Victory Road  

Go Back   Victory Road > General > Video and Computer Games

Notices

 
 
Search this Thread
  #1  
Old July 5, 2012, 07:19:18 AM
BadboyUK's Avatar
BadboyUK BadboyUK is offline
Mudkip
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Galifrey
Posts: 41
Default Do Graphics Really Matter?

Hey guys ,I just wanted to know what people think about graphics .I wasnt around when the NES Gamecube ect.. was released so some people might not agree with me .Well I think that graphics dont matter ,I will take a good gameplay over graphics any day ,I mean most of the best games wernt graphicly good .They were all 2D ,like Mario ,Sonic and games like Metroid I mean they are a hell alot better then most of the games we have now.And for some reason most of the people these days only look at games for there graphics .Is that all that is going to happen now ,only the games with good graphics are going to be popular .Ok I understand that we are progressing into the future but why cant we just slow down and realise that most of the games they bring out are just crap ,I mean I dont want to start a argument but I think that after MW1 the Cod series just got boring it was some crappy story about some terrorist every time ,and people like it because of its graphics.I like BF3 but only for its multiplayer and squad Mechanism if it wasnt for that team based stratagy I would of hated the game .But back on subject I want you guys to tell me if you agree or not ,because to me Graphics dont matter ,just tell me what you think .
  #2  
Old July 5, 2012, 07:44:04 AM
teamplasma's Avatar
teamplasma teamplasma is offline
Shaymin
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,710
Default

Yes, they do matter in a sense. Ithink I matters because there are younger minds (and sometimes older) that aren't all that into a game, and with the good graphics they will attach to it more and get more wrapped into the game. And I believe that is the makers plan, to get the person wrapped in the game. The graphics also help depict the story better, and gives you a petter picture. Like an example, in The Legend of Zelda you had to picture everything because it was basically walls text and a few figures. So it does help one understand the story without someone talking having to describe everything.

No, with a good story and imagination, good graphics will not mean anything. As you can see today in the new games there are many games with amazing pictures but no content whatsoever. It is sad, and I usually see this in shooting and racing. Because you will see that they try to put a story in there but they don't get it good. It seem that games aren't really focusing on stories much more. So I do not think that they are important. Because a good game always has you wanting to know what happens next, or emotionally attached.
  #3  
Old July 5, 2012, 08:02:58 AM
TurtwigX's Avatar
TurtwigX TurtwigX is offline
Giratina
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Strawberry Field- permanent stay
Posts: 3,060
Default

I think I can summarize my opinion of graphics in to one short sentence: I think Mega Man has better graphics than Halo.
There are 3 things I focus on when I play a game: The music, the gameplay, and the story. A game must always have good music for me or I will never play it, and it needs one of the other 2. Unless I playing it for kicks, like Cheetahmen II. Great music. Awful anything and everything else.
To me, using a metaphor, good graphics with a game is like having a 2nd piece of candy attached to the one you pull out. They're nice to look out, but I'm not entirely focused on staring at them. The way I like them is usually bright and smooth, like in Mega Man. They looked perfect, except for the occasional annoying sprite flicker, which was removed in mega Man 9 and 10, while keeping the flawless graphics. Halo's are nice, but they look kind of messy and fuzzy. Pretty much all 3D games do, even in HD, but they're not flawless, like Mega Man.
Long story short, I don't let graphics stop me from enjoying a game. Music will stop me, and if the controls suck, I won't try it, but graphics visuals aren't too big an issue as long as they're not unfinished visuals or simply boring ones.
  #4  
Old July 5, 2012, 08:03:50 AM
NismoZ's Avatar
NismoZ NismoZ is offline
Kyurem
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 2,014
Default

Graphics are a sort of second priority to me. Good graphics pretty much always make a game better, some genres more than others. Less realistic graphic styles, in most genres, can end up just as good if they're creative enough. However, I won't by a game solely on its graphics.
  #5  
Old July 5, 2012, 08:55:40 AM
The Spirit of Time's Avatar
The Spirit of Time The Spirit of Time is offline
Rayquaza
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dubai
Posts: 3,934
Default

Nowadays, graphics has become a compulsory thing in today's gaming world. You might prefer gameplay, but a good game with bad graphics wouldn't sell as much. This is mainly due to the increased competition between gaming companies, where each company tries to improve on the graphics, to bring the image as realistic as possible.

