Agreed, though this should be a given. You're right to call those people idiots, because they are. It's as simple as that. You want to see amazing CGI and graphics, go watch a movie. I play games to PLAY games lol.
Ok,nice graphics cool thing,but many"modern"games important only graphics!gameplay its shit.....and 5-6 hours long... This games not videogames.....this interactive movies.
I agree in general that you shouldn't value graphics over gameplay, but to call people an idiot or not real gamers for doing so over a particular game?
I dismiss certain manga/anime because I don't like the artistic style of it. I could be missing out on a good story, but to me the art style is far to hideous that it distracts from the overall experience thus I can't bare to read/watch it. Besides why force myself to watch something that has bad visuals, but a great story, while I can watch one that has both?
The same can be applied to video games. People act like gamers have to play every game on the planet and agree with the majority consensus of that particular game in order to be considered a 'true gamer'. Personally I don't think it's wrong for someone to dismiss a particular game because they don't like the graphics. Some people have different preference for different genres. For example, One might not care for graphics for the FPS genre and only care about the gameplay. While for another genre, like let's say a sandbox third person shooter, that same person might prefer to have both good graphics and good gameplay so if either one is lacking, for this sake we'll say if the graphics are lacking, that person will dismiss the game.
Sometimes the graphics might attract a gamer. For example Ni no Kuni got my interest because of the visual eye candy it provides. I probably wouldn't even be looking forward to the game if it weren't for it's visuals and it turns out(judging from the bits of gameplay shown) that the game might rival PS1 jrpg classics. Please don't call me an idiot or not a real gamer because I would have dismissed Ni no Kuni if it had bad visuals.
Also there is nothing wrong with viewing games as interactive movies. Certain developers view games this way. For example Hideo Kojima views video games this way and has made nothing short of masterpieces that boast BOTH good graphics and good gameplay.
Yeah, I've got a gaming rig, and I do prefer PC over consoles most of the time. Though I never worry about graphics, it's just a nice bonus to be able to play with them a bit on your computer.
Honestly, there are asses out there for every platform whether PC, console, mobile, phone, etc.
I completely disagree with PC gamers being "graphic whores".
Games run smoother on a PC. There is a lot less screen tearing and framerate dropping on a PC of low caliber specs compared to these older consoles. I do however think that it gets carried away when someone needs 4 GTX 580 gpus in quad sli, a 6 core i7 extreme and 6 120gb SSD drive in a raid 5.
At that point the budget has run clear away from all practicality of specs and in that, they are definitely graphic whores or just outright have too much disposable income.
hahahah yea reminds me of crysis. lol all the pc gamers were like "THE GRAPHICS IS SOOOO REAL> HAHA YOU CONSOLE NOOBS WONT GET IT!" when the gameplay was sh*t
Gameplay is fun...but in this day and age of HD gaming to not take that into account and to believe that aesthetics do not matter would be a dangerous way to think when it comes to making your games. Think of it this way...the first thing that men and women notice about each other are the looks, they like at first because you are physically appealing to them. And please do not tell me that while looking at a game you are probably gonna be turned away if it looks bad because you will say to yourself, why would I buy this when THAT looks good and plays just as well.
No he is certainly not right to call those kinds of people idiots. If someone only wants to play good looking games (good looking in THEIR OWN eyes), then who are you to tell them otherwise? I love games of all kind whether it has great visuals or not. However, it is always nice to see hard work put in to the graphics of a game, because we are in 2012 where technology is very far ahead now. My cell phone is now faster than the current generation of consoles, so developers need to step up next gen. Now, if the type of game does not call for eye appealing visuals, like the indie game he mentions in the article, then that is fine. But don't half ass something and be lazy if you are trying to make a game with realistic visuals. Every developer has the means to make a great looking game today, while still having plenty of substance in it. We can have both today, and developers need to take advantage over that rather than give us one over the other.
I don't mean general PC gamers (im one too) im on about the guys that just go on and on about how consoles are holding the PC back because a game doesn't run at such an such frame rate and the textures are not as detailed blah blah.What really matters is gameplay.
Art department (graphics) and the programming and gameplay department (gameplay, AI, playable game) are two separate things in a game development studio. If the game looks nice but the gameplay sucks the programmers failed in the gameplay. If the level doesn't flow right it's the designers fault. If the graphics blow than obviously the artist didn't do their best.
I only disagree in that you seem to be implying I shouldn't want amazing graphics if I want to play games.
