How do graphics make a game more fun?

  • 97 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by PS4hasNOgames (1570 posts) -

Even last gen had 720p and 1080p games, all the lines are smooth, games aren't pixelated like pac-man and pong anymore. So tell me how do even better graphics which are barely noticeable at this point no matter how many p's a resolution is....how does that make a game more fun? Because actual gameplay mechanics haven't changed much if at all since the ps2 era.

#2 Posted by MonsieurX (30038 posts) -

At that point,it's not about fun,it's about the immersion you get from it.

#3 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4711 posts) -

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

#4 Posted by lostrib (36202 posts) -

I just like looking at the pictures

#5 Posted by soulitane (13490 posts) -

When you say that all the lines are smooth, I'm assuming that you're meaning there wasn't any jaggies? If so then you must really be blind, lots of games last gen had very noticeable jaggies.

To answer your question, the graphics don't change how fun the game is, but it's always nice to play a good looking game.

#6 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (7490 posts) -

It's fun to count pixels. Screw playing the game.

#7 Edited by WallofTruth (1582 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

#8 Posted by WallofTruth (1582 posts) -

Even last gen had 720p and 1080p games, all the lines are smooth, games aren't pixelated like pac-man and pong anymore. So tell me how do even better graphics which are barely noticeable at this point no matter how many p's a resolution is....how does that make a game more fun? Because actual gameplay mechanics haven't changed much if at all since the ps2 era.


Um last-gen games on PS3/Xbox 360 mostly looked god awful with the exception of Gears, Uncharted, GoW and some others.

#9 Edited by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Of course man, they're the same. Obviously.

#10 Posted by PsychoLemons (2084 posts) -

More colour.

#11 Posted by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

I'll be honest: games stopped being legitimately fun a few years ago for me. Now the only real factor I take in to play is immersion, which is why I really enjoy high fidelity open world games. Graphics are probably the most important aspect regarding immersion, so it certainly enhances my enjoyment of the game.

But graphics are tied in with gameplay, sometimes they are dependent on each other, the gameplay serves the presentation and the presentation serves the gameplay.

#12 Posted by WallofTruth (1582 posts) -

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Of course man, they're the same. Obviously.

Well some people have mentioned that you need a 144Hertz monitor to notice a difference so I wasnt sure.

#13 Posted by clyde46 (46046 posts) -

@parkurtommo said:

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Of course man, they're the same. Obviously.

Well some people have mentioned that you need a 144Hertz monitor to notice a difference so I wasnt sure.

200FPS will feel no different on a 60Hz panel. The panel will only refresh 60 times a second so 60FPS is the max you can really feel.

#14 Posted by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

@parkurtommo said:

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Of course man, they're the same. Obviously.

Well some people have mentioned that you need a 144Hertz monitor to notice a difference so I wasnt sure.

I thought you were joking! :P

60HZ monitors can only display up to 60 fps, same goes with 144HZ, they can display up to 144 fps. In other words, yes you need a 144HZ monitor for it to make a difference.

#15 Edited by m_machine024 (14938 posts) -

Great visuals bring an overall better experience. Problem with some people here is that they care too much about technical graphical aspects of games that most of them won't even notice.

All I need from visuals is that they please me (sorry couldn't find a better word :P) and games don't need to run at 1080p (by ex) to do so.

#16 Posted by ghostwarrior786 (4366 posts) -

personally only play games that support 4k, anything less is just too blurry for me

#17 Edited by Wasdie (49801 posts) -

"Gameplay mechanics haven't changed much since the PS2 era."

Either you're a troll or you live under a rock.

#18 Edited by LustForSoul (5876 posts) -

As said, it's the immersion, which definitely counts towards the fun of a game. I want the mutants in Metro to look ferocious and scary, not fake. Take Prototype 2, its textures are really bad, it bothers me every time I notice it.

#19 Posted by Devil-Itachi (4372 posts) -

Some get more enjoyment out of it because it helps suck them in. It doesn't benefit me much at all anymore because mainly just care about gameplay mechanics and level design.

#20 Posted by Vecna (3394 posts) -

@Wasdie: He is a troll that lives under a rock.

#21 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4711 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

other people have answered already, but *godverkut* i like talking to you, so prepare to receive a bunch of information for a second time:

basically, the 60 hz monitor will show 60 refreshes a second - max. if the gpu's at 120, you'll only see 60.

on a 144 Hz monitor you can see up to 144 refreshes a second. so if the gpu's at 60, you see 60. 120, you see 120.

but 200, you see 144. 150, you see 144.

another good thing about this monitor is (anecdotally i notice) less tearing at 'funny' frame rates, like 45 fps. but basically to answer your question directly 144 fps on a 60 hz monitor would likely "feel" like 60 hz.

#22 Posted by naz99 (1318 posts) -

Great game = Great game

Great game + Better Graphics = Better immersion = Great Game+

/Thread

#23 Edited by NFJSupreme (5311 posts) -

well I disagree. I can easily notice graphical differences. As for do they make a game better the answer to that is yes. But graphics are only the icing on the cake. If the cake is bad the icing wont fix it. But things like framerate, resolution so you can see detail better, and more immersive effects do make a game better.

