People that criticize games purely on graphics

[Jibblejab]

The blocks are nearly all uniform sizes with little variation.

That line caught my eye, thats like complaining about lego because all the blocks are the same and neatly fit together. Do the walls on my house offend you because they are all the same shape?

Back on topic, aside from games (like Minecraft) where the art style is an integral part of the game where it cant be changed graphics are reasonably important. Today its not difficult to have a good looking game and if you could play an RPG where everything looks realistic or an RPG where everything looks like arse then you would chose the good one, unless you're visually challenged prehaps.

Its fine if you are making bricks or whatever, but rocks, trees, the ground, etc. They aren't made of uniform pieces that fit together nicely (unless you want to get down to the atomic level). The game doesn't even bother to have parallelograms and such to even try and emulate this fact. Everything is just the same size square. It works, but to me its lazy.

On the art style side I think that actually its just the way minecraft is, but on an actual developer side, I see Notch as the laziest ponce who ever ponce past the poncing parlour. Whatever that means, he just doesnt really add anything substantial to the game compared to what modders do for free.

 

[Robert Ewing]

Deny it all you want, but Graphics are vital to the playability of a game. Quite a large number of consumers of games take graphics into account more so than any other aspect of the game.

It's only seasoned veterans like escapist forum posters, and some others that realize that a game is a form of art not in the way it looks, but the story, the lore, the aesthetics, and every other aspect. Graphics included.

 

[Tdc2182]

Never heard someone actually judge a game purely based on graphics. I'm pretty sure it's just a giant over exaggeration that we like to point out when someone doesn't like the way our favorite game looks, and then we immediately assume that they have bad taste because we think we're more artistically inclined.

"Oh, he likes Call of Duty? Phht... I'm better at video game than him."

 

[TheDooD]

Good graphics should be the mere icing on the cake, not the whole bloody cake mix

This right here. this is why I still love 2D, Sprite stylization and Cel Shading.

OT

I heard from somebody I know that they didn't like Warhammer 40k Space Marine because it didn't look realistic compared to Gears of War 3.

 

[Fishehh]

Like I say every time one of my friends starts talking about Borderlands and how amazing it is, I say "Well, the graphics make my eyes bleed, so I never got past the part where you're walking around a dusty place with one of the 3 guns". It isn't unreasonable to judge games on their graphics alone, like if you don't like how it looks, it makes it a lot harder to enjoy it. I can't play minecraft for this reason, squares just don't appeal to me.

 

[Xanadu84]

Oh please, you are comparing apples and oranges. Black and White movies do show color, by having different shades. Cartoons can have downright excessive amounts of detail if an artist is willing to put the time in. Limbo falls under the black and white movie clause. Minecraft's lack of detail is only "purposeful" in that its easy. The minecraft worlds are very large, so lots of detail would bog the game down. I understand that. However, that doesn't excuse the graphics for being poor.

I'm really not comparing Apples to Oranges. It doesn't matter if your talking about Music, Movies, Comics, Paintings or Games, there is always occasions where less is more. Black and white movies do not "Show color. They imply certain aspects of color with shading and context, while the viewer has to fill in the mental blanks because they have access to LESS DETAIL. Interestingly, a lot of artistic mileage comes from black and white, even when the option of color exists, in spite of the fact that black and white started as a limit of the technology of the time. Limitations were turned into strengths, and theres no reason that can't work in games as well.

Comics are an even better example. Lots of detail is frequently a big stylistic mess, while stark, simple, well thought out drawing can bring about a huge emotional response. If you, personally, by your individual taste, want Minecraft to have more detail, well, find a texture pack. But the choice of leaving a lack of detail is an intentional one made for a very specific and rational reason.

Besides, countless people love Minecraft's aesthetic choices. They enjoy the creative freedom that comes from a less cluttered aestetic. The fact that so many people enjoy the style, well, that's a pretty undeniable argument against your position. Who are you to say that other people are wrong for liking a style?

 

[No_Remainders]

Is there something wrong with liking good graphics? And to be fair, Minecrafts graphics do look like crap. That is completely right.

There is a problem with liking ONLY good graphics, and judging games entirely based on that, because it means that you'll eat any shit that's spoon-fed to you as long as it's polished a bit (the original Crysis, for example, was a horrible game). For Minecraft, HD texture packs are awesome like that, though I actually quite enjoy the graphics of Minecraft as it is.

OT: Yeah, people who judge games on how they look are fucking morons. Terraria is by far one of the most enjoyable games I've played all year, but my brother came in while I was playing and said "Oh that looks so shit, why don't you play Crysis 2?"

