Halo 3, Forza 2, WIi games, Resistance etc. When do graphics take a back seat?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for YourExpert
#1 Posted by YourExpert (387 posts) -

All of these games are fantastic.  None of them are ugly by any means.  None of them may not be a techinical marvel like gears of war but all seem to offer awesome gameplay.   When does the complaing about the graphics stop and the appreciation of the great fun it is to play these games begin?

 

Isn't the #! reason why we play games is because they are fun?   Alot of users here have forgotten that. 

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
#2 Posted by jg4xchamp (61742 posts) -
i picked the some part. all the graphics have to be is acceptable. Zelda TP and Superpapermario are acceptable. same with future wii games. Halo 3 looks fine to me, and the gameplay looks SICK. I dont know why people are looking for those amazing eye candy games, most of them are really shallow, have bad storylines, lack some serious depth, etc. The only exception is Gears and Oblivion where the gameplay and graphics are both great. Other games while they maybe good, they arent special. Resistance isnt that great of a FPS. You can find way better. Motorstorm lacks depth in terms of racers. Lost Planet is good but nothing special IMO.
Avatar image for briguyb13
#3 Posted by briguyb13 (3123 posts) -
I don't care what system one prefers, graphics ALWAYS takes a back seat to game-play. Who ever disagree's with that statement can not be called a true GAME fan.
Avatar image for 11Marcel
#4 Posted by 11Marcel (7241 posts) -
Of course graphics take a back seat, especially in MP games. Good graphics are always nice of course. You need some reasonable graphics to enjoy the game still.
Avatar image for Grive
#5 Posted by Grive (2971 posts) -

Some. I still have Arcade Volleyball tournies from time to time.

 

However, good gameplay is NOT an excuse for poor graphics. Good graphics do not hinder gameplay. So, a game with terrific gameplay AND terrific graphics will always be better than a game with terrific gameplay and poor graphics.

Considering this, I might lean in favor of slightly worse gameplay for much better graphics... to a point. 

Avatar image for Smoke_ManMuscle
#6 Posted by Smoke_ManMuscle (651 posts) -
I appreciate graphics with respect to the hardware they've been achieved on.  It seems silly to complain about GBA's graphics when the 360 is out, so I don't understand why you'd make the same mistake of crying about the Wii's graphics when it wasn't built to create those outlandish visuals.
Avatar image for Iyethar
#7 Posted by Iyethar (4660 posts) -
As long as things look reasonably nice and I can see what's going on in the game, I'm good.  My biggest complaints about graphics usually revolve around camera work.  Excellent camera work can make a good looking game look great, for an example see God of War.  Conversely, bad camera work can murder the graphics and the gameplay.
Avatar image for Grive
#8 Posted by Grive (2971 posts) -

I appreciate graphics with respect to the hardware they've been achieved on. It seems silly to complain about GBA's graphics when the 360 is out, so I don't understand why you'd make the same mistake of crying about the Wii's graphics when it wasn't built to create those outlandish visuals.Smoke_ManMuscle

Problem there, chief. The GBA is not in competition to the 360... the Wii is somewhere in the line of the competition. It IS correct to take into account graphics capabilities when discussing the 360 vs. Wii, the same way the Wiimote should be taken into account. The great question is: Does the Wiimote improve gameplay enough to offset the graphical disadvantage considering the $90-150 price difference? 

The Wii wasn't built to create the visuals, you're right. Should it be excused because the creator didn't care enough for those graphics? I say no. It's a decision Nintendo will have to deal with.

It's like buying a Scion and saying "well, the creators didn't intend for the car to look pretty, so we shouldn't take into account that the competition is more appealing, even if a bit more expensive". It makes no sense.

