Poll: Graphics: How important are they?

[oldMcDouche]

they're important for the atmosphere which is the most important feature in a game besides GAMEplay of course.
if the gameplay sucks tho you can throw the game into a bucket aswell, no matter how pretty it looks. vice versa not so much IMO.

 

[Bobicus]

The importance of graphics really depends on the genre. Graphics can give way to neat/innovative gameplay or an excellent story in action or adventure games, but in a sports game or an FPS, graphics play a much bigger role and are more important.

However, I do believe the current trend in gaming (hyper-realistic graphics) is good for the medium. Developers/publishers will follow the money and games that drops jaws sell.

 

[Xvito]

Graphics is the most important part of any game, because it helps set the mood and it gets you immersed.

Example: If Halo was like this: [Use gun]...[On what]...[On grunt]...[The grunt has died]...[Go west]...[You see a grunt]... Then Halo would be pretty boring and not very immersive.

 

[ThisNewGuy]

Graphics can make or break a game. When I play a game, it's about the entire gaming experience. It's about being enjoyable. And a awesome game with 8-bit horridness in current generation will break my enjoyment.

It's as important as every other part of the game.

 

[ElTigreSantiago]

I voted it can make or break a game and was surprised to see there were only 3. If a game has below-average graphics, it pretty much has to be Game of the Year for me to spend $60 on it. Looking back at Final Fantasy X's PS2 graphics breaks my heart.

 

[Cuniculus]

They are important. Gameplay is key, but you'll never get to that if you are first put off by the terrible graphics. Having something nice to look at (or at least tolerable) is something you should really concentrate on when making a game. No one is going to pick up the game if all the footage and screen shots look like ass.

One point, FFVII is the best game ever from what I have been told. I can't play it though, because I can not stand the graphics long enough to get to anything interesting.

Point two, which was explained to me back in high school is a boy meets girl analogy. One person would argue, "Who cares how I look? If someone wants to date me, I want it to be for my personality." The other person would argue, "How are they ever going to experience your personality if you aren't even approachable?"

 

[DerpyDerpyDerp]

I can enjoy games without amazing graphics, but I think it is important for them to at least try and keep up to date. It shows a reflection of the companies dedication, in my opinion.

 

[Khazoth]

Completely unimportant, and it saddens me that no one else voted this way.

Graphics are the cherry, its something thats nice, but completely unneeded.


I still have more fun with Septerra Core then any of the prettier JRPGS.

I still have more fun with Planescape: Torment then I did Knights of the Old Republic (And I loved that game!)

I still have more fun with Sanitarium then I did Psychonauts

And Unreal will always be better then Halo.

So graphics aren't needed at all?

So, you're saying all games should be text-based?

No, what i'm saying is, gameplay should be where the most effort is focused. I can overlook an ugly game, but not a boring game.

 

[0p3rati0n]

I can't say graphics are that important. They are but the story needs to take up 60% of it. But today with all of your XBox fanboys, PS3 fanboys and so on as so forth. Graphics need to be at their best with todays society. I'm still playing the first call of duty and let me tell you. It has not very good graphic but it's very very very fun! World at War doesn't have good graphics on the Wii but it's fun! Why does graphic take over the fact a game is fun? If you've played the first Half Life or the first Call of Duty, or any other games made in that general time you know what I mean.......

 

[PAGEToap44]

Graphics are important to me. Personally, if a game doesn't satisfy visually, then it probably isn't worth playing. Unless it's made by Valve.

 

[orangebandguy]

I like a nice looking game, but other things are more important. The defining things that make said game unique and genuinely brilliant. For example Team Fortress 2's art style and more emphasis on less serious gameplay. Portal's logical puzzles are praised more than it's graphics. So graphics can't mask ineptitude at game designing.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

As important as gameplay is, a game's graphics are almost as important. Excellent visuals are almost essential to completely draw in the player.

Well, that's more of an argument for art direction, but graphics are still a major factor in that direction.

 

[Zealot_Guy]

Alone in the Dark: Inferno
It looked great but that won't save it from having horrid control and bad physics.

Metal Gear Solid 4
It looks and plays fantastic, but the cutscenes and story killed the fun

Rainbow 6 Vegas 2
It dosn't look THAT awesome, but I still have a lot of fun with it.

Crysis
It looks SO DAMNED GOOD HOLY CRAP MY EYES, but if it didn't have such nice gameplay I'd just say it's a really pretty program that overheats your computer.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Graphics are important wind waker would not be the same game without the cell shading, video games are a primarly visual medium.
Good graphics is not just the ability to simulate the real world but have an artistic standpoint the way Rapture looks in Bioshock lends itself to the story, how excatly would an 1940's underwater city look like architexture/advertisments.
Now as for crysis the game is perfectly playable on medium and offers the same experience in gameplay as Dx10 Very High the potentional for amazing graphics didn't detract from the gameplay or change the story/vioce acting in anyway

 

[soaringbiscuit]

Graphics are important to me. Personally, if a game doesn't satisfy visually, then it probably isn't worth playing. Unless it's made by Valve.

Amen Sir, Amen. Valve defies all odds.

 

[PureChaos]

graphics are liked, but not a must. i'm more of a game play/story/atmosphere person

 

[Simalacrum]

people usually say graphics take a second place to gameplay, but some games are largely based on artistic value, such as Flower - games like that need graphics.

That said most games don't reaaallly need them, unless they have nothing else unique to show off (*cough* Killzone 2! *cough*)

 

[13lackfriday]

Very, its that simple. It can make or break a game. Story is more important though if you ask me

True that.
The most spectacular graphics wouldn't make a difference if it didn't hake an, at least, equally convincing story to put it to good use.

I think graphics are really just there to enhance the experience.
The story, the characters, and the gameplay form the core of a game's value, but graphics can be what really brings it to life.
Conversely, one that starts with a nice HDR topping and no base makes a weak product, having a wonderfully sculpted world that you really just can't find much pleasure in.

Edit:

I'm sorry if I offend any nostalgics here, but I really just can't bear to play the original Half-life and its related expansions...
I find if I play it too long, I actually get a headache from all the bland, pixelated textures slathering the world.