Graphics have ALWAYS mattered, and ALWAYS will matter.

ALWAYS.

Think about it.....When you were a little kid and you had your NES (for those of you who were kids back then).......whats the main reason you wanted an SNES?

Better graphics right? You didnt give a rats ass about blind loyalism, all you cared about was seeing a better version of mario right?

When you had your SNES as a kid, and you saw the Playstation for the first time.....whats the main reason you wanted it? Better graphics right?

When you had your PSone/N64 as a kid (this is the category I fit into, although I had the above systems in the house as well. And im 19 incase anyone asks) you wanted a PS2 because it had better graphics right? Right. I know I sure as hell did, and I know most of you did as well.

Now, why did you guys buy the 360, Wii, and PS3? Because you wanted to see next gen versions of your favorite games right? With better graphics?

A common fail arguement that people bring up is saying that "graphics dont matter, look at the PS2, and PS1. Both were weaker than the N64, Gamecube and Xbox". What you fail to realize is that all THREE of those platforms came out an entire year after playstation, and ONLY came out as a form of retaliation to it. The PSone was meant to be an attachment to the SNES, but Nintendo f*cked Sony over, and nintendo made the N64 to compete with Sony once they realized how stupid of a mistake they made. (obviously they were going to make a new platform anyways, but the N64 was a retaliation to the PS1)

The PS2 was originally made to compete with the Dreamcast (and it did just that, being much more powerful). Then Nintendo went and came out with the Gamecube a year later. Microsoft was also secretly building the Xbox at the same time they were helping Sega with the Dreamcast. This is the ONLY reason the PSone and PS2 were weaker than N64, Gamecube, and Xbox. The ONLY time graphics have ever "not mattered" was when the Wii came out, and the only reason people say that is because fanboys cannot brag about it, so they use this as a defense mechanism.

People have the mistaken impression that Sony used to not care about graphics, and only just NOW with the PS3 went more powerful than the competition. This is an arguement I see brought up all the time to discredit the importance of graphics. Even seeing Wii fans going to the extent of calling better hardware "gimmicks" and travelling the lengths of the earth to downplay them, even damage controling the recent specs of the Wii U, etc....

Every Playstation platform thats EVER been released was more powerful than anything on the market at the time of release. The PS1, PS2, PSP, PS3, etc....

Any deviation from the above was a device that came out AFTER the system, and was in direct retaliation to it.

Same thing with Nintendo. The NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, etc. The first time graphics ever DIDNT matter, was when the WII came out. Thats the only time people "didnt care" about graphics. And yes, we are well aware that Gameplay matters as well (as you never let us forget. Because its impossible to have good gameplay if your graphics are good :roll: )

Visuals always mattered, and they always WILL matter. Bottom line, the only reason Nintendo doesnt stay up to par with everyone else, is because they know they can short you NOW, sell you crap hardware for a huge markup, and then sell you a better (or REAL) console LATER, (ala. Apple ****.

Graphics do matter. Gameplay just matters more.

And no, the reason I wanted the next console as a kid was because it was a new console. How a game looked was the least of my concerns at the time.

I disagree.. to some extent.

Graphics are the last damn thing on my mind when I buy a video game. But do they matter to a majority of people? Yes, there is no denying that. Otherwise we'd be still playing sprite based games.. which I would love to be doing.

Graphics do matter. Gameplay just matters more.

mmmwksil

I disagree.. to some extent.

Graphics are the last damn thing on my mind when I buy a video game. But do they matter to a majority of people? Yes, there is no denying that. Otherwise we'd be still playing sprite based games.. which I would love to be doing.

MLBknights58

[QUOTE="mmmwksil"]

Graphics do matter. Gameplay just matters more.

Wii-U4Fun

I agree and disagree at the same time. I agree that graphics do matter (obviously not as much as gameplay), but I never buy a console because of good graphics. The reason I want the Wii U so bad isn't because of the "advances in technology" I mean sure, that's one of the reasons I want it, but I wouldn't buy a Wii U just for that reason. I want the Wii U because I need to catch up on all the past Paper Mario and Zelda games (along with Kirby, Xenoblade, etc.).

