Are GRAPHICS important to you as gamer?

Karl.

I see a lot of people saying "This review is shit, all they talk about is the pretty graphics! It should be all about gameplay".


I, however have turned into a bit of a video game snob. Probably one of the main reasons I'm not enjoying the Vita so much. I do like Rayman which is bold, bright and beautiful but I couldn't enjoy assassins creed because genocidecutter is a fag and its just not up to the standards of the other AC titles graphics-wise. Also was my main problem with GTA IV which was grey as fuck.

If you make a game for a console with and OLED screen or made for Blu ray and HD they should be up to that gold standard and it pisses me off when it's not.

ocelot

I agree... Have you checked out the trailer of Killzone Vita?

And you should've known that AC... COD Vita, and Resistance would've been have ass... That's why you get Gravity Daze, Uncharted, Persona 4, etc... You got to research the games you buy and not the title Karl.

Karl.

I have to be honest I was really happy with Uncharted and I've been thinking about copping Persona 4.

I didn't fuck with Resistance and COD because I knew they would be horrible.

I'm a big fan of AC though so I just copped it. A lot of people really like it.


Killzone looks cool. Probably my next cop. May get Sly too.

Karl.

This is definitely not a Vita hate thread. The console is definitely capable as proven by various games. I may have used a bad example.


I just wanted to gauge how important graphics were to people.

ohhhla

Because games are visuals.

Graphics are part of an objective quality of games.

ocelot

Graphics are important to me... Gameplay too... Any niggas that tell you different are lying... Theyre the same niggas that leave the girl they suppose to be with for the lightskinned girl with the cute face, phat ass, but is crazy.

grumpy_new_yorker

gameplay is more important to me, but there is no reason a game should look like complete shit this day in age.

Karl.

Yeah that's what I mean. I just think its unacceptable especially with the prices they charge.
I still play and enjoy old games with shitty graphics because it was acceptable all them years ago.


You ever copped a game solely off the rep of it graphics?

I remember picking up the original Splinter Cell because the graphics were meant to be insane whilst not knowing what kind of game it was.

ohhhla

Karl. wrote: »

Yeah that's what I mean. I just think its unacceptable especially with the prices they charge.
I still play and enjoy old games with shitty graphics because it was acceptable all them years ago.


You ever copped a game solely off the rep of it graphics?

I remember picking up the original Splinter Cell because the graphics were meant to be insane whilst not knowing what kind of game it was.

No but if the gameplay is crazy. We can't let it slide

But all in all. Graphics are important.

A game can have decent gameplay and compensate for its graphics.

Karl.

ohhhla wrote: »

Karl. wrote: »

Yeah that's what I mean. I just think its unacceptable especially with the prices they charge.
I still play and enjoy old games with shitty graphics because it was acceptable all them years ago.


You ever copped a game solely off the rep of it graphics?

I remember picking up the original Splinter Cell because the graphics were meant to be insane whilst not knowing what kind of game it was.

No but if the gameplay is crazy. We can't let it slide

But all in all. Graphics are important.

A game can have decent gameplay and compensate for its graphics.

I can't disagree with that. Can you think of any examples?

ohhhla

@Karl

Um, I can't think of any because I ain't a graphics whore.

But Assassin's Creed?

Karl.

I suppose World of Warcraft is supposed to be awesome but has shitty graphics.

earth two superman

wow looks good if you have a good pc.

earth two superman

personally ive always thought infamous had subpar graphics, but made up for it with a great story and gameplay.

cassette

Gameplay is most important, but graphics are nice as well. Never copped a game solely based on graphics, though. Most of my favorite games (Earthbound, Mother 3, Zalda: A Link to the Past, etc) have prehistoric graphics, yet I find them a lot better than most of the games out these days.

ohhhla

cassette wrote: »

Gameplay is most important, but graphics are nice as well. Never copped a game solely based on graphics, though. Most of my favorite games (Earthbound, Mother 3, Zalda: A Link to the Past, etc) have prehistoric graphics, yet I find them a lot better than most of the games out these days.

Wow, you can't be serious.

darkone360

It's important. But if the gameplay isn't up to par, then what's the point.

It's like being wit a dime, but the hefa lacks personality or conversation.

themadlionsfan

whats the point in having a beautiful game if its not fun to play

RawAce

when a game is beautiful and fun to play(Far Cry 3) thats the cream of the crop

but i will take an okay lookin game that keeps me playing,like Fallout3

Wild Self

At this point, graphics are closing in on reality. I don't care for it nearly as much as in, let's say the PS1 era where most 3d games still had bad camera angles and shitty lighting.

cassette

ohhhla wrote: »

cassette wrote: »

Gameplay is most important, but graphics are nice as well. Never copped a game solely based on graphics, though. Most of my favorite games (Earthbound, Mother 3, Zalda: A Link to the Past, etc) have prehistoric graphics, yet I find them a lot better than most of the games out these days.

Wow, you can't be serious.

Does something about my post bother you? That I like older games over newer ones? Maybe my taste in games?

peagle05

grumpy_new_yorker wrote: »

gameplay is more important to me, but there is no reason a game should look like complete shit this day in age.

this

KINGEC

darkone360 wrote: »

It's important. But if the gameplay isn't up to par, then what's the point.

It's like being wit a dime, but the hefa lacks personality or conversation.

Q45T

Graphics are the main reason why I didn't get Gran Turismo 5...

How the fuck do 200 cars look like this:



but a whopping 800 look like this:



That "standard cars/premium cars" bullshit ain't what's up.

ohhhla

cassette wrote: »

ohhhla wrote: »

cassette wrote: »

Gameplay is most important, but graphics are nice as well. Never copped a game solely based on graphics, though. Most of my favorite games (Earthbound, Mother 3, Zalda: A Link to the Past, etc) have prehistoric graphics, yet I find them a lot better than most of the games out these days.

Wow, you can't be serious.

Does something about my post bother you? That I like older games over newer ones? Maybe my taste in games?

At those times, those graphics were great.

We're not comparing old games graphics to new games graphics.

That would be silly.

BoldChild

To a point.

I always feel a certain type of way when a game is still selling for top dollar, and they didn't even utilize the power of the system to a reasonable extent. Like developing some shit that could struggle run on a ps2, but charging 60 bucks for it on the PS3, haven't seen any of this shit though, so I ain't tripping. I'm sure there migth be some out there though.

As far as graphics overall, FF12 still looks nice, and there are a couple PC games released back in early 2000 that still look nice to me, they had graphic updates back in 04 or whatever though, so maybe they don't count. Still, it's been a long time since 2004.


Hasn't had any graphics updates since 04. (WoW put a lot of mmorpg's on struggle status due to taking away so many players)