Death to Good Graphics!

[marco75]

I was surprised when people said "Godhand was great, even though the graphics were shit". How are the graphics bad, exactly? The character designs are cool, it runs at a high framerate, the environments are varied and interesting, and the animation fluid and believable.

I think the proper statement would be "Godhand's graphics are not cutting-edge".

 

[Estocavio]

I like realistically inclined graphics - But thats mainly because i dislike most other kinds.

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

I think developers are taking a graphical time out. The current gen systems are about 5 or 6 years old at this point and if you go back and do the math. thats the average time between console generations. But all the major companies have stated they have no intention of coming out with a new generation of games anytime soon. It looks like there sticking things out until they see a return on the current gen systems...which is fine with me.

So it would seem you have a point and developers are agreeing with you.

 

[s0p0g]

@ Shamus Young: to make a long story short: amen to that

@ Credge: pretty much the same over here; i play lots of "indie" games for the pc (*cough* steam *cough), or i play games (that actually deserve the name, rather than "eye-candy" or "graphic-demo" or "60$-beta-test") for handhelds (mostly nds) - why? because they are actually all about the gameplay, NOT the graphics; games are not things invented to test the limits of GPUs. a benchmark absolutely does the job.

 

[Allan53]

I'm not a hardcore gamer (one of those who fall in the middle between "casual" and "hardcore", but that's another topic for another time), but isn't what you suggest more or less what indie game companies do? Focussing on innovation rather then ever-so-slightly-prettier graphics?