Sam Hewitt of Level Complete is getting sick and tired of gamers arguing over which console has the best graphics. Shouldn't they be arguing over which has the best GAMES?
In some instances, they do help, but I mostly just want a game with a great, unique art-style, good replay value, solid controls, and a nice story (if it's that sort of a game). Honestly, I don't care much for realism in games (unless it's a game about realism, of course).
Agreed + bub for well said. I'd like to ad that "realism" doesn't necessarily mean good graphics. How can dark souls look real? Dragons and minotars are not real. Its how they are represented: the character model movement, the reactions to the player, the imagination of the artists. I've seen monsters drawn in fine detail and lots of lines but look plain dumb. I've seen creatures in two tones of grey that scared the bejesus out of me. Sure, lots of pixels add to the overall feel but give me a great artist, butter smooth frame rate and fluid character movement with addictive action over picture perfect backgrounds any day.
Agreed. However, on PC, emphasis is placed on graphics and physics by many directions because Intel, AMD/ATI, and nVidia all constantly have cutting edge chips that they're trying to move.
I agree, graphics are nice but not the main ingredient of a game. I have played some of the most beautiful games that really sucked and I didn't want to play it no matter how good it looked. IMO gameplay first, graphics second. I would rather have an immersive story than top of the line graphics.
I know that this not what the article is talking about, but I believe that graphics do matter. They do not matter in all types of games, but they do matter. I think we have been spoiled by some games that combine both gameplay, graphics, and sometimes story perfectly to set standards for how many Triple A titles should be madre. Do i really want to play a game that look like a ps1, ps2, and some early ps3 games even if they had "great gameplay"? Not really. However, I would play a game with decent graphics, like sleeping dogs, on current gen consoles. Would I have played a game like Last of Us if it had sleeping dog type graphics with muddy textures, given its linear? Heeeelll NO! Part of what made last of us so special are the amazing graphics, which increased the level of immersion and how effective the gameplay became.
I get what you're getting at. I don't mind graphical progression to a better standard over generations, but I don't necessarily require or want games that sport ultra-realism in visuals. In some games (bf, cod, etc.), sure, it makes sense. But realistic visuals in other games may not make sense to implement.
Realistic graphics don't matter. What matters is next gen technology like sub-surface scattering, soft body physics and volumetric lighting. Yes we have 'some' of that already, but next gen means applying those techniques to EVERYTHING. That's why power is important regardless of whether developers aim for realism or not. I fear that some people are already being fooled by two numbers: 1080p/60fps. What you have there is basically HD versions of current gen games.
GRAPHICS are important why do people keep dismissing it. Its like having a movie with a great plot but shit ass actors=shit movie. Movie with decent story but great actors=Good movie. jgrfni!!!
Uh, wat. That's a horrible analogy. Games like Ocarina of Time, Mario 64, and Metal Gear Solid might have shit graphics by today's standards, but they remain amazing games nonetheless.
Graphics don'tNV atter. There are plenty of well received games that aren't all about graphics. The Walking Dead The Elders Scrolls: Skyrim The Fallout games The Saints Row games Etc.... Graphics aren't needed. Good graphics are nice to have, but they're not needed.
I think it's fair to say that graphics do matter to a certain degree at least for a selling point. For a new machine, especially a consecutive product(like going from 3 to 4), you are going to want it to do a lot more than the current machine you own. I wouldn't say LIFE LIKE graphics matter, surely PC is the only one that will get close to that, but at least be a big improvement over previous games at a bare minimum.
My opinion is for individual games not at all. Mario and Zelda on NES are still as fun as they were when they came out. But in the context of a next generation console, yes. People want there to be an improvement over the previous generation. Graphics have always been the main improvement of every generation over the last.
There has to be a balance. If a game has great, 'realistic' graphics but the gameplay/plot isn't up to par, how good the visuals are is irrelevant. Likewise, if the gameplay/plot is great, but the game's awful to look at, it can affect how enjoyable it is to play. I think @Ashlen hit the nail on the head about next gen, though. Gamers want PS4/Xbox One games to look far better than current/past gen, as it's evidence of technical progression and hardware evolution. To that end, graphics are important, but what's far more important is a healthy perspective; they are not the be all and end all...
This is true. Obviously I want to see game push the PS4 and Xbox One to its limit, graphical wise. It just annoys me when a game is shown off and people say "NOT NEXT GEN GRAPHICS!!!" For example Kingdom Hearts 3 footage that was released today. Quite a few people moaning about it. Sometimes the graphics of a game are held back due to the size of its map and content.
Realistic Graphics are important in some games , not all
True. Saying graphics don't matter in a game is like saying special effects don't matter in a movie. The better they are, the better it can immerse you in the moment and suspend your belief.
