Do graphics matter to you?

Does a game need up to date graphics for you to buy/play? Simple question.

Graphics are good but gameplay is more important.

No point in driving a ferrari if you can't go a block without hitting something.

It depends heavily on the genre. If it's horror or something that's supposed to be immersive, they are a big deal. But, if it's something like a platformer, they aren't too important.

Not really. The fact that I like older games and still play them means my rig can be set to max everything out and I get to enjoy the graphics and the gameplay.

It depends heavily on the genre. If it's horror or something that's supposed to be immersive, they are a big deal. But, if it's something like a platformer, they aren't too important.

turtlethetaffer

Well, if a game has a good story and good gameplay but not so good graphics, i will play it (of course, if i like the game or genre). Graphics are not the priority for me, BUT they certainly are a BIG plus. I mean, a game with good gameplay and story is great, but a game with good gameplay, story and graphics is superb.

Hell no i care about this in this order

Gameplay

Sound

Controls

art design

Graphics

other....

Not at all. Gameplay, Story, Game length etc are all vastly more important than graphics. Good graphics are nice, but they shouldn't be the priority.

I do if details matter. If I play a horror game or some other, very linear game, they could at least add some detail since they have the space to do it. For RPG's or sandbox games I don't mind.

Most of the time I don't mind, since all games these days generally look good.

Does a game need up to date graphics for you to buy/play? Simple question.

WretchmanDrake

I dont worry so much on polygon count but if the models, buildings are out of proportions and badly designed it will matter.

Not much

I prefer a smooth framerate and solid gameplay/design over pretty graphics

Does a game need up to date graphics for you to buy/play? Simple question.

WretchmanDrake

To me they are a large part of the game today. I'm happy enough to go and play MGS1 regardless of the graphics because its gameplay is amazing and it's a product of its time. Today however I feel that the graphics should live up to many of the other fantastic looking games out there. Good graphics can make a game so much more immersive.

I still play FF IX...I think that answers your question.

Never, it can have 2d graphics as long as it's a good game.

Short answer... no.

It matters they have a solid low level. Meaning I want error not to be bad. More important is that I want to see what is going on. Some games have iomportant switches and other thing blind in with the background. I should not need to go to a walkthrough to find a single swtich to open the hidden door.

They are just as important for me as any other aspect of a game. However, I only expect that they are the best a particular set of hardware has to offer, instead of unrealistically expecting 360-level graphics from the Wii, or Wii graphics from the PS.

Example:

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the absolute best looking game the Wii offers... and it relies heavily on its bright and very crisp visuals to drive the experience. Many might scoff at it because it isn't in HD (I for one think Nintendo failed in this respect, considering how much better games like SMG2 look in HD when emulated on PC) but for what the hardware is capable of, it is a visually pleasing experience, that also driven by the quality and variety of design and the perfected gameplay.

They don't matter nearly as much as gameplay

To me game play and even story are more important than graphics. Yes having games that are appealing to look at is nice, but its not an absolute must have. Honestly it seems like too many games these days focus too much on looking pretty and not enough on substance. Just look at how popular the virtual console and the ps1 classics on psn are. Sure many of those game had great graphics for their era, but thats not what keeps people coming back to them years later, its the game play, stories, and overall memorable moments that those games produced which make them classics. Graphics will always keep improving, but its the actual GAME itself and not the pretty exterior that will make it stand the test of time.

No :D

Not really. Long as I can see something; gameplay, and features are what matter.

There is a general consensus that graphics aren't important as gameplay. I agree to that, but to a certain extent. At the end of the day, gameplay is king, but I feel the visuals should up to snuff. A good looking game can improve the experience to me. I've spent a lot of time in Fable 3 and Mass Effect, and I'm always impressed by how good they look, even though I've spent hours looking at them before.

Graphics

Gameplay

Sound

I don't expect ultra-realistic graphics, but, it has to be at least viewable.

What's the point of having precisely realistic graphics if you have a pile of steaming **** in terms of gameplay?

Not at all . I can play 10 year old games as long as they have good gameplay, story and are fun to play .

Yes, especially wen modding older games and tweaking them a bit to look more modern with fantastic visuals. Playing Doom 2 with bloom, 1080p & higher res. textures is a blast, and that goes for a lot of games, Daggerfall, Deus Ex, etc. Crysis made my jaw drop wen i modded it for the first time, i oftenly replay it.

I have a exception with 2D games, such as platformers, fighters and izometric RPG's. Examples such as Mario World, Fallout 2 & Guilty Gear are timeless, i believe i could play them fovever, and never feel as if their getting old.

But regardless, i haven't lost the entertainment value playing PS1 games, or PS2 games at all, they look perfect for their age, and considering i first bought a PS1 in 2008 and over 20 games for it, i would say i feel bad for some people that would refuse to give some older games a chance. Simply because their missing out on 80% of variety out there, i could never picture my self playing only this generation of games, there's just to little variety and i would most likely get bored fast. I simply can't comprehend this type of mentality, except for those that are casuals.

But ofcourse if the gameplay is average and boring, those photorealistic visuals can go down the toilet for all i care.

Sure they matter. I'd be rather stupid to have spent $400 on a PS3 and $500 on a hi-def TV if I didn't care what stuff looked like. Gameplay is more important than graphics, but that doesn't mean I give it a free pass.

its not as simple as "i only play current generation games" (because i still do play games from the 90's), but i acknowledge the things hardware power adds to gaming. beyond making the game look prettier, there are things like draw distance, water effects, physics engines, AI, lighting, and animations that make the game world more compelling. even then, those have to be balanced with performance (the most beautiful graphics ever would be useless if the game was unplayable).

still, outside of performance, none of those things are particularly necessary for a good game. ocarina of time looks hideous by today's standards, but i would still play that game today because of its excellent game design.

I love to see advances in graphics.

Hell did anyone see Skyrim yet?

I'm glad to see that people put gameplay before graphics, but a lot of comments in forums I see don't reflect that. I see some of my favorite older games getting torn up in threads due to the graphics. I think some people are desensitized now that graphics have come so far.

1. story

2. controls

3. graphics

Good graphics are always nice but I won't enjoy a game any less if graphics are bad.

Nope. I will go back to the ps2 to play RE4 or kingdom hearts without any HD remakes. hell i would even go back to the ps1 somedays if i had it still.

They can't be horrible or anything like that but normally they don't ultimately determine my decision to buy a game.