#24 Edited by uninspiredcup (8363 posts) -

They don't. Planescape Torement is better than Killzones, Last Of Us, Uncharted e.t.c.... Substance wins. Sadly, being a niche game, console gamers have never experienced substance before.

An incredibly sad tale.

#25 Edited by RoboCopISJesus (1408 posts) -

OP trying to hide ps4's shortcomings after he hyped gfx for 2 years.

#26 Edited by happyduds77 (1451 posts) -

Graphics are very subjective. Some games benefit from low res cartoonish textures while other games just look rubbish.

#27 Edited by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Not sure if serious.

#28 Posted by Douevenlift_bro (5119 posts) -

They don't make it more fun but bad graphics can make it less fun. If the performance is inefficient or you're not fully immersed, how do you enjoy it completely?

*cough* Xbone

#29 Posted by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

other people have answered already, but *godverkut* i like talking to you, so prepare to receive a bunch of information for a second time:

basically, the 60 hz monitor will show 60 refreshes a second - max. if the gpu's at 120, you'll only see 60.

on a 144 Hz monitor you can see up to 144 refreshes a second. so if the gpu's at 60, you see 60. 120, you see 120.

but 200, you see 144. 150, you see 144.

another good thing about this monitor is (anecdotally i notice) less tearing at 'funny' frame rates, like 45 fps. but basically to answer your question directly 144 fps on a 60 hz monitor would likely "feel" like 60 hz.

Does it have GSync or whatchamacallit?

#30 Posted by Cloud_imperium (2995 posts) -

@naz99 said:

Great game = Great game

Great game + Better Graphics = Better immersion = Great Game+

/Thread

#31 Edited by CrownKingArthur (4711 posts) -

@parkurtommo: nah i don't have gsync on this one. it was the cheapest 144 hz monitor i could get. 350 NZD. for comparison over here PS4's are (now) $550 NZD.

i have seen a 1440p, 144 hz, gsync monitor. that'd be absolutely magic.

#32 Posted by wis3boi (31301 posts) -

graphics dont matter to people who cant have them

#33 Edited by strangeisland (1151 posts) -

it doesn't period.

this is a video game and it only consists of UI's and right now its player count is at 17k, regularly peaking at 60k everyday. No graphics king will have this many players ever.

#34 Posted by wolverine4262 (19249 posts) -

I need AT LEAST one thousand p's in all my games. BARE MIN GUISE

#35 Posted by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

it doesn't period.

this is a video game and it only consists of UI's and right now its player count is at 17k, regularly peaking at 60k everyday. No graphics king will have this many players ever.

You're wrong. Period.

Ad populum is a great way to defend your opinion! Good job! /s

#36 Posted by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

I need AT LEAST one thousand p's in all my games. BARE MIN GUISE

Look man, that's really the way it should be :S I play all my games at 1080p on a 3 year old card. It's less powerful than the cards in the PS4 (or maybe on par at most). It doesn't matter if I get unplayable framerates, if that happens I'll lower the settings, but never the resolution.

I think console gamers really don't understand the difference it makes to have 1080p over 720 or anything in between. Let alone 1440p or 4k.

#37 Posted by Mr_Huggles_dog (1068 posts) -

OP trying to hide ps4's shortcomings after he hyped gfx for 2 years.

This is said by the same person that claimed the PS4 ppl go into the PC threads and derail/troll it.

Fucking pathetic.

Anyway...it's about immerision. It also depends on the game. Games that are all serious and trying to be realistic need to have good graphics for me to get immersed.

Games like Mario Kart don't need hyper ultra shadow and pixel intense graphics, imo.

Either way....it's good to have nice graphics and more so aesthetics.

#38 Posted by RoboCopISJesus (1408 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Not sure if serious.

at least its not 30 fps

#39 Posted by wolverine4262 (19249 posts) -

@parkurtommo: I was just making a joke, dude. I play all my games at 1080p too. My TV is 1080p, so I wouldnt want my PC games being all blurry. And my card is around the same age. Performs well.

#40 Posted by Minishdriveby (9869 posts) -

it doesn't period.

this is a video game and it only consists of UI's and right now its player count is at 17k, regularly peaking at 60k everyday. No graphics king will have this many players ever.

Work still went into the UI to make it aesthetically pleasing. Aesthetic pleasure is extremely important in video games, even in UI.

#41 Edited by Mr_Huggles_dog (1068 posts) -

@parkurtommo said:

@wolverine4262 said:

I need AT LEAST one thousand p's in all my games. BARE MIN GUISE

Look man, that's really the way it should be :S I play all my games at 1080p on a 3 year old card. It's less powerful than the cards in the PS4 (or maybe on par at most). It doesn't matter if I get unplayable framerates, if that happens I'll lower the settings, but never the resolution.

I think console gamers really don't understand the difference it makes to have 1080p over 720 or anything in between. Let alone 1440p or 4k.

I have a GTX 680 and I can't run Crysis, Crysis 2, or Farcry 3 at 1080p without sacrificing a decent fps count.

Hmmmm....

