Graphics and online killing our games???

[QUOTE="Chickan_117"]What on earth are you talking about? Stop trolling. I said the quality doesn't overly affect the amount of fun I have I didn't say I wanted to somehow play games without any visuals.forza420

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]One I'm not trolling, and two all my posts deal with the question; "So what, you have fun by looking at the graphics?" posted by Yangire. The question simply being all gamers do. Chickan_117

We are saying that the quality of the graphics doesn't affect the amount of fun we have in a game.

You retort(twice on the one page) with a statement that graphics are required for games otherwise we'd look at nothing.

You are deliberately taking what we say out of context and starting an argument. Unless you honestly think our opinion is that graphics are not required for a game in which case [self moderation applied :)]

So, for the sake of closing this argument, I am not saying that I do not think graphics are required for a game. I am saying that the quality does not affect the amount of fun I have playing that game. As with Forza470, I thoroughly enjoy older games like Tetris of Mario 1 as much as current gen games so the quality of the graphics does not affect my experience.

What on earth are you talking about? Stop trolling. I said the quality doesn't overly affect the amount of fun I have I didn't say I wanted to somehow play games without any visuals.Chickan_117

[QUOTE="dkjestrup"]Online is fine if it's good. If every time you die it's because it's your fault, not the games fault, and if the game is balanced/skill based it's great fun. Tacked-on multiplayer needs to die though. If you're not focusing on a proper, supported online service like in Battlefield/COD then just make a longer single player game.gamebreakerz__

Best Graphic game is FPS game

and RPG game is so realistic and cool game :D

when you're drunk the graphics are like crysisforza420

When I'm drunk everything looks like 3D Dot Game heroes :)

Case and point. There's a game that came out this year with terrible graphics but is still a whole mountain of fun!

(I know the pixelation is part of the retro effect but the blurriness and graphical quality could have been far better without losing that effect).

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"][QUOTE="dkjestrup"]Online is fine if it's good. If every time you die it's because it's your fault, not the games fault, and if the game is balanced/skill based it's great fun. Tacked-on multiplayer needs to die though. If you're not focusing on a proper, supported online service like in Battlefield/COD then just make a longer single player game.dkjestrup

[QUOTE="forza420"] when you're drunk the graphics are like crysisChickan_117

When I'm drunk everything looks like 3D Dot Game heroes :)

Case and point. There's a game that came out this year with terrible graphics but is still a whole mountain of fun!

(I know the pixelation is part of the retro effect but the blurriness and graphical quality could have been far better without losing that effect).

Best Graphic game is FPS game

and RPG game is so realistic and cool game :D

that has been my biggest problem since this gen started. there are so many games that looks great but are just boring or gets repetitive, yet they are acclaim by most ppl.

A good example is gta 4: the game has a high level of details, but the missions are repetitive as hell, same thing for red dead redemption. i liked those games at the beginning then the more you play, the more you realize that you are pretty much doing the same thing u were doing except you shoot more people. So many things were strip down or remove from gta san andreas that it was just not funny anymore.

there is a lot of games like that this gen

[QUOTE="dkjestrup"]Online is fine if it's good. If every time you die it's because it's your fault, not the games fault, and if the game is balanced/skill based it's great fun. Tacked-on multiplayer needs to die though. If you're not focusing on a proper, supported online service like in Battlefield/COD then just make a longer single player game.lightleggy

Best Game is Kingdom Hearts ;)

i absolutely prefer online multiplayer to single player games. gaming for me is primarily social so i tend to play a lot of rpgs, ccgs, tabletop wargames and the like. when i cant get together with my mans for some gaming then i have the alternative to do it online and play against human opponents who are pretty much without exception mroe fun to play against than a crappy ai.

my perspective is probably skewed because i only really like games where multiplayer is the core aspect (puzzle fighter, super turbo, tf2, etc)

but i am tired of all these people bellyaching that multiplayer gaming is ruining their solitary fun. you had many, many years of boring, predetermined-outcome single player games for you to play. they are still widely available. additionally, theres been an embarassment of riches of single player games that have been great this gen and if you cant find something to like then you probably are just a curmudgeon anyway.

[QUOTE="Yangire"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] All gamers do.... Without graphics you would have nothing to look at period.i5750at4Ghz

ASCII, and I'm not saying graphics are not needed I'm asking who has fun just by looking at graphics.

