Wahh wahh.....Graphics dont mattar!!........Can we please stop saying this?

Here's how I see it:

Game A: 1/10 graphics. 10/10 gameplay.

vs

Game B: 10/10 graphics, 9/10 gameplay.

Graphics is the core of the game, how fun it actually is. So to me, game A will always be better than game B, simply because game A offers more enjoyment.

Everything else is a compliment, but when it boils down to it, gameplay > everything else, because gameplay is core enjoyment we get from a game. Sure it might be nice to have nice graphics, but that's all it is - nice.

So to answer the question, graphics do matter, but not nearly as much as gameplay. What's the point in playing a crap game with great graphics? And why dismiss a game that has completely horrible graphics when the gameplay offers so much enjoyment?

And the fact that people did play games with 8 bit graphics without complaining is a testimony to how gameplay really matters, not graphics. If graphics mattered as much as some people say, then people in the 70's wouldn't of even touched that games. Same goes for the 80's and 90's.

Dem Graphics Matter Guys!

This game isn't in HD, therefore it's terrible.

This game is in HD Guys! Best Game Ever!

LegatoSkyheart

I think you really missed the point of these thread.

I don't care about graphics. When I go back to play a game, it's not because it looks pretty.

yes graphics have to be up to par. its like why even buy a next gen console then? because of updated graphics.

People are lying to themselves when they say graphics do not matter.

All you have to do is look at anyone who has bought a current-gen system

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

Dem Graphics Matter Guys!

This game isn't in HD, therefore it's terrible.

This game is in HD Guys! Best Game Ever!

GD1551

I think you really missed the point of these thread.

Or is it that TC has compeletly missed the point on why some of us say that Graphics Don't Matter?

That was pretty much MY point.

I could have easily used Terraria and Crysis as simple examples instead of Tatsunoko and Marvel.

One's Sprite Base and One is hailed as the Graphics King and Both have been said to be Good games with Terraria seemingly to have More Replay Value than Crysis and Yet Graphics Matter?

consoles evolve for Eye Candy sure and in today's day and age you really can't do a simple job on any Current Gen Console and make it look like it was for the N64 without it being SO INNOVATIVE like Minecraft or Rock of Ages or something like that.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

Dem Graphics Matter Guys!

This game isn't in HD, therefore it's terrible.

This game is in HD Guys! Best Game Ever!

LegatoSkyheart

I think you really missed the point of these thread.

Or is it that TC has compeletly missed the point on why some of us say that Graphics Don't Matter?

That was pretty much MY point.

I could have easily used Terraria and Crysis as simple examples instead of Tatsunoko and Marvel.

One's Sprite Base and One is hailed as the Graphics King and Both have been said to be Good games with Terraria seemingly to have More Replay Value than Crysis and Yet Graphics Matter?

consoles evolve for Eye Candy sure and in today's day and age you really can't do a simple job on any Current Gen Console and make it look like it was for the N64 without it being SO INNOVATIVE like Minecraft or Rock of Ages or something like that.

The TC is pretty much saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics.

The TC is pretty much saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics.

GD1551

and yet this exsits.

and this.

and this exsits (and got nominated for GAME OF THE YEAR HERE!)

2D GAMES! O EM GEE They're totally not pushing any hardware here.

-rant-

StrongDeadlift

Sorry to break this to you TC.....but....graphics don't mattar.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

The TC is pretty much saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics.

LegatoSkyheart

and yet this exsits.

and this.

and this exsits (and got nominated for GAME OF THE YEAR HERE!)

2D GAMES! O EM GEE They're totally not pushing any hardware here.

You don't need to push hardware to have modern visuals..

Ehh, in my opinion it's less about "visuals" and more "art style."

A technically superior game with bland visual design is vastly inferior to a technically inferior game with an extremely cohesive visual design.

---

But yeah, the traditional western way of thinking is the more realistic a game looks = the better it is.

That's actually a trend that's been in western thinking for thousands of years dating all the way back to the Greeks + Romans.

peterw007

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

The TC is pretty much saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics.

GD1551

and yet this exsits.

and this.

and this exsits (and got nominated for GAME OF THE YEAR HERE!)

2D GAMES! O EM GEE They're totally not pushing any hardware here.

You don't need to push hardware to have modern visuals..

"Modern visuals"

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

and yet this exsits.

and this.

and this exsits (and got nominated for GAME OF THE YEAR HERE!)

2D GAMES! O EM GEE They're totally not pushing any hardware here.

LegatoSkyheart

You don't need to push hardware to have modern visuals..

"Modern visuals"

What are you exactly trying to prove here? I am telling you this thread is basically saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics. Do you think zelda would be any worse if it had ps3 level visuals?

What are you exactly trying to prove here? I am telling you this thread is basically saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics. Do you think zelda would be any worse if it had ps3 level visuals?

GD1551

No, I'm pretty much saying that You don't have to have Amazing Visuals aka Graphics for a game to be Good.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

What are you exactly trying to prove here? I am telling you this thread is basically saying graphics + gameplay > gameplay without the graphics. Do you think zelda would be any worse if it had ps3 level visuals?

LegatoSkyheart

No, I'm pretty much saying that You don't have to have Amazing Visuals aka Graphics for a game to be Good.

Err we knew that, but this thread was about having gameplay and graphics being better than just having 1.

Of course graphics matter ... otherwise we would still be playing dos games where you have to type what your ingame character has to do next.

But they don't matter as much as system wars makes it seem i.e. those 2 pixel differences between a 360 and PS3 version.

How would you justify the fact that most of the "best in the genre" games are universally considered to be games that are not from this generation? PS1 games for jRPGs, Black Isle and early BioWare games for wRPGs, UT/Quake/Doom for FPSs, SC/AoE for RTSs...

Seriously, what a bull**** argument :|

Maybe they matter for devs who don't have anything else to offer ...

graphics are the least of my worries im not playing the graphics really thats just a visual representation of the game, the gameplay is where it really counts for me tbh.

Graphics do matter, this is not to say games with bad graphics can't be good.millerlight89

Good art direction is more important than pushing graphical power.

The Conduit might be a considered technical powerhouse for Wii hardware, but it still ends up looking ugly as sin since it looks so generic, bland and boring. Killzone 2/3 might look amazing for the PS3 hardware since it's pushing it to it's limits, but the art is bland and boring and it uses way too much blurriness.

Great graphics are awesome.