Well... I do want amazing graphics. In fact I also want a great story and lots of ingenuity. I just want great gameplay more.
Yes, I agree... at the end of the day gameplay should trump everything else. Gameplay should be first and foremost and gameplay should never suffer at the hands of story, graphics, or even ingenuity. But its not wrong for me to want great graphics as well.
The use of FF-XIII as the picture for this article is especially fortuitous. The last FF game (other than the Tactics series or a spin-off like Dirge of Cerberus) to have good gameplay was FF7 (imo). FF6 was great (tho the story turned into a farce every time the clown popped up), FF5 was great (tho forgetable story-wise), FF4 was great (and still my favorite 16-bit FF), and FF7 was great. FF8 sucked, FF9 was ok, FF10 was ok, FF12 was good (but not great), FF13 was a sin. In fact the entire JRPG genre seems to have gone to shit after FF7... the last really good JRPG I played was Breath of Fire 3... and that was an overhead isometric style game with 2d-sprites released on the original playstation around the same time as FF7.
But for just one game... FF7... the FF series had it all... great story, innovation, graphics, and even great gameplay. The problem is that Square (and the rest of the industry) learned the wrong lesson. What they took away wasn't the synergy between these components but the idea that graphics were everything. The main talking points for Square when they launched FF8 were all about the FMVs. And why not? The main talking point for fans when they played FF7 was the FMVs (even though the game had a lot more going for it).
Call me an idiot because if a new game doesn't look good enough then I won't enjoy it as much as I would if the graphics are good. To each their own. I wouldn't enjoy killzone 4 if it looks like skyward sword as much as I would enjoy it if it looks like bf3 on ultra settings for pc. If the gameplay is bad then its bad and I won't enjoy it but my first draw will be the graphics
Having grown up with video games since the days of PacMan & Defender in the arcade, I fully agree with this article. Even the worst looking games nowadays (say, Deadly Premonition?) are a million miles away from where it all started. If you can't get past poor graphics, well, sucks to be you.
then play that, endless replay value, multiplayer, it has it all!
graphics are what propel the industry forward, the stagnation of current consoles is the worst thing to happen to gaming in a while.
wake up, 720p is a garbage 12 year old, relic of tech, jaggies should be a thing of the past, anti aliasing is perfected on pc, screen tearing is inexscusable, pop-in, terrible framerates.....all the things that plauge current last gen consoles are non-existant on a mid-range, 4 year old, pc.
graphics are HUGE, equal to gameplay in importance, more so in some ways as without the push for better tech, we just stay where we are.
that example you gave is a horrible one, but i'm not surprised based on the intelligence level (or lack thereof) of the rest of your post.
a game like that has no depth in the gameplay, no real progression (other than speed), no intricate challenge, and no variety. it's not just that the graphics suck in that, but the gameplay would be boring and stale for anyone who didn't grow up playing it.
i can play NES, SNES, Gensis, etc all day if the games have fun, unique, varied and challenging gameplay, though, because the graphics don't matter.
games have replay value for their gameplay, not because of graphics. i don't play games over and over if they're just about the graphics and story, i play them once, enjoy it, and move on. but games like Ninja Gaiden, Mario, Portal...where the gameplay is truly special...i can play those forever.
so in short...yeah, if you value graphics over gameplay, go watch a movie.
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is a textbook example.
When was the last time you made a post that DIDN'T include some reference to screen resolution, framerate, or anti-aliasing techniques?
Graphics, themselves, are not what pushes gaming tech to be better. Gameplay is. Being able to do more in a game, or do it better, is what's most important; graphics improving is a happy bonus.
I apologize for coming off as "elitist" in many of my posts. I am aware how it appears, that is not my intention.
It is just that, as a passionate gamer, and someone who loves to see giant strides made in the industry, I feel that the lack of any new consoles in so long is holding us back, not just in graphics, but in advancements in physics, a.i. calculations, depth of gameplay...ect....it all begins with developers having more RAW POWER to allocate resources to.
The current trend in game development is this;
pump all of the ps3/360's available resoure into producing the best graphics possible, well, what we see is 720p max, maybe, MAYBE 2x anti aliasing and 30 frames in 95% of games....then, there is barely anything left for innovation.
With new consoles, with 4gb ram, a 560 ti like gpu, and a i7-920 like cpu, those previously mentioned threseholds would be attainable without even a second thought, then developers would have the freedom to allocate resourses to developing much, MUCH more intracite gameplay, detailed a.i. routines, gameplay mechanics yet unseen on console.
look at a game like Shogun 2 total war, the depth and bredth of that game is simply unavailable on console, they fundamentally do not have the raw processing power to facilitate that type of gaming.
