Cutting edge graphics. Anyone else bored ?

Am I the only one tired of seeing new games coming out with computer killing graphics ? Not that my computer can't run the lasts games but I'm only wondering when will we hit the "graphic limit". When will we see a game and say : "ok.. we can't possibly ask for better graphics now" ?

Because, except for a few exceptions, some companies are really working TOO hard on graphics at the expense of gameplay. And that's the point in a game that will keep me coming back : gameplay !

Speak up people ! :)

I agree somewhat, but I also agree that FPS games need to have good graphics and atmosphere to suck you in. RTS games already look great, I would like devs. to work on zooming in more and work with the indiviual combat of units although that is getting better.

For games on consoles, I actually like the cartoon art style more than realistic. I think super mario galaxy, at least at times, is possibly the best looking game at what it is trying to acomplish.

Bioshock is a great looking game with great atmosphere, but I wish the would try to tighten up the world so you don't see unrealistic looking walls and dynamic effects, like I hate in games where a weapon goes through a wall, I mean WTF? I don't know how hard that is to fix, but people need to get on to that and slow down the graphics upgrading.

Some devs. are working on perfecting gameplay and other companies are working on top notch graphics, I hope that in the near future those companies meet to make a perfect game that also has replayablility. :)

As long as the dev. companies try their very hardest and never settle (which I feel many must do) for less, we are headed in the right direction.

I read an article somewhere online by someone in the game industry (lol sorry, it's been awhile since I read it) in which they said the next big leap forward in gaming isn't going to be the output (graphics, sound) but the input (keyboard, mouse, controller). If you think about it, it makes sense. They said the amount of data required to create output (measured in MB or GB) is magnitudes larger than the amount of data required for input (measured in bits or bytes). Besides that, the QWERTY key layout hasn't changed in over 130 years. I think they were right in saying we're overdue for the next big input device.Bane_v2

I don't know. Why fix something that isn't broken? Generally the QWERTY keyboard is tried and true as an input device. I think innovative input devices are best left to consoles like the Wii that are specifically built around their input devices.

i have to say i am. i know theres alot of room for improvement still...but is the huge cost in time and resources really worth it? imho not really anymore. graphics are really hitting that area of diminishing returns. personally i have no problem at all going from something like crysis to something like battallion wars on the wii. both fun games and the graphics dont make me go "eeewwww" at all.

i would prefer to see devs use the extra horsepower to do something more interesting than just make the games pertier. id also prefer to see them cut back a bit on the graphics budget and invest in better writers and sound designers and other non related graphics areas in games.

I don't know. Why fix something that isn't broken? Generally the QWERTY keyboard is tried and true as an input device. I think innovative input devices are best left to consoles like the Wii that are specifically built around their input devices.BladeMaster84

Nope. I never get bored of seeing amazing visuals, and I never will. Not that I'm a graphics whore (see mid-range machine), but I like seeing pretty things as much as anyone. To be honest, I can't think of any games whose gameplay has notably suffered because of their graphics. There are games with awesome graphics that could have been better, but none where I feel the devs would have donebetter on the gameplay even if they had focused on it more. That is, there are no games where I feel the focus on graphics drew available resources away from the gameplay; they probably wouldn't have done any better even if they didn't put a lot of effort into the visuals. Better to have a beautiful average game than a visually boring, still average game.

A lot of people assume that more focus on gameplay means it would automatically be better, but I think most of the time it wouldn't make any difference. If you spend more time on a math problem beyond your capabilities to solve properly instead of going on to the easier ones, you almost certainly aren't going to get any closer to the correct answer. That's the way I think dev teams are; however well they do on the gameplay is the limit of their personal capabilities on it for that project, barring cases where they were rushed by a publisher or something and the game was released unfinished in multiple respects. Putting further time or focus into it beyond the completion point would just be banging their heads against the current limit of their quality of worksmanship. Their own incompetence is what holds the gameplay back, not how much focus they decided to put in different areas.

That's my theory, anyway.

[QUOTE="BladeMaster84"]I don't know. Why fix something that isn't broken? Generally the QWERTY keyboard is tried and true as an input device. I think innovative input devices are best left to consoles like the Wii that are specifically built around their input devices.Bane_v2

True enough, I suppose. An accessory like this one for all games would certainly be an interesting alternative to, say, mouselook:

http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/02-products/product-TrackClip-PRO.html

I have always been a fan of artistic design, rather then actual graphics power.