With the success of recent game TC is absolutel right.

Personally I agree pretty much with what mmmwksil said. They matter but not really that much, gameplay is the most important part of a game, framerate is the second most important which you'd think I wouldn't have to bring up and developers would be skilled enough to make polished games at this point in time but, no.

Do graphics matter? Of course.

But do technical graphics matter? Of course not.

It's all about art style.

Also TC, saying the reason people by new gen consoles is to see better graphics is bull.

People buy new gen consoles mainly for the new experiences, because they know that's where all the new games will be going and for whatever games are currently in its' library.

If there are people that run out to buy new consoles just because they want to see better graphics, then those people are a very small minority.

Too much to read but I do agree. The quality of graphics reflects a lot on the developer. Crappy visuals=laziness. Madden is a great example. These "huge" graphical leaps for the game are a joke. MLB 09 The Show still looks better than Madden 12. It is sad really. A lot of the time graphics aren't pushed to the extreme due to deadlines or a lack of incentive. Modern Warfare is another perfect example.nightshade869

Also TC, saying the reason people by new gen consoles is to see better graphics is bull.

People buy new gen consoles mainly for the new experiences, because they know that's where all the new games will be going and for whatever games are currently in its' library.

If there are people that run out to buy new consoles just because they want to see better graphics, then those people are a very small minority.

Wii-U4Fun

Actually, you'd be surprised how many people do go out and buy new consoles because of better graphics and gimmicks. Keep in mind that the general public doesn't research much on gaming, and these are the same people that continously buy Apple products and Modern Warfare games. The truth is that System Wars is the small minority, not the other way around.

Also TC, saying the reason people by new gen consoles is to see better graphics is bull.

People buy new gen consoles mainly for the new experiences, because they know that's where all the new games will be going and for whatever games are currently in its' library.

If there are people that run out to buy new consoles just because they want to see better graphics, then those people are a very small minority.

Wii-U4Fun

Same thing with the PSone. I had an NES, and all I knew was that when I went to my friends house, and played his PSone, MY machine wasnt doing anything like it. Thats all I knew, and all I cared about.

Obviously the games are what matter, but its stupid to deny that hardware mattered at least in the last 3 gens.

[QUOTE="Wii-U4Fun"]

Also TC, saying the reason people by new gen consoles is to see better graphics is bull.

People buy new gen consoles mainly for the new experiences, because they know that's where all the new games will be going and for whatever games are currently in its' library.

If there are people that run out to buy new consoles just because they want to see better graphics, then those people are a very small minority.

StrongDeadlift

I was the same way when I was younger.

When the N64 came out I just dropped my SNES like a rock.

But that was then, and I'm mature enough now to recognize that you don't need technical prowess to make a game better.

To me it's all about distinctive art styles...i adore stylistic games over those that go for an uninspired, pseudo-realistic art style.

I used to be like what the TC is explaining. Then I grew up.

Wrong I play quake live so much and it has piss graphics, well actually I made even uglier: me playin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWlEaPGawvkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTCsKmRyIjohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLJBd0-xV3cJigglyWiggly_

Wait, you're meaning to tell me that games existed without 1600p Ultra HD graphics with super-realistic lighting, god rays, ridiculous depth of field, and hyper-real textures?

After seeing Wii games on Dolphin in native 1080p, I think resolution and anti-aliasing matter more than "graphics."

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"][QUOTE="Wii-U4Fun"]

Also TC, saying the reason people by new gen consoles is to see better graphics is bull.

People buy new gen consoles mainly for the new experiences, because they know that's where all the new games will be going and for whatever games are currently in its' library.

If there are people that run out to buy new consoles just because they want to see better graphics, then those people are a very small minority.

peterw007

I was the same way when I was younger.

When the N64 came out I just dropped my SNES like a rock.

But that was then, and I'm mature enough now to recognize that you don't need technical prowess to make a game better.

To me it's all about distinctive art styles...i adore stylistic games over those that go for an uninspired, pseudo-realistic art style.