I have no problem with Crysis 2, but fuck off, I'm playing Terraria and it's much more fun than Crysis 2 is.

 

[Coranico]

There isn't really anything wrong with liking more realistic graphics but i hate it when some people who very rarely play anything other than CoD (i'm not stereotyping, i actually know people who do this) ***** at me for playing games like Borderlands and Wind Waker, saying that the graphics are cartoons which could run on an N64. This is made even worse by the general understanding of how a game engine works is about as low as it can be in these people.

An extract from a conversation with friend of mine, he's stupid, but a friend nonetheless. This took place shortly after he'd beaten the Black Ops campaign.

Him- "I don't really like this one the graphics are cartoony."

Me- "Come again? They're exactly the same as WaW if not better."

(note i do not consider them to be amazing either but they're about as far from cartoony as you can get without being a Tarantino film)

Him- "Yeah but they're not as good as MW2"

Me- "So that means they're cartoony?"

Him- "Yeah."

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

By the time I got Morrowind, it was dated. And I did not care. In other words: its idiotic to judge a game sorely on graphics. A game with bad graphics can easily be one of the best out there. On the other hand, a game with great graphics can be a steaming pile of shit. Sure, nice graphics are always a good bonus, but they do not make the game.

 

[TitanAtlas]

Nothing wrong with criticising graphics as long as you make allowances for age.

For instance; Red Alert 3? Didn't like the cartoon style. Bioshock? Looks like everything's been dipped in vaseline. Duels of the Planeswalkers? Do we need that much whooshing and sparkle to play a card game?

To be honest if a game's graphics are crap then it does ruin the feel of the game.

I think it's more of a question that if the gameplay matches the graphics.... for example Psychonauts... it doesn't have the best graphics, but the art-style balances in wich is a great humorous game.

Even though people say "screw graphics", everyone has to admit, lack of certain elements on a game, can weaken you're opinion in it.

Also hate when companies downgrade the graphics "For a different and fresh feel to the game"... that is just a stupid thing to do... i agree with you on Red Alert 3!!!

And the Darkness 2... sure looks like fun, but the graphics take out the seriousness of the game itself, with a cartoonish look.

 

[adrakonis]

Well, you can judge a game based on graphics. For me, the best examples are planescape: torment, Baldur's gate series, the fallout series up to 2. What do al these games have in common?

They give me headaches when I look at them. I've heard they are fantastic games and I like RPG's. The story in most of them was interessting. As far as I got, but you can't play games if they give you physical pain. The same can be said about some music. It's nice, but it hurts my head...

Strange now I think about it...

 

[The Hero Killer]

Graphics are what give me my first impression on a game, if the gameplay and artstyle are good enough then I can look past it but if its supposed to be some kind of realistic game like a FPS and it has bad graphics I wont want to play.

I can tell you this... I enjoyed the PC version of Dragon Age: Origins 200 times more than the console version, and 50% of the reason why was because of the better graphics the other 50 was because of the mods.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Besides, countless people love Minecraft's aesthetic choices. They enjoy the creative freedom that comes from a less cluttered aestetic. The fact that so many people enjoy the style, well, that's a pretty undeniable argument against your position. Who are you to say that other people are wrong for liking a style?

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html

Not the right way to argue your point boyo. And I never said anyone was wrong for liking Minecraft's graphics. I just said that they were bad. Who are you to say that I'm wrong for not liking them?

 

[Gay Luigi]

Okay, let's say that in the near future Graphics will be 100% life-like. Meaning you won't be able to distinguish virtual from reality. Would we REALLY use that in our games ? We have the technology, so why not ? But then what ?...
...nothing much to say about the future / importance of graphics then, is there?

At any rate, gamers also enjoy different games for different reasons, but a point of view is a point of view and I think I've expressed mine on the matter quite neatly :3

 

[crystalsnow]

I criticize games that do base their experience purely on graphics.

 

[Fishyash]

IMO, graphics objectively make a game better. However, grahpics don't objectively make a game GOOD.

And you can have good grahpics but terrible art design. And that sucks.

 

[Broomy Broomfield]

I feel that Valves source engine has all ways been a good indicator of what the average realism oriented game should look like at time of release. because they all ways find the sweet spot, so that a decent computer can run there games so that the visuals look good and not get there graphics card but-fucked.

 

[sindremaster]

IMO, graphics objectively make a game better. However, grahpics don't objectively make a game GOOD.

And you can have good grahpics but terrible art design. And that sucks.

I would just like to point out that "IMO" and "objectively" shouldn't be in the same sentence.