Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

I just hate it when people say things like that..
"If graphics suck, the game sucks!!"

One day, I brought FFVII for the PSX and asked if a friend wanted to play it.. He said yes.. So I put it in and started new game for him, right when it showed Cloud jumping off the train to follow the AVALANCHE members, he said to me "Is this graphics going to be like this always?" and I said,"Duh?" And he got pissed off and he demanded that I turn off the game and switch to another game..

What I'm trying to say is that most gamers these days only prefer games due to the quality of graphics, not gameplay...

If people prefer graphics only, why not just load up the game, go to your favorite, best-looking graphics scene, press pause, and take off the controllers and look at the screen all day until Billy's parents say "Billy, turn off the PS2!!"

People these days are horrible morons who aren't interested in gameplay... They don't even deserve to play video games...

Do you agree with me? That people should not hate the game if it has bad graphics, but good gameplay??

I also feel rather strongly about the subject. While Graphics can be incorporated into a gameplay style, and I do enjoy them, they are by FAR the last thing I look for when I want a good game. I also dislike when people make the, "graphics make the game," statement, and I on these occasions i proceed to mercilessly pummel the offender with words. Like I said, I am in no way an old school elitist, and can appreciate nice graphics, but I also deeply offended by those that insist graphics make the game, as the are usually rabid Madden or GTA fans, not to say thats bad, but they also tend to be the same Jockish asshole kind of person I would hate ordinarily.

--------------------

If you've been mod-o-fied,
It's an illusion, and you're in-between.
Don't you be tarot-fied,
It's just alot of nothing, so what can it mean?
~Frank Zappa

Sins exist only for people who are on the Way or approaching the Way

I agree that graphics do NOT make or break a game, but you gotta respect the other side's opinions, too.

Most of the younger generation has grown up with hi-res graphics. Light effects. Shading. Shadowing. Stuff we never, ever had when we were growing up with games like the original MegaMan and Mario Bros. It's spoiled them, so now when they play a game, regardless of genre, they expect more out of it graphically.

Are games more than eye candy? Absolutely. But don't expect the newer gen of gamers to pick up on that as a whole for some time yet.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

I totally agree, eye candy is marketer's best trick in making customers buy their products, and this refers to everything including video games. Some of my favorite all time greatest games originated on the NES, back when there was basically no graphics but VERY addicting game play. Some of today's great graphic games used to be 8-bit sprites: Megaman, Samus, Link, Mario to name a few. Plus there are games with eye-popping graphics but suck as hell, there's countless games like that on the market. Visuals aren't the top reasons to buy games, if at all they should only be a bonus to help illustrate environments. And FF7's graphics are decent, you're friend must've had a lobotomy or something to be saying it sucks.

--------------------

The Cait Sith Avatar has Returned!

Check out my DeviantArt profile! ....If you don't mind that is

i kinda know what youre getting at there. i've got a couple of friends who've seen me play ff7 or ff8 and, just becuz the way it looks, they think it sucks. some people just favor games with awesome graphics i guess. although i agree with you for the most part, i don't think those people are "morons." one of my friends, who actually thought ff6 sucked cuz it's graphics weren't all that great (since we are living in the ps2, xbox, gc era) ended up liking it after i had him play it with me. after a few hours, he thought it was freakin sweet, lol. i think it just depends on the person, cuz you can get some ppl to understand that graphics dont make the game for the most part. so yeah, i do agree with you LwC, but not to such an extreme extent.

--------------------

"The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved."
- Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

Graphics don't make a game. I'd choose FFI over X-2 any day.

That said, graphics have a major impact on what we get out of a game. If a game looks like crap, I'm not gonna sit their destroying my retina and struggling to distinguish if that's an arm or...
Take the later FFs. One of the first points people bring up are the majestic cut-scenes, one of the other points is that 'wow' factor. These go hand in hand. Games I love usually send me reeling for one reason or another. It may be a fantastic piece of music, a powerful moment or an incredible fight, but more often than not, that sense of the game being something different comes from an awe-inspiring scene with flashy lights and all sorts of stylish graphical moments.

But no, graphics don't make a bad game good. They make a good game better.

Heh, I usually use something like this as an example of Square's latest games.

Seems like ever since FFX/X-2 Square's storylines and character development have decreased in goodness (My word ^-^) dramatically. (Of course, that's just me talking)

Their graphics keep improving and improving, but I keep finding that their stories/character keep getting worse. Now, I ahven't played FFXII, nor seen much of it.... yet. So I can exactly keep using this theory, but at the current time, I am.