It really does depend on the style of game. Take Wind Waker for example. The graphics utilized in that game recreated in HD makes the game look absolutely stunning. Mario has never needed photo-realistic graphics. It's all about bright colors and a sense of fun. When you are playing games like Call of Duty, Battlefield, GTA, realistic graphics help set the mood and style. They help create that sense of immersion. So while great graphics help sell the story, it should never be the driving force behind a game. Great graphics are no substitute for a poorly written game that isn't fun to play.
Well said Neonridr. I cannot go against anything you said there. Btw I wrote this article.
The better the graphics,the better the quality of some games. Depends on the genre
Arguing over graphics is something that is carried over from console wars of old. It was more or less the defacto way to qualify one system over the other and usually one system always had a graphical advantage over the other. These days, consoles release and the graphics are so similar that the untrained eye can barely tell them apart. What makes or breaks a console these days is the quality of its games library, at least for me. You can have the best graphics in the world but if the gameplay is crap or even merely okay, then those graphics are nothing more than eye candy. All flash and no substance. I'd much rather have a game with stellar, innovative gameplay where graphics aren't necessarily the area most concentrated on.
I don't get why some people get ogle eyed over realistic graphics. For me realism isn't all that impressive to the eye, I would take games like Okami, Dark Souls, and God of War 3 over battlefield 3 on pc any day of the week. If you want realism just go outside.
God of War 3 is a fantasy game but with realistic graphics. It's just taking something that is not real and if it were to be real, that's the developer's adaptation of a realistic God of War universe. It's like having live-action adaptions of comic book characters, they aren't real nor the universe but they are put in a realistic world, if the universe would have been real (if the makes sense to you). That's the way I see it anyways, same with Harry Potter not real but if were real the films are one adaptation of a realistic attempt.
God of war 3 has realistic graphics? What do you mean? The entire imagery of the game is focused on art design. A game doesn't have to be cel shaded to have a focus art design.
Art was never mentioned in my comment, and its a whole new concept on it's own. What I was simply stating that God of War has realistic graphics event through it's a fantasy setting. In your comment you said you would take Okami, Dark Souls, and God of War 3 over Battlefield 3 any day. I didn't realize this at the time but Dark Souls and God of War have realistic graphics like Battlefield just that Battlefield is set in reality with Hollywood realism. Okami is a fantasy game like God of War and Dark Souls, but the graphics aren't realistic like Battlefield 3, God of War 3, or Dark Souls.
having a blast with gta5 nuf said
while i am not a graphics whore i just sometimes want the developer to make improvements on how a game looks if the tech is there to make these improvements without sacrificing quality in anyway
It's interesting that a lot people are dismissing graphics but a good portion of the website debates about what version looks and runs better of a particular game. As for me the version doesn't really matter because the goal is to look / run identical, but as with the game itself it depends on the game universe created. Certain games I would rather have more realistic graphics adds the experience and others no. I really understand the author is trying to get at about, a game feeling like a game, without really articulating themselves on what that is exactly. In the end graphics matter to most if not all even if they don't realize it. As long as the graphics look realistic in the universe created the experience is enhanced greatly. So games like Naruto can look unrealistic but I still expect it to looks as much of a cartoon as possible. Staying true to the source material is key on creating a particular type of experience. Realistic graphics bring different experiences / expectations than unrealistic graphics.
No. Graphics don't mean shit in vidya.
Realistic graphics don't matter nearly as much as physics and art direction imo. Look at a game like gtaV. No one with eyes would think the game looks "real" like beyond 2 should. But it's visually pleasing, due in part, to rockstar's meticulous attention to detail. For example, The way foliage, flags, and sails react to the wind in the boat yard, would look better, in game, than a high fidelity, yet static image.
it depends on the genre..but games like gta imo do not need to become ultra realistic in the graphics compartment cos of the violence and all..but uncharted and halo .......hell yeah.
Graphics are important but I think it also depends on the TV or monitor your using. You can have a brand new console with the greatest looking game on it but, if you have a lousy TV you wont experience those gorgeous graphics the same way you would with a better TV.
graphics catch your eyes, gameplay catches your mind, use minecraft as an example
for some games yes, the graphics can really madder, like in Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. but for a lot of games i think a less that realistic look is just fine
This has been a very subjective question since the dawn of gaming. People on one side will tell you that visuals don't matter as much is gameplay, therefore it doesn't matter how they look. Then there are others who will tell you that they do matter because it brings in more immersion in to the title. I am with the latter. I am one who believes realistic visuals draw you into the game world, make you feel more for the characters and the world around you. It makes a gamer feel as if they're in the real world accomplishing things they couldn't in their real lives. I think realistic visuals allow the player to feel more that their actions have consequences, blurring the line between fantasy and reality. Making them think before they do something in the game world, knowing that the outcome could affect everybody and the world around them. Whereas with unrealistic, fantasy style visuals, people generally don't care how they do something or how it affects the world around them because their brain tells him that it's fake.