Would you rather have a deep game or a pretty game?
- Thread starter impeccable
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd prefer a fun game over everything. Deeper isn't as good without good graphics but good graphics is pointless if the game sucks. I like games like Minecraft though so i'm going to say deeper.
well, honestly i want a deep AND pretty game but that's never gonna happen. so i'll go with a deep game.
I still play Planescape:Torment, Arcanum and such. "Pretty" doesn't matter. Of course repulsive products are out of question either.impeccable said:
i dunno. how extreme are we taking this, an average looking game with deep gamplay is good....
but i cant stand dwarf fortress, even though from what i read of it, its an amazing game. Its all moving text for crying out loud!
but i cant stand dwarf fortress, even though from what i read of it, its an amazing game. Its all moving text for crying out loud!
I want them to make a game they envision and I decide if it agrees with my taste.
Laying down some law on one way or the other is bullshit, the game needs to come together on all parts and that can't be done without someone having a clear picture how it should work.
I would like all game to be incredibly pretty and incredibly deep, it's up to the designer to decide how his game must be portrayed, the end product will always be somewhere in the middle.
P.S. DEHR has some piss poor design choices, that is the immediate problem.
Laying down some law on one way or the other is bullshit, the game needs to come together on all parts and that can't be done without someone having a clear picture how it should work.
I would like all game to be incredibly pretty and incredibly deep, it's up to the designer to decide how his game must be portrayed, the end product will always be somewhere in the middle.
P.S. DEHR has some piss poor design choices, that is the immediate problem.
one word. Bioshock. That game could be as deep as you want it to, just depends on how much you want to look
Shouldn't this be a poll? /:> Anyway, deep of course. See exhibit A: The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind...Ocarina of Time....Any other known RPG from the last generation..or two. If it looks pretty, great. If not, it's still got my attention if it's got something compelling to tell me.
Modern stuff such as Mass Effect and others? Best of both worlds.
Modern stuff such as Mass Effect and others? Best of both worlds.
My favourite game is still deus ex. The original. I goback to it at least every 18 months or so, an that was a graphical nightmare.
How is this even a question?
The right answer is: "it depends on my mood at the time." Or, it could be, "it depends on the type of game it is."
It depends on my mood because frankly, sometimes I don't want to be bothered with a story or anything. I want to blow shit up. "Pretty" usually is more appealing than "deep" in such cases (though not always--I consider the original DOOM one of the best blowing-off-steam experiences one can have, but it's neither pretty by today's standards nor deep by any standard).
The "it depends on the type of game" gets into a whole mess of conditionals and subjectives that I don't really want to get into. Suffice to say that if a game has little or no depth, it better damn well be pretty or it's not gonna survive long, whereas a game with deep story and/or gameplay elements can get by with lesser visuals. FPS are a good example of this. They keep touting the graphics because there's not much else there. On the other hand, take the Fallout games. Kinda pathetic graphics-wise by comparison to contemporary shooters ain't they. For an even more extreme example, take Pokemon games. Yeah. I went there.
The right answer is: "it depends on my mood at the time." Or, it could be, "it depends on the type of game it is."
It depends on my mood because frankly, sometimes I don't want to be bothered with a story or anything. I want to blow shit up. "Pretty" usually is more appealing than "deep" in such cases (though not always--I consider the original DOOM one of the best blowing-off-steam experiences one can have, but it's neither pretty by today's standards nor deep by any standard).
The "it depends on the type of game" gets into a whole mess of conditionals and subjectives that I don't really want to get into. Suffice to say that if a game has little or no depth, it better damn well be pretty or it's not gonna survive long, whereas a game with deep story and/or gameplay elements can get by with lesser visuals. FPS are a good example of this. They keep touting the graphics because there's not much else there. On the other hand, take the Fallout games. Kinda pathetic graphics-wise by comparison to contemporary shooters ain't they. For an even more extreme example, take Pokemon games. Yeah. I went there.
I prefer a deep game that can be returned to over and over, but I also like some games like gears of war and space marine that you can have a bash at for a little while at a time and have some fun with.
That being said, I want my games to be deep and pretty and like another poster said, modern games like mass effect are able to achieve both. Gears of War might not be the deepest game in the world, but the universe they have created is extensive and engaging in its own way which adds depth to the game, plus it looks awesome!
Can't wait until sep 20th for gears 3!!
That being said, I want my games to be deep and pretty and like another poster said, modern games like mass effect are able to achieve both. Gears of War might not be the deepest game in the world, but the universe they have created is extensive and engaging in its own way which adds depth to the game, plus it looks awesome!
Can't wait until sep 20th for gears 3!!
I'm playing a game called Aurora. [http://aurora2.pentarch.org]
Imagine Dwarf Fortress.. but in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
Heres a scenario that I encountered very early in the game: a crazed alien had appeared in a system I was exploring, and destroyed a geological survey vessel. So I put all my research efforts to design military components for a combat vessel. Then I doubled the size of my shipyards so that I could produce the vessel, and then used my industrial base to prefabricate the engines and weapon components to speed the construction time. Then, I sent the fleet on a three month training mission to at least get the crew reasonably skilled enough to follow move orders in combat situations. I then flew to the system where I encountered the alien, closed to attack range, and realized that my fire control system only had a grav resolution of 5000 tons-- I couldn't actually target the 1000 ton alien vessels until I was much closer, at which time their missiles began appearing on my missile scanners, and my point defense rockets were unable to match their speed, so all my ships were lost.
Imagine Dwarf Fortress.. but in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
Heres a scenario that I encountered very early in the game: a crazed alien had appeared in a system I was exploring, and destroyed a geological survey vessel. So I put all my research efforts to design military components for a combat vessel. Then I doubled the size of my shipyards so that I could produce the vessel, and then used my industrial base to prefabricate the engines and weapon components to speed the construction time. Then, I sent the fleet on a three month training mission to at least get the crew reasonably skilled enough to follow move orders in combat situations. I then flew to the system where I encountered the alien, closed to attack range, and realized that my fire control system only had a grav resolution of 5000 tons-- I couldn't actually target the 1000 ton alien vessels until I was much closer, at which time their missiles began appearing on my missile scanners, and my point defense rockets were unable to match their speed, so all my ships were lost.