Since when did graphics become the main point of a game.

[Andey]

They have all these graphical feats nowadays but what does it accomplish slightly sharper dirt textures just because a game is not pretty doesn't make it bad (counter strike)

 

[Pandalisk]

Since people of all kinds are more attracted to shiny games than games that are well made and make you think, learn, have a quality experience etcetera, its also their ace in the hole if they have no ideas for new gameplay features.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Graphics were important from the start because they have been limited by the technology and humans enjoy visual stimulation. I think that too many people have become lazy though and forget that the graphics are not the most important thing even if they take the most time and effort to make.

 

[Skizle]

ever since we found out that shiny things attract more people than reading. or when we found out what the capabilities are for every console

 

[Lios]

Since Ubisoft started taking control.


Some developers are sticking to the good ol "gameplay is everything" ways of gaming.


However, it's more than just separating graphics and gameplay. Developers need to do what Valve has done, and make the graphics a huge contribution to the gameplay.

A lot of people think most gamers believe a game is only as good as it's graphics, but really it's just all the new gamers that haven't been around for a while, along with another small fraction of people who only like games for cinematography.

 

[jp11]

Graphics have been a point of contention since the beginning, just look at the 8-bit / 16-bit wars when Sega and Nintendo were competing (with Atari running along behind them) for control of the gaming market.

 

[HerbertTheHamster]

Ever since Tennis for two, graphics has been a mayor issue. That game had no storyline.

 

[Pandalisk]

have any of you noticed how hard it is to go back to games with poorer graphics?.. i started up blood money and stopped 5 minutes in from the terrible graphics i thought were great, same with Rome:total war

 

[RebornKusabi]

This isn't a recent phenomena; this graphical "Arms Race" has been around for decades. Atari and Mattel made it a constant reminder how shitty each other were in commercials.

 

[300lb. Samoan]

graphics are the most obvious sign of progress, and we all worship progress. i remember making so much noise about Quake III arena having circular surfaces and being the first game to do so, almost no one gave a shit - except all my gamer friends who thought it was cool as fuck and wondered how powerful a computer had to be to render that much crazyness

 

[zenoaugustus]

This has been what turns me off from popular games. They choose not to think out and balance the online in favor of making that one extra blade of grass.

 

[matnatz]

I don't care much about Graphics personally... visual Style, now that's what I care about, as well as gameplay.

 

[Pandalisk]

have any of you noticed how hard it is to go back to games with poorer graphics?.. i started up blood money and stopped 5 minutes in from the terrible graphics i thought were great, same with Rome:total war

To be honest, no it has not for me.

But yes graphics has always been a key factor for people to get games even if they don't want to admit it. I have come to the point where graphics aren't the main focus of the games I pick. I know people who are so nitpicky when it comes to graphics that it isn't even funny.

ah but your selection of games that dont focus on graphics is dwindling.

i'd like to point out that its not that i dont like the look of it, i just notice it looks less better, it is that whenever i go to a game with a lower graphics i get this terrible migraine, it doesn't happen with newer games, just the older ones, unless its all in my mind.

 

[GodsOneMistake]

Because shiny things are shiny

 

[Birdehh]

I like to see nice graphics, but the gameplay has to follow.. I'd rather a well rounded game instead of one that excels visually.

For me i even take sound quality into account, for say a shooter, i like the sounds of gunfire to be somewhat accurate to their model, or it deters me from using certain weapons. A game that offers a balance in all aspects for me is an excellent game.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Because we keep demanding it. You say gamers don't need these awesome graphics yet a game that is not up to ther current standards usually gets mocked for it.

 

[SkylerRock]

Funny. One of my all time favorite games is still Max Payne 2: The Fall Of Max Payne, and graphically it is pretty poor by today's standards. It is driven purely by narrative and cinematic style, made me all the more angry when I saw that farce of a movie.

I actually feel that this slant towards realism is negatively affecting the gaming industry, that it's stifling the creativity imposed by system limitations. Developers seem more prone now to creating Space Marine Protagonist 6179-88-Alpha-B than say a plumber who can jump what must be at least 20 feet into the air to land in a big green pipe or say a 'Peer' of Nuclear arsenals who brings a variety of exotic weapons to bear against pigs in police uniforms. (Not mentioning any games involving blue hedgehogs because they haven't been good since the Death Egg was destroyed over the Floating Island).

 

[tenlong]

i didn't even care about graphics till last gen. i see graphics as icing on the cake. take for example a game like gunstar heroes where the gameplay kicks ass even by today's standards. it also had very good graphics for a genesis game. the devs need to reaize that graphics don't make the game. but if they make a badass game with badass graphics . that's a match made in heaven