Bethesda: People Who Say Graphics "Don't Matter" Are Usually Lying

[Karma168]

Sure Graphics are important - try playing liberty city or San Andreas after playing GTA4 - but by now we've hit the pinnacle; graphics can't really get better or more realistic so AAA titles shouldn't waste time and money trying to squeeze better graphics into their games. Just put in decent graphics and spend your money on a decent writing staff and voice cast; i don't care if your game has amazing backgrounds, if the stuff in the front is shite the games a bust.

 

[Taxman1]

Graphics can take different meanings.
To me, Minecraft looks as good as Crysis due to its respective context. Then theres extremely grey and dull games that turn me off, even if the polycount is higher than the population of Canada.

 

[I forgot]

Bullshit. I'm not lying nor are the millions of people who play minecraft. Of course he says this since he's an immersion whore. What good is immersion for a boring game? Developers are continually wasting their time making sure you can see every pore of skin or grain of sand and sometimes in vain because it ends up ugly looking anyway.

 

[KalosCast]

You guys do realize that he's 99% talking about Marketing, right? About how graphics are a game's way of making its first impression on a consumer. Whether they're impressive on a technical level (like Crysis) or on an artistic level (like Braid), the appearance of the game is going to be the first thing that you notice. He mentions immersion too, but people don't get immersed in a game they don't play.

 

[bpm195]

In a way he's right from a marketing perspective. I've rarely looked at screenshots of a game with unimpressive graphics and really been wowed by what I saw. However, usually I become interested in a game because of descriptions of it either in some article or a friend describing of it. I've never investigated a game that a friend recommended and put it down because the graphics were inadequate. Quite to the contrary I've put down a few games because the graphics were outside of what my PC can comfortably handle.

 

[Delock]

Why hello old PS1 classics. I'm sorry, but apparently I can't play you any more because Bethesda says I'm lying when I say I have fun with you despite poor graphics.

Oh, and SotC, you're no longer my favorite game as you've aged just a bit too much, which obviously breaks immersion, despite that being the point of the large empty world that you separate yourself from after the desolation proves too much, only for you to be left with "YOU BASTARD!" feelings at yourself for that last colossus fight.

Demon's Souls also apparently sucks due to the fact that while the background is nice, the detail of the character models, which are mostly unnoticeable due to clever camera angles are severely lacking.


Ok, yes Bethesda has a bit of a point in dealing with graphics and games that depend on realism immersion (such as Fallout 3, where graphical glitchs slashed into the immersion that was the only part of the game I liked), and they do matter enough that they can be a pet peeve or detract away from the overall experience of the game, but this doesn't mean they're everything or that everyone who says that is just trying to say that to be nice.

Imagine games as a cake. Graphics are the icing, the thing you see first and what will define the game to anyone first viewing it. Sure there are delicious cakes that you'll remember the taste over the appearance, but you'll always remember if the icing of that delicious cake was rather poorly applied. You'll also remember the horrid tasting cake with perfect icing.

However, you probably won't remember the average tasting cake with better than normal icing, unless it's got a strange design to it.

Now I'm hungry...

 

[Chibz]

Okay, so you're telling me that in 2011 if the gameplay were better, you would pick a basketball game that looked like this...

[http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/image/19691/basketball/29687/]


...over a basketball game that looked like this?




They're not the only piece of the puzzle, but they are an important piece just like everything else. They don't even have to be great, just believeable. But this notion that they don't matter at all is just ludacris.

Actually, I am. If the gameplay in the first game were vastly superior to the second game's gameplay I wouldn't even bat an eye at it.

 

[BrionJames]

if the game is well made and at least sort of close to current gen graphics than no, graphics don't matter. I still really enjoy Daggerfall. Plus I think its kind of a shit example to compare atari graphics to even semi modern games. Gameplay mechanics and story are really what draw me in to a game. Gear of War is a series of games that has shyte writing and characters but the gameplay mechanics are so damn fun that it doesn't matter.

 

[Olrod]

Squaresoft's games on the SNES prove you're wrong. Or should I say, "prove you're lying" Mr. Hines?

 

[Jennacide]

Dear Mr Hines,

Bullshit. The people, like myself, that say graphics don't make the game aren't lying. We aren't always finishing the sentence maybe, but we aren't lying. You want a few examples? Here are some beautiful games that almost nobody cared about:
Risen, Metro 2033, and Dirt 2.

Now I'm not saying any are bad games. I happen to rather like Risen and Metro 2033. The point is this: they look very good, and sold very poorly. That's one half of what the "Graphics don't matter" crowd is saying. The other half of the statement is: "Style is MORE IMPORTANT." Again, here are some games that used style to be of a lower visual quality, but are still enjoyable to look at it because of it:
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, Jet Set Radio, Vagrant Story, EARTHBOUND.

Wind Waker can stand up to any modern game and still look good while being behind a generation; Jet Set Radio also looks great still to this day. Vagrant Story adopted an interesting style that makes it still look crisp and striking, even when it's models and textures show their age. And hell, Earthbound is 20 years old now, and is STILL more charming than any game released in those 20 years, other than Mother 3, it's own sequel.

Graphics DON'T matter. Style does. It's why games that use things like UE3 are so forgettable visually, because while they have good graphics they also are so commonplace now we don't care. Not to mention there will always be a newer engine that is pushing realism to top whatever previous games went for realism like Skyrim is. Amusingly, the one that will blow Skyrim away is owned by your very company. Go talk to John Carmac about Rage, IT knocked my socks off with presentation. Skyrim didn't do anything new.

 

[Neverhoodian]

Given that one of my favorite games of all time looks like this,

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Hines.

I'm just hoping Skyrim will have more varied locales than Oblivion did. Morrowind might not look as pretty, but its otherworldly environments were far more immersive than its successor.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

Good graphics are always good,but they shouldn't be the main focus when making a game.

The gameplay and the plot should be the priorities before anything else if you ask me.If the gamers that play the game will have fun and be immersed in the plot,then having beautiful graphics will just add more to the overall "epic"-ness of the game.

My 2 cents

 

[TheBaron87]

Good job Mr. Hines, I see the entire gaming community shares is made up of a single archtype that share all core values.

Idiot. Most people are swayed by graphics. Most does not mean all. Of course, Bethesda is dependant on people who buy for graphics since their games are such ass.

 

[CommanderKirov]

Minecraft says hi.

 

[hermes]

Graphics care only when they are not good. We are at a point where AAA and AA games are expected to have great graphics, especially in certain genres...
If you don't want to care about graphics, work arround it with alternative concepts other than realism. Games like Limbo and Okami are not among the best looking games out there, but are among the most gorgeous.

 

[MorganL4]

Well, to be honest..... Graphics don't matter as long as the game is fun.
For example: MINECRAFT. That said Bethesda generally has more than 1 guy working on a game
at any time. So, we do expect a little more from them.

 

[luckycharms8282]

I completely agree with Hines. Graphics are usually the make or break in whether people will buy a game or not. My choices in games dont completely ride on graphics, but they are important.

 

[Carnagath]

I have to agree with some of the above posters, that art design is what matters, not graphical horsepower. I felt more immersed and also actually marvelled more at some of Planescape Torment's locations on my recent playthrough, than I did with Dragon Age.