagers trying to be smart and that can be entertaining often. Sometimes I get into debates on here and sometimes someone can even make me reconsider my position on something. Sometimes, I just want to debate something with somebody so long as it is video game related. I have argued for things that I don't even necessarily back just to see where the conversation went. Often though, I post something and it largely goes ignored. Only on rare occasions will I throw bait in my opinion to snag a quote that counters mine.

Overall, the Escapist is not one of the best online communities I go to. Heh, it isn't even close if we count game specific forums. I love this place for its diversity and the community's outlook of "What's your opinion about _______?" which always ends up with two people shouting the word "subjective" at one another completely making everyone talk in circles. Most of these kinds of threads I enter and merely read, not post. I only post to counter something on the board I spot usually. (Possibly taking someone else's bait) I figured if I was going to quote you to question your motives, I may as well tell the OP my thoughts on his topic.
Your posts within this thread has become a pretty common trend on these boards with a different sub-group that thinks that posting that over and over will deter the activity, even though the effort has failed for 2 consecutive years that I am aware of. I am sure it will continue for more but I personally live and let live on the whole matter. There are a lot of "asspickers" (not sure about 90% but it is high) here but I have decided I am OK with it so long as they think about what they post.
My pet peeves on these forums is people who post some journalist/webshow's work and then try to take credit for it indirectly by claiming that sums up THEIR views. Why even bother with the discussion if you are just going to plagiarize your own opinion? I could go on forever about how that shit is completely moronic, but I won't and you're welcome. I can see how yours might be repeat threads but honestly, I don't grasp how you can't just ignore it is there. That isn't me saying "What's your problem?" it is just easy for me just as it may be easy for you to dismiss my pet peeve.

In this day and age, we can plainly see how arguments are just wars of who can ***** the longest without going to the lavatory.

Here's to a healthy colon.

 

[Savagezion]

Well the other people who have replied seemed to have no problem figuring out what "graphics" means. I'm sorry that you seem to have difficulty with that. And exactly how am I showing disrespect to the community, I have said anything to disrespect them as a whole. Whats showing disrespect to the community is people like you who go to threads they don't like simply to complain about them. All I was trying to accomplish was ask the communities opinion on a subject, you did not have to take part in the discussion at all, but you chose to. And what was it that you had to contribute? You talk about me fostering a cynical attitude in the forums, when that is exactly what you are doing by taking part in discussions solely to complain about them and making this a very hostile environment for those of us who wish to actually contribute. Sure my first thread may not have been completely original or groundbreaking, but at least I was able to spark discussion with out being hostile. So please if you have nothing to actually contribute please go be a miserable cynic somewhere else.

After my last post, I figured it best to mention that you ain't an "asspicker". I am really enjoying using the term though. Since you had someone come in to slam the thread, I will reinforce it. I just ask that you don't ever post a webshow episode or article as your opinion, pretty please since we're on the subject.

As for the original topic, what games were used in this discussion at the water cooler?

 

[LilithSlave]

Even though they weren't exactly designed for HD resolutions? Do you have a video of that or something?

I'll probably get the PS3 port of FFX eventually, if that adds anything.

Even though they weren't exactly designed for HD resolutions? Do you have a video of that or something?

I'll probably get the PS3 port of FFX eventually, if that adds anything.[/quote]
With the help of a 2500K overclocked I probably could. But I've been procrastinating fixing the CMOS RAM problem in my motherboard on my desktop for over a month right now. I've been moving houses into a fixer upper for a long time now and cleaning and such. And gaming on my considerably weaker gaming laptop.

You see, it's much easier gaming on my gaming laptop right now because I've been doing a lot to the floors and walls and I don't really have much that's plugged into the walls right now. Like no flat screens at all, they're still in the boxes. Same with my PlayStation 3 and other systems.

So I would probably normally have the horsepower to do so right at the moment, but... no... sorry.

I can show you some official videos the PCSX2 developers have created themselves, though.
Go on to youtube and click the 1080p button yourself. I think you'll be impressed. Though they didn't showcase the best possible footage for many things. For instance, the cutscenes in Final Fantasy X look fantastic. The models for Auron look especially high fidelity.

Then again, I suppose I am easily impressed. After all, I like my 16-Bit graphics.