People that criticize games purely on graphics

Funky Flump

New member
Jun 24, 2010
121
0
0
If they are judging a modern game with a heavy focus on graphics then that's fine. I expect Call Of Duty and Battlefield (As Examples) to look nice and shiny, if not, expect me to criticise! But I dont think you can ever judge a game entirely on anything! But I have many friends who instantly think some games are awful as soon as they here the title. Example "Im exited Catherine is coming soon" "Looks shit" "You dont even know what it is!" "Still shit" My stupid friends, annoy me so much sometimes.
 

Odbarc

Elite Member
Jun 30, 2010
1,155
0
41
SpaceArcader said:
This probably comes up on the forums a lot but I am sick and tired of people who judge games by the aesthetic side.

For example, I stayed over a friend's house where he was having a group party. He started to play Minecraft and then two people blurted out "Eurgh those graphics look sh*t" I replied back that graphics don't make the game it's all about the enjoyment but they ignored my sentence completely.

Mind you, these people are casuals and claim that the best game is the latest CoD/ Fifa/ Madden on the market.

So if you can post your experiences of hatred by other people.

EDIT: Dont get me wrong, graphics heighten the setting and can sometimes make or break a game but criticising the quality of graphics only and nothing else is a bit unfair.
These people play games that haven't changed mechanically in 20 years. Graphics are all that does change.
Sports games, first person shooters. Stupid games.
 

Sougo

New member
Mar 20, 2010
634
0
0
Bad graphics are bad, but fun games are fun.

Doesn't this statement resolve this thread?
 

Ordinaryundone

New member
Oct 23, 2010
1,568
0
0
Zhukov said:
Ordinaryundone said:
You can have a pixelated art style that doesn't look bad. Super Meat Boy looks great, and its all done in pixels. As do most 16-bit platformers. Minecraft, on the other hand, looks terrible.
Terrible is a relative term.

You say Minecraft looks terrible. Someone else says it looks nice. What makes you right?
*shrug* Nothing really. But all reviews are subjective, so really nothing makes the other person right either. Its a completely circular argument. That said, Minecraft's textures aren't very detailed and it's only shapes are blocks. I understand that the company making it is small, but that doesn't mean I have to say it looks good. Because, objectively, there are lots of other games under similar limitations that look better.
 

KennardKId5

New member
May 26, 2011
128
0
0
Ah, the return of the stupids. Even if they get into Minecraft, they still want guns in it.
 

omicron1

New member
Mar 26, 2008
1,729
0
0
TheKasp said:
But this is not the graphics, its the aesthetics... And to be honest: In my opinion the aesthetics of most modern FPS is shit compared with FPS like TF2, HL2 and Gothic.
...FPS like Gothic?

Gothic? You mean, 2001-ish third-person action RPG Gothic? That's an "FPS"?


...Anyway, a large part of the problem is when a game depends on being better than its contemporaries in terms of graphical technology or polygon pushing. Certainly, this puts a shiny veneer on it for a while - remember how good games like Metal Gear Solid 2 or Call of Duty 2 looked when they first came out? - but over time the effect wears off. Five years later, we're left looking at a relic, a game missing both style and technological competency. This is what happened to many games from the early '00s and late '90s - left behind by the advance of polygon counts and shader techniques. This is what has happened to certain games from even the most recent generation - just look at Oblivion today and try to remember how perfect it looked back in 2005 and '06! Technology has moved on, and the game just doesn't have the style to stand on its own.
 

ultimateownage

This name was cool in 2008.
Feb 11, 2009
5,346
0
41
Yes, I hate those people. I also hate the people who never shut up about how some people are so 'materialistic' just because they dislike that art style, and insist that it doesn't make a game but then proceed to argue about how pretty the games are anyway.
Everything makes a game, you can say one bit is more important than the other but at the end of the day if one bit was missing then it would be a sub-par game.
 

Subwayeatn

New member
Jan 28, 2011
126
0
0
i had a couple of friends that judged a game based on who their killing. :(
From what they talked about, it seemed like Homefront and CoD were the best.

There was no talking sense into them, ANYTHING i said got the same reply: "But there's Korean's in Homefront, or Russian's in CoD."
 

Life_Is_A_Mess

New member
Sep 10, 2009
536
0
0
I can't stand people who say if a game is good or bad just by looking at the graphics. People that ignorant shouldn't even be allowed to play games. And plus, I don't even care about the graphics if the artstyle of a game is original. Graphics do improve the gameplay, but they aren't the whole game.
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
I think it depends on the game.

There's a lot of games for which graphics are a secondary concern and gameplay, story and characters are much, much more important.

But there are also a number of games that make or break depending on their graphics, mainly in the FPS genre. Can you really say Crysis would've been Crysis without it's, at that time, superior graphics? Of course graphics aren't the only important thing for these games but it is right there at the top and the success of these games does depend on their graphics.
 

