Graphics don't matter, ey?

My point is, more than once I have seen people say "Graphics don't matter", when they clearly do. No one wants endless grey for every game, therefore graphics do matter, and matter hugely to be honest.locopatho

Those people are wrong. Humans are a visual species, we can't escape the fact that visual appeal is one of our biggest weaknesses. It's in our DNA.

Also, there are FAR MORE people who say " This game sucks, just look at it's graphics?"

fallout 3's color palette is appropriate, i think. after all, its a world devastated by nuclear apocalypse. rachet and clank, banjo, mario should have a bright color palette. it fits the mood. but i don't really think that's a graphics issue specifically.

graphics do matter, but they are the least important of the 3 main components of a game

Gameplay > Story >>>>>>>>>> Graphics

[QUOTE="jalexbrown"]

[QUOTE="PublicNuisance"]

I would take that over every game looking like this:

SaltyMeatballs

Wow...is that actually what Far Cry looked like on the Wii? That's...laughable. :lol::lol::lol:

Was it? Well, I don't know. I just checked out the picture properties, and saw Far Cry Vengeance.

That was N64 Virtual Console :|SaltyMeatballs

That screenshot looks good to me.

well your taking it to far, there has already been games that look like that on the n64 ,and those games sold very well ,

not as well as playstation which obviously couldnt match it but still

goldeneye go look at that game your self

zelda also does , so ya um do some research

and the fact that just dance is the top selling wii third party title proves my point or guitar hero /rockband on 360 ps3

nothing is beatuiful about that game is there,

its just a bunch of colors on screen the n64 can produce that

When games cut out good content just to make a game look better, like GTAIV, then it becomes a problem. Graphics are not more important than great content in games, if "gamers" think otherwise then they should just watch movies instead of playing games.

My point is, more than once I have seen people say "Graphics don't matter", when they clearly do. No one wants endless grey for every game, therefore graphics do matter, and matter hugely to be honest.locopatho

matter just not as much as gameplay because graphics can be kik ass but if the game sucks i want my money back:(

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]

[QUOTE="jalexbrown"]

Wow...is that actually what Far Cry looked like on the Wii? That's...laughable. :lol::lol::lol:

jalexbrown

Was it? Well, I don't know. I just checked out the picture properties, and saw Far Cry Vengeance.

Yep its Vengeance for the Wii. The graphics actually got a lot worse than that at times. Its absolutely disgusting in motion too.

I got the game when I was a sheep and slammed it. Fellow sheep said I couldn't bash a game without finishing it and that its the gameplay that matters. So I finished it, traded it in the next day.

Well, depends on what you mean by how graphics matter.

Seeing that the Xbox 360 and PS3 are quite powerful, high resolution textures, normal mapping, post-processing, and physics engines sum up their standards.

However, since the wii isn't as powerful, the visual talents would have to depend more on the art direction.

As for the PC, there's a large amount of configuration options, depending on one's budget. I doubt that there are really any standards. While one developer might go for a game that can be played on a netbook, few other developers might try to develop a game for the most recent GPUs, rendering console versions an impossiblity, at the cost of making the games accessable for those who have systems that are a or two older.

But one thing that bothers me when it comes to PC gaming are titles that are visually identical to the console counterparts, and yet have higher requirements than games released two years ago. Are developers becoming lazier with optimization?

I wouldn't mind if every game looked like that. Fallout 3 was great :)

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]

[QUOTE="jalexbrown"]

Wow...is that actually what Far Cry looked like on the Wii? That's...laughable. :lol::lol::lol:

jalexbrown

Was it? Well, I don't know. I just checked out the picture properties, and saw Far Cry Vengeance.

No, That is what Far Cry wii looks like. No N64 Virtual Console game. It is an actual wii game.

how dare you talk about fallout 3 like that even though the graphics are not the best its an awesome game:D

Who said graphics don't matter this is far cry on the wii lol it got a 5.5 but on pc same game got a 9.2 back in like 2004

Yep its Vengeance for the Wii. The graphics actually got a lot worse than that at times. Its absolutely disgusting in motion too.

I got the game when I was a sheep and slammed it. Fellow sheep said I couldn't bash a game without finishing it and that its the gameplay that matters. So I finished it, traded it in the next day.

tomarlyn

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]

[QUOTE="jalexbrown"]

Wow...is that actually what Far Cry looked like on the Wii? That's...laughable. :lol::lol::lol:

jalexbrown

Was it? Well, I don't know. I just checked out the picture properties, and saw Far Cry Vengeance.

It's a lot worst in person. I unfortunately purchased it...

Who said graphics don't matter this is far cry on the wii lol it got a 5.5 but on pc same game got a 9.2 back in like 2004

ChiChiMonKilla

I agree in the part that graphics do matter. But the part about the score I'm sure it's unrelated. Farcry: Vengance(?) on the Wii was just a crappy, outdated(not even referring graphically), buggy game.

[QUOTE="Solar-X"]

So visuals are important of course. But you have to factor in everything. You can't just "graphics don't matter".. and you can't say "graphics are very important" either. It depends on a lot of things. The genre of the game first and for most.

locopatho

Certainly not.

Artstyle is a part of the graphics. The distinction between the two is unnecessary.

Certainly not.

mrfokken

Whoever the hell tells you graphics don't matter is wrong. They do. But I don't care about how technically impressive a game is, I care about its eye pleasing nature. That's why I like Windwaker more than Gears and SMG more than Resistance 2 graphically. If I'm a fool for that, so be it.

Hahaha :) dull grey slop made me laugh....

I'm easily entertained... hahaha he said dull grey slop...

*goes to play with sparkly stuffs*

Technical graphics are different from artistic style. Games like Muramasa prove they don't need new "HD" stuff to have great, timeless graphics.

[QUOTE="Shad0ki11"]

Graphics do matter. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Gameplay and graphics go hand-in-hand. You can't have one without the other.

BuryMe

Yes. It's called an animated film, but animated films aren't videogames.

Who said graphics don't matter this is far cry on the wii lol it got a 5.5 but on pc same game got a 9.2 back in like 2004

ChiChiMonKilla

far cry vengeance =/= far cry

I love the artstye of Fallout 3. So it wouldn't matter to me. Do you want Post Apocalyptic environment to look like a lush green environment with people running through grass singing with rainbows in the sky? :| Stevo_the_gamer

Graphics do matter alot. Still not as much as gameplay

Well, depends on what you mean by how graphics matter.

Seeing that the Xbox 360 and PS3 are quite powerful, high resolution textures, normal mapping, post-processing, and physics engines sum up their standards.

However, since the wii isn't as powerful, the visual talents would have to depend more on the art direction.

As for the PC, there's a large amount of configuration options, depending on one's budget. I doubt that there are really any standards. While one developer might go for a game that can be played on a netbook, few other developers might try to develop a game for the most recent GPUs, rendering console versions an impossiblity, at the cost of making the games accessable for those who have systems that are a or two older.

But one thing that bothers me when it comes to PC gaming are titles that are visually identical to the console counterparts, and yet have higher requirements than games released two years ago. Are developers becoming lazier with optimization?