Poll: Do high end graphics take more than they give?

[Corpse XxX]

I like nice graphics, its like eye candy to me..
Yeah, games take longer to make, but real studios who knows what they are doing should have no problem taking the best of both worlds, beeing innovative, immersive and have smashing graphics..

I dont think having nice graphics should have anything to do about beeing innovative, thats just poor excuses in my opinion..

but i also agree on the fact that games dont need to have awesome graphics in order to be good..

 

[NeuroticBabbler]

I agree. I have friends who seem to only care about graphics. When they see me play older games such as Doom and Metal Gear Solid, the first thing they do is comment on how bad the graphics are. Then they keep commenting on them as I play. When they play a game like Just Cause 2 (great fun, by the way.), they'll go on and on about how great the graphics are. Graphics are nice. However, they don't make a game good. The story and gameplay do that.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I completely agree with you. Graphics are like icing on a cake it can make the experience better but you don't need stunning HD graphics to make a game enjoyable, just like you don't need to cover a cake in icing to make it taste good. Mmmmmm cake.

 

[Bloodstain]

I agree with you in all points, really.
You nailed it. Great job.

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

Snip

While i do agree for the most part with what you said, there are always exceptions to the rule, there are some new interesting games out that dont go the graphics route. But unfortunately they are few and far between.

One exception im beating myself up for not being able to play (i dont own a ps3, yet...) is 3d dot game heroes. Se below.

I just saw 'From Software' on that video, that brings up a similar point. They were the ones behind Otogi, which for it's time had excellent graphics. But it also had a great art style, not aiming for realism. My point here is that high end graphics doesn't mean that the end-product will only focus on that one aspect; sometimes it's used to much benefit to bring everything together in a beautiful way, such as with the Zelda games.

Screenshot of Otogi for your viewing pleasure:
http://insomnia.ac/reviews/xb/otogi/screenshot2.jpg

 

[Josh Kurber]

I think graphics are nice, and I can be impressed by them. The first time I played Mass Effect 2, I was quite pleased to see a higher-quality version of my Mass Effect 1 character. But that said, it's gameplay that really counts. That's why I still replay the first Halo, Super Metroid, and Star Fox 64. Sure, sequels to all of those games have come out. But were they as good...?

Well, okay. Prime and Reach were pretty damn good.

Bahahah, Reach being the only good sequel to it xD

EDIT: Correction: Reach was a prequel So technically, no, Halo didn't have any good sequels lol

 

[Legion IV]

I like my graphics i like my gameplay i like my story. I love them all. If i developer messes up because they wasted all there time then thats there issue dont hate on graphics. Plus What if i dont wanna play minecraft cause its full of elitests playing a badley graphiced lego game?

 

[Zhukov]

No, please don't fuck graphics. I think they are important.

As important as story and gameplay?

No.

But still important. If I am going to be staring at pictures on a screen, I would prefer that those pictures be pleasant to look at. Furthermore, graphics can strengthen the atmosphere, setting, narrative and even the characterization in a game.

 

[blipblop]

n64 had high end grafic in it´s time and feelt wery higtech when I was a kid.
and games has generaly gotten better as grafics, gameplay, music and storys has evolved.
no you cant bild a great game just on high end grafics, but good grafics dosent make a bad game

 

[Daxter343]

Today's games are less about "Who has the best graphics?" and more about "Who has graphics that don't suck?" Seriously, if you take a look at most games today, a lot of them look gorgeous, even those that don't really try to look good. This puts more emphasis on gameplay, which is the only thing I cared about in the first place.

 

[mParadox]

Depends on which era of games you are playing.

Minecraft is an exception. One of the few i can forgive for having 90 style graphics.

However, i will never forgive Bioshock 2 'cause the graphics were so horrible. The first one had better ones!!! :\

 

[Hogbinladen]

You lost me on points 2 and 3 and I have my doubts on point 1 if you'd love to play all the new games coming out today.

 

[drisky]

Well I think visual style is important, rather than the specs it takes, I would much rather look at Team Fortress 2's cartoony style than Call of Duty's gritty realism. In that respect I think visuals are important, I'm a very visual person and want something nice to look at. I'd never want that visual style to be completely neglected.

 

[Ze_Reaper_Of_Zeath]

I don't care about Graphics.

I usually set them on low, so I get better FPS's.