Anyway, that was my little off-topic rant. Back on topic.

No, I don't think people should play games based soley on graphics.
For example, one of my friends owned a ps2 and played it before he ever saw any game for ps1 and had no clue what they looked like. He always referred to the chars sprites in FFVII as 'kids' due to the pixelated sprites. He refused to play the game soley on graphics. Then, one day, saw me playing the game, (During an attempt at Ruby weapon) and got interested, now he says he loves the game.



--------------------

Link: "What is it?"
Mario: "It's coin, what the hell does it look like?"
Link: "Well.... What do you do with it?"
Mario: "You buy lives with them."
Link: ".... Isn't that slavery?"
~Mario/Link crossover comic~

Most of my suitemates in my dorm are total graphics-whores. They see me playing The Chronicles version of Chrono Trigger on my PS2, and the dialogue goes something like this:

"What game're you playing?"
"Chrono Trigger"
"Never heard of it. Is that a playstation game?"
"Yeah, it's a PS1 re-release of an SNES game."
*Peers at the screen "Those graphics suck. Why do you play these old games, [laszlow]?"
"Ummm... because they're great games..."
"But the graphcis suck."
"And your point is?"
"Whatever." *goes off to play Halo 2 or something*

Graphics don't make the game. Great visuals and cinematics can help to make a game great, but outdated graphics don't automatically make a game suck, as my roommate would believe.

Oh, and keep in mind that there's a difference between outdated and bad. Bad graphics are ones that actually make a game worse, outdated graphics simply mean that the graphics aren't very advanced.

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

I must admit shamefully, I was in the graphic critics boat for a while. I flat out refused to play Windwaker for the longest time due to it's graphics. However, It wasn't because my tender eyes were greiviously offended by the Cel-Shading that I didn't play. I just didn't want to buy the game, and therefore contribute to Nintendo's belief that this was the direction new games should go in.

Now that I've actualy played it, I have to admit, I loved the game. The gameplay was a ton of fun. I'm glad I played it, albeit long after it was released. However, I still wouldn't like Zelda graphics to continue on this trend. I'm eagerly awaiting the new, sweet graphics Zelda, (Out in June )

Final Fantasy 7 is a bit of a touchy game though. It just annoyed me that Square didn't really seem to try to make the graphics nice, save for in cutscenes. It wasn't really a new artistic venture either, such as Windwaker. I really would have preferred FFVI esque sprites to the blocky 3-d things...

That said, I don't belive someone should shun a game for graphics only, but I do apreciate a game with nice, artful graphics. I know graphics, while not the deciding factor, is still a pull for me when I buy games. I don't want to watch something for 10 hours when I hate the look of it.

--------------------

TURKEY! - (The only way not to get blocked for using Fowl Language)

Well how often do you guys play games that were created before you were born? As a child you develope a standard for what you expect in a video game. Anything below that standard isn't worth playing. Perhaps younger gamers think newer games have better gameplay than the older ones. My bro is 12, and he can pick up almost any modern game and immediately start having fun with it. I try those same games and think they're boring. He has grown up with 3D. I haven't.

I highly doubt any significant amount of people claim graphics are everything. For younger gamers it's all about the 3D experience... not the 2D experience. Most new 3D games have more gameplay features than older 3D games, so the newer the game is the better. We're in an age where sequels rule the industry. Each new installment to a series is an upgrade, complete with new features and usually yes, improved graphics too. It's not like "OMG GT4 has better graphics! I'll never play GT3 again!". I'll never play GT3 again because it's pretty much inferior in every way to GT4. It's not just about the better graphics, but it's certainly nice to have them. I won't complain.

This post has been edited by i90east on 10th March 2005 00:34

--------------------

FFXI (Siren server)
Tauu the Windurstian Tarutaru!
White Mage & Paladin

Quote (Mimic @ 9th March 2005 17:00)

But no, graphics don't make a bad game good. They make a good game better.

Indeed.

One of the other important things related to graphics, though, is gameplay. Crappy graphics (this usually applies to older games, but various factors including camera angle can make this affect newer games as well) can render a game unnecessarily hard and/or annoying to play, decreasing its quality.