I can still play games like Divine Divinity, Sacred 2, Diablo II, ect to this day becuase how beatifully the game world is designed, even though the graphics are not (nor were they then) cutting edge.

I think that's why Blizzard does so well...they really focus more on the little details rather then trying to be cutting edge.

I'm only wondering when will we hit the "graphic limit". When will we see a game and say : "ok.. we can't possibly ask for better graphics now" ?

Keb101

Never.

Yet when a game has graphics that are not cutting edge you are going to see massive threads about it being ugly.Nikalai_88

I read an article somewhere online by someone in the game industry (lol sorry, it's been awhile since I read it) in which they said the next big leap forward in gaming isn't going to be the output (graphics, sound) but the input (keyboard, mouse, controller). If you think about it, it makes sense. They said the amount of data required to create output (measured in MB or GB) is magnitudes larger than the amount of data required for input (measured in bits or bytes). Besides that, the QWERTY key layout hasn't changed in over 130 years. I think they were right in saying we're overdue for the next big input device.Bane_v2

The only thing that will be better then the QWERTY settup is virtual reality and we are a far way off from that.

I don't think we will ever stop and say hey this is enough. Every industry pushes to improve. For example Ipods getting smaller but have more space, who the hell is going to use 60 gigs on an Ipod. There are still those games that are focused on gameplay like Spore. The graphics aren't the best, the only thing its known for is the gameplay and what you can do. I really don't mind they keep pushing the limits. I know once I get off my lazy ass and get a job I will build a nice computer that will actually be able to run these games. I also think the main focus on Crysis was the graphics because you know there are going to be lots of people who are going to mod it to make good gameplay, people will have to buy the game to play the mods

Good graphics are nice, but I think I'd rather see more developers focus on an art style other than the pursuit of photorealism more often.BladeMaster84

I agree with this guy!!!!!

Yet when a game has graphics that are not cutting edge you are going to see massive threads about it being ugly.Nikalai_88

But since its so easy to make games look good nowadays do u really think thats gonna happen, just slap on some good looking textures on the UE3, CE2, or source engine and you have a good looking game....and besides, if a game plays awesome, I personally won't mind HOW it looks.....

Anyways, I think that devs should now be looking at improving things like Stories and emotionally bringing a player into the equaion of playing...... that would make games really great imo........

The only thing that will be better then the QWERTY settup is virtual reality and we are a far way off from that.xwolfghost

[QUOTE="BladeMaster84"]Good graphics are nice, but I think I'd rather see more developers focus on an art style other than the pursuit of photorealism more often.42316

I agree with this guy!!!!!

Yet when a game has graphics that are not cutting edge you are going to see massive threads about it being ugly.Nikalai_88

But since its so easy to make games look good nowadays do u really think thats gonna happen, just slap on some good looking textures on the UE3, CE2, or source engine and you have a good looking game....and besides, if a game plays awesome, I personally won't mind HOW it looks.....

Anyways, I think that devs should now be looking at improving things like Stories and emotionally bringing a player into the equaion of playing...... that would make games really great imo........

Thats what costs millions of dollars, so its not 'so easy' and there are already people who think the Source Engine looks bad.

Yeah, horse hockey. Developers spend more money (probably much more) on visuals than gameplay because that's what sells things. Surely, you must have played some game that could have been better in a gameplay way but not so much in a visual way?

Srinivassa

Yes, I covered that in my post. Yes, there are games with great graphics, but gameplay that could use a lot of work. But the point I was trying to make is that the devs of those games wouldn't do any better on the gameplay even if they hadn't tried to make the graphics better. It would be possible to make the gameplay better, but not for the developers of that game. In every game I've played with good graphics and lackluster gameplay, I've felt the gameplay suffered due to the incompetence of the particular devs who worked on it, not because of the areas of focus they chose. They made the gameplay as good as they personally were capable of at that time, as good as their competence allowed for (again, barring cases where the game was unfinished for whatever reason). It wouldn't matter how much more they focused on gameplay, I don't believe they could do any better. Some other dev team, sure, but not them.

