Poll: do graphics matter to you?
- Thread starter enzilewulf
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If story and setting count more than gameplay, then yes. If You care more about gameplay (which I do), no.
Of course the graphics (including art style) matter, and the graphical limitations don't really matter as long as you can make something good out of it. Some NES games can beat the crap out of some modern games in graphics, for example, the original Ninja Gaiden in NES looks so god damn good, especially the cutscenes.
Ugly games won't attract players as well as pretty games, and in my opinion good games have to have good graphics in addition to everything else being good. A game isn't going to get a 10/10 rating if it's graphics department is slacking, especially if the player has to stare the environments for hours. Good graphics also contribute to a better gaming experience, Soul Calibur, for example, wouldn't be that enjoyable (in my opinion) if it had poorly animated characters, just not that smooth polygons, ugly backgrounds or if it was a text-based game.
And besides the aesthetics, an ugly game can be incomprehensible or very confusing, therefore making it less accessible for new players (experienced players and newbies alike). Sure it doesn't matter so much if you've played it a few times but if you're playing it the first time ever then it's probably pretty frustrating.
Dwarf Fortress is a pretty good example, I wouldn't really call it an ugly game (your mileage may vary, I like ascii art) but it sure as hell doesn't make any sense at the first glance and it takes a while to learn what every character and their different colors mean (in addition to everything else). It's especially annoying if you've had a long break from it and start playing it again just to see that you can't remember what an 'k' is or what a 'b' is.
In conclusion, yes, graphics matter, not only because of aesthetics, but also because of accessibility and a better gaming experience.
Ugly games won't attract players as well as pretty games, and in my opinion good games have to have good graphics in addition to everything else being good. A game isn't going to get a 10/10 rating if it's graphics department is slacking, especially if the player has to stare the environments for hours. Good graphics also contribute to a better gaming experience, Soul Calibur, for example, wouldn't be that enjoyable (in my opinion) if it had poorly animated characters, just not that smooth polygons, ugly backgrounds or if it was a text-based game.
And besides the aesthetics, an ugly game can be incomprehensible or very confusing, therefore making it less accessible for new players (experienced players and newbies alike). Sure it doesn't matter so much if you've played it a few times but if you're playing it the first time ever then it's probably pretty frustrating.
Dwarf Fortress is a pretty good example, I wouldn't really call it an ugly game (your mileage may vary, I like ascii art) but it sure as hell doesn't make any sense at the first glance and it takes a while to learn what every character and their different colors mean (in addition to everything else). It's especially annoying if you've had a long break from it and start playing it again just to see that you can't remember what an 'k' is or what a 'b' is.
In conclusion, yes, graphics matter, not only because of aesthetics, but also because of accessibility and a better gaming experience.
It's not really that obvious, Chrono Trigger is one of the most beautiful games SNES has to offer in my opinion, and I believe many people would agree with me. What you're saying is like saying "I don't care about art. I have Mona Lisa on my wall so... my answer had to be obvious."Donnyp said:
Yes, I do. I have waited for decades for graphics to be this good. When I was a kid playing 8-Bit games I dreamed about graphics like this. Now there are here and I LOVE IT. It is only going to get better too! It is simply awesome.
Gameplay is still king though. I will still dislike a game if it has great graphics but terrible gameplay. Nothing can forgive terrible gameplay.
Gameplay is still king though. I will still dislike a game if it has great graphics but terrible gameplay. Nothing can forgive terrible gameplay.
Your poll is a little limited. It matters to a degree with me but I will look at gameplay more.
Not at all. I don't play a game cause its pretty (though it doesn't hurt if it is.), I play because it's a fun game...
Ok, if the graphics are eye-bleedingly bad, it might bug me a bit...But a mild to moderate bad I can ignore.
Ok, if the graphics are eye-bleedingly bad, it might bug me a bit...But a mild to moderate bad I can ignore.
Graphics are important because they are a key part of gameplay
videogames are a primarly visual medium we have to be able to see what things are, how much ammo/health,
Without the power to create a 3D engine it would have been impossible to create the 3D platformer
videogames are a primarly visual medium we have to be able to see what things are, how much ammo/health,
Without the power to create a 3D engine it would have been impossible to create the 3D platformer
Yes.
But, as long as I'm not playing something that looks like it's from the PS2 era or before, I'm fine.
But, as long as I'm not playing something that looks like it's from the PS2 era or before, I'm fine.
I'd like to say no, but when I go back to some games it just isn't the same after being spoiled by Uncharted 2, Resident Evil 5 etc. On the other hand, in a few others I don't care the slightest, such as the Might & Magic 6 and 7 - perhaps because those games had outdated graphics to begin with, and it was thus never a factor in loving them.
For the most part no. However if he graphics are so bad that it just looks like everything is a smeared up child's fingerpainting to the point where it's almost indecipherable then yes. Anyone who's played red steel knows what I'm talking about.