I want progress, advancement and innovation, these things are not possible on current console hardware, all that you will ever see from ps3/360 going forward is gears of war 4, uncharted 4, god of war 4, halo 4...ect....ect...ect....ad infintium.....
^you have good point but you don't have to be an elitist about it.
I also prefer gameplay over graphics. Longevity/playtime is also important. That is why I enjoy JRPG's because they have long playtime for SP and play RTS on PC.
I might be the freak here but i value story just as highly as i value gameplay. Case in point i played Back to the Future game on ps3 The graphics were horible, the controls made me want to throw my controller at the tv, but i wanted to see where the story went so i stuck with it. I have stuck through quite a few games stricly for this reason im a sucker for a good story!
If tomorrow they implement realistic human behaviour and personality play into the graphics in video games then even the gameplay will change to adapt that.
Its when they dont go hand in hand is when the game goes to the shitter.
Graphics are very very important and so is gameplay in equal measures.
Honestly as long as the graphics are in some form of HD, it's all I need. Gameplay, story, characters, music all take precedence over graphics any day of the week.
Aren't graphics the main advantage to PC over consoles? That is all I ever read from PC players...how the game performs graphically. Are they right? Are they idiots?
To have a great game you need three things: Gameplay, graphics and story.
To say one is better than the other is stupid! There are a ton of games out that have great gameplay and story, but look like it would run on a C-64, will not sell well!
I like when the game I play looks good but when we r talking about JRPG graphics r not even in the TOP 5 things I am looking for like story, characters, gameplay, soundtrack, how many hours u need to finish it, re-playability, exploration, secrets.. & somewhere at the bottom is the graphics for me at 9th or 10th place, & btw agree that FFXIII/XIII-2 & RE5 was crap other than graphics but that's what happen when companies focus more on graphics over anything else.
All this talking about graphics and gameplay, where'd story go? IMO story and gameplay are equally important and graphics are a bit less important. I can enjoy a game with bad graphics, but if either the story or gameplay absolutely sucks, I find a game hard to enjoy. Naturally games with no real story don't count, I mean if a game tries to have a story but it sucks.
Graphics are reaching a plateau. They are approaching photo realistic levels... and they are already good enough that the uncanny valley is no longer an issue. Also we have reached the point where large improvements in VPU tech still doesn't produce noticeable improvements in actual graphics.
In the next few years developers are going to find that new games don't really look different from old games and no one is paying attention to graphics... they are going to be forced to produce better games gameplay wise. It's just really really unfortunate that it took running into brick wall face first in regards to graphics to make that happen.
Eventually some one will start working on how to bring the cost for developing games down and perhaps not long after that innovation will return to the industry as well.
If gameplay and story were all we needed, then we'd still be play all the old games (which everyone is free to do)
The reason the industry keeps selling millions, and millions each year is cause people like a new coat of paint on the games they know and love. (COD doesn't even get that new paint, HA!)
I appreciate how VG are made, and the engines behind rendering ever more realistic graphics. I've been known to love a game with amazing graphics, and poor story.
RE: IF YOU LIKE GRAPHICS GO WATCH A MOVIE
If you like gameplay go play "unnamed ancient title that was praised for gameplay" ie. the original zeldas/FinalFantasies/marios
(those are the games that gameplay lovers praise, right?)
well i'm an artist, so i'm not gonna just completely blow off the graphics. whether its realism or not, the art style matters.
you cant just judge an entire production (the game) on only one aspect. sure the gameplay is important, but so are the visuals. but if by graphics you mean, resolution and uber realism than of course the gameplay is more important.
i.e. if you went to a movie and witnessed some of the greatest storytelling ever but 70% of the time the cameraman was shaking the camera vigorously or aiming the camera at a wall, not many people would come away from it saying it deserved an Oscar.
all in all, there needs to be a balance between the visuals, gameplay, and story.
60°
80°
290°
80°
Ad 
40°
20°
20°
20°
20°
10°
I videogamer,not Blu-ray&DVD player:D
Ok,nice graphics cool thing,but many"modern"games important only graphics!gameplay its shit.....and 5-6 hours long...
This games not videogames.....this interactive movies.
I dismiss certain manga/anime because I don't like the artistic style of it. I could be missing out on a good story, but to me the art style is far to hideous that it distracts from the overall experience thus I can't bare to read/watch it. Besides why force myself to watch something that has bad visuals, but a great story, while I can watch one that has both?