Yes, older gamers like us have enjoyed Mario and Sonic in their early days with the less effective graphics, but at that time, we didn't experience anything better. It was all the we had. But now, younger minds have only experienced the better graphics, and introducing them to the old 2D wouldn't be successful.

And since everyone aims for the younger minds and the future gamers, graphics will remain a fundamental factor in today's games.
  #6  
Old July 5, 2012, 09:06:00 AM
Cat333Pokémon's Avatar
Cat333Pokémon Cat333Pokémon is offline
Administrator

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nevada
Posts: 10,303
Default

While graphics aren't everything, they still play an important role in a video game. Today, even old games can have very nice graphics for their time. Super Mario Bros. 3, for instance, pushed the NES to its limits enough that the far right of the screen often glitches out.

Games, however, don't necessarily need high-end graphics. They need effective graphics. The better the programmers do at immersing the player into the game without saying "If I could see what's happening, maybe I wouldn't be so frustrated," the better the player may enjoy what they're playing. Games don't require cutting edge 3D renders and ray tracing lighting.

Puzzle games can be very immersive, and the only thing you really need is a way to tell different blocks apart in many of them (stuff like Jewel Quest or Hexic). Halo is an example of a game with beautiful graphics that does them well and helps the player every bit in enjoying their game.

In the end, graphics are still important, but just because a game looks better than another doesn't necessarily mean it's more fun. It just means that the programmers felt that the game needed to have more visual appeal. Beautiful games can still be awful to play.
  #7  
Old July 5, 2012, 09:43:57 AM
Fubab_107's Avatar
Fubab_107 Fubab_107 is offline
Shaymin
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Unknown Pointless Veil.
Posts: 2,682
Default

While I do agree that graphics are good to have, they do not put priority whether a game is good or not. But if a game does look unappealing to my eye, say has too much bloom in it or it likes to take the "realistic" turn and goes brownish grey, then that tends to turn me away from the game and just kind of shrug it off until I hear better things of it. Then again, I hate some games like Crysis who put graphics as their selling point for their game, claiming it's the "best".

Most the time graphics don't bother me, just as long as it looks decent and is playable.
  #8  
Old July 5, 2012, 03:07:53 PM
Quadcentruo's Avatar
Quadcentruo Quadcentruo is offline
Giratina
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Unknown area
Posts: 3,684
Default

In the necessities/luxuries category of video gaming, graphics fall right between the two. What I mean is that there is a certain level of graphics rendering that is necessary and there is another level that is just for making everything look nice. You may say graphics don't matter, but in your sub-conscience you know that you wouldn't play a game if it looked like this the whole way through.
  #9  
Old July 5, 2012, 03:21:09 PM
A'bom's Avatar
A'bom A'bom is offline
Volcarona
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 535
Default

Personally, I like my graphics to be as good as possible for that kind of game. I was never a fan of pokemon battle revolution or any other similar games because pokemon, to me, is a pixelated game. SSBB, on the other hand, needs to be more "realistic" for lack of better term, because that's how SSB has always been like that.

When you get to "HD or not HD", that's when I stop caring. I can't tell the difference. Even in side-by-side comparisons, it's negligible in my eyes.
  #10  
Old July 5, 2012, 03:21:57 PM
Twiggy's Avatar
Twiggy Twiggy is offline
Kyurem
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Somewhere interesting?
Posts: 2,098
Default

I think that gameplay is more important, like many others think, but one shouldn't ignore graphics. I think if the graphics are out of place, there'll be a bad case of a player-to-game disconnect caused by expectations not quite lining up. There's a good reason why I can't seem to tolerate the graphics of a pre-SNES game anymore...