I don't know much about Halo 2 as I'm strictly a PC gamer, but okay, let's say they did add all those things instead. That doesn't mean they would have implemented them as well as they may have promised, or that they would make the game experience any better (my money in both cases would be on that they wouldn't).

Honestly I couldn't care less. Half-Life 2 and Fear in my mind still looks fanastic.. And they could make another amazing game in that engine and I would buy it...

I am also sick of the constant talk of people not liking Starcraft 2 graphics.. To me this seems immensely hypocritical sense Starcraft was never cutting edge to begin with.

I just built a new computer couple days ago and here are some pics i took of crysis running on my rig.. IM IN LOVE

high to very high is a major difference.. i never knew until now

wish i could use AA but thats pushing it.. haha.. i can still play the game on ALL very high at around 25-30fps average

[QUOTE="xwolfghost"]The only thing that will be better then the QWERTY settup is virtual reality and we are a far way off from that.Bane_v2

Here you go

It still looks like a sci-fi device, but brain control helmet has been already created and will be released as a gaming gadget this years.

An American/Australian firm called Emotiv announced that -later this year- they will be releasing a neuro-helmet which "allows the user to manipulate a game or virtual environment naturally and intuitively."

The helmet, called Epoc, " picks up electrical activity from the brain and sends wireless signals to a computer," said Tan Le, president of Emotiv.

Epoc implements a technology known as non-invasive electroencephalography (EEG) to read the neural activity of the brain by capturing the electrical pulses neurons (nerve cells) emit while interacting.

Reading neural activity is not completely new as it has been implemented several times since the seventies but, according to Ms. Tan Le, "this is the first headset that doesn't require a large net of electrodes, or a technician to calibrate or operate it and does require gel on the scalp. It also doesn't cost tens of thousands of dollars."

In addition to understanding the player's movement and action orders, Epoc also detects his emotion and relay it to the game so that his avatar would reflect them. "If you laughed or felt happy after killing a character in a game then your virtual buddy could admonish you for being callous", said Ms. Le.

Epoc will retail for $299. It is able to more detect than 30 different expressions, emotions and actions. The helmet also includes a gyroscope to detect movements and it connects to the pc wirelessly through a USB dongle.

Emotiv is working with IBM to develop the technology for uses in "strategic enterprise business markets and virtual worlds"

Paul Ledak, vice president, IBM Digital Convergence said brain computer interfaces, like the Epoc headset were an important component of the future 3D Internet and the future of virtual communication.

You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.Ps2stony

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.F1_2004

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

[QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.sSubZerOo

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.F1_2004

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

WoW isn't that graphically intense game... It gets no where near the visuals of say Half-Life 2, a game 4 years old.. Sooo thats my point.. Graphics arn't king..

I think developers ought to not scale back the way things look maxed out, but at least make things look pallatable for people with older rigs. Thats one thing that I like about the Valve people is that they understand that some of thier fans built thier pcs in 2000-2003 or so instead of 2008. So many developers expect that you buy a new graphics card everytime a new one is released and while some people fit that catergory, the majority of people dont.

Companies would only increase thier fan base and sales if they make thier games compatable with the past decade of video cards instead of just the past month. (they should also make it so that the frames per second are still solid even with 512 ram also)

Frankly I want to be spoiled - I want the best graphics and the best gameplay.

Its not a question of which one would you prefer?

I want both and a sandwich

Nope. I never get bored of seeing amazing visuals, and I never will. Not that I'm a graphics whore (see mid-range machine), but I like seeing pretty things as much as anyone. To be honest, I can't think of any games whose gameplay has notably suffered because of their graphics. There are games with awesome graphics that could have been better, but none where I feel the devs would have donebetter on the gameplay even if they had focused on it more. That is, there are no games where I feel the focus on graphics drew available resources away from the gameplay; they probably wouldn't have done any better even if they didn't put a lot of effort into the visuals. Better to have a beautiful average game than a visually boring, still average game.

