Topic: How important are graphics to you?

[GoldenPhoenix]

After perusing an Xbox 360 board, I came accross many posts that stated they would not get a Wii because of its lack of graphical horsepower. In fact some say they can no longer play games in anything other than 720p. Personally this point of view does sicken me a bit, sure I like nice visuals, but so many times that is all I'm getting. A truly great game is one that relies more so on gameplay with graphics as a secondary piece to the puzzle, heck even my N64 which put out some blurry games is still fun even with the drop in visual quality. This makes me wonder if gamers today have gotten too caught up in graphical horsepower, and that has jumped to a primary reason to buy or not buy a console. When I hear stuff like people not even being able to play a Wii because of its weaker graphical capabilities, I begin to wonder about the state of gaming. I'm curious to hear what your guy's opinion is on the graphic debate, do you feel that is becoming a focus in gaming now (Or just a way to defend the console you own) along with your own personal opinion of the graphics debate.

[capamerica]

Graphics don't make a game good, its the Gameplay.

I just ignore that type of retards who think graphics are everything and shun systems because they don't have the graphic power, I say let them play their stupid GTA and WWE in their run downed trailer when their not working at their minimum wage job or working on their beat up truck thats been on blocks for the last 2 years. Screw Them. They're ignorant fools who have no right to be playing games out side the Atari Generation.

They wouldn't want to play the Wii games anyway, their is no killing Police officers and hookers in Nintendo games.  

[Smash_Brother]

It's irrelevant.

Historically, the graphically superior console has never come out on top:

The Game Boy beat the Game Gear
The PSX beat the N64
The PS2 beat the Xbox and GC
The DS beat the PSP

The MS fanboys are just looking for excuses to dismiss the Wii. That's what fanboy petting looks like: a bunch of idiots on a forum trying to make themselves feel better about buying a competing product by all saying, "Well, I'M not going to buy a Wii." That inconsequential anecdotal information translates into their minds as security in their buying decision. People will hide inside a wall of ignorance for as long as possible.

[Ceric]

I will say this.  I have a nice tv at home, 26" HDTV (no 720p though) CRT, and a small old 13" tv.  Yes I prefer my bigger tv.  Though the old ones going to die soon, hence the other, It's fine for most games except...  If they involve a lot of text.  For some reason the combination of old tv, bad connections, poor eye sight, and getting use to the sharp black makes the text hard to read on that screen.

For the most part I think more on lines of styles.  That's a discussion for another time.  I'll end by this.  As long as I can see the game the way the developers wants me to I'm fine with it.  I'm also wondering if the rumor about the Flipper only being able to flex 50% of its power is true.  If so some games that didn't run quiet right might have been developed to fully use it but when it got to production units it didn't happen, sort of like King Kong for the 360 on non-HD screen, so we might see a big jump in quality and the like when we go to the Wii from even older games.

[Caliban]

Graphics? I like graphics, as long as they are balanced with gameplay, what I mean is that if they are going to have a gorgeous game at least make it fun to play, just like Resident Evil 4 or Terranigma or Faxanadu. Oh and I'm thinking of getting a 42" EDTV plasma screen just for the Wii, it's not that graphics matter but I just want to enjoy the Wii/GC/VC to it's fullest, I will put in my room because I stopped playing GC games because I'm too lazy to play them in living room and I spend too much time in my room.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Let me put it this way, over the last year or two, I've found that gaming has really started to lose my interest. Its not so much video games as an industry but the actual act of playing the video games that has actually started to get boring. I keep buying all of these games but everytime I sit down to play them, I found myself easily distracted and pulled away from the game. Most of the games kinda seemed like I played them b4 or I played a better version of this same game b4. I kept getting the "deja vu" feeling or the "been ther and done that, only better" feeling, and neither of those had anything to do with how the game looked. Most of the games actually looked very different from each other, some going for realism and other for the cartoony or fanstasy look. But the point of this is that it isn't the graphics that make the game, it how you play it, and in saying that I think you realize how important graphics are to me.  

[Requiem]

I love me some good graphics. YOu know, that type that is awe-inspiring....

But....

If they gameplay is lacking, then it all was in vain.

[Requiem of Darcness]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
It's irrelevant.

Historically, the graphically superior console has never come out on top:

The Game Boy beat the Game Gear
The PSX beat the N64
The PS2 beat the Xbox and GC
The DS beat the PSP

The MS fanboys are just looking for excuses to dismiss the Wii. That's what fanboy petting looks like: a bunch of idiots on a forum trying to make themselves feel better about buying a competing product by all saying, "Well, I'M not going to buy a Wii." That inconsequential anecdotal information translates into their minds as security in their buying decision. People will hide inside a wall of ignorance for as long as possible.

You left out two comparisons though. One supports your post the other does not.

The NES beat the Master System
The SNES beat the Genesis (SNES was the graphically superior, it had a 8 times the color palette, displayed 4 times the colors, and displayed twice the sprites)

[BlackNMild2k1]

But the Genisis had Blast Processing(tm) therefore it was doing things graphically that the SNES could only dream of  

[KDR_11k]

Ahahaha, today I heard a kid complain "but it has crappy graphics" when his mom wanted to buy him Halo.