The same can be applied to video games. People act like gamers have to play every game on the planet and agree with the majority consensus of that particular game in order to be considered a 'true gamer'. Personally I don't think it's wrong for someone to dismiss a particular game because they don't like the graphics. Some people have different preference for different genres. For example, One might not care for graphics for the FPS genre and only care about the gameplay. While for another genre, like let's say a sandbox third person shooter, that same person might prefer to have both good graphics and good gameplay so if either one is lacking, for this sake we'll say if the graphics are lacking, that person will dismiss the game.
Sometimes the graphics might attract a gamer. For example Ni no Kuni got my interest because of the visual eye candy it provides. I probably wouldn't even be looking forward to the game if it weren't for it's visuals and it turns out(judging from the bits of gameplay shown) that the game might rival PS1 jrpg classics. Please don't call me an idiot or not a real gamer because I would have dismissed Ni no Kuni if it had bad visuals.
Also there is nothing wrong with viewing games as interactive movies. Certain developers view games this way. For example Hideo Kojima views video games this way and has made nothing short of masterpieces that boast BOTH good graphics and good gameplay.
Honestly, there are asses out there for every platform whether PC, console, mobile, phone, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Console gamers are not graphics whore at all! right?
Games run smoother on a PC. There is a lot less screen tearing and framerate dropping on a PC of low caliber specs compared to these older consoles. I do however think that it gets carried away when someone needs 4 GTX 580 gpus in quad sli, a 6 core i7 extreme and 6 120gb SSD drive in a raid 5.
At that point the budget has run clear away from all practicality of specs and in that, they are definitely graphic whores or just outright have too much disposable income.
not exactly. If graphic really appeal to the masses, you wouldn't see handheld or mobile gaming proliferate at such an alarming rate.
Game is about FUN (gameplay/content/story/intere sting ideas) and that has nothing to do with graphics.
I wouldn't call them "idiots"...they just aren't gamers.
But innovations in graphics also leads to even better gameplay. So it's a win win situation when the both go hand in hand.
It's sad that a great graphical game (Crysis 2) has limited and horrible gameplay (IMHO when compared to Crysis)
For me I gotta have both. I need great gameplay and great graphics cause i enjoy the immersion of great games.
I don't mean general PC gamers (im one too)
im on about the guys that just go on and on about
how consoles are holding the PC back because a game
doesn't run at such an such frame rate and the textures are
not as detailed blah blah.What really matters is gameplay.
Well... I do want amazing graphics. In fact I also want a great story and lots of ingenuity. I just want great gameplay more.
Yes, I agree... at the end of the day gameplay should trump everything else. Gameplay should be first and foremost and gameplay should never suffer at the hands of story, graphics, or even ingenuity. But its not wrong for me to want great graphics as well.
The use of FF-XIII as the picture for this article is especially fortuitous. The last FF game (other than the Tactics series or a spin-off like Dirge of Cerberus) to have good gameplay was FF7 (imo). FF6 was great (tho the story turned into a farce every time the clown popped up), FF5 was great (tho forgetable story-wise), FF4 was great (and still my favorite 16-bit FF), and FF7 was great. FF8 sucked, FF9 was ok, FF10 was ok, FF12 was good (but not great), FF13 was a sin. In fact the entire JRPG genre seems to have gone to shit after FF7... the last really good JRPG I played was Breath of Fire 3... and that was an overhead isometric style game with 2d-sprites released on the original playstation around the same time as FF7.
But for just one game... FF7... the FF series had it all... great story, innovation, graphics, and even great gameplay. The problem is that Square (and the rest of the industry) learned the wrong lesson. What they took away wasn't the synergy between these components but the idea that graphics were everything. The main talking points for Square when they launched FF8 were all about the FMVs. And why not? The main talking point for fans when they played FF7 was the FMVs (even though the game had a lot more going for it).
then play that, endless replay value, multiplayer, it has it all!
graphics are what propel the industry forward, the stagnation of current consoles is the worst thing to happen to gaming in a while.
wake up, 720p is a garbage 12 year old, relic of tech, jaggies should be a thing of the past, anti aliasing is perfected on pc, screen tearing is inexscusable, pop-in, terrible framerates.....all the things that plauge current last gen consoles are non-existant on a mid-range, 4 year old, pc.
graphics are HUGE, equal to gameplay in importance, more so in some ways as without the push for better tech, we just stay where we are.
think if the av industry just stopped at vhs
a game like that has no depth in the gameplay, no real progression (other than speed), no intricate challenge, and no variety. it's not just that the graphics suck in that, but the gameplay would be boring and stale for anyone who didn't grow up playing it.
i can play NES, SNES, Gensis, etc all day if the games have fun, unique, varied and challenging gameplay, though, because the graphics don't matter.
games have replay value for their gameplay, not because of graphics. i don't play games over and over if they're just about the graphics and story, i play them once, enjoy it, and move on. but games like Ninja Gaiden, Mario, Portal...where the gameplay is truly special...i can play those forever.
so in short...yeah, if you value graphics over gameplay, go watch a movie.
When was the last time you made a post that DIDN'T include some reference to screen resolution, framerate, or anti-aliasing techniques?
Graphics, themselves, are not what pushes gaming tech to be better. Gameplay is. Being able to do more in a game, or do it better, is what's most important; graphics improving is a happy bonus.
It is just that, as a passionate gamer, and someone who loves to see giant strides made in the industry, I feel that the lack of any new consoles in so long is holding us back, not just in graphics, but in advancements in physics, a.i. calculations, depth of gameplay...ect....it all begins with developers having more RAW POWER to allocate resources to.
The current trend in game development is this;
pump all of the ps3/360's available resoure into producing the best graphics possible, well, what we see is 720p max, maybe, MAYBE 2x anti aliasing and 30 frames in 95% of games....then, there is barely anything left for innovation.
With new consoles, with 4gb ram, a 560 ti like gpu, and a i7-920 like cpu, those previously mentioned threseholds would be attainable without even a second thought, then developers would have the freedom to allocate resourses to developing much, MUCH more intracite gameplay, detailed a.i. routines, gameplay mechanics yet unseen on console.
look at a game like Shogun 2 total war, the depth and bredth of that game is simply unavailable on console, they fundamentally do not have the raw processing power to facilitate that type of gaming.
I want progress, advancement and innovation, these things are not possible on current console hardware, all that you will ever see from ps3/360 going forward is gears of war 4, uncharted 4, god of war 4, halo 4...ect....ect...ect....ad infintium.....
some of you are fine with that, i want more!
I also prefer gameplay over graphics. Longevity/playtime is also important. That is why I enjoy JRPG's because they have long playtime for SP and play RTS on PC.
That's all, everyone is entitled to like whatever he wants.
If tomorrow they implement realistic human behaviour and personality play into the graphics in video games then even the gameplay will change to adapt that.
Its when they dont go hand in hand is when the game goes to the shitter.
Graphics are very very important and so is gameplay in equal measures.
To say one is better than the other is stupid! There are a ton of games out that have great gameplay and story, but look like it would run on a C-64, will not sell well!
If you value graphics over gameplay, you're an idiot
If you value graphics over story, well you're an even bigger idiot
"GAMES" = gameplay
Graphics are reaching a plateau. They are approaching photo realistic levels... and they are already good enough that the uncanny valley is no longer an issue. Also we have reached the point where large improvements in VPU tech still doesn't produce noticeable improvements in actual graphics.
In the next few years developers are going to find that new games don't really look different from old games and no one is paying attention to graphics... they are going to be forced to produce better games gameplay wise. It's just really really unfortunate that it took running into brick wall face first in regards to graphics to make that happen.
Eventually some one will start working on how to bring the cost for developing games down and perhaps not long after that innovation will return to the industry as well.
If gameplay and story were all we needed, then we'd still be play all the old games (which everyone is free to do)
The reason the industry keeps selling millions, and millions each year is cause people like a new coat of paint on the games they know and love. (COD doesn't even get that new paint, HA!)
I appreciate how VG are made, and the engines behind rendering ever more realistic graphics. I've been known to love a game with amazing graphics, and poor story.
RE: IF YOU LIKE GRAPHICS GO WATCH A MOVIE
If you like gameplay go play "unnamed ancient title that was praised for gameplay"
ie. the original zeldas/FinalFantasies/marios
(those are the games that gameplay lovers praise, right?)
you cant just judge an entire production (the game) on only one aspect. sure the gameplay is important, but so are the visuals.
but if by graphics you mean, resolution and uber realism than of course the gameplay is more important.
i.e. if you went to a movie and witnessed some of the greatest storytelling ever but 70% of the time the cameraman was shaking the camera vigorously or aiming the camera at a wall, not many people would come away from it saying it deserved an Oscar.
all in all, there needs to be a balance between the visuals, gameplay, and story.