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )

I absolutely hate it when people, listing the pros and cons of certain older (or even newer) games, make a point to mention "Oh, but the graphics suck." Now, granted, the person asking may be a graphics whore or the game may have such awful and/or outdated graphics that it does look like you're peeking into a broken-down washing machine's window rather than playing a video game, but I guess it just irks me to think that the person viewing peoples' opinions of a game might think "Okay, apparently it's fun, it's story's amazing, has high replay value and...what's this? Bad graphics? OH NOES!!!" No, what REALLY irks me is I know for a fact there are people out there who would react that way.

But, like some of you said, younger gamers are spoiled in that department. Some of the games on the SNES that I still find graphically beautiful are nowadays considered ugly 'cause there aren't FMV's every five minutes. Or a lotta explosions. Always gotta have the explosions. Course, there are quite a few games, especially early PSX ones, that give me headaches from their blocky ugliness (like FFVII, for example), but that doesn't mean I brush them off as bad games...at least not directly because of that. Heck, one of my fav games, Adventure (an early Atari game, and yes, I know I've mentioned it enough) consists of a "hero" made up of 16 pixels forming a square dot that changes colors depending on the room. He/she/it floats — not walks — but floats legless everywhere picking up things like an arrow (really a sword), a pixelated letter "U" (really a magnet), and two giant, blocky letter "C"s (really bridges) as he/she/it vanquishes three deformed pregnant ducks (really dragons) to retrieve the glowing blob of pixels (really a magical chalice) from a huge, discolored part of a room (really a black castle). But, dude, that game rocks!

Also, y'ever noticed how, in games with flashy FMV's and neato polygonal effects, the in-game animations usually suffer more than they ever did in the 2D era? That and the frame skips don't give 'em the same smoothness older games had. Not saying I'm an OMG Old-Sk00L elitist - just an observation.

So I'll just reiterate: It's gameplay, man. GAMEPLAY!!

--------------------

Words of Wisdom:

If something can go wrong, it will.

If anything simply cannot go wrong, it will anyway.

If there is a possibility of several things going wrong, the one that will cause the most damage will be the one to go wrong. - Murphy’s Law

Boing! Zoom! - Mr. Saturn

So you're heading down to the store to pick a new game. There's Bumble Bee Figher: Hyper Adventure, and Blocko the Fireduck. You pick them up and have a look behind the box.

BBF:HA features various 16x16 bee sprites floating about a plain series of 2D maps made with 16x16x4 tiles and with a nice, static 8bpp background. The gameplay is described as a fast-paced action-shooter revolutionary in many ways! And it actually is!

BtF features a hyper-realistic, high poly-count cell-shaded duck wandering through a very detailled, rich 3D environment. Cutting-edge pixel shader technology brings near-photorealistic effects to life and the stunning FMVs make the experience seem like a movie. Which it almost turns out to be.

Not knowing anything about these two games, and seeing as they're both roughly $60, you'll most likely think BBF:HA shouldn't even be on the shelves. It's just not up to par! So you toss it aside and play BtF, which you enjoy but don't find particularly impressive. The soundtrack really gets to you and plays in your head constantly, though, and you were impressed by the graphics and the awesome videos.

Let's face it, when confronted with having to make a choice between two different games and not knowing what either'll be like, you're probably going to pick what looks best. Which is unfortunate... And even if you have an unsatable hate towards 3D, the average gamer doesn't, and will pick the better-looking game. It's a sad reality, but the truth.

I've always found myself enjoying 2D a lot more than 3D. 3D fighting games sound just plain wrong to me (and often play really bad...) 3D puzzle games? Hell, when's the last time you've played a puzzle game like Tetris or Dr. Mario? Even side-scrollers barely cut it in 3D, often being made into first-person shooters. Some of my favorite genres just don't cut it in 3D. Even shooters (R-Type, anyone?) often end up playing just badly in 3D. What's the point in making an awesome 3D world for a fighting game with really detailled characters, realistic lighting effects, pixel-perfect shading, and a set of shaders that push your card to its limits if the game just turns out being a bad Tekken clone?

The game I'm working on was originally intended to be 2D. This turned out looking ridiculously amateur despite very nice sprites, a rather good storyline (subjectively-speaking, of course), and some unique concepts that set it apart. Why? Because in comparaison to other games, it just didn't look as impressive ('course, it's not like comparing yourself to AAA titles like FFX will ever make your game look impressive, but hey.) On the flipside it gave me a chance to get familiarized with more graphic APIs, but I can't help but feel a little saddened by this. At least I'm still using sprites for my characters.

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

Quote (Silverlance @ 10th March 2005 00:03)

... Even side-scrollers barely cut it in 3D...