Those fanboys can go to hell. "OMG I cannot play anything lower than 720p now!" I'll let you in on a secret, I've been playing at 1280x960 progressive for roughly 5 years now and I can still play a PS2 game. What gives?

Graphics are 25% power and 75% artistic ability. Compare EQ2's ugly "fully customizable" characters to WoW's pretty similar but well designed ones. I think you'd be hard pressed to call EQ2 better looking despite the fact that it uses a lot more graphical power.

But the Genisis had Blast Processing(tm) therefore it was going things graphically that the SNES could only dream of

So does Dell

EDIT: Thought of a better comment .

[Ceric]

Lets stop this here.  We've been down this road a lot.  I'm sure if I wasn't lazy and had a better memory I could find 5 different unique thread on that topic.

[Spak-Spang]

Let's not kid ourselves.  Graphics are important to any gaming experience.  However, there is ALOT that great gameplay can make up for.  

But, lets take a minute to break down what we mean by graphics and what makes them important.

Graphics are basically the visual representation of what is going on within the game.  Without them we wouldn't have a game period.  Therefore, the graphics have to be clean, precise and understandable to human brain.  Everything must interact in a means that the player can predict what will happen next within the game at any given time.

It is only the above statement that makes graphics important...not the flash.

In other words, Super Mario Brothers 3 is graphically perfect, for its game...and is no better or worse than Gears of War.  

For that matter Perfect Dark or Goldeneye is no better or worse than Gears of War.  Both games are capable of allowing the gamer to enjoy the game experience.

Therefore, I am not looking for the richest most detailed graphics.  I am looking for pleasing graphics that a fluid and work well with the actual gameplay of the game...and hopefully gameplay actually exists in the game.  

Other than that, Graphics mean nothing to me.  I will play Mega Man on NES, Zelda and Mario on SNES, Goldeneye and Mario 64 on N64, Windwaker and Mario Kart on the Cube and be happy with all the graphics and the experience.

[Mario]

Good Graphics





Bad Graphics - http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/740/740717/img_3228409.html

All I care about is how pleasing it is to my eyes, not the technical mumbo jumbo. Good looking games can be made on any platform, and so can bad looking ones.

[Spak-Spang]

Ha.  Mario, you proved my point with pictures instead of words.  

[Bill Aurion]

Graphics aren't important; art design is...More artistic games like Wind Waker and Heroes, please!

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem of Darcness You left out two comparisons though. One supports your post the other does not.

Actually, I left out quite a few others: Dreamcast, Jaguar, Turbografx, Lynx, etc.

But I don't think the SNES necessarily "won" against the Genesis. If I remember correctly, it was the Genesis which gave Sega the prosperity it would later squander and waste on other systems.

[mantidor]

I love graphics, and along with sound they are important part of the experience, but as bill says, I prefer an artistic focus rather than a "how much polygons and lens flare can we use" aproach. My love for the artistic aspect of a game can go as far as to make me forget about bad gameplay mechanics. American McGee's Alice is one of my favorite games, despite how from a pure gameplay perspective is not that good, because the music and graphical representation is just awesome.

[Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Graphics aren't important; art design is...More artistic games like Wind Waker and Heroes, please!

I agree and promote this statement!

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Graphics aren't important; art design is...More artistic games like Wind Waker and Heroes, please!

I agree and promote this statement!

Great replies guys, hey I too enjoy graphics (Heck my computer proves that point since it is fairly high end) but I've found that I always head back to consoles with less "superior" graphics. For the first time in quite awhile the Wii is providing for some great anticipation, this last generation was mainly distinguished by graphical horsepower, and thus my excitment was limited. With Wii, it appears I am getting decent visuals but above all else a new way to interact with games along with new gameplay experiences. That in my mind is all that matters.

[Ceric]

Last generation was distiguished by the graphics that could be pushed and shoe horned out of a PS2.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Last generation was distiguished by the graphics that could be pushed and shoe horned out of a PS2.

Lol I guess you have a point there. It is funny people whine and complain about the lack of graphical horsepower of Wii, yet the number 1 system this last generation was far and away the weakest!

[Sir_Stabbalot]

Art style and little details matter for me. By 'details' I DO NOT mean being able to smack your face against a wall and see all the marks in the wood. I mean simple things, like being able to see an important location in the distant background, butterflies and creatures in a meadow and rain that doesn't clip through roofs.

[Smash_Brother]

Wasn't huge fan of the WW graphics.

After 20 minutes of playing the game, I stopped noticing them and they just looked bland and uninspired except for a few well-done models later in the game.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

The ocean is boring.  And overall design of the world is almost one dimensional.

Everything exists either as a huge flat plane (the ocean), or the inside of a dungeon centered around a cylindrical structure, whether a tower, a tree, a moutain, or a hole in the ground.

[ShyGuy]

A plane by its very nature is 2 dimensional pwn3d.