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="dkjestrup"]Online is fine if it's good. If every time you die it's because it's your fault, not the games fault, and if the game is balanced/skill based it's great fun. Tacked-on multiplayer needs to die though. If you're not focusing on a proper, supported online service like in Battlefield/COD then just make a longer single player game.gamebreakerz__

TC, I still play NES games.;)

My brother mentioned this yesterday...and I have been thinking about it...I think its true.

Think about it...most of the games that have been released recently either suck at gameplay or story, every day, the devs put more and more effort in giving us better graphics and improving the multiplayer...but what about the single player? what about the story? what about the game lenght?

Take a look at PS2/Xbox/gamecube games.

most of them would last over 10 hours or so, 12 hours was pretty much the standard for any PS2 game,

now on PS3, almost every game can be completed in 6 hours at least.

in my opinion, the devs focus so much on improving the graphics, adding physics and making a better multiplayer, that when they realize they have almost used all the space in those things so when it comes to designing the single player, they can only use a small percentage of space, resulting in shorter games with little to no changes/improvements in the gameplay.

For example, I recently got GoW3 and I thought it was a cool game, but I felt extremely dissapointed, it was not half as long as GoW2 and it was not as epic as the previous installments, it had very few "WOW" moments and, tbh, the story sucked, and the final boss fight was extremely easy.

I think that SMs were just thinking about how to improve the graphics and not the main game...and its almost the same in every game nowadays...take a look at it, games like call of duty which have an extremely short campaign that finishes in a flash, and all because the devs feel lazy after having worked so long in the graphics and multiplayer of the game.

even EA (I think that EA is a very stupid company imo) said that "the future of gaming is not in single player experience, but multiplayer, in the future we will focus more in online mode for our games"

even MGS4...I think that it has the least gameplay in the saga after MGS, I think that is 5 hours of gameplay and 15 hours of cutscenes if im not wrong...that is just sad!

so what happened to those old ps2, xbox, gamecube games? what happened to the long games that lasted over 20 hours like kingdom hearts, GTA, final fantasy (even final fantasy 13 failed this generation, if im not wrong FF13 can be completed in 8 hours)

what do you think about it...do you think that games should still compete to be graphics king? (the saddest part is that they cant take the crown away from crysis yet...) or give us the great gameplay we had once?

lightleggy

it all depends on the genre... for example, RTS depends on multiplayer, RPG/adventure not so much... it's hard to classify 'games' in one lump like that

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"][QUOTE="lightleggy"] when did I mentioned anything about "MP SUCKS I DIE EVERY TIME!" I said that devs are focusing way more on MP than on SPlightleggy

So you play games with your eyes closed? Graphics are extremely important, while you may not care about the quality, with out them you wouldn't have a videogame to look at. i5750at4Ghz

[QUOTE="lightleggy"]

My brother mentioned this yesterday...and I have been thinking about it...I think its true.

Think about it...most of the games that have been released recently either suck at gameplay or story, every day, the devs put more and more effort in giving us better graphics and improving the multiplayer...but what about the single player? what about the story? what about the game lenght?

Take a look at PS2/Xbox/gamecube games.

most of them would last over 10 hours or so, 12 hours was pretty much the standard for any PS2 game,

now on PS3, almost every game can be completed in 6 hours at least.

in my opinion, the devs focus so much on improving the graphics, adding physics and making a better multiplayer, that when they realize they have almost used all the space in those things so when it comes to designing the single player, they can only use a small percentage of space, resulting in shorter games with little to no changes/improvements in the gameplay.

For example, I recently got GoW3 and I thought it was a cool game, but I felt extremely dissapointed, it was not half as long as GoW2 and it was not as epic as the previous installments, it had very few "WOW" moments and, tbh, the story sucked, and the final boss fight was extremely easy.

I think that SMs were just thinking about how to improve the graphics and not the main game...and its almost the same in every game nowadays...take a look at it, games like call of duty which have an extremely short campaign that finishes in a flash, and all because the devs feel lazy after having worked so long in the graphics and multiplayer of the game.

even EA (I think that EA is a very stupid company imo) said that "the future of gaming is not in single player experience, but multiplayer, in the future we will focus more in online mode for our games"

even MGS4...I think that it has the least gameplay in the saga after MGS, I think that is 5 hours of gameplay and 15 hours of cutscenes if im not wrong...that is just sad!

so what happened to those old ps2, xbox, gamecube games? what happened to the long games that lasted over 20 hours like kingdom hearts, GTA, final fantasy (even final fantasy 13 failed this generation, if im not wrong FF13 can be completed in 8 hours)

what do you think about it...do you think that games should still compete to be graphics king? (the saddest part is that they cant take the crown away from crysis yet...) or give us the great gameplay we had once?