Avatar image for Trading_Zoner
#9 Posted by Trading_Zoner (4100 posts) -
???
Halo 3 looks pretty good IMO.
We haven't really even seen any single player shots yet. Which always look better and more detailed.
Avatar image for YourExpert
#10 Posted by YourExpert (387 posts) -

i picked the some part. all the graphics have to be is acceptable. Zelda TP and Superpapermario are acceptable. same with future wii games. Halo 3 looks fine to me, and the gameplay looks SICK. I dont know why people are looking for those amazing eye candy games, most of them are really shallow, have bad storylines, lack some serious depth, etc. The only exception is Gears and Oblivion where the gameplay and graphics are both great. Other games while they maybe good, they arent special. Resistance isnt that great of a FPS. You can find way better. Motorstorm lacks depth in terms of racers. Lost Planet is good but nothing special IMO. jg4xchamp

 

I agree 100% with you 

Avatar image for Nintendo_Ownes7
#11 Posted by Nintendo_Ownes7 (30973 posts) -
I can't play games on the 2600 because the Graphics make it unplayable, but NES graphics I can play those and still think the game is great including Graphically.
Avatar image for darthogre
#12 Posted by darthogre (5082 posts) -

All of these games are fantastic.  None of them are ugly by any means.  None of them may not be a techinical marvel like gears of war but all seem to offer awesome gameplay.   When does the complaing about the graphics stop and the appreciation of the great fun it is to play these games begin?

 

Isn't the #! reason why we play games is because they are fun?   Alot of users here have forgotten that. 

YourExpert

Isn't that like asking why we all want a cool looking car, truck, suv?

It makes us feel better about ourselves.  Sure we could all drive around that 1980 pento, but to be honest who in their right mind wouldn't take a BMW or Lexus if they could afford it. 

Gameplay has to be a part of the games but so does graphics.  This is like saying "She has a wonderful personality.....but looks like a horse with bucked teeth"......a balance between looks and personality is the best combination.  Right now the Wii is the horse with a great personality........there is no way to make over the horse.  In the case of PS3 and X360, they are thin blond bimbo.....we are willing to give her time to work out those personality shortcommings because again, they can be worked out over time with a some effort.  No effort is going to make a horse look good (unless your from certain states I won't mention)

Avatar image for mavven
#13 Posted by mavven (560 posts) -
Not too much!!
Avatar image for m_machine024
#14 Posted by m_machine024 (15872 posts) -
I just want clean graphics. Something pleasantly looking.
Avatar image for jbeen
#15 Posted by jbeen (2372 posts) -

Graphics take a back set about 10 minutes after you start playing the game.

Avatar image for Adrian_Cloud
#16 Posted by Adrian_Cloud (7169 posts) -

"Visually so far I have to admit that it doesn't look as good as I would have hoped. I heard mentioned quite often from other players that it looked like a Halo 2.5, but I've gone back and played Halo 2 multiplayer lately and I believe Halo 3 looks much better. Maybe I've been spoiled by too many solid next-gen first person shooters as of late, and was expecting Halo 3 to top those, as well. With that said, you see the visor actually going online now, and the HUD is actually imbedded and arched on the inside of the visor. Water effects are outstanding, and a spike grenade exploding in a corridor looks quite impressive. However, we've still noticed a number of jaggies in some places, especially at a distance."

 

Never. Graphics and Gameplay are just as important as each other.  Imagine GTAIII in 2D :|..you don't have to GTAII, and look how that turned out.

Avatar image for 11Marcel
#17 Posted by 11Marcel (7241 posts) -

"Visually so far I have to admit that it doesn't look as good as I would have hoped. I heard mentioned quite often from other players that it looked like a Halo 2.5, but I've gone back and played Halo 2 multiplayer lately and I believe Halo 3 looks much better. Maybe I've been spoiled by too many solid next-gen first person shooters as of late, and was expecting Halo 3 to top those, as well. With that said, you see the visor actually going online now, and the HUD is actually imbedded and arched on the inside of the visor. Water effects are outstanding, and a spike grenade exploding in a corridor looks quite impressive. However, we've still noticed a number of jaggies in some places, especially at a distance."

 

Never. Graphics and Gameplay are just as important as each other.  Imagine GTAIII in 2D :|..you don't have to GTAII, and look how that turned out.