[QUOTE="nightshade869"]Too much to read but I do agree. The quality of graphics reflects a lot on the developer. Crappy visuals=laziness. Madden is a great example. These "huge" graphical leaps for the game are a joke. MLB 09 The Show still looks better than Madden 12. It is sad really. A lot of the time graphics aren't pushed to the extreme due to deadlines or a lack of incentive. Modern Warfare is another perfect example.StrongDeadlift

Well.. yes. I am happy with that. When I was a little kid I didn't want a new console because it had better graphics, I wanted it because it was new. When I was a kid I was fooled into thinking that newer = better. Which isn't always the case. Just like a video game. Killzone 3 has amazing looking graphics but I don't think it plays as well or is as fun as Doom II.

I don't consider myself a blind loyalist either, for buying something I know I will enjoy. Why exactly should I demand they give me better hardware? So it can cost more? I got so much enjoyment out of my Wii and I fell in love. Broke my little gamer heart to have to sell it. I have hard time accepting the whole "Dev lazy" as it is unprovable so I will ignore that. I don't hate on graphics, I just don't think they are a necessity if every other aspect of the product is excellent.

I'm one of the few people that really just don't give a damn. If the experience I get out of a product justifies the price, then I have no complaints.If a 60 dollar game made of stick figures has amazing gameplay and really pulls me in, then I will have no complaints about the graphics or the price. If it's fun, it's fun.

Playstation fans who bought their 599 PS3 at launch and had a blast with it probably feel the same. If they had a great time playing their PS3 and felt it was worth it, why complain? I thought my Wii was more than worth the 200-250 bucks I paid for it. I don't care what it could have been, I loved it for what it was and offered at that time.

[QUOTE="peterw007"]

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"] I dont know about you, but I had a PSone when I was younger, and when i was 9 all my friends got PS2s. I wanted a PS2 because I went to their houses and played Final Fantasy 10 and MGS2 and all I knew is that MY machine wasnt doing anything like what those machines were doing. Eponique

I was the same way when I was younger.

When the N64 came out I just dropped my SNES like a rock.

But that was then, and I'm mature enough now to recognize that you don't need technical prowess to make a game better.

To me it's all about distinctive art styles...i adore stylistic games over those that go for an uninspired, pseudo-realistic art style.

Maybe. I just love it when games ditch the utilitarian look for something that could be more classified under "art."

I'm a huge sucker for games that try something new.

Wrong I play quake live so much and it has piss graphics, well actually I made even uglier: me playin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWlEaPGawvkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTCsKmRyIjohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLJBd0-xV3cJigglyWiggly_

After seeing Wii games on Dolphin in native 1080p, I think resolution and anti-aliasing matter more than "graphics."

Tikeio

[QUOTE="nightshade869"]Too much to read but I do agree. The quality of graphics reflects a lot on the developer. Crappy visuals=laziness. Madden is a great example. These "huge" graphical leaps for the game are a joke. MLB 09 The Show still looks better than Madden 12. It is sad really. A lot of the time graphics aren't pushed to the extreme due to deadlines or a lack of incentive. Modern Warfare is another perfect example.StrongDeadlift

Nintendo isn't Sony or MS. They can't sell hardware at a huge loss and then recoup those losses in some other section of their company because they are a gaming only company and a big part of their profit comes from selling hardware.

Wii was a risk for Nintendo. They didn't know if it would be a sure success based on its' innovation so they had to make a high profit on it so that if it failed they wouldn't be put into a financial hole.

Wii was Nintendo's only console that they took a big profit from by the way. Their previous consoles, they only made a small profit off each hardware (GC was sold at a small loss at launch).

[QUOTE="nightshade869"]Too much to read but I do agree. The quality of graphics reflects a lot on the developer. Crappy visuals=laziness. Madden is a great example. These "huge" graphical leaps for the game are a joke. MLB 09 The Show still looks better than Madden 12. It is sad really. A lot of the time graphics aren't pushed to the extreme due to deadlines or a lack of incentive. Modern Warfare is another perfect example.StrongDeadlift

[QUOTE="Tikeio"]

After seeing Wii games on Dolphin in native 1080p, I think resolution and anti-aliasing matter more than "graphics."

