how much do graphics mean to you?

well how much do graphics mean to you. to me bad graphics bug me but it wont stop me from buying a game

[Excessive punctuation removed. -Mod]

Graphics are definitely important to me. I spend money updating my TV and Audio systems, why wouldn't I want a game that pushes them? They're not the end all, be all, but they are very important.

Graphics mean very little too me. They won't stop me from playing a game. It's nice if they look good though.

Graphics don't partly mean a great deal to me, I guess because I grew up in the 8 bit years.

One of my all time favourite games in LARN a rogue like game from the eighties. It has no real graphics to speak of, check out the YouTube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4pWccQtTRc

A lot of the time I think they dont matter but then i try and go back to a game i loved (contra for example) and the flicking sprites and slowdown (which i consider to be a sub section under graphics) make the game less fun.

After seeing this repeated in a few games that i absolutely loved from 8/16 bit days I have to say my enjoyment and immersion is significantly effected by graphics.

Not much.Myviewing

Very little. I even like PS2's graphics than PS3's. Best graphics for me is FFX, MGS 3, Hitman BM, and SotC. And I honestly like GTA's graphics.

Current gen's graphics is too smooth.

I, too, grew up during the 8-bit days. The only thing I require of graphics is that they don't impede the gameplay. I got stuck a few times in the first Tomb Raider because I couldn't see the entrance to a cave or an opening that I had to go through.

I actually find a lot charm in older games with lesser graphics because I have to use my imagination to bridge the gap between the box art and the pixels on the screen.

Like someone already posted, I am perfectly happy with Gamecube graphics.

Goes without saying that simple gfx will not stop me from playing a game, or even buying one. Still, I don't see why I have to sacrifice one over the other. Videogames are a visual hobby, after all.

Honestly, every time a game is made now, I expect great gameplay and great graphics. Seriously, graphics are better now since last gen, and though I can still deal with old graphics, my expectations are higher - devs have shown what can be done, there's no excuse for mediocre graphics now. And seriously, what game this gen has had great gameplay and NOT at least looked nice? Usually poor looking games are pretty sloppy all around.

It goes both ways, but I want both - and all games should have both.

SO BLARRRRRRR. >:(

In the last few years I've gone back to play games like Fallout, I played Planescape Torment for the first time and even pushed through a bad game called Soulbringer

They all had pretty bad graphics but the only thing that bothered me was the sometimes it was hard to find a path in Planescape or Fallout... The graphics in Soulbringer were serviceable but were ugly.

They really didn't effect my enjoyment of the game or if they did it was a small degree.

I can care less about graphics, just as long as the gameplay is good, the story is worth playing through and the music suits the game.

it is the most important thing ..

maype 50% - 60% of the game

it depends on the games. Sports games and shooters i need top notch.

Games with deep stories it doesnt matter story>graphis IMO, i could play FF7 and enjoy it now.

graphics are great, but it has to have great gameplay, audio, music, AI, controls, story and so much more......

They mean as much to me as any other aspect of a game. A game isn't a game if it is missing part of what makes a game a game.foxhound_fox

what about text based games? Does the font choice count as graphics?

what about text based games? Does the font choice count as graphics?Bauers-Twin

it depends on how the game is suppose to play. take SSBB. real cartoony but its suppose to be like that. look at the evolution of the mario series. truley has changed but as longs as its a adpation to what your suppose to be playing its fine.

a bad example is virtual fighter. i hated the very first one casue it looks like blocks fighting. completely different game now. REZ HD sucks.

well how much do graphics mean to you. to me bad graphics bug me but it wont stop me from buying a game

[Excessive punctuation removed. -Mod]

karugukinywa

well how much do graphics mean to you. to me bad graphics bug me but it wont stop me from buying a game

[Excessive punctuation removed. -Mod]

karugukinywa

Yea I pretty much am the same way also

Around 70 to 80 percent.

But, art direction makes a huge difference in graphics also. I do prefer a realistic quality in a design. But stylized art can really make a great game look epic. MGS1, Team F., and Bioshock come to mind. Those worlds really pulled me in, because the studio's really worked hard at making their vision stand out. You get a sense of love as you push through another area.

Not hippie or puppy love. Love for the game, the design. What is means to truly give a damn, about making a great fecking world to rock in.

I see a lot of other posts, saying graphics mean much less to them. I don't agree, nor do I believe them. I think it's bullspit, that they claim to play a game that looks like crap. I wouldn't , you wouldn't and Jesus wouldn't. There is a damn good reason, why no one would pay for Maple road or Carebear Island.