Tallim

New member
Mar 16, 2010
2,054
0
0
I don't mind people ragging on graphics so much providing they will at least try the "game" as well. If they won't at least give a game then it annoys me.

For instance as much as I love the original Deus Ex it has not aged well at all in terms of looks.
 

James Crook

New member
Jul 15, 2011
546
0
0
Well, I'd just like to refer you all to one episode of Extra Credits, the one about Graphics & Aesthetics. (How do I embed videos from The Escapist weekly issues on the forums?)
Take a look at Team Fortress 2 runs on Source: a comfortable, highly modifiable, open engine which isn't exactly top-of-the-line graphics-wise thus far (knowing Valve likes making nifty engine updates like the EP2 engine), but allows for beautiful settings and aesthetics, such as the aforementioned game, a prime example of "aesthetics over graphics". It's not the greatest-looking game on the market, it doesn't sport these fancy lighting effects or high-quality self-animated foliage we see in games such as Crysis, but it still looks fairly good thanks to the cartoonish setting and feel, helped by the special shaders ("lightwarps" is the technical term for the engine).
Now, about Minecraft: the game, graphics-wise, isn't the most technically-advanced in the history of gaming, either, but the "blockiness" isn't related to graphics at all: it's an aesthetics (and art, and design) choice, which accommodates for the gameplay itself (i.e. placing blocks). Minecraft does allow for higher-resolution textures and higher-poly models however, meaning you CAN make the game look better.
 

Alphakirby

New member
May 22, 2009
1,255
0
0
Evil Top Hat said:
SpaceArcader said:
Mind you, these people are casuals and claim that the best game is the latest CoD/ Fifa/ Madden on the market.
Oh god... just kill... it's kinder that way

I was speaking to a friend recently about video games, and he claimed that COD: Black Ops was the height of what humans can achieve in regards to video games (with wording that made barely any sense).

A little part of me died.


Humanity has officially failed.
May apocalypse save the smart ones and leave the retards to die in the eternal inferno of suffering.
 

Ryuu Akamatsu

New member
Feb 26, 2009
137
0
0
My stance has and always will be "Aesthetics over graphics" and "Graphics=/=Aesthetics"

A lot of people don't get that second one. For example, I said to a friend that I thought Okami was a beautiful looking game. They wen on to say that the graphics were bad, highlighting the painting look of the world, lack of detail on faces and some of the simple character designs. When I explained to him what aesthetics were and told him it's supposed to look like an old japanese painting, he had no other response besides a "It's still got worse graphics."

I really hate those kinds of people.
 

Proverbial Jon

Not evil, just mildly malevolent
Nov 10, 2009
2,093
0
0
this isnt my name said:
Idiots.
"Reach charracters ar better than ODST, everyone in ODST is ugly". Yes that was his argument.
Goodness me... that person should not be allowed near video games! I mean, did he seriously call those walking battle suits in Reach... characters? That's the last thing any of them had. I kid, I kid! I loved all the Halo games but that's a pretty poor reason to condemn ODST, which is one of my favourites.

OT: I used to be what one of my friends termed as a "graphics whore" because I couldn't get me enough of them shiny graphics! But nowadays pretty much everything looks great so the effect has worn off. I would never have turned a bad looking game down but I was mesmerised by the latest achievements in graphical fidelity.

Some of the games I thought looked amazing (Max Payne at the time) look pretty average about now but it doesn't stop me having fun with them. But I have played a lot of older games lately that don't look amazing but are a really fun experience that I have missed out on previously. Tail Concerto (PS1) and The Longest Journey (PC) being two stand out titles.
 

MasTerHacK

New member
Apr 15, 2009
243
0
0
"People that criticize games purely on graphics"

...are called idiots.
/thread

Graphics was always the least of my worries. Gameplay is THE. MOST. IMPORTANT. PART. in any game.
 

Alphakirby

New member
May 22, 2009
1,255
0
0
Hagi said:
I think it depends on the game.

There's a lot of games for which graphics are a secondary concern and gameplay, story and characters are much, much more important.

But there are also a number of games that make or break depending on their graphics, mainly in the FPS genre. Can you really say Crysis would've been Crysis without it's, at that time, superior graphics? Of course graphics aren't the only important thing for these games but it is right there at the top and the success of these games does depend on their graphics.
I guess you have a point,without it's shiny looks,people would've dismissed it as an average first person shooter and it would've died without fanfare. Instead we now have Crysis 2 which I have heard good things about,but have not yet played.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Final Fantasy XIII. Beautiful graphics but the game is sub-standard. Combat is fun, but the rest of the game isn't worth the disc its "printed" on.
It all comes down to a balance. Graphics aren't essential in making a good game and dev's that concentrate on graphics and not on physics engines, storyline, combat or other mechanics generally make pretty looking pieces of shit.
Doesn't matter how you dress up shit, its still shit in the end. Even if it smells like roses and looks like Megan Fox.