I beg to differ on the precedent of- Mystical Ninja 2 for N64. If you've ever played it you would believe that a side scroller could be done extremely well in 3D.

This post has been edited by MogMaster on 10th March 2005 14:41

--------------------

If you've been mod-o-fied,
It's an illusion, and you're in-between.
Don't you be tarot-fied,
It's just alot of nothing, so what can it mean?
~Frank Zappa

Sins exist only for people who are on the Way or approaching the Way

Let's not forget Contra: Shattered Soldier. What I really love about this game is that it sticks to Across-The-Screen-Shoot'em-Up Action, staying true to it's roots and gameplay, all while having some pretty damn good graphics. It could've still had it's NES or SNES backgrounds or pixels and it STILL would've been a really great Contra game.

--------------------

The Cait Sith Avatar has Returned!

Check out my DeviantArt profile! ....If you don't mind that is

Quote

From Laszlow- ...there's a difference between outdated and bad. Bad graphics are ones that actually make a game worse, outdated graphics simply mean that the graphics aren't very advanced.

Excellent, excellent point. I highlighted the word outdated because that is exactly it. FFVI, in my opinion, did some of the most amazing things with the graphics available to them in the day. I remember playing through it not long after it first came out, and being visually stunned by the things they were doing with the backgrounds and sprites. When I go back and play games like that now, the graphics aren't up to par with what we currently have... but that doesn't mean they were bad. Not at all. They were awesome... just outdated.

My son, who is five, absolutely LOVES watching my play things like FFT. Guess what his favorite parts of the game are? The summons. Yes, little 2D drawings that just basically get floated onto the screen and shook around a bit while fancy colors flash around..... absolutely amazes him. Course.. he's only five.... but then again, I'm almost 27, and I love the summons graphics, too.


--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

I dig cool 3D graphics, but I would love a game just as much in 2D. Modern-day graphics is a "bonus" if you will in a game (although the new playboy game is all about the graphics, but some other topic) but, by no means are graphics the epitome of a good game or a bad one. Storyline and characters win a game over for me, not appearance. Eye-candy is just a great part of a much MUCH bigger package to me.

--------------------

"Thought I was dead, eh? Not until I fulfill my dream!"
Seifer Almasy


"The most important part of the story is the ending."
Secret Window


"Peace is but a shadow of death."
Kuja

Listen, if graphics were everything, PS2 would sell like crap. I love the PS2, but it has poor graphical capabilies.

Graphics are a plus, but gameplay, story, and fun factor are much ,more important. Some games need realism to be effect (RE4 is a lot scarier than RE1-3). Some don't. It's a matter of the game.
If people played games for graphics only, then GBA wouldn't have sold the most units of all time.



--------------------

"Dance, water, dance!"
-Demyx, Kingdom Hearts II

"I met my love before I was born..."
-AFI, 'Love Like Winter' from 'Decemberunderground'

Currently Playing: Guitar Hero, Shadow of the Colossus

I don't think I would classify the PS2 graphics as "crap". Are they inferior to the XBox? Yes. Are they superior, though, to the Gamecube? Yes.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

Quote (Silverlance)

Even side-scrollers barely cut it in 3D

Quote (MogMaster)

a side scroller could be done extremely well in 3D

What's a 3D side-scroller?

Seriously. I'm not too sure what you're referring to. I've heard games like Super Mario 64 being referred to as side-scrollers, but I think there's something at least a bit wrong with calling it that. It's not a side-scroller. You don't play on an essentially 2D map (think the levels of Super Mario Bros., the maps of various Metroid and Castlevania games, the levels of Sonic games, Tail Gator, Mega Man games, GBC Gex games, Super Mario World, etc. etc. etc....), on which you go right, left, down, or up. The screen doesn't 'scroll'.

Now an example of a side-scroller on a 3D-capable system (albeit a bad example) would be some parts of Super Smash Bros. Another would be some of the earlier Mega Man and Mega Man X games for Playstation. Except in certain moments, the game essentially treats the sprites and platforms as having no significant 'depth'. It may look like they do, but it's not even as much as there is in the old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles arcade games, where you could move Leonardo/Michelangelo/Raphael/Donatello up or down on the screen depending on the 'elevation' of your enemy.

Do we have to have a 3D system to get such depth? Well, just by the example I just gave, obviously not. For a better-looking example, Donkey Kong Country 3 has some slight 'layering' (I'm not sure what it's really called), such as being able to land on a platform that's in front of the waterfall only while you're falling in front of the fall but not when you're falling behind it.