One of the appeals of Minecraft is the simple graphics, blocky desgin.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Not to be sarcastic, but this isn't exactly a revelation.

At least once a day, someone makes a thread like this, and I must admit, yours was better than most. For one thing, you didn't outright say that people who like high quality graphics are stupid philistines, which is rare. Yours was also better written than most, which was also appreciated.

Sadly, you fell victim to the three most common issues plaguing these types of things: Pseudo-Messiah, Lack of Discussion, and Assumption of Normalcy.

Pseudo-Messiah: Perhaps the most common failing, you seemed to believe you were the first, or at least one of the few, to realize this. Not as bad as some of these threads, but the impression was there.

Lack of Discussion: You simply presented your position on the issue (and it's been presented oh so many times before) without allowing people to say much more than "Yup". This is more a formatting issue, as just a small paragraph asking people's position on this would have guaranteed more interesting discussion and extended the life of this topic too several days.

Assumption of Normalcy: You assumed (erroneously) that everyone believes the same as you, we just failed to see it (see, Pseudo-Messiah). While innovation is nice, it shouldn't exist solely to exist, it should only occur when someone has an actually interesting idea.

On top of that, you seemed to have forgotten that while there are many high-budget, high graphics games, services like PSN, XBLA, and to a certain degree Steam, thrive on low budget, semi-innovative visually charming games. In other words, what you want exists, but something you don't want exists simultaneously, and that is somehow intolerable. Because while big blockbuster games exist, so do low budget indie games, and there are arguably more of them. You can happily play your indie games, your only interaction with the Blockbusters is watching the occasionally ad for them.

Because diversity is a good thing, and there is a huge market for what you want. These high profile games bring people, talented people, into gaming, making it better for everyone. Because the guy who make the next Minecraft could very well have started by playing MW2.


Final Grade: I give this topic a C+, overdone, but somewhat well written.

 

[Calendor1]

What if i don't like minecraft because playing with legos just isn't fun to me?

I'm going with this. However I will put forward Half Life 2 and the Dead Rising series as an obvious example of games that don't need high-end graphics. But I definitely appreciate high-end graphics. And when the two come together, you get great things, like Red Dead Redemption and Halo Reach. And that is all I have to say about that.

I feel excatly that way dude.

What if i don't like minecraft because playing with legos just isn't fun to me?

Then you probably had a depressing childhood, and I'm sorry that instead of letting you have fun your parents forced you to balance an accounting equation every day. But at least you can go to sleep every night knowing that assets will still equal liabilities plus stockholders equity when you wake up tomorrow.

Thats a bit harsh..just cause i don't like legos means i have to be a evil money grubber? What if instead of Legos to play i had Super Mario 64....why the fuck would i play with legos when i had that game.

Yeah, that comment made him seem kind of like an ass to me. He had this whole thing about how goods games can be even without high-end graphics and whatever, and then he says this, and it shows he is just as bad as other jaded and ignorant gamers who hate people with their own opinions.

 

[sneakypenguin]

I disagree with pretty much all of OP, I don't think we lose anything in a race to the top for better graphics. There is still room for you indie game players just as there is room for tons more AAA titles from big publishers. Neither side harms each other.

 

[Skorpyo]

Personally, I think that the major studios will start to take notice of the fact that a primitive looking game is kicking their asses so hard they could fly to the moon on its' shoe.

I see a little more effort on the horizon.

 

[efeat]

I've said it before and it's just relevant here.

WOW as an example, don't throw tech at it, just hire quality artists who know how to make things look beautiful with minimal specs.

I'm pro quality art, but anti pushing up development costs and tech requirements just for shinier water.

Thank you. I was hoping someone would bring that up!

What the OP is describing is just one facet of graphics: technical graphics. Technical graphics are what makes the water in a game ripple and make the grass sway in the wind. They make light reflect off metallic surfaces and shadows dance across the floor in candlelight. None of those are bad things by themselves, but they should not be relied upon solely. You still need a good art direction to go along with it.

Artistic graphics and art direction are what made games of the past so charming and enthralling despite their [extreme] technical limitations. Now, that's not to say that all games nowadays are purely based on technical graphics. There are still games that rely heavily on their art (Braid, Okami, Shadow of the Colossus) but their numbers are dwindling. Art direction is what makes a screenshot like this....

Spoiler: image

...to be just as interesting as something like this:

Spoiler: Image

Personally, I find the first screenshot to be more appealing, but that's just me.