Thats just BS and you know it. Halo 3 with gyromite graphics.......

as long as a game dosent look dated on release im happy. i like my new releases to be on a similar level to other games released around the same time.

Around 70 to 80 percent.

But, art direction makes a huge difference in graphics also. I do prefer a realistic quality in a design. But stylized art can really make a great game look epic. MGS1, Team F., and Bioshock come to mind. Those worlds really pulled me in, because the studio's really worked hard at making their vision stand out. You get a sense of love as you push through another area.

Not hippie or puppy love. Love for the game, the design. What is means to truly give a damn, about making a great fecking world to rock in.

I see a lot of other posts, saying graphics mean much less to them. I don't agree, nor do I believe them. I think it's bullspit, that they claim to play a game that looks like crap. I wouldn't , you wouldn't and Jesus wouldn't. There is a damn good reason, why no one would pay for Maple road or Carebear Island.

Thats just BS and you know it. Halo 3 with gyromite graphics.......

Soothsayerr

Totally agreed. Graphics are far, far more important than most people in this thread are willing to admit. Props to you for being honest. You're not less of a "rea1 gamerz!!" if you say graphics are extremely important, people...

well how much do graphics mean to you. to me bad graphics bug me but it wont stop me from buying a game

[Excessive punctuation removed. -Mod]

karugukinywa

I am the same.

Graphics are definitely important to me. I spend money updating my TV and Audio systems, why wouldn't I want a game that pushes them? They're not the end all, be all, but they are very important.

Jbul

i m quite agree with u .

the Graphics is much more important than others. to me ,it will be more than50%.

Here's a test: Take a great-looking and great-playing last gen game and saddle it with some of the worst last gen graphics.

Can you imagine MGS3 or Ninja Gaiden with GTA3 graphics? Yeah, nightmare time, I know.

Here's a test: Take a great-looking and great-playing last gen game and saddle it with some of the worst last gen graphics.

Can you imagine MGS3 or Ninja Gaiden with GTA3 graphics? Yeah, nightmare time, I know.

Angry_Beaver

The GTAs didn't look as pretty in screenshots as most games, but they were much less linear and much more open than most games (in DMC3 one passed through lushly textured corridors, in San Andreas one freely wandered throughout a state).

A lot of people here mention classic games. And they're right. They do look awful by today's standards, but there's a couple of factors we have to keep in mind.

a) Most classic arcade games were pushing the available hardware at the time they were released.

b) Endearing artwork usually survives the test of time.

c) Nostalgia goes a long way.

Nowadays, there's no excuse why a game doesn't look as good as it can. I'm not talking about resolutions and stuff, but I do demand a pleasant visual experience from my games.

[QUOTE="Angry_Beaver"]

Here's a test: Take a great-looking and great-playing last gen game and saddle it with some of the worst last gen graphics.

Can you imagine MGS3 or Ninja Gaiden with GTA3 graphics? Yeah, nightmare time, I know.

CarnageHeart

The GTAs didn't look as pretty in screenshots as most games, but they were much less linear and much more open than most games (in DMC3 one passed through lushly textured corridors, in San Andreas one freely wandered throughout a state).

Yeah, I know. I'm just isolating the graphical element, and I couldn't think of anything from last gen that looked worse than GTA3.

the dont matter 2 me much the gameplay is what matters.ishoturface

Are graphics important? Sure. Do they make or break a title? No they don't. Whatmakes or breaks a title is whether or not it's fun to play.

Dragon Warrior VII is one of my favorite games of the PS1 era, and it's graphics even by PS1 standards were atrocious. Didn't make it any less fun to play. I was bothered far more by the grinding required than the graphics. Morrowind too makes a great example of this. By all standards Oblivion is far and away graphically superior but I'd pick Morrowind over Oblivion any day because I enjoyed it more.

Those are just two examples, but my point is while it is indeed great to have nice graphics, it's far more important to me that the game is enjoyable.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="Angry_Beaver"]

Here's a test: Take a great-looking and great-playing last gen game and saddle it with some of the worst last gen graphics.

Can you imagine MGS3 or Ninja Gaiden with GTA3 graphics? Yeah, nightmare time, I know.

Angry_Beaver

The GTAs didn't look as pretty in screenshots as most games, but they were much less linear and much more open than most games (in DMC3 one passed through lushly textured corridors, in San Andreas one freely wandered throughout a state).

Yeah, I know. I'm just isolating the graphical element, and I couldn't think of anything from last gen that looked worse than GTA3.

Graphics doesn't matter as long as it suits the game. For me, GTA's graphics suits the game well. GTA would not be good if it has a God of War graphics.