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )

To be fair we complain about game play and label it as unoriginal but, its hard to come up with something new and orginal.

Yes graphics look good theres just something satisfeying about summoning Anima and seeing that large number of the eneimes head, however when i remeber who called it (yuna i think was her name) i get sad, mostly becuase i hated ffX somehow each FF feels less magical with each new game. (but hey at least i get to summon anima right? right?

but
graphics+good gamplay+good sound= solid game

Sound sets the mood and overall makes the game better.

--------------------

procastinate now, dont put it off

Odds are the better the graphics, the less amount of time put into the storyline and gameplay. I hate games that get good reviews because they look good. I really don't care if it looks good, if it does it's a bonus. Dragon Warrior VII, when I first started playing that game I became so nostalgic and was absorbed in the more than two hundred hours I got out of a single play through. Legaia: Duel Saga for PS2 got a bad review because the graphics lacked in areas. Best PS2 rpg I've ever played, and I'd much rather play it over FFX or FFX-2. This new generation sucks.

--------------------

This is my world: (Got my second chapter up, 3rd Chapter about 80% complete)
http://www3.sympatico.ca/daniel876/homepage.html

The graphics make the game problem has been around for quite a while and I remember arguing this point with many people on the FFIII boards on AOL and also the RPGA board on AOL back in the late 90s. Graphics are cool but it's the flow of the game that's going to impress me. That's why I always liked the Playstation as opposed to the N64 or PS2 for the GameCube. That's not to say that the Nintendo systems don't have good games, they do, but not in my specified genre. I'm like 98% RPG and neither of the Nintendo systems have offered enough in comparison to Sony's system. However, saying that, I will always stick with Nintendo until the end, because they have the other 2% of my gaming. I also have to say that the same goes for the Xbox. It has better graphics than the PS2 in many games but I don't find the games on the Xbox as fun. It's the potential for fun games that weighs in my mind whether or not I'm going to buy a system or not. As it stands right now, I'll definately get the DS and the next Nintendo system. I will also definately get the PSP and the next Playstation, but I'm not very likely to guy the next Xbox, regardless of the Final Fantasy creator's support.

--------------------

Elena Indurain

Currently Playing: Suikoden II

I'm not going to lie here, I play games for the sole purposes of my enjoyment and fun. If I find that one game is on average superior to another, the chances are that I'll spend more time playing the prior game then the latter one. On that note, I find the most pleasureable part of a game is the gameplay but the graphics, sound and sometimes story help to play a part in the total enjoyment level of a game too. That means that the graphics of a game do have some swaying on me.

For an example of what I mean, I find the Super Mario All Stars version of Super Mario Bros. 2 to have more enjoyable graphics NES counterpart. However, in terms of gameplay, the two differnt games are almost exactly the same, right down to the order in which the enemies apear on the screen. Now which one do you think I will end up playing more if I have a choice between the two? Yes, in that sense I do have some biased towards graphics. (Though on the same note, if you were to plop down Ghosts 'n Goblins and Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles down in front of me], it's G 'n G all the way.)

Now this brings me to a differnt point. Even though I personally prefer the gameplay more then the graphics, there are still others that find things to be flipped the other way around. Sure, I don't agree with these people but still I can't say I hate their way of thinking. Truly, its simmilar to my own except with differnt priorities. The only thing I truly don't get about it is why play a video game when you can buy an actual movie for half as much? The movie would probably look much better. I know it can't be because of an affection twords animation because there are animated movies as well. Oh well, go figure.

On a side note, I never liked the term "Outdated Graphics". I personally find 16 bit graphics to be better then the 3D animation used nowerdays. Its all a matter of asthetic taste so why would newer techniques make what somebody would find to be clearly enjoyable imagery outdated. Nobody ever calls the Mona Lisa "outdated" despite later styles being invented such as modern art . . .

This post has been edited by Tonepoet on 11th March 2005 02:34

--------------------

Role reversal at its finest.

Quote (Tonepoet @ 10th March 2005 21:24)

Nobody ever calls the Mona Lisa "outdated" despite later styles being invented such as modern art . . .

Well, here, though, unless you're talking about attempting to create a newer, better version of the Mona Lisa, with da Vinci's original intentions, but using new/modern/technologically more advaced media, then there's some difference. The difference you're speaking of is stylistic. It's like comparing Charles Schulz to Jim Davis (respectively, Schulz and Davis drew the Peanuts and Garfield comics).