Prettiness without depth is pretty useless, though.
  #11  
Old July 5, 2012, 04:09:18 PM
LugiaDialga's Avatar
LugiaDialga LugiaDialga is offline
Volcarona
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Whirl Islands
Posts: 676
Default

I personally do not think Graphics matter or at least are not that important of a detail to me. I am more about the story-line then the gameplay rather than the graphics which is the last thing I'm worried about usually. Story-telling in video games is the main reason I like them and the more amazing the story is the more likely I'll love the game. Gears of War is a prime example, while it may be a shooting game it has a crazy amazing story line that's very powerful and moving honestly and the gameplay is awesome. Though I will say this, Graphics are shiny and neat so I do pay attention to them. I would like that the game company obviously put some real effort into them to fit the game's art-style. I hate games that look like they just quickly threw the game together anyways. Graphics are an important element to any game and can really make the experience way more enjoyable but it's not the main important thing. I find it silly that people now a days will shun a game just because it has "bad" graphics yet they don't realize that the gameplay may be the best ever made or the story is enthralling.
  #12  
Old July 5, 2012, 05:57:18 PM
Idno58's Avatar
Idno58 Idno58 is offline
Landorus
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Human tongue can't pronounce it.
Posts: 1,770
Default

As an aspiring video game artist, I'd have to say that for me, for the most part, yes, graphics do matter in video games. If you take games like the Xenoblade Chronicles, the game wouldn't be the same without the beautiful landscapes that you see during your adventure. Even Mario Kart relies on imagery as a majority of its appeal.

One of my favorite games in terms of graphics is BlazBlue. Its beautifully flowing, hand-drawn sprites are a perfect compliment to the smooth gameplay. (Of course, in BlazBlue, the story and Character Development are even more impressive) Many of the games I play wouldn't be the same without their cosmetic appeal.

Of course, a flower is nothing without the roots and stem to nourish and support it, just as graphics alone are nothing without good gameplay and a compelling story. A good example of this is Sonic and the Secret Rings for the Wii. The graphics look nice, but the gameplay mechanics are awful and the story is boring.

So yeah. Those are my two bits on the subject.
  #13  
Old July 7, 2012, 10:19:57 AM
TurtwigX's Avatar
TurtwigX TurtwigX is offline
Giratina
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Strawberry Field- permanent stay
Posts: 3,060
Default

Oh, another thing I am to be forgetting. The loveliness that is Sonic 06.
The game looked absolutely stunning. Every location gave off a feeling, it looked realistic, every cutscene was movie-tastic, it makes you think by looking at a walkthrough "Wow, this game is amazing" And then you encounter: Unfinished Game Disease
SEGA had a great game on their hands. While I didn't tolerate the end of the story because it was dumb, the stages actually looked pretty interesting. And then, the 1001 glitches attacked. Falling through levels, not being able to move, STUPIDLY LONG LOADING SCREENS (Because they literally have to load an entire map's graphic instead of just 1 small area), and worst of all? "It's no use! Taaaake this!" How could a game with such great graphics be so bad? Simple. Graphics don't mean much. The best looking games could be trashpiles underneath. Especially with SEGA, they always do what they can to make the graphics look as stunning as possible.
  #14  
Old July 27, 2012, 10:34:44 AM
GTP_NickSkyline's Avatar
GTP_NickSkyline GTP_NickSkyline is offline
Haxorus
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pokéwood
Posts: 299
Default Another beautiful-looking yet terrible video game

Adding onto the Sonic '06 example...I present the brainchild of Peter Molyneux and Lionhead Studios, the Fable franchise. More specifically, Fable III.

Here's my quick opinion on the other two Fable games; I have never gotten into either game, or even picked up a controller to play them. So I can't say much about them, except that neither game looks very impressive. And judging from what little I've seen, they're okay. The third one looks okay as well...judging by it's cover.

I've never played Fable III, either; but I've seen gameplay footage of it. From what I saw, it's not Sonic 06...but it's still bad in it's own corner (it might be worse than Sonic 06 and all the professional critics don't know it). I felt that Lionhead was focusing strictly on Graphics, and more effort was probably put into the amazing opening cinematic than the rest of the game. The DLC...and I can't believe I'm saying this...is worthless, just like everything else here. This begs several questions:

* Why do I have to pay to dye my clothes?
* Why is there a dog outfit?
* Why am I required to have the same DLC as the person I want to play with IF I wish to play with them (even if it's the free Yule Hat/Weapons Pack)?
* Why is "Sanctuary" regarded as another word for "Inventory"?
* Why must I complete quests designed to sell more copies of the game to morph one of my weapons?
* Why are the NPC interactions more pointless than in Fable II?
* Why does it take so long to travel between places?
* Why can't I pause the game and bring up the map while I'm walking around in the open?
I can answer all of these questions and more with another...Why did you buy Fable III?