A lot of people assume that more focus on gameplay means it would automatically be better, but I think most of the time it wouldn't make any difference. If you spend more time on a math problem beyond your capabilities to solve properly instead of going on to the easier ones, you almost certainly aren't going to get any closer to the correct answer. That's the way I think dev teams are; however well they do on the gameplay is the limit of their personal capabilities on it for that project, barring cases where they were rushed by a publisher or something and the game was released unfinished in multiple respects. Putting further time or focus into it beyond the completion point would just be banging their heads against the current limit of their quality of worksmanship. Their own incompetence is what holds the gameplay back, not how much focus they decided to put in different areas.

That's my theory, anyway.

JP_Russell

Here you go [snip]04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Here you go [snip]Bane_v2

Of what ive read about this you run a program/settings in the background and it emulates the mouse so any game should be able to use it.

[QUOTE="F1_2004"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.sSubZerOo

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

WoW isn't that graphically intense game... It gets no where near the visuals of say Half-Life 2, a game 4 years old.. Sooo thats my point.. Graphics arn't king..

Hi! Friends,

I am trying to convert Age of empires .mgx file to video file. Can anyone help me how to convert saved games to play on Videoplayer?

thanks

It should all boil down to gameplay at the end. If it's not fun to play, than any level of high-quality graphics in the world won't save it.TDLlama

exactly. And that is why Crysis is such a great game, because the graphics were icing on top of a great gameplay cake.

but I agree, I am getting tired of these "killer" graphics. I want to see more art direction, you know, like trippy environments like in Alice and Heavy Metal: FAKK.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.Ps2stony

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

WoW isn't that graphically intense game... It gets no where near the visuals of say Half-Life 2, a game 4 years old.. Sooo thats my point.. Graphics arn't king..

No... I own a 8800 GTS and played Crysis as well.. It looks fanastic.. But it ISN'T NECCESARY.. Half-Life 2 and FEAR for instance still look fanastic in my eyes.. Yes its a plus to have better graphics but I do not need bleeding edge graphics to begin with.. And apparently neither does Gamespot with how their ratings go.. Or really any professional reviewer..

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.sSubZerOo

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

WoW isn't that graphically intense game... It gets no where near the visuals of say Half-Life 2, a game 4 years old.. Sooo thats my point.. Graphics arn't king..

No... I own a 8800 GTS and played Crysis as well.. It looks fanastic.. But it ISN'T NECCESARY.. Half-Life 2 and FEAR for instance still look fanastic in my eyes.. Yes its a plus to have better graphics but I do not need bleeding edge graphics to begin with.. And apparently neither does Gamespot with how their ratings go.. Or really any professional reviewer..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Ps2stony"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="F1_2004"]

[QUOTE="Ps2stony"]You can't call yourself a PC gamer if you don't think graphics make the game.Ps2stony

True story. Better looking graphics enhance the enjoyment you get out of a game by much more than anyone cares to admit. There's a reason why outdated games are so difficult to go back to and replay, and it's not cause the gameplay was much worse back in the day ;) Many people seem to consider gameplay as the holy grail, and graphics as the devil, and renounce graphics quicker than the Pope renounces gay marriage, but graphics are a huge part of a game.

Tell that to the huge amount of people playing Starcraft, Diablo 2 and WoW.. All games with huge fan bases that dwarf all other communities usually...

And it completely depends on the game.. For instance I still think Baldur's Gate 2 is still pleasing to the eyes due to its art direction..

Starcraft graphics are pretty decent (although everyone will very likely migrate to SC2 when that comes out) and WoW is hardly an outdated game. Diablo 2, I guess, but how many Diablo 2's are there in the world? There's always an exception to every rule.

WoW isn't that graphically intense game... It gets no where near the visuals of say Half-Life 2, a game 4 years old.. Sooo thats my point.. Graphics arn't king..

No... I own a 8800 GTS and played Crysis as well.. It looks fanastic.. But it ISN'T NECCESARY.. Half-Life 2 and FEAR for instance still look fanastic in my eyes.. Yes its a plus to have better graphics but I do not need bleeding edge graphics to begin with.. And apparently neither does Gamespot with how their ratings go.. Or really any professional reviewer..

Ironic seeing as the majority of great games out there for the pc are by no means cutting edge :lol: thanks for the laugh though.. I am glad you set me straight, sense games like Sins of a Solar Empire have become so popular and its by no means the best looking game..