Graphics

[Seth]

No, not much anyways.
The game needs to look good obviously so they matter to an extant. But while TP obviously has better graphics than ALttP I still see ALttP as having beautiful graphics. It is all about style and what you do with the technology at your disposal. I still find OoT and MM graphics as great to.

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

With a lot of people I know, there seem to be two different attitudes about graphics: (1) all amazing games have amazing graphics and everything that's not at Crysis 2 level is a piece of crap, and (2) you don't need good graphics to have a good game but all games with good graphics happen to be crap. In short, either good graphics or bad graphics are best. I don't agree with either of these perspectives, as they're very shallow.

There are some wonderful games out there that didn't match the graphical prowess of the more powerful consoles out at the time - such games include Metal Gear Solid, Tomb Raider, Shenmue, Sonic Adventure 2, Super Mario Galaxy, Red Steel, and No More Heroes. Few would say that any of these aren't wonderful games, and they were all for the significantly less powerful consoles of their respective generations.

On the other side of that token, though, that doesn't make games with good graphics bad games. I can appreciate when a sequel or a remake of a game is released and the graphics are significantly nicer than in the old game or the old version. When you start to compare the graphical quality of games from different series, though, especially within the same generation, you start to miss the point of each individual game. Sure, games should try to take advantage of their consoles' power, but you shouldn't get too focused on that. If anything at GameCube level has "bad graphics," you might be crazy.

It's also worth noting that the graphical style of a game is infinitely more important than the graphical quality. Is it cel-shaded, or is it a more realistic style? Are the characters drawn more like anime characters, or in what other style are they drawn? That has a tone more to do with the specific game you're playing, as it's controlled directly by the creators of the game, whereas if they don't have the hardware to make something have a ton of polygons or complex lighting, that's not the fault of the creator of the game.

 

[Man_of_Squid]

It's true that gameplay is far more important than graphics, but good graphics add a level of enjoyment and depth to a game and serve to enhance the gameplay of a game
These two screen shots are of the exact same game, with the exact same gameplay, but think about which version you would rather enjoy and play.


Now I'm not dissing the wii. I think it is a great system, I really do. All I'm saying is that the graphics of a game might be a little more important than you might think.

 

[Master Kokiri 9]

Of course they matter. Graphics can definitely effect the way you look at a game. If the graphics are horrible enough, then it's just too big a factor to ignore and you probably won't end up buying the game. The opposite can be said too, since absolutely stunning graphics can leave you really interested in the game, potentially prompting you to buy it.

However, it's not to say that just because the graphics are crappy that it's a bad game. No, no, no, no, no, no! Just take MOTHER 1 and MOTHER 2, NES and SNES games with bad graphics even for their retro systems. But, instead of being lauded as bad games, they are generally accepted as excellent Cult Classic games (okay, they ARE labeled as bad games because of their graphics, but reviews like those are rare). The reason for this is because they make up for the graphics with other things, like how charming the game is and just how dang FUN it is to play the game (trust me, if you've played MOTHER 2 or a good translation of MOTHER 1 then you probably know exactly what I'm talking about).

And, at the same time, a game that takes the best of both the fun factor (IE gameplay and usually plot) and the graphics can create an absolutely AMAZING experience (think Okami or Super Mario Galaxy or something).

All in all, yes graphics matter, but they don't matter as much as the other things unless they're really REALLY horrible and they make your eyes throw up.

 

[00steven]

I don't believe graphics make a game, but they definatly matter. You mean to tell me that games like The Wind Waker or Okami didn't gain attention do to there amazing graphics? Of course they did!

 

[Emma]

I'd say they are somewhat important. A game suffers if the graphics are poorly done. But certainly it's not the most critical thing. What's most important in a game is debatable, but what can mostly be agreed upon by most people is that it is not graphics. Graphics are like good clothes. Poorer quality clothes work well enough, but better clothes are more appealing. And of course really bad clothes are not a good thing. But clothes that are too over-the-top are off-putting, distracting, and don't exactly help.
The analogy works for me.

So I prefer that the graphics be well done, not sloppy, but not so far as that they distract from the more important elements in the game. Such as adding distracting lens flares (ha, ha Star Trek!). In real life you can shield your eyes from them by closing them slightly or with your hand. Not so in most games.

 

[PhantomTriforce]

Graphics do not matter all that much to me when playing any video game. Sure, I'd like to see some good looking graphics, but if the graphics aren't the best, then it isn't the end of the world for me. I played Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask after I play Twilight Princess and the Wind Waker, so I had a different mindset and higher expectations walking into these two games. However, I did not let it affect my views on the games, for I also have to take into account the fact that they were released long before Twilight Princess and the Wind Waker; almost at the beginning of 3D gaming.

Super Mario Galaxy had great visual graphics, which is something I enjoyed a lot about the game, and I think it might have enhanced the gameplay of Super Mario Galaxy and it's sequel. Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door and Super Paper Mario had the same graphics, and I think that the graphics are perfect for the mood and "paper" feeling of the game. Another game I use to refer a lot while discussing this topic is Oracle of Ages. I always thought that the graphics were not up to date with that game, and that better graphics would have made the game more enjoyable to play. But now, I don't quite agree with myself on my own views due to perhaps a different feeling it tried to create.

 

[Deleted member 6224]

no they dont matter Im 12 and i still love playing the original zelda and also games on the atari

 

[llamaman000z]

well for me they dont have to be completely excellent if its a fun game then the graphics dont matter

 

[Zanzibar]

well it depends, like a FPS the graphics should be a bit better. but other games such as zelda and stuff it really doesn't matter.

 

[fredthehylian]

I think this video should offer some interesting points on the discussion:


On a side note, I'm utterly shocked that this duplicate thread has lived so long without someone pointing out the existence of the original: http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showthread.php?5115-Graphics

 

[Hanyou]

Thanks for the heads-up. In the future, a formal report will help the staff merge threads more quickly, so that's probably the best course of action to take for whoever does spot duplicates.

Threads merged

 

[GanonSlayr]

I'm tired of people saying graphics don't matter, cause they do. When i'm playing an NES or SNES game, and people say "that has bad graphics" i'll say "they were good for the time. If they are today, i will expect the graphics to be good. while how good the graphics are do not determine a games greatness, htey are important, as they will help market the game, as well as improve the playing experience(sometimes)

 

[amaterasu]

I am just going to say to everybody that GRAPHICS DONT MATTER! Geeze! It's all about the game, storyline, characters, things like that. The game Earthbound really shows that because it's graphics are crap and they often glitch, but it's still one of my favorite games.

 

[fredthehylian]

The game Earthbound really shows that because it's graphics are crap and they often glitch, but it's still one of my favorite games.

Pardon me, but Earthbound's graphics aren't crap. The battle backgrounds are actually very nicely made, since they have a cool "kaleidoscope" effect. Also, I'm pretty sure the Giygas animations are considerably well-animated; it wasn't every day that you saw that magnitude of image warping on the SNES.

Better examples for your argument would be Pitfall, Pac-Man, Bomberman, and Joust. All of them have subpar graphics, but they are highly revered as the all-time classics of the gaming industry.