Poll: Do you give a crap about graphics?

[HSIAMetalKing]

They matter-- if a game has graphics, they need to be effective. Badly designed and rendered graphics can detract from the enjoyment of even the best story.

It doesn't matter to me if the graphics are cutting-edge or photo-realistic-- what matters is that the game's style. That said, there are some beautifully rendered graphics out there in the gaming world that can be appreciated for their aesthetic value as artistic designs.

 

[JEBWrench]

also,what 16-bit games had good/well written stories? (honest question)

Chrono Trigger.

 

[johnman]

Games need to have decent graphics, older games can give me really bad headaches trying to play them. I dont mean Crysis levels of realism, just good enough so that characters are not elongated cuboids

 

[Sonicron]

They do matter. I'm not saying that they take precedent over story and gameplay, but I can forgive a lot of annoyance if a game is beautifully presented.[footnote]See: 2008's Prince of Persia[/footnote]

You nailed it there. They're the least important corner of the triangle, but they're important nonetheless.

 

[NeutralMunchHotel]

Yes, and anyone who says no is lying.

As to what extent though - well, if every game that will ever be made looks like Assassin's Creed 2, I wouldn't be disappointed. I enjoyed Dragon Age - and let's face it that game looked terrible!

 

[MellowFellow]

I do not care that much about graphics. I see graphics for a game as a nice addition that can make a game that much better, but if a game has great graphics and poor gameplay or story I think the game is bad.

You could say I see graphics as icing on the cake.

 

[FinalDream]

Does the game graphics matter to you? Simple.
To me, no, the only thing that matters too me is story and gameplay, hell I still play 16-bit
What I mean is the style of graphics, do you care if they are the next best thing to real life.

No, you have to be very shallow if they do.

 

[vanillabeans320]

yeah, they matter, but not every game has to look like Gears or Heavy Rain. look at braid, which uses very basic graphics but is still expertly and pleasantly drawn, or source engine games. what im saying is it has to look like they tried. they dont have to be high-end or expensive-looking, but real time and effort has to be put in.

 

[Proteus214]

To me, graphics are only "bad" if there are excessive glitches or serious inconsistencies in the way things look. Otherwise I really don't care.

 

[thiosk]

Its nice when things look nice, but Graphics a good game do not make.

 

[veloper]

It matters but my tolerance for ugly gfx is pretty high.

Low res, brightly colored pixel art I can appreciate.
It's the early attempts at realistic gfx I cannot go back to.

Inconsistent quality or style can also get in the way.

 

[flaming_squirrel]

Graphics cannot make a game, but they can perfect or expand it.

So I'd say yes, they do matter to me, but it's the gameplay which makes up the largest chunk of importance.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Well, I do care about the game having graphics, since I don't really like playing text-based games.

But I don't really care about a few thousand extra polygons.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Everybody does to some degree, but I voted no.

good Graphics are one of my lowest priorities in a game.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Not really, no. I'm much more concerned about storyline and gameplay. We could go back to 16-bit digitized sprites for all I care as long as the gameplay and story are good.

 

[Dexiro]

Yes i do, BUT WAIT let me explain ;D

I think graphics matter to the extent that you know what the hell is happening on-screen.
Good graphics and HD graphics are 2 different things too. I could say that the first Tetris has better graphics than Borderlands, i just find Tetris more visually appealing.

It all comes down to gameplay though. Given the choice of 2 games i'd take the one with great gameplay and terrible graphics.

 

[Fuloqwam]

Spider-Man 2 and Saint's Row 2 are two of my favourite games. Not known for their graphics.

Low graphics often indicates that a game was rushed.

 

[Brad Shepard]

Im my book its

Story>Gameplay>Graphics

I can deal with shitty gameplay if it means i can watch a epic story unfold. and it can have doom 1 graphics for all i care.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Although I voted no, given the times if a game doesn't hold a certain visual standard it starts to get iffy. For the most part, games are, and should be, judged based on their content, not on their visual appeal. If you're going to care about nothing but visuals then you won't have any fun and end up thinking Avatar was the best thing ever.

this.

modern day games dont need the most up to date graphics, if the environment and atmosphere is good, the graphics can be at 2003 standards for all i care

however, i will say this, i greatly prefer 3D to 2D, so i do have some standards i would say, but nothing that requires it to be up to date modern graphics, its usually the last thing i look for

p.s. i still appreciate cool graphics/cutscenes like in ffxiii