Bethesda: People Who Say Graphics "Don't Matter" Are Usually Lying
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
I agree.
The whole point pf gaming is that it combines the mediums of audio, storytelling, interactivity and VISUALS! A truly great game should have all of these.
The whole point pf gaming is that it combines the mediums of audio, storytelling, interactivity and VISUALS! A truly great game should have all of these.
Gameplay is so much more worth it than graphics.
Few people will care about a game that has horrible gameplay. While many could get used to or don't mind bad graphics if the gameplay is really good.
Now if you have good gameplay and really good graphics, then your golden. But gameplay should be your first priority. Then maybe a story depending on the game. And then graphics.
Few people will care about a game that has horrible gameplay. While many could get used to or don't mind bad graphics if the gameplay is really good.
Now if you have good gameplay and really good graphics, then your golden. But gameplay should be your first priority. Then maybe a story depending on the game. And then graphics.
This seems to be a fairly one-sided argument, or at least it is showing that game devs really DON'T know how gamers seem to feel oftentimes.
My argument is that too much expectations are placed on game graphics when ultimately it isn't what will make or break a game, TO AN EXTENT.
I like good graphics, they certainly help, but I keep hearing people complain about graphics being crap when they look perfectly fine; I play Deus Ex 1 without complaint, because it doesn't rely on graphics for a good game-experience. If we WERE to say graphics are truly pivotal to a gaming experience, that would mean that every few years, all games made before a certain point would immediately become invalidated.
Graphics are NOT as important as many people make them out to be. If people will truly only get a game because of graphics, then they are missing what games are about, and I pity them.
To conclude, graphics are somewhat important (for example, you won't find me playing an atari game) but only to an extent, gameplay is much more important and even though story is lacking, it is more important as well.
I won't say graphics "don't matter", because that'd be an exaggeration, but they are not as important as they're made out to be.
My argument is that too much expectations are placed on game graphics when ultimately it isn't what will make or break a game, TO AN EXTENT.
I like good graphics, they certainly help, but I keep hearing people complain about graphics being crap when they look perfectly fine; I play Deus Ex 1 without complaint, because it doesn't rely on graphics for a good game-experience. If we WERE to say graphics are truly pivotal to a gaming experience, that would mean that every few years, all games made before a certain point would immediately become invalidated.
Graphics are NOT as important as many people make them out to be. If people will truly only get a game because of graphics, then they are missing what games are about, and I pity them.
To conclude, graphics are somewhat important (for example, you won't find me playing an atari game) but only to an extent, gameplay is much more important and even though story is lacking, it is more important as well.
I won't say graphics "don't matter", because that'd be an exaggeration, but they are not as important as they're made out to be.
Well that's because "graphics don't matter at all" is simply a stupid statement.
They always matter but you have a priority list, graphics need to be decent but gameplay is key, once you got that polished to a mirror shine then go spanking up the looks.
They always matter but you have a priority list, graphics need to be decent but gameplay is key, once you got that polished to a mirror shine then go spanking up the looks.
To Pete Hines, I would say "Blow me." And then quickly apologize.
Immersion is subjective. Every game is not Oblivion, Skyrim or Fallout 3 and not every person is immersed by the same visuals. Not all developers are looking for the most groundbreaking gritty brown gray-a-thon aesthetics or the highest polygon count robotic facial expressions.
At some point, you have to say "Okay, the cut-off point for graphics is *here*. Let's make sure the controls and game play are functional and entertaining."
Immersion is subjective. Every game is not Oblivion, Skyrim or Fallout 3 and not every person is immersed by the same visuals. Not all developers are looking for the most groundbreaking gritty brown gray-a-thon aesthetics or the highest polygon count robotic facial expressions.
At some point, you have to say "Okay, the cut-off point for graphics is *here*. Let's make sure the controls and game play are functional and entertaining."
IMO, graphics doesn't matter that much.
As long the graphics are decent (AKA circles are circles or at least circle-ish) and the gameplay is good the game is good.
As long the graphics are decent (AKA circles are circles or at least circle-ish) and the gameplay is good the game is good.
In comparison to newer games they're horribleArontala said:
Not that it matters, they get across the point fine and that's kind of the point of graphics (which is why minecraft is so successful, you know what everything is the instant you look at it). But in comparison to the type of graphics Bethesda is talking about, yeah, they're bad.
Bleh, Medieval: TW has nothing on the original medieval.dogstile said:In comparison to newer games they're horribleArontala said:
Not that it matters, they get across the point fine and that's kind of the point of graphics (which is why minecraft is so successful, you know what everything is the instant you look at it). But in comparison to the type of graphics Bethesda is talking about, yeah, they're bad.
That's what that game was called?MorphingDragon said:Bleh, Medieval: TW has nothing on the original medieval.dogstile said:In comparison to newer games they're horribleArontala said:
Not that it matters, they get across the point fine and that's kind of the point of graphics (which is why minecraft is so successful, you know what everything is the instant you look at it). But in comparison to the type of graphics Bethesda is talking about, yeah, they're bad.
Dude, you have no idea how long i've been trying to find that out :O
Medievil 1 & 2 for the PSOne.dogstile said:That's what that game was called?MorphingDragon said:Bleh, Medieval: TW has nothing on the original medieval.dogstile said:In comparison to newer games they're horribleArontala said:
Not that it matters, they get across the point fine and that's kind of the point of graphics (which is why minecraft is so successful, you know what everything is the instant you look at it). But in comparison to the type of graphics Bethesda is talking about, yeah, they're bad.
Dude, you have no idea how long i've been trying to find that out :O
good art direction typically trumps simply good graphics.
Of the top 20 selling games of all time an extreme minority had graphics as a selling point.
Considering Bethesda's track record I'd say that I'd worry about bugs and glitches ruining immersion before I started propping graphics as what's holding it back. How old's that gambryo engine again?
Of the top 20 selling games of all time an extreme minority had graphics as a selling point.
Considering Bethesda's track record I'd say that I'd worry about bugs and glitches ruining immersion before I started propping graphics as what's holding it back. How old's that gambryo engine again?
I wonder what percentage of responses cite Minecraft? Personally I love graphics and I am open about it as I don't feel the need to justify gaming due to less immediate elements of gaming pleasure an attempt to denote some deeper understanding of gaming.
Good graphics is in the eye of the beholder. Good is a relative term, and has nothing to do with resolution, anti-aliasing, poly count, or any technical 'oh yay we sold more graphics cards' reasons.
It's about whether the graphics fit, whether they work visually, and that, dear Mr Hines, is down to your art department, not your software developers.
So sure, good graphics make a good game. As one poster mentioned somewhere, X-Wing vs Tie Fighter, or Baldur's Gate have good graphics. Not the most detailed, and I'd not say no to improvements in them if such were possible, but it didn't stop me playing them, and more importantly, playing them today. Yes, even today.
It's about whether the graphics fit, whether they work visually, and that, dear Mr Hines, is down to your art department, not your software developers.
So sure, good graphics make a good game. As one poster mentioned somewhere, X-Wing vs Tie Fighter, or Baldur's Gate have good graphics. Not the most detailed, and I'd not say no to improvements in them if such were possible, but it didn't stop me playing them, and more importantly, playing them today. Yes, even today.