Allow me to compare to a good game in a completely different genre: GT5, a racing game. It's also a great game in it's own right, with beautiful graphics, fluent gameplay, semi-realistic physics, and a large and well-deserved fanbase. But the mechanics of the DLC in that game are designed much better than in Fable III. If you want to race on Spa or Motegi, yes, you need the same DLC as the people you're playing with; but this only goes for Course DLC, not cars. If you didn't buy, let's say, the Racing Car Pack, you can still play with someone who did get that DLC. And, if there's a car you don't want after installing the cars and using all of your tickets, you can access your garage from the GT Mode Main Menu and sell the vehicle from there.

Also, a new feature implemented allows you to buy one copy of the DLC, and it becomes available across every PSN account on your PS3.

OVERALL: I would call Graphics an important factor in a video game, but not THE most important factor. A game (original, movie-licensed or otherwise) needs to immerse you into it's atmosphere and give you a story and characters to remember, not show complete disregard for everything but it's 3D visual style or what it's based on. And if a game is bad enough for you, I guess it's O.K. to spoil the ending for yourself...but great games can have unforgivably bad endings as well, just like a bad game can have a few shining moments.

TL, DR: Graphics DO matter, but not as much as some would like you to believe.

Last edited by GTP_NickSkyline; July 27, 2012 at 10:44:49 AM.
  #15  
Old August 2, 2012, 07:48:36 PM
GalliumGrant's Avatar
GalliumGrant GalliumGrant is offline
Volcarona
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 690
Default

My apologies for the bump, but I thought I should take a crack at this:

Graphics matter to some extent in video games; if you have no clue what you're looking at, you can't play the game very well. As you can tell, this is somewhat relevant to visual realism, as you go a step or two beyond the point where everything in the game is represented well enough for the player to make out the imagery with ease. This means that realism isn't necessary, unless you're looking at graphics from the context of the modern gaming industry. Good graphics are necessary for the retro gaming world, while great graphics are a must for the modern gaming world. As long as graphics allow you to know instantly what you're looking at the majority of the time, chances are, you're good.

Last edited by GalliumGrant; August 2, 2012 at 07:50:42 PM.
  #16  
Old August 2, 2012, 07:54:26 PM
Pingouin7's Avatar
Pingouin7 Pingouin7 is offline
Charizard
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Canada, Quebec
Posts: 142
Default

I'd say that graphics are important, but they're easily the least important part of a game.
  #17  
Old August 2, 2012, 08:56:12 PM
emogirl's Avatar
emogirl emogirl is offline
Cyndaquil
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5
Default

Graphics are nice, but they aren't that important. I actually like playing some of my really old games (GameBoy and GameBoy Color! Hahah), just because the pixely graphics are amusing, especially when you can see how much better they've gotten. But there is a line of video games that purposely has the pixelled look now.
  #18  
Old August 2, 2012, 09:01:48 PM
Quadcentruo's Avatar
Quadcentruo Quadcentruo is offline
Giratina
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Unknown area
Posts: 3,684
Default

While I already have made some point in this thread, I feel like I need to expand my point.
Just for clarity reasons, graphics are anything visual in the game - not just art, but animations, frame rates, etc.. While it is completely possible to go through a game with poor art design, there is a point in time where you will snap and say "I can't take anymore of these graphics!" and toss the game out the window because the animations look unrealistic or the frame rates constantly drop even on a new disc. Sometimes the poor art styles are part of the charm in a game (such as Minecraft), but when a game isn't trying to make bad art styles part of its charm, opting out for trying to make a visually stunning game, and the game is just failing at what it's trying to accomplish, it becomes noticeable and harder to watch, thus making it harder to play. It would be like going to a movie and every now and again, the movie becomes inexplicably blurry.

If a game does have a good story and good gameplay mechanics, but poor graphics, it is possible to deal with the graphics until the end. It might get a little hard to watch sometimes if character 1 is trying to talk to character 2 and character 1 is making unnatural hand movements while talking (Kingdom Hearts seems to have this problem) or character 1's lips don't sync up properly with what he's actually saying. You won't stop playing because of these issues, but it will certainly bug you throughout the game.
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Victory Road ©2006 - 2024, Scott Cat333Pokémon Cheney
Theme by A'bom and Cat333Pokémon