Adrian_Cloud
:| 2D and 3D is something completely different. That's a way of making a game, not the quality of graphics. You can't have a 2D, and mid development or something the dev say, "oh, I think we can manage 3D.". We're more talking about textures, framerates and animations here.  
Avatar image for lordseer
#18 Posted by lordseer (4671 posts) -
I'm one of the 4 that voted # 1.  Graphics add to the fun.  I can always find a fun game with good graphics and pass on the "fun" game that I could have played 5 years ago.
Avatar image for Adrian_Cloud
#19 Posted by Adrian_Cloud (7169 posts) -
[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]

"Visually so far I have to admit that it doesn't look as good as I would have hoped. I heard mentioned quite often from other players that it looked like a Halo 2.5, but I've gone back and played Halo 2 multiplayer lately and I believe Halo 3 looks much better. Maybe I've been spoiled by too many solid next-gen first person shooters as of late, and was expecting Halo 3 to top those, as well. With that said, you see the visor actually going online now, and the HUD is actually imbedded and arched on the inside of the visor. Water effects are outstanding, and a spike grenade exploding in a corridor looks quite impressive. However, we've still noticed a number of jaggies in some places, especially at a distance."

 

Never. Graphics and Gameplay are just as important as each other. Imagine GTAIII in 2D :|..you don't have to GTAII, and look how that turned out.

11Marcel

:| 2D and 3D is something completely different. That's a way of making a game, not the quality of graphics. You can't have a 2D, and mid development or something the dev say, "oh, I think we can manage 3D.". We're more talking about textures, framerates and animations here.

No there not buddy. :lol: Graphics are everything you see. And my example from GTA, should show the significance of 3d graphics in a game with GTA style of gameplay. 

Avatar image for MGS9150
#20 Posted by MGS9150 (2491 posts) -
I dont see why games cant have amazing graphics AND amazing gameplay.
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
#21 Posted by Bread_or_Decide (29206 posts) -

I remember when fun used to come free with great graphics.

Somehow they had a fight and now fun no longer calls or writes anymore

 

Avatar image for donalbane
#22 Posted by donalbane (16383 posts) -

All of these games are fantastic.  None of them are ugly by any means.  None of them may not be a techinical marvel like gears of war but all seem to offer awesome gameplay.   When does the complaing about the graphics stop and the appreciation of the great fun it is to play these games begin?

 

Isn't the #! reason why we play games is because they are fun?   Alot of users here have forgotten that. 

YourExpert
I think after spending hundreds or thousands, it's nice to see the fruits of your expenses, and great graphics are expected.  But a cheapo system like the Wii brings little expectations from a graphical perspective, so I didn't hold it against Nintendo when Zelda looked like a Gamecube game.
Avatar image for darthogre
#23 Posted by darthogre (5082 posts) -
[QUOTE="YourExpert"]

All of these games are fantastic.  None of them are ugly by any means.  None of them may not be a techinical marvel like gears of war but all seem to offer awesome gameplay.   When does the complaing about the graphics stop and the appreciation of the great fun it is to play these games begin?

 

Isn't the #! reason why we play games is because they are fun?   Alot of users here have forgotten that. 

donalbane

I think after spending hundreds or thousands, it's nice to see the fruits of your expenses, and great graphics are expected.  But a cheapo system like the Wii brings little expectations from a graphical perspective, so I didn't hold it against Nintendo when Zelda looked like a Gamecube game.

Technically speaking it was a gamecube game although my guess is they probably couldn't make it look any better with building specfically for the Wii anyways.

Avatar image for Silenthps
#24 Posted by Silenthps (7301 posts) -
[QUOTE="YourExpert"]

All of these games are fantastic. None of them are ugly by any means. None of them may not be a techinical marvel like gears of war but all seem to offer awesome gameplay. When does the complaing about the graphics stop and the appreciation of the great fun it is to play these games begin?

 

Isn't the #! reason why we play games is because they are fun? Alot of users here have forgotten that.

darthogre

Isn't that like asking why we all want a cool looking car, truck, suv?

It makes us feel better about ourselves. Sure we could all drive around that 1980 pento, but to be honest who in their right mind wouldn't take a BMW or Lexus if they could afford it.

Gameplay has to be a part of the games but so does graphics. This is like saying "She has a wonderful personality.....but looks like a horse with bucked teeth"......a balance between looks and personality is the best combination. Right now the Wii is the horse with a great personality........there is no way to make over the horse. In the case of PS3 and X360, they are thin blond bimbo.....we are willing to give her time to work out those personality shortcommings because again, they can be worked out over time with a some effort. No effort is going to make a horse look good (unless your from certain states I won't mention)

You are sooo wrong!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ljZOHnZNaBc