Scoob64

it all depends on the genre... for example, RTS depends on multiplayer, RPG/adventure not so much... it's hard to classify 'games' in one lump like that

TC, I still play NES games.;)

mitu123

I love how you say killstreaks have nothing to do with it then you complain about getting a chopper gunner. The gameplay is fine. The only things that really annoy me are commando, akimbo and noobtubes. If you take out killstreaks you also have less incentive to camp. Also, what's wrong with FMJ/ACOG/Holographic sight/Thermal/Extended Mags/Heartbeat? I mean, Heartbeat and Thermal could be said to be a bit "cheap" but both have a counter. Even with thermal, it's not like they wouldn't see you normally. And if it mattered you'd be trying to go stealth with Cold Blooded.dkjestrup

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"] Any argument you made is invalid due to your claim FF13 is 8 hours long.gamebreakerz__

TC, I still play NES games.;)

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

TC, I still play NES games.;)

forza420

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"][QUOTE="lightleggy"] I talked about a game I have not played basing on the standard for most games reciently, as if you hadnt do that once :Plightleggy

so remember after hearing the words of longing to play NES games on the NES Metal gear :cry:

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

TC, I still play NES games.;)

lightleggy

I'm so retro.:P

so remember after hearing the words of longing to play NES games on the NES Metal gear :cry:

Flame102

[QUOTE="forza420"][QUOTE="mitu123"]

TC, I still play NES games.;)

[QUOTE="forza420"][QUOTE="mitu123"]

TC, I still play NES games.;)

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="forza420"] i envy you. i wish i had a NESforza420

I'm very sad because my first memories after playing metal gear on the NES...:cry:

[QUOTE="forza420"][QUOTE="mitu123"] You never had one?:o I still have one after all those years, and still works well.:D

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"] Yes but you made the claim in a lenghty fashion, as if you had some authority which you clearly didn't.gamebreakerz__

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="forza420"] i envy you. i wish i had a NESlightleggy

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="mitu123"]

TC, I still play NES games.;)

mitu123

I'm so retro.:P

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="forza420"] no, lol i had one .i meant i wish i had one nowforza420

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="mitu123"] You never had one?:o I still have one after all those years, and still works well.:D

mitu123

They should only focus on one thing. Most games should just focus on single player unless it is call of duty which shouldn't even have single player just a strong multiplayer which it doesn't have anymore.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] so do I, I played the legend of zelda 4 years ago and I thought it was a great and fun game... I still have my sega genesis :p too bad I lost the power adaptor :(lightleggy

I'm so retro.:P

Goldeneye was my 1st FPS and my friends invite me over to play it. Man I loved those times.:P

[QUOTE="dkjestrup"]I love how you say killstreaks have nothing to do with it then you complain about getting a chopper gunner. The gameplay is fine. The only things that really annoy me are commando, akimbo and noobtubes. If you take out killstreaks you also have less incentive to camp. Also, what's wrong with FMJ/ACOG/Holographic sight/Thermal/Extended Mags/Heartbeat? I mean, Heartbeat and Thermal could be said to be a bit "cheap" but both have a counter. Even with thermal, it's not like they wouldn't see you normally. And if it mattered you'd be trying to go stealth with Cold Blooded.gamebreakerz__

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] I was not born at the times of the nes, but the SNES. My first console was the PS1, then the 64, then the PS2, and my cousin had a sega genesis and he gave it to me about 8 years ago. my dad has an intellevision...its on my grandma's house, too bad it doesnt work anymore :(lightleggy

They should only focus on one thing. Most games should just focus on single player unless it is call of duty which shouldn't even have single player just a strong multiplayer which it doesn't have anymore.

jaqulle999

[QUOTE="forza420"][QUOTE="mitu123"] Oh, well, find one.:P

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="mitu123"] Damn, that sucks, I also have a Sega Master Sysem, Super NES, N64, PS1, etc.

I'm so retro.:P

mitu123

Goldeneye was my 1st FPS and my friends invite me over to play it. Man I loved those times.:P