StrongDeadlift

Yeah. Wii games look amazing in 1080p with AA.

Nintendo should just do what Dolphin does to Wii games on the Wii U, and sell it for $250 with the tablet controller.

Looks better than some multi-plats on the HD twins, including Dragon Age.

I used to be like what the TC is explaining. Then I grew up.

D4W1L4H

:lol: exactly. this dude's talking about being 9 when the ps2 came out, no wonder he's on this dumb s***.

Graphics do matter, but if it doesn't have good gameplay the game will suck so graphics are only half of the battle.

tl;dr version: I hate the Wii and Nintendo fanboys.GarrusVakarian7

Fixed.

[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"]

I used to be like what the TC is explaining. Then I grew up.

lazerface216

:lol: exactly. this dude's talking about being 9 when the ps2 came out, no wonder he's on this dumb s***.

Graphics always mattered. Whether it mattered more than gameplay is a totally different matter.

[QUOTE="lazerface216"]

[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"]

I used to be like what the TC is explaining. Then I grew up.

StrongDeadlift

:lol: exactly. this dude's talking about being 9 when the ps2 came out, no wonder he's on this dumb s***.

Fixed.

LOL

I remember that when my big brother convinced our folks to buy us a SNES we were so blown away because Super Mario World had way better graphics than SMB3, and it also had the Mode7 games like F-Zero and Mario Kart, we were like this:o ... :lol:

I just remembered when Mortal Kombat was released and video games had finally achieved photorealism. :lol:

LOL

I remember that when my big brother convinced our folks to buy us a SNES we were so blown away because Super Mario World had way better graphics than SMB3, and it also had the Mode7 games like F-Zero and Mario Kart, we were like this:o ... :lol:

I just remembered when Mortal Kombat was released and video games had finally achieved photorealism. :lol:

glez13

haha those were the good ol' days. i remember seeing mortal kombat for the first time at the arcade and not believing how real it looked. i have to admit, it was an exciting time. nowadays, we've advanced so much that it's just not as big of a deal to me.

Graphics matter very little when it comes to gaming.

The heavy focus on "production values" this gen has left consumers with some really watered down games that are just bland and boring.

Seriously, I can't think of much this gen that I would go back and play next gen, but I am still buying SNES/PS1/PS2/GC/GBA/DS/etc. games that I have never played before and they are a ton of fun.

[QUOTE="glez13"]

LOL

I remember that when my big brother convinced our folks to buy us a SNES we were so blown away because Super Mario World had way better graphics than SMB3, and it also had the Mode7 games like F-Zero and Mario Kart, we were like this:o ... :lol:

I just remembered when Mortal Kombat was released and video games had finally achieved photorealism. :lol:

lazerface216

haha those were the good ol' days. i remember seeing mortal kombat for the first time at the arcade and not believing how real it looked. i have to admit, it was an exciting time. nowadays, we've advanced so much that it's just not as big of a deal to me.

Graphics have always been essential and do matter.

What it really comes down to is WHAT you LIKE.

For example... a realistic game with facial and body motion... lets say ----- Half Life 2.
or a cartoony game with cartoon graphics like looney tunes... lets say ------ Zelda:wind walker.



Now whos going to care about graphics more?

Certain fanboys will vouch for "only gameplay matters"...
If that was the case, we'd all be playing TETRIS, but with different shapes each year.

No improvement in graphics would mean no modern games.
And ive watched too many cartoons in my time too.

My 2 cents

Do graphics matter? Of course.

But do technical graphics matter? Of course not.

It's all about art style.

peterw007

When I think about it.

I've NEVER cared for Graphics, ever.

I may say that this game is gorgeous or beautiful or nice looking or whatever, but I've never really cared for the Graphics in any game.

For the PC I would like to have a Decent Computer to run all the games in the highest form because well the option's there, I like my games to run at their fullest.

But other than that Graphics never really mattered to me, it was all about the Gameplay, Tony Hawk ProSkater and Dave Mirra's FreeStyle BMX looked like CRAP when I first played them, but dang it They were some of the best games I've ever played.