Poll: Do Graphics Really Matter?

[Drunken Cutman]

We have seen some amazing graphics in recent years. Gears of War impressed many and then Crysis came along and wowed anyone who gazed upon it. But does this really matter that much to you.

Do you find it hard to enjoy a game without gritty realism, blood splats and every line on your character's grizzled face projected into your living room? Or do you find game play is king, so much so, that you barely care about graphics. Or maybe you're somewhere in between.

There are those who hold up some retro games as the greatest of all time despite their comparatively poor graphics and then there are those who will gush about the rippling muscles in fight night round 4 before even thinking about mentioning anything else.

Which one are you?

 

[Hazy]

I'm pretty sure we've had plenty of these threads.

But for my contribution: Graphics don't make a game. This is proven by Final Fantasy 7, one of the most popular RPG's of all time, which is 13 years old and still sold 100,000 copies on PSN within a week.

 

[PrinceMarth]

I'll repost just for the hell of it. No need to get snippy unpronounceable poster name.

I've been playing games since the original Nintendo, and this has always been my stance. Good graphics are a good thing, but not at the expense of game play. If the ignorant masses think "Oh it's graphics are amazing that totally makes up for it's lack of game design" they're wrong. Blizzards graphics are laughable at, but they have some of the best games in the world.

Crysis had amazing graphics, but was a mediocre shooter. Same thing with Far Cry 2. Graphics should only be used to enhance game play not be game play.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

And heere comes five pages of arguments we've seen time and time again.

Either way, no, unless the main draw of a game is immersion and not fun.

 

[Kinguendo]

No damn it, just like this over done thread.

EDIT: i meant that in the nicest way possible.

You know this was sooo mean, I think you actually made the guys testes shrink. XD

 

[Kinguendo]

I'll repost just for the hell of it. No need to get snippy unpronounceable poster name.

I've been playing games since the original Nintendo, and this has always been my stance. Good graphics are a good thing, but not at the expense of game play. If the ignorant masses think "Oh it's graphics are amazing that totally makes up for it's lack of game design" they're wrong. Blizzards graphics are laughable at, but they have some of the best games in the world.

Crysis had amazing graphics, but was a mediocre shooter. Same thing with Far Cry 2. Graphics should only be used to enhance game play not be game play.

Did... did you just report xmetatr0nx? This will not end well.

*DUCKS FOR COVER*

 

[NotAPie]

No they don't matter.
Unless its something like Crysis where I was just
"Ohh...Puuuurrrrtty..."

 

[munx13]

Yes they do, visuals help emerce you in the game. When I put a crowbar in a zombies head I want it to be a zombie's head and not a single polygon with blurry textures on it.

 

[Shynobee]

Graphics should be a factor in any game, but really, it IS a game after all, to how the game plays should be more important.

For example, Crysis, while being one of the most beautiful games out there, the graphics were a slight setback as many people don't have the computers to play that game without some serious framerate issues.

So, yes graphics mater obviously, no one wants to go back to the days of pong, but the main factor in any game should be how well it plays.

 

[Hazy]

I'll repost just for the hell of it. No need to get snippy unpronounceable poster name.

I've been playing games since the original Nintendo, and this has always been my stance. Good graphics are a good thing, but not at the expense of game play. If the ignorant masses think "Oh it's graphics are amazing that totally makes up for it's lack of game design" they're wrong. Blizzards graphics are laughable at, but they have some of the best games in the world.

Crysis had amazing graphics, but was a mediocre shooter. Same thing with Far Cry 2. Graphics should only be used to enhance game play not be game play.

Did... did you just report xmetatr0nx? This will not end well.

*DUCKS FOR COVER*

*Whispers*
Hey, I'm hiding here..
Get your own damn spot! >

 

[Dr Mango]

I don't care what a game looks like, only that I know what I'm looking at and it plays well. Bring on stick-man games to console! (Not really)

 

[Good morning blues]

If by "graphics" you mean "graphic technology," no, that doesn't matter all that much. If by "graphics" you mean "art design," then yes, it matters quite a bit. Nobody wants to play a game that is downright ugly.

 

[KingGolem]

No, I don't really care about graphics. In fact, I think that all these cutting edge graphics are hurting the game industry by making games more expensive and time consuming to make. Not only that, but it seems that some people judge games these days by the graphics to a far greater degree than I can agree with. It's the story, characters, and gameplay that count! If we were to scale back the graphics to be just a little bit better than those of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time in exchange for improving the game in some other areas like price or length, I would consider that a step in the right direction.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

Less Important than gameplay.
More important than anything else.

 

[Kinguendo]

I'll repost just for the hell of it. No need to get snippy unpronounceable poster name.

I've been playing games since the original Nintendo, and this has always been my stance. Good graphics are a good thing, but not at the expense of game play. If the ignorant masses think "Oh it's graphics are amazing that totally makes up for it's lack of game design" they're wrong. Blizzards graphics are laughable at, but they have some of the best games in the world.

Crysis had amazing graphics, but was a mediocre shooter. Same thing with Far Cry 2. Graphics should only be used to enhance game play not be game play.

Did... did you just report xmetatr0nx? This will not end well.

*DUCKS FOR COVER*

*Whispers*
Hey, I'm hiding here..
Get your own damn spot! >

Oh no! ARRRRGH! *Runs away with arms flailing*

 

[Hazy]

I'll repost just for the hell of it. No need to get snippy unpronounceable poster name.

I've been playing games since the original Nintendo, and this has always been my stance. Good graphics are a good thing, but not at the expense of game play. If the ignorant masses think "Oh it's graphics are amazing that totally makes up for it's lack of game design" they're wrong. Blizzards graphics are laughable at, but they have some of the best games in the world.

Crysis had amazing graphics, but was a mediocre shooter. Same thing with Far Cry 2. Graphics should only be used to enhance game play not be game play.

Did... did you just report xmetatr0nx? This will not end well.

*DUCKS FOR COVER*

*Whispers*
Hey, I'm hiding here..
Get your own damn spot! >

Oh no! ARRRRGH! *Runs away with arms flailing*

You just made my day.
Thank you, I needed that.

 

[The_Deleted]

For me the bug bear is the absolute lack of imagination in modern gaming. Just because we can render almost real life graphics and animations it's pretty much all we're being given.
If we can do anything using modern tech, just look at Jurassic Park, The Mask, King Kong and Transformers within movies, why can we not get a publisher who'll take a chance with something akin to the old Seaman games. Even the Japanese are towing the Western ideal with gaming development these day. Largely due to the huge cost of development and selling as many units as possible. But, at the same time, these quirkier titles need not cost the millions that a AAA release would.

Admittedly we do get the odd off-kilter title through PSN, XBL or on the PSP and DS, but all the really interesting stuff has to be imported. And even then you have to have the corresponding hardware.

As for the older games, very few PS1 titles are still playable in the old 3D but certain games, Vib Ribbon, Ape Escape or Incredible Crisis, are still hugely enjoyable.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Does graphics matter in a largely visual medium, I would say yes