Poll: What is the most important type of Graphic?

[Aeshi]

Instead of doing a generic "How much do you value graphics" thread I thought I'd do something slightly different.

Namely what SORT of graphics do you tend value more (say your computer can't run a game you like at full everything.)

Mine are, from most to least:
Texture Detail
Shadows/Lighting
Effect Detail
Model Detail
View Distance
Anti-Aliasing

 

[Zantos]

Decent shadowing tends to draw me in far more than any super-ultra-high-realistic detail.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Other - fluid animation is most important to me. I'd rather have a decent character model with great animation than a greatly detailed character with jerky animation.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

You know it's Anti Aliasing right?

As for your actual question I'm not actually sure, I very rarely run into a situation where I have to lower something, but I guess it's usually AA that I drop, but I don't know what I'd keep above all else.

 

[Aeshi]

You know it's Anti Aliasing right?

As for your actual question I'm not actually sure, I very rarely run into a situation where I have to lower something, but I guess it's usually AA that I drop, but I don't know what I'd keep above all else.

Sorry, I forget the spelling since I'm almost never able to have it.

 

[Archangel768]

yea, It's Anti Aliasing.

Model Details and V sync is quite important. Crysis didn't have V sync, the screen tearing was annoying.

 

[New Troll]

The only part of graphics that matters is what helps make the gameplay feel fun. Whether that is rich detail as in a Bethesda game, or just fluidity with distance like in Team Fortress 2 is up to the type of game.
The best graphics to me are the games I don't even think about them in, like in World of WarCraft.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

You know it's Anti Aliasing right?

As for your actual question I'm not actually sure, I very rarely run into a situation where I have to lower something, but I guess it's usually AA that I drop, but I don't know what I'd keep above all else.

Sorry, I forget the spelling since I'm almost never able to have it.

Hoho! I like that. No problem, man.

 

[Raideh]

Cleaned.

 

[veloper]

You cannot have a game with any sort of action without a decent framerate and sufficient view distance. How much is enough varies, but these two are at a shared #1 place.

You can also apply all the textures you want on a cube, but it will never look like a football, while you can in theory show anything with just tiny flat shaded triangles. It's just that no machine has that kind of horsepower and textures are a far more efficient solution.

So from important to least important to unwanted:

2 models
3 animation
4 textures
..
10 AF
11 AA
..
99 depth of field

 

[Keava]

As far as the graphics are consistent it doesn't matter. The overall impression is what makes for "good" or "bad" visuals. If it's pleasing to the eye, with decent level of detail and enough of AA to fix the pixelated edges i don't care whenever the face has stupidly high texture map, whenever a character model is split in head+rest or head+upper body+lower body textures, etc.

However, as the hardware moves forward i'd really like the games to put bit more effort into environment texture resolution. Too often you can see how stretched and thus blured they are at close view while modern PCs could easily pull a grade higher resolution. Sadly part of blame goes to consoles.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

1, Animations
Whenever I hear someone say the word, I immediately think of Dawn of War's synckills. Fun times.

2, Effect Detail
I like it when explosions look like...explosions....yeah...

3, Model Detail
Nice stuff doesn't look nice if you don't have nice stuff to put the nice stuff on.

4, Texture Detail
I don't really mind just how good the textures are most of the time, but I really can't stand inconsistency. Like seeing an awesome looking Spartan guy decked out with shiny armour piecies in Halo Reach's multiplayer, then noticing how rubbish looking the wall he's standing in front of looks.
It's...jarring.

 

[Akihiko]

Shockingly, AntiAliasing probably. With Models and Textures coming fairly close. The only thing that really annoys me in a game, is jagged edges, get rid of those with AA, and I'm an happy camper.

 

[Occularis]

Jiggle-physics!

 

[MindBullets]

Other - fluid animation is most important to me. I'd rather have a decent character model with great animation than a greatly detailed character with jerky animation.

Totally agree. Fallout 3 felt a bit cheaply made because of this, even though the textures an models were pretty impressive. It just destroys immersion.

 

[Richardplex]

(other) Aesthetics. If it doesn't LOOK good, and fit the overall mood/tone/point of the game, then what's the point of having the best possible models/textures/shading/ect.? As long as it looks good, no matter how "good" the graphics are, then I'm happy.

This, Aesthetics definitely outweigh everything else. Green & Blue > brown.

 

[Nutcase]

fluid animation

Aesthetics.

Art direction

The question was about the technical aspects of graphics you can adjust. These do not answer it.

I'd say a one-choice poll just doesn't work, though, because different games clearly need prioritizing different things. Top-down strategy games like Starcraft 2? Texture detail. Dark FPSs like FEAR? Lighting, followed by texture/model/effects q. Lighter FPSs like Portal? Texture/model/effects q. Large-world navigation games like World of Warcraft and GTA? View distance followed by texture q, model q.
Need for AA/AF is pretty much dependent on individual game. Some games scream for them and some aren't really affected. A game with short view distance, high detail models and little model/texture transparency (like chainlink fences or vegetation) that has fast screen movement will generally not need AA.

 

[Nfritzappa]

Shadows and Lighting because without that there would be no depth (unless you're making a 2d game, in that case textures are most important)