What we're actually discussing here as game graphics involves technological differences. I'm too sleepy to explain what I mean right now, but I'll do it later if requested.

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )

Quote (Hamedo @ 10th March 2005 11:12)

Are they superior, though, to the Gamecube? Yes.

I strongly disagree. No way is the PS2 a more powerful machine to Cube.
Cube has a much higher processing power, and a higher frame rate.

Now, I like the PS2, obviously, but its not very good graphically. Of course, I don't mean to say that the PS2 has "crap graphics," just lower than the others.
If the PSP (a handheld) looks better than its mother console, something's wrong.

Still, PS2 sells the best because it has a larger library, lots of RPGs, the main FF series, DMC, MGS, etc...
It DOESN'T sell well due to graphics. That's what I'm saying.

--------------------

"Dance, water, dance!"
-Demyx, Kingdom Hearts II

"I met my love before I was born..."
-AFI, 'Love Like Winter' from 'Decemberunderground'

Currently Playing: Guitar Hero, Shadow of the Colossus

Quote (Shinjutsei @ 11th March 2005 08:56)

Cube has a much higher processing power, and a higher frame rate.

Keep in mind that more advanced hardware doesn't necessarily equate to better graphics. I can't think of an example right now, but there's at least one SNES game that has graphics worse than an NES game like Mega Man 6 (where the graphics were quite awesome).

And also keep in mind that a game can have really cool-looking graphics but play crappily because of the graphics. I can't think of an example of a game like that, but I do remember getting a

Edit

really cool-looking and highly detailed

Yoshi's Island Winamp skin that was SO cluttered with stuff (although I appreciate the effort of its creator) that I had a lot of trouble using it.

~~~~~~~

Come to think of it, how are we judging what 'better graphics' are? More detail? Smoother pictures? More realistic? Amount of camera-based problems in a 3D environment? 'Little things at the side', such as Super Mario RPG's showing plain blue/red/black/brown outside the viewable area of the room? Sprite/character visibility?

In my opinion, there are ways to make graphics on an NES look really nice and make graphics on a Gamecube suck.

This post has been edited by Glenn Magus Harvey on 12th March 2005 03:29

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )

Quote (LockewithCeles @ 9th March 2005 16:36)

Do you agree with me? That people should not hate the game if it has bad graphics, but good gameplay??

Yeah I agree, people 'shouldn't' but some do. I think generally, the more casual a gamer is, the more they'll go for graphics as being first priority.

Having good graphics in a game isn't a bad thing but the so called next generation consoles have made this too important.

"erm guys, can we remember there's a game you need to make here too? You need gameplay, story, etc, quite important you know? "

I don't have a problem with games companies making games for casual gamers like this but maybe they could take gamers like us, who want a good story and gameplay, a little more into consideration. After all we play games more than most. So ignoring us seems a bit crazy.

I may be exaggerating a bit but I'm only doing this to get my point across. It would be nice to have some more classic games.

--------------------

'Let that be a lesson to all oppressive vegetable sellers.'

The obvious problem with DW is that it's graphics are really outdated. That is exactly why DWVII wasn't as popular here than it was in Japan. Xbox has some pretty unique games and the only reason to get it would be because of that. Halo racked up Xbox sales, but, and other than that there would be no other reason to get it. PS2 games are usually the best in terms of gameplay and story like FF and others. GameCube games tend to be quite "kiddy" because of games like Paper Mario, Animal Crossing, etc. But great games like Metroid, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Legend of Zelda, Crystal Chronicles, and Resident Evil made it worth buying.

--------------------

Yunalesca: "Hope is...comforting. It allows us to accept fate, however tragic it might be. "

Yunalesca: "Poor creature. You would throw away hope. Well... I will free you before you can drown in your sorrow. It is better for you to die in hope than to live in despair. Let me be your liberator. "

I'm almost tempted to make a two word answer of "hell no", but that would be pointless.

Graphics to me are like icing on the cake. Gameplay/story would be the cake itself. If you have uber cool graphics, but a sucky story/gameplay, the end result will be still less than satisfactory. Someone burnt the cake that didn't rise and threw on some good frosting. Not going to cut it.

--------------------

kame, tortue, tortuga, schildkröte, tartaruga, turtle

"Arthur Dent?"
"Yes."
"Arthur Philip Dent?"
"Yes."
"You're a total knee biter."