Caring About Visuals Does Not Make You Shallow

Game Podunk blogger, MonkJammas writes, "Should a man be chastised for believing that the graphics of a game really do make a difference? It is strange how when it comes to internet wars about video games, it is almost seen as wrong to acknowledge a game for being graphically superior. As soon as you mention that a game has good graphics, or looks better in HD, you are shot down and treated as if your opinion is no longer valid. It is a strange concept that only seems to exist on the internet, and I for one believe that graphics really do matter..."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
MariaHelFutura3242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

No it doesn`t. If you didn`t care about visuals you wouldn`t have boughten a PS3, 360 or upgraded your PC. The PS2 library is one of the best in the history of gaming. Does that mean you can`t enjoy older titles.....NO. But the better they`s gonna make me complain.

and YES. Gameplay > Graphics.

But...... Great Gameplay w/ Great Gameplay > Bad Graphics w/ Great Gameplay.

GWAVE3242d ago

People forget that the "graphics" department also includes many important "gameplay" aspects such as the number of enemies on screen, the physics engine, the amount of detail (making it easier to identify enemy types, etc), and so forth.

Only fanboys separate gameplay and graphics. They go hand-in-hand and the better both are, the better the game is.

MariaHelFutura3242d ago

LOL. I mean it "NOT gonna make me complain.

The better they look, it`s gonna make me complain.......LOL.

Trroy3242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

Not everyone who got a PS3 or 360 did so "for the graphics".

You may have noticed that the number of titles being released each year for the PS2 has dropped pretty dramatically since 2006.

NeutralGamer3241d ago

"Great Gameplay w/ Great Gameplay > Bad Graphics w/ Great Gameplay."

Dont u mean:

Great Graphics w/ Great Gameplay > Bad Graphics w/ Great Gameplay.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3241d ago
Incipio3242d ago

If the talent is there to produce great visuals along with great gameplay, I want both.

If the ability isn't there or resources limit it, then just give me good gameplay and it'll be acceptable.

kaveti66163242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

static graphics don't appeal to me.

look at Halo Reach. The graphics are better than Halo 3's, but the level of environmental interaction is the same: very limited.

Same story with Uncharted 2.

Developers satisfy the shallow graphics whores who are easily impressed by better textures.

When the Uncharted 3 trailer was released, everyone was interested in graphical improvements. Does anyone care that Uncharted 2's environments are so static that you can shoot at a lightbulb and nothing happens?

Not to bash UC2 as a game - it's fantastic, I know - but when people say, "Oh my god, this game is like real life" I shake my head.

Same thing with Gran Turismo 5 and Forza 3. The graphics are definitely improved over their predecessors, but what about full-scale destructibility? If I hit a guard-rail at 150 miles per hour why doesn't anything happen to the guard-rail? Or better yet, why don't any of the fans react with surprise? If a 2 ton vehicle smashed into a wall right in front of me I'd jump back.

It's these little observations that break the immersion for me. It's not enough for me that the graphics look great because physics interactions are what separate real life from games.

Physics and AI don't seem to have improved at the same pace as graphics has.

Caring about Visuals does make a gamer shallow. People who pay too much attention to graphics lose sight of the fact that nothing else has changed much in gaming.

We still have games where all the enemies look exactly the same (Halo, Gears, Uncharted, Call of Duty, Killzone, Resistance, Half Life, Army of Two, L4D, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Metal Gear Solid, etc.)

Voice Acting is limited. In MGS4, all the FROGs look the same, all the PMCs look the same, and there are 6 voice actors that do the voices for NPC non-boss enemies.

In Killzone 2, the Helghast are nearly all the same. Same voices, same accents, same armor.

Shooting at a tree in Crysis with a rifle with bring down the tree. Shooting at a tree in Halo with a tank does NOTHING to the tree.

Lack of reaction to pain also breaks the immersion. In Halo I can empty an entire clip into a brute and as I'm shooting him he does not clutch at the wounds. No wounds even appear. Sometimes he doesn't even run.

Same thing in Uncharted 2. I shoot an enemy in the leg and he grunts at most. Has anyone here ever been shot? If you have been you'd know that none of these shooter games are realistic.

To me, graphics is something that naturally improves. It's an almost effortlessly produced improvement. When the developers start making games with better physics and better AI, then people can use the word "realism."

A game called Soldier of Fortune 2 was released in 2002 and demonstrated a very high level of reaction from enemy AI who have been shot. That was in 2002. In the year 2010, games like Halo, Killzone 3, Uncharted 3, Mass Effect 2, and even Crysis fall short of a game made in 2002.

Graphics whores are responsible. Fuck them.

Incipio3242d ago

Soldier of Fortune 2: Double Helix is probably my favorite shooter. The incredibly realistic blood, gore and reactions are nearly unnerving.

