do you care about game graphics ?

[Amarok]

Yes and no. I don't care how many polygons were used to make this tree to make it looking so damn realistic. But I do care if clever shading, lighting and effects and general art direction have helped make this virtual forest look damn beautiful. Catch my drift?

 

[CapnGod]

Anyone who says no is lying. Graphics are important but they are not the MOST important thing. Solid gameplay is the key, and that can be built in any number of ways. If your gameplay is solid, you can present it with low quality graphics and still have a memorable game on your hands. If you slap in some incredibly fancy graphics, well it's like the cream cheese icing on the mayonayse cake.

And how do you explain the popularity or MUDs or games like Zork? Graphics free, man. Still popular. Also, Second Edition AD&D. We didn't have graphics or miniatures. Still loved the game. In fact, there's a couple of computer games on my desk right now, and I itch more to play AD&D than one I could throw in my disc tray right now.

So, not important. Nice, enjoyable, and a beautifully rendered game is most definitely something to behold, but not essential. Hell, look at Geometry Wars. Those are old school graphics with some color. No fancy rendering needed. Just a fun game.

I'll admit I appreciate graphics, but I've enjoyed a game on the Wii with its last gen graphics, and I've hated beautiful games on the 360 or the PS3. Hell, I just installed Dune 2000 on my computer. Thinking about picking up the Command & Conquer 12 pack. Do graphics on those games makes them enjoyable?

They can be fun, they can help, but they are not the end all be all of gaming, despite the bitching you hear out of reviewers.

 

[Xpwn3ntial]

It depends upon the game. Mario games, not really. The games don't need next-gen graphics. Concerning most games, they couldn't hurt, but they're not vital.

 

[jad4400]

I perfer good story telling, but I do definentaly care about graphics.

 

[Trisk]

I care about the functionality of graphics. Does it mean the game is now 3D with real time sword swinging? Then the graphics are good. Is it a slideshow of pretty pictures? Graphics suck.

 

[KaZZaP]

Worms is one of my favorite games so I'd have to say no.

 

[willgreg123]

To be honest? No, I do not care about mind blowing graphics. A good game should be able to stand on its own, even if it's made entirly in MS paint. The reason I say this, I know this isn't a game but it has many game elements to it, We Are The Strange.

It's a masterpiece of cinema in my book and partly because it has the balls to not render itself in perfect graphics to make you go "Oooo, shiny 3D!" and it stands on its own.

 

[irishstormtrooper]

Graphics should be good, but they don't make or break a game. If a game is amazing and has terrible graphics, that's all fine, and I'd rather have that than a game that sucks but has amazing graphics. Good graphics can make a good game better, but not a bad game good.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

Good graphics count. That doesnt mean a game with bad graphics is bad but graphics are a quality. I'm playing fallout 3 and i am constantly amazed by the graphics. Graphics csn be good even without realism in the case of of team fortress 2.

 

[Sparrow]

I play Fable: TLC more than any other game I own. So no.

 

[y8c616]

I didn't care before I got a XBox 360, but now they're sort of a requirement for me, which is unfortunate.. I just can't appreciate some games the same as I used to.

If you care that much about graphics, then why get a 360? It's a well known fact that the ps3 has superior graphical capabilities.
And dont mistake my post as mere flaming against the 360, it's a good console, with some great games. I am merely pointing out technical specifications

 

[TMAN10112]

I care more about art-direction/style then graphics, so as long as a game is fun bad graphics don't bother me much (to a certain extent).

 

[CapnGod]

I have some fond memories of playing Quake Team Fortress in high school. Shitty graphics, awesome game. Loads of fun. I suppose for the time, though, they weren't shitty graphics.

 

[TMAN10112]

I didn't care before I got a XBox 360, but now they're sort of a requirement for me, which is unfortunate.. I just can't appreciate some games the same as I used to.

If you care that much about graphics, then why get a 360? It's a well known fact that the ps3 has superior graphical capabilities

Why buy a PS3 when you could build your own gaming PC? Not even the PS3 can stand up to the "PC gaming master race".

 

[CapnGod]

I didn't care before I got a XBox 360, but now they're sort of a requirement for me, which is unfortunate.. I just can't appreciate some games the same as I used to.

If you care that much about graphics, then why get a 360? It's a well known fact that the ps3 has superior graphical capabilities

Why buy a PS3 when you could build your own gaming PC (Crysis for the win!)? Not even the PS3 can stand up to the "PC gaming master race".

Because I built a pretty sweet computer for a little more than $600, but I had the keyboard, monitor, mouse, and speakers already. And the computer I want to build from scratch, well, anyone want to give me $3,300?

 

[Kajt]

To a certain degree, I can't stand the graphics of FFVII.

 

[CapnGod]

Also, I suppose the graphics of the era when you started playing games probably has something to do with whether you're a graphics whore or not. I mean, we had some ultra shitty football game on our Apple IIe which was almost entirely text based. I loved Centipede. If you started playing games that had little to no graphical enhancement, it's probably easier to enjoy a game regardless of the graphics.

 

[TMAN10112]

I didn't care before I got a XBox 360, but now they're sort of a requirement for me, which is unfortunate.. I just can't appreciate some games the same as I used to.

If you care that much about graphics, then why get a 360? It's a well known fact that the ps3 has superior graphical capabilities

Why buy a PS3 when you could build your own gaming PC (Crysis for the win!)? Not even the PS3 can stand up to the "PC gaming master race".

Because I built a pretty sweet computer for a little more than $600, but I had the keyboard, monitor, mouse, and speakers already. And the computer I want to build from scratch, well, anyone want to give me $3,300?

Since when did price become a factor in this discussion? The point I was creating was that the PC is graphically superior to the most advanced console. I assumed that cost wan't a factor.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Good graphics can help, but are not important enough for me to keep playing a game just for the graphics. Best examples are Assassin's Creed and Far Cry 2, they both look stunning but I don't touch them anymore. I also enjoy Simcity 3000 a lot, building a city while listening to those easy jazz tunes, good stuff.

But one of the best examples of a "graphics don't matter" game must be Dwarven Fortress. That game is insanely detailed (down to the molecular information of materials used for, for example, making weapons) but in basic it uses graphics based on text. You can upgrade to spreadsheat, 16-bit (I think) graphics, but dámn that game is amazing (too amazing for me actually). To quote someone playing it:

To be perfectly honest, i'm glad, in a way, that the game doesn't have much better graphics, i have less than 100 Dwarfs and its using 25-30% of my Q6600, its pretty damn hefty.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

graphical design is better than powerful graphics in my opinion. Style and presentation trumps photo-realism in my opinion. But it is nice to see games that are pushing photo-realism, as long as the gameplay is still good.

Gameplay always comes first. Graphics can make a good game great, or a good game merely tolerable.