#42 Posted by wolverine4262 (19249 posts) -

@mr_huggles_dog: I max out Far Cry 3 on my GTX570 at around 30 fps. I dunno whats acceptable to you, but that card should definitely outperform mine.

#43 Edited by strangeisland (1151 posts) -

@parkurtommo:

Because Shadow Fall at 1k players is at the highest tier of fun and replayability?

Sorry i thought the more people play something the fun more it is /sarcasm

#44 Posted by kingtito (4930 posts) -

Immersion is what you make of it. It doesn't have anything to do with graphics. I wasn't any less immersed in games like WOW or Half-Life when they came out and neither were considered graphics kings of there time. Half life was decent but I wouldn't have been any less immersed if the graphics were anything less.

#45 Posted by Heirren (16904 posts) -

Fuck new graphics. Nothing special about em. 99% of the time they are dull and lifeless. You want visuals go play some 80s arcade games or get a vectrex. Those games are feasts for the eyes.

#46 Posted by CountBleck12 (22805 posts) -
#47 Posted by WallofTruth (1582 posts) -

@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

other people have answered already, but *godverkut* i like talking to you, so prepare to receive a bunch of information for a second time:

basically, the 60 hz monitor will show 60 refreshes a second - max. if the gpu's at 120, you'll only see 60.

on a 144 Hz monitor you can see up to 144 refreshes a second. so if the gpu's at 60, you see 60. 120, you see 120.

but 200, you see 144. 150, you see 144.

another good thing about this monitor is (anecdotally i notice) less tearing at 'funny' frame rates, like 45 fps. but basically to answer your question directly 144 fps on a 60 hz monitor would likely "feel" like 60 hz.

Thank you, exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. And yes, I've just tried it on CS:GO, capping the framerate at 60FPS felt exactly the same way as capping the framerate at 144FPS did. So it seems a 144Hertz monitor is really needed to enjoy the smoothness you've been mentioning lately.

Man, there are so many game changing advancements for PC gaming out right now, 144FPS gaming, 4k gaming, 3d gaming, VR gaming etc, it's crazy and I have no idea what I want to try first.

#48 Edited by parkurtommo (26798 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:
@walloftruth said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

playing at 144 fps is incredible. everything feels unbelievably responsive, unbelievably smooth.

i wouldn't say its more fun but i'd say the fun which is already there feels enhanced.

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

other people have answered already, but *godverkut* i like talking to you, so prepare to receive a bunch of information for a second time:

basically, the 60 hz monitor will show 60 refreshes a second - max. if the gpu's at 120, you'll only see 60.

on a 144 Hz monitor you can see up to 144 refreshes a second. so if the gpu's at 60, you see 60. 120, you see 120.

but 200, you see 144. 150, you see 144.

another good thing about this monitor is (anecdotally i notice) less tearing at 'funny' frame rates, like 45 fps. but basically to answer your question directly 144 fps on a 60 hz monitor would likely "feel" like 60 hz.

Thank you, exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. And yes, I've just tried it on CS:GO, capping the framerate at 60FPS felt exactly the same way as capping the framerate at 144FPS did. So it seems a 144Hertz monitor is really needed to enjoy the smoothness you've been mentioning lately.

Man, there are so many game changing advancements for PC gaming out right now, 144FPS gaming, 4k gaming, 3d gaming, VR gaming etc, it's crazy and I have no idea what I want to try first.

You need a seriously powerful card to get 144 fps on anything remotely good looking. I guess it's kind of like how 4k is borderline impractical witht he current gpus.

In a few years, it might be easier.

#49 Posted by WallofTruth (1582 posts) -

@walloftruth said:

@parkurtommo said:

@walloftruth said:

Do you know if 144FPS on a 60Hertz monitor feels the same as 144FPS on a 144Hertz monitor?

Of course man, they're the same. Obviously.

Well some people have mentioned that you need a 144Hertz monitor to notice a difference so I wasnt sure.

I thought you were joking! :P

60HZ monitors can only display up to 60 fps, same goes with 144HZ, they can display up to 144 fps. In other words, yes you need a 144HZ monitor for it to make a difference.

Ha yeah, I know that it sounded a little stupid but I've heard people saying that it didn't matter how much hertz a monitor has and some others have been saying the exact opposite and since I only have a 60hertz monitor I had no way of knowing what to believe so I thought I'd ask a person who actually own a 144hertz monitor. Thanks for your answer though! :)

#50 Edited by X_CAPCOM_X (6157 posts) -

Graphics don't make a game more fun.

@ps4hasnogames said:

Even last gen had 720p and 1080p games, all the lines are smooth, games aren't pixelated like pac-man and pong anymore. So tell me how do even better graphics which are barely noticeable at this point no matter how many p's a resolution is....how does that make a game more fun? Because actual gameplay mechanics haven't changed much if at all since the ps2 era.

There was a very good discussion about this on system11 a while back (boldfaced part). Pretty much the height of the digital test of the player has been reached, and was reached in that era - especially on PS2.

EDIT: I still play a lot of PS2 era games ranging from arcades to console games. Think about it: why are there so many HD remakes (particularly from this era)?