• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Graphics

Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Very true. There's next gen games out there that pale in comparison to some original NES games in terms of gameplay. They're all flash and no substance, and if there's no substance in a video game, then you're just looking at some pretty pictures. If that's the case, then I'd rather buy a coffee table book of the graphics and forego the pain of playing the bad game!

Thats not entirely true. Personally, I find Halo 3 as a better game than Punch-Out, Mega Man, and Kid Icarus. But that doesn't mean the Mario and Donkey Kong Country trilogy aren't as good. I'd play those games over Halo 3 any day.
 

Zeruda

Mother Hyrule
Joined
May 17, 2009
Location
on a crumbling throne
I'm not going to say I don't think graphics are necessary, but I don't think they are what make a game. There are many games out there that may have horrible graphics, but they still make games with great graphics look like junk. Still, there are some games that have both great graphics and great gameplay.

For instance, I played Resident Evil 5, and while the graphics were great, I have seen better. The gameplay, though, was incredible. Well, let me rephrase that- coop was incredible, CP AI sucked.

But then there are some games that might not be graphically incredible, but they are still great. For instance, when Metroid Prime came out and I saw condensation on the visor, I almost died. When I saw Samus' reflection, I almost died. And, recently MP Trilogy has been released. No, the graphics aren't as balls-to-the-wall good like X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but the controls are so...just... jeez, the controls make me think, "This is how FPS should be." It might not match up to other games in terms of graphics, but that's not necessarily important, obviously.

Do I think graphics are important? Only in games where the graphics are part of the main focus. Otherwise, no. I think eye candy is a nice plus, but not often important.
 

Megamannt125

Blue Link
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Location
Zora's Domain
I've never cared about graphics, the only thing graphics really improve a game is if it's a game with a big adventure field like twilight princess where you can just ride around randomly and enjoy the scenary.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
This is how I see it. Mario Galaxy is really how good Nintendo has to be. In all honesty, that graphical style suits Mario perfectly, and I think they should keep it. If you get "too realistic" in a cartoon based game, it's gonna suck (I'll admit, I wasn't that big of a fan for Mario's overalls in Melee and Brawl). Now, I can understand that graphics need to be good in a Zelda game, but gameplay wins out in importance.

It's funny. With all the dumb games out for the Wii, they're actually fun and have great controls and gameplay. PS360 have occasional Goldmines, but mostly gameplay is poop.

Wii: Mario, Zelda, Metroid, SSB, Wii Series, Mario & Sonic, several other appealing franchises, some sports games.

PS360: Shooters...Sports...Racers...and that's about it. Nothing to really get you going. Spyro is good, Crash is good, Banjo used to be good. But Shooters, Sports, and Racers are all those systems have going for them. While most have good graphics, gameplay is poo.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
This is how I see it. Mario Galaxy is really how good Nintendo has to be. In all honesty, that graphical style suits Mario perfectly, and I think they should keep it. If you get "too realistic" in a cartoon based game, it's gonna suck (I'll admit, I wasn't that big of a fan for Mario's overalls in Melee and Brawl). Now, I can understand that graphics need to be good in a Zelda game, but gameplay wins out in importance.

It's funny. With all the dumb games out for the Wii, they're actually fun and have great controls and gameplay. PS360 have occasional Goldmines, but mostly gameplay is poop.

Wii: Mario, Zelda, Metroid, SSB, Wii Series, Mario & Sonic, several other appealing franchises, some sports games.

PS360: Shooters...Sports...Racers...and that's about it. Nothing to really get you going. Spyro is good, Crash is good, Banjo used to be good. But Shooters, Sports, and Racers are all those systems have going for them. While most have good graphics, gameplay is poo.

Mario should indeed stay cartoony and not have cheesy RPGs *cough*marioandluigi*cough*. Zelda needs the graphics to build drama but I think in TP I think alot of it was hideous *cough*midnazantandooccoo*cough*.

I think all games for Wii have something good in them. Even though I only use it for VC.

I hate how people say that PS3 doesn't need gameplay and how awesome all those Fighters, Shooters, and Racers are. MvC is good, Virtua Fighter sucks, Halo is decent, Ratchet and Clank is the only good thing on PS3, and 360... Conker. PS360 suck because they need to go to gameplay school. Do you know why that disgraceful sonic game was only released on PS360? Because it sucked and its only natural for it to go on the suckish systems.
 

Nepolink

Corrupted Idiot
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Location
The Netherlands
Well i don't say i like Halo only for the graphic's, even i can say that Halo is a little bit overrated, If you look back they just copy and paste some places, give it a new environment and a new place has born. But overall i think graphic's doesn't make the game a prefect game, how many times i told that anyway?
I'm not a huge fan of realistic graphic's, i like the graphic's from the Legend of Zelda, Spyro and Mario ways more. I remember a friend of me bought a new game with ''prefect'' graphic's, well his opinion then. After that he didn't like the gameplay, kind of stupid. I don't remember the game anyway.

For some people the graphic's are just everything and doesn't look at the gameplay, for the others the gameplay is a greater importance. I have to say all the games with good graphic's are out of my taste. I played the newest GTA game on the Xbox360 but the graphic's aren't that great, while the gameplay was very nice. I have to say i don't like every game with very good graphic's just because they are out of my taste, it's always nice to see a game with such great graphic's. I like how they made The Legend of Zelda, it has not the best graphic's around here, but who wants to see a realistic Zelda game? It will ruin the whole game in my opinion

Graphic's aren't important. I can't say a game doesn't need good graphic's, it will always be great to have sharp and semi-realistic game around. I look at Super Mario Galaxy how they made the galaxies and other stuff. I pick the apple as example, it looks halfway real and how they did the reflection's and other stuff, amazing for just a Mario Game.
The gameplay and story is the most important thing to put in a game. Is the story interesting? Are the characters interesting? and much more. Well that's just my opinion, great graphic's would be nice.
But i shall never buy a game because the graphic's are ''the best''. Most of them are out of my taste and very boy-ish games.