Motion3242d ago

Heh, I just watched that video. Memories, memories.

IcarusOne3242d ago

Kaveti, well said. Really well said. Bubbles.

I wouldn't call them shallow per se, but I do think we're getting to a point where if that's all you can say about a game, that it's pretty, then the game isn't really delivering much.

DaTruth3242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

What you're currently proposing is outside of any developers technological and programming ability and what is would come with NES graphics. We're not shallow, we're just not stupid! Why would we bother getting upset over something that's not currently possible?

I will be upset about this stuff when it isn't on my PS6 games! Like PS1 not only came with improved graphics, but also 3-dimensional gameplay, but we never saw any 3-dimensional gameplay with NES graphics on the previous consoles and PS1 had better graphics!

Procedural programming techniques just haven't evolved that far yet!

MidnytRain3242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

Saying Uncharted's enviornments are static is just... Uncharted 2 has some of the most responsive enviornments to be seen in a game. The way snow and water react to and affect Drake is impressive. And how you can shoot pottery apart piece by piece could be considered overboard. Uncharted 2's enviornments are VERY detailed (not just graphically). If UC2 has static enviornments, then so do 99% of games available today. Just my two cents.
Also, when you say graphics naturally improve, you make it seem like it DOESN'T take a super-dedicated and talented team like Naughty Dog to make it happen. Plus, if all those little things somehow break your immersion, I can't imagine you enjoying games like the rest of us.

kaveti66163242d ago

Uncharted 2 was an example. I know that there are other static games. I mentioned Halo.

You're being a little too defensive.

Uncharted 2's environments are VERY static. You just mentioned only two ways in which they are not.

"Plus, if all those little things somehow break your immersion, I can't imagine you enjoying games like the rest of us."

You're creepy. Who are "us"?

I just mentioned ways in which games can be better. You're content getting butthurt because I criticized a game you adore in an unhealthy manner.

MidnytRain3241d ago (Edited 3241d ago )

I figured I wouldn't drag on with a list of everything I could think of. The point is Uncharted is one of the best at what it does. If that's not good enough for you, then almost nothing else is. Just because I disagree with you (strongly) does not mean I'm "butthurt".
P.S. When I said "the rest of us", I meant us gamers who thoroughly enjoyed UC2.

Also, it doesn't make sense to impress expectations from other games onto another if that game is not meant to be that way. UC2 did almost everything right. How did you want to interact with the enviornments? Destructibility? It's a cover-based shooter, so that wouldn't work out well, considering how the game plays. Gun down some trees? Why? With an AK-47? The game does everythng it's supposed to do.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3241d ago
Arup023242d ago

I don't care about graphics. I still go back and play old DOS games, They are better than most of these games released nowadays. But if you going to make a game on the 360,PC or PS3, the game need to have nice graphics. We're not in the 8bit era anymore. The gamers are demanding more and more each day. But the devs need to know that gameplay is more important than graphics.

Highlife3242d ago

"True, it was impossible for me to run GTA IV in my PC. I had to change the Catalyst options but the result was the graphics worst than the console versions. GTA IV is a problem on PC."
Your words

Thought you didn't care about graphics????

Arup023242d ago (Edited 3242d ago )

No i dont care AT ALL. I bough GTA IV after i finished my game on the 360. I just wanted to see if my card would run the game. And if you don't believe in me, i can show some pics of thousands of DOS games that i have here... Graphics are just a minor part of the game imo. If you want for me to clarify something more, feel free to send me a PM.

@Below Yes, i said this because i like to run games at a decent frame rate, a thing that you can do better on PC. Now tell me: WHAT THE FUCK do the FPS rate have to do with the graphics? You should learn a bit more about PC's dude.

" everthing else will be the same. " No. You can Mod games on PC, you can tweak games to have a better performance... Wow, what are you point here? I think you never played in a PC before. As i said before, feel free to send me a PC if you want to continue this talk.

Highlife3242d ago

"Now it's time for the superior version show up."

You said this in a Red Dead coming to pc post.

The only thing that can change is graphics everthing else will be the same.

Who are you trying to kid by saying you don't care about graphics

Highlife3242d ago

"WHAT THE FUCK do the FPS rate have to do with the graphics? You should learn a bit more about PC's dude."

a lot ever notice upping the graphical quality your fps dip???

And good for you and your dos games that is just great and has nothing to do with you liking or not liking graphics. I still love burger time on intelivision.

Gameplay FPS Graphics that is the order i like but I do want the game to look good too.

Trroy3242d ago

Eh, sorry. Depending on how much you value visuals, it can indeed qualify you as shallow or narrow-minded, IMO.

They're a perk, and nothing more. Many of the best games on the market today do not have the best visuals, and they don't need them to be the best, either.

Show all comments (39)
The story is too old to be commented.