Poll: do graphics matter to you?

[Internet Kraken]

As long as the graphics aren't "cartoony", such as the latest price of Persia, then the graphics don't matter to me.

Gameplay > Story > graphics.

I actually prefer "cartoony" graphics to more realistic graphics sometimes. They usually are much more appealing. It's one of the reasons I prefer LoZ:Wind Waker over LoZ:Twilight Princess.

Though I have seen little of the new Prince of Persia game so we may be using different definitions of "cartoony".

I always feel that the people who make a game with anything less than life like graphics (apart from things like Sonic and Mario cos that would be a little weird) are just saving money, time or effort.

Not necessarily. They could be trying to give their game a distinctive art style. Though you are probably thinking of low-budget shovel ware games, in which cheap cartoony graphics are often used to reduce the amount of money and time spent on graphics.

They may be trying to make it stand out with art, but why not make it stand out for gameplay?

I will never buy or play a game with prince of Persia style graphics, borderlands looks guilty of it as well.

Having a distinct art style doesn't necessarily mean the game play is bad. Take for example TF2. The game play is solid and entertaining, and the exaggerated cartoony art style featured in the game only further enhances the experience. It's strange that you say Borderlnads values it's appearance over it's game play; from what I've heard the game play is the most important and well-designed part of the game. Again, it's distinct art style only serves to enhance the experience.

 

[coldshadow]

lets put it this way, not everything has to be photorealistic. I personaly perfer a cartoonish feel or an diffrent style. I do like seeing graphicle gliches is photorealistic games.

 

[Pilot Bush]

I think breathtalking graphics are the on;y ones that make up for bad scripts

 

[Dapper Ninja]

I care about graphics, but not in the "Game must look ridiculously realistic or I won't touch it" way. I'm far more concerned with whether or not a game is visually appealing. If given a choice between the art styles of, say, Okami or Gears of War, I'd choose the former in less than a heartbeat. Just because Brutal Legend isn't as shiny as GTA IV doesn't mean I'll avoid it like the plague; I actually greatly prefer Brutal Legend's graphics because they're unique. I wasn't even bothered by how bad the characters looked in Final Fantasy VII because the world looked so nicely designed.

The only time I'm affected by graphics to the point that I stop playing is when the game is so ugly and unappealing to look at that I'm unable to focus on anything besides the pile of vomit in front of me or when I want to bash my character's ugly face in with a crowbar because it would be cruel to let such a monstrosity continue existing.

 

[omega 616]

Having a distinct art style doesn't necessarily mean the game play is bad. Take for example TF2. The game play is solid and entertaining, and the exaggerated cartoony art style featured in the game only further enhances the experience. It's strange that you say Borderlnads values it's appearance over it's game play; from what I've heard the game play is the most important and well-designed part of the game. Again, it's distinct art style only serves to enhance the experience.

I never said a "cartoony" style makes a game bad or effect gameplay (or story) in anyway, what I am saying is I won't buy or play a game with this style of graphics cos I personally don't like them.

I think borderlands could have been much better if they had used realistic graphics and proportions (like C.O.D) rather than the style that they chose to do it in.

 

[fluffybunny937]

gameplay first, graphics second.
Everything else is one and a half.

 

[klakkat]

Graphics are helpful; I'd much rather have good graphics. However, they are not the make-or-break quality for a game. Hell, I still play some SNES games, and I like a lot of Flash games (which obviously are not known for graphics). Gameplay fun is definitely more important, and the story, if done well, can help make up for poor graphics.

Also note that 'good graphics' doesn't mean photo-realistic. I enjoy the City of Heroes and Borderlands graphics a lot; both have a more cartoon-like appearance. For the former, this enhances the comic-book feel the game is going for. In the latter, it takes away the gritty and dark feel the game might otherwise have had, allowing for a more humorous feeling; and, most importantly for a FPS, it makes enemies much easier to see against the background.

 

[JustinOCo]

Good Graphics aren't the most important thing in a game for me, granted, I do prefer if a game I'm playing does have good graphics, but having good graphics is not a requirement for me to be able to enjoy a game

 

[ethaninja]

There are other aspects of a game that touch my eruption button, but graphics is not really one of them. Even though one of the points of a video game is for visual stimulation, we've sort of overcome that factor.

 

[Mr Thomsos]

If its a retro game like mariop or zelda then no, 2d is cool. But crappy 3d that really looks like shit, then ya!

 

[Snotnarok]

To a degree, I play older games all the time but it's the 3D games that I have a hard time going back to sometimes. They just don't age well, but if the art style shows through? Then yes I usually see right through issues like that. If that makes any sense that is. Mostly it's the gameplay that keeps me going in a game.

 

[Lilani]

It depends on if it's distracting. I was on an Earthbound kick a while back, and I found the graphics quite suitable for the game's atmosphere. They worked with what they had, and everything felt authentic.

But I remember a long, long time ago I was playing a Suikoden game, I think it was the 3rd one on the PS2. I distinctly remember those little avatars running about. It was so pathetic; whenever any of the ladies with skirts, their legs parted just as though they were just wearing pants. There were no skirt mechanics. Whenever they stood still the illusion matched up just fine. But whenever they walked it all fell apart. It was just a rental, and I never picked up the game again.

I knew it was a popular game, but after playing Final Fantasies X and X-2 I felt a bit betrayed by those last-generation tricks (the same trick was used on Aeris in Final Fantasy VII, outside of battle and high-quality cutscenes.).

 

[Stu1701]

I feel limited by only 2 options

I agree.

I don't care about graphics that much, but to a point. There a difference between sacrificing graphics for gameplay and just not putting in effort.

 

[Quadtrix]

Only in a game like Elder Scrolls, where admiring the beautiful overworld is half the fun.

 

[Ziadaine_v1legacy]

So long as they dont come out on the Wii/PS3/360/PC looking like this, i'll be fine.

 

[Noone From Nowhere]

Who here prefers Text-Based Adventure Games to the polygonal or sprite-based graphic adventures these days?
How DID we ever play the Carmen Sandiego games and Oregon Trail? (Yes, they had minimal graphic elements, but they were still text-based games at their cores.)

Another question: Where is a third or fourth option to the poll, already?!

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

Yes, they matter to me. If it's a new game, I expect graphics that wont make my eyes hurt. They aren't essential for me though.