Like others say. I love the very old games on the SNESS and N64 ways more than the current ones. Because the lack of good graphic's those games are win in gameplay, or it has a nostalgic reason. Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are my favorite games ever, they don't have great graphic's, so i say graphic's isn't a importance, it will always be nice.
 

Master Kokiri 9

The Dungeon Master
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Location
My ship that sailed in the morning
weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll i like good graphics to say the least but really they're just the frosting on the video game. Graphics enhance only the way the game looks and really i like graphics in games like tp and oot but really they're just the frosting on the cake so to speak. It just appeals to the consumer with colorfullness and let's the other factors like gameplay, story, and humor hook(shot) you in. so long story short graphics matter but they don't matter much.
 

chrisbg99

OBEY THE FIST!
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Location
Fargo, ND
Graphics are an important aspect of a game for sure but degrade in importance as you go. So if a game is going to keep your interest years after it better have hooks whether they be gameplay, story or whatever that can make it still capable of being played years after it's release.
 

hsb39

Why so logical?
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Sorry if what I say has already been mentioned.

I think that graphics do count for something but not too much. The thing is, I emphasise that this should not be taken as realistic graphics make the game better, in many cases I think that they make the game worse when a more creative style could be used. I love 8 Bit, and think that it actually *looks better* than most of the stuff we have today. Take Megaman 9 even, I loved how that looked. Much more creativity. In fact, it was graphics limitations that made Mario the lovable character that he is today, rather than the ever so popular white scruffy guy, used because realism makes it look "cooler". Windwaker is possibly my favourite game graphics wise, just so well done and different, suiting the purposes of the game.

I could go on for a while, but the general point is that graphics don't matter too much, but when they do matter, most of the time making it look really realistic etc. is not the way to go, and can actually detract from the game (whatever happened to bright colours?).
 
C

Camisado

Guest
I don't normally care about graphics.

People being ridiculed for playing older consoles? That's like saying the DS is rubbish compared to the Wii. You can't make the comparison. =| I still play with the NES (when it works), SNES, N64 and GameCube regularly, and I don't notice the graphics. I've played Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess in the same day before and it's not bothered me or even occurred to me. It's gameplay that really matters to me. And what if the graphics have been developed to a point where the game is seriously crippled by the abilities of its hardware? I believe this happened with a Spyro game on GameCube.

Also, Mr Miyamoto speaks some wonderful words of truth on the fight between realism and graphics (they're more often than not, mutually exclusive).

Shigeru Miyamoto: What role does realism play in videogames I ask myself. Is this image more interesting? Sometimes... however, what if a "detailed" hand with 5 fingers is catching a bottle but the fingers pass right through it? Is this still realistic? Rather than to show each meticulous and tiny detail of a finger, it is more important to make the end action look more credible by working on the movement and functionality of the arms and the hand in relation to the object.

I think the only place I'd miss good graphics is The Sims 3 (for which I just bought a nice new graphics card, though mine was three years old and on its way out)...I like all the little details on the Sims and their houses. :> And ah, I needed more video RAM.
 

elliotstriforce

trollin for booty
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Location
somewhere.
well uuummm graphics are a pretty big deal for alot of people but not me my friend sez oot graphics suck but i disagree for the time it was made there awesome but not as awesome as tp
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
well uuummm graphics are a pretty big deal for alot of people but not me my friend sez oot graphics suck but i disagree for the time it was made there awesome but not as awesome as tp

So you're one of those people who has a community with people who vote graphics over gameplay? I think I should be grateful I have friends who accept my retro age video game obssession.
 

hsb39

Why so logical?
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
So you're one of those people who has a community with people who vote graphics over gameplay? I think I should be grateful I have friends who accept my retro age video game obssession.

I know a lot of people who think graphics just make the game, seemingly not caring about gameplay or true artistic features.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
I know a lot of people who think graphics just make the game, seemingly not caring about gameplay or true artistic features.

Here's an idea for a game that would appeal to them:

A game where you would just play as an ordinary, grey, levitating block flying through different landscapes to admire them and whatnot (grassland like the one from Twilight Princess, a Star System like Metroid Prime, a forest maze like SMRPG, etc.) It would be 584 bit or something closer to that. No need for gameplay. Just great graphics and some stellar soundtrack. That is what would be good for those types of gamers. And to back it up, a marketing ploy: Super Gamma Light. The Glass Processing graphics worked for SEGA no? Why should SGL not?
 

hsb39

Why so logical?
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Here's an idea for a game that would appeal to them:

A game where you would just play as an ordinary, grey, levitating block flying through different landscapes to admire them and whatnot (grassland like the one from Twilight Princess, a Star System like Metroid Prime, a forest maze like SMRPG, etc.) It would be 584 bit or something closer to that. No need for gameplay. Just great graphics and some stellar soundtrack. That is what would be good for those types of gamers. And to back it up, a marketing ploy: Super Gamma Light. The Glass Processing graphics worked for SEGA no? Why should SGL not?

No, no, no. It would need to be violent with some first person shooter elements remember?!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom