Does Graphic's Matter

[Secant]

You're a horrible, HORRIBLE debater.

 

Not cool, bro. Personal attacks don't make you any better.

[dekupk5]

Dude, Demise is probably only slightly more detailed than other characters in the game. What are you smoking? He isn't that much more detailed at all. Also, applying a reflection to the ground and adding distortion effects doesn't make it the best damn looking thing in the game. And yeah, the lighting in the first lava dungeon? I find it better than Demise's arena, by far. Also, as for awesome dark clouds? Remember when you go after the fire dragon? I saw some nice ones coming out of the volcano. The only thing in Demise's arena that is unique is the ground, and it is by far not the best looking place in the game.

 

---

This was sent from a magical space satellite in the Andromeda Galaxy. Hurr.

 

Yes it seems you are right. But have you seen that many graphical effects at one time, and place? Fusing different effects together could make the most (seemingly) detailed textures and polygons.

[Jabba]

Heres an example of a shortcoming in SS. In the cutscenes in Skyloft when the camera pans above and you can see the cross hatching of the trees where you can see its just 2D layers cross to create a 3D effect. Sure from far away its a good trick but that was what they were doing on the N64 and to expose in a cut scene I think is a bit silly, like a magician revealing his illusion, some people might not even notice it, but it just shows that the Wiis time is coming to an end and this is the best it can do, which I think SS has shown and its a great way to bow the console out.

[Zeth Ryder]

Yes it seems you are right. But have you seen that many graphical effects at one time, and place? Fusing different effects together could make the most (seemingly) detailed textures and polygons.

 

uh no, its just a skybox that's it with collision. There really is nothing high poly or detailed going on except sky textures and a framebuffer reflection. :I

[dekupk5]

uh no, its just a skybox that's it with collision. There really is nothing high poly or detailed going on except sky textures and a framebuffer reflection. :I

 

Ya, im done. You win this debate Rainbow Dash. Mixing up dynamic feeling with graphics.

[Conker]

 

Not cool, bro. Personal attacks don't make you any better.

 

I wasn't trying to attack him. I was just telling him what I saw. ._.

 

But you're right, I will stray away from that.

 

---

This was sent from a magical space satellite in the Andromeda Galaxy. Hurr.

[dekupk5]

I wasn't trying to attack him. I was just telling him what I saw. ._.

 

But you're right, I will stray away from that.

 

---

This was sent from a magical space satellite in the Andromeda Galaxy. Hurr.

 

Tis, fine. Something I could learn from. C:

[DeathBasket]

I agree with the points on Skyward Sword's graphics not being great. Sometimes they can seem a little too blurry but that's probably because I spent the last few years hoping for a game with graphics that were a step up from those seen in Twilight Princess. So what? I honestly couldn't care less if Nintendo were to release a game today with graphics of the same quality as Ocarina of Time. Sure, it doesn't look as realistic as you might wish but with Zelda games it's not about the graphics, it's the storyline, characters, environment and gameplay that make the games so involving for the player.

And just because the graphics aren't 'high resolution' doesn't mean that the environments don't still look great. Yes, the effects in the final battle looked brilliant, but so did many other places in the game. I especially loved seeing Faron Woods underwater. The only parts of the game that I found to be dull graphically were parts in Lanayru Desert (in the present), but they probably only seemed so dull because the rest of the game was so colourful compared with them.

 

Well anyway, graphics are probably the least important part of a game for me. I would rate a game based upon:

 

30% - Storyline/originality - it needs both because unoriginal stories aren't terribly interesting

15% - Gameplay/controls - obvious

15% - Difficulty - games that are too easy get boring quickly, I need something to make me think

15% - Music - the soundtrack is important because it adds to the atmosphere

10% - Logic/physics - stuff has to make some sort of sense but unless it's supposed to be set in the real world I'm not too fussed

10% - Look - the graphics should fit the game's atmosphere

5% - Detail - how high resolution everything is

 

So if I used Skyward Sword as an example:

Storyline/originality - 8/10

Gameplay/controls - 6/10

Difficulty - 7/10

Music - 6/10

Logic/physics - 9/10

Look - 9/10

Detail - 6/10

Overall I would give it 73.5%. As a comparison, Majora's Mask would score 91% if I rated it this way and in my view that's probably the best game ever made.

[Arcaith]

I think one thing I've always loved about Nintendo's games is that they're immersive, regardless of what generation they were released on; you get a real sense of the world from the general ambiance and your mind fills in the 'blanks' left by any lack of superficial detail.

[Mellow]

I think one thing I've always loved about Nintendo's games is that they're immersive, regardless of what generation they were released on; you get a real sense of the world from the general ambiance and your mind fills in the 'blanks' left by any lack of superficial detail.

 

QFT

[Blaine Earhart]

Well, in my opinion, there's a line between good graphics and ugly graphics. Most of the time, I'm picking graphics because there's a huge difference between seeing what the hell you're killing, and trying to figure out what that shaved gorilla you just killed IS.

 

Don't mind me, just stating my opinion...

[Gazpacho146]

IMO, graphics don't matter.

As Zeth said, it's Storyline, gameplay, and having fun.

Which is why I still play NES-n64 games.

And as Naxy said with FPS games, they can sell the same game over and over with a few enhancements, and everyone rushes to buy it.

(If you're a person who flames at people who dislike COD, don't bother to read this next segment.)

I used to like Call of Duty until they started putting out the same god-damn game every year.

Millions of people buy CoD every year, saying it has so many differences from the last one, when in reality, they're just getting the same game. I find Call of Duty to be extremely overrated.

The thing that makes Nintendo so good, is they still focus on storyline and other elements that make their games so fun.

Skyward Sword looks amazing, and the lighting effects and other things add on to it.

So I guess graphics have SOME relevance, but I can't stand graphic's whores. They're annoying.

[darksoulsisawsome]

Graphics matter in the sense that well without them good luck seeing whats going on, but besides that they don't add a hole lot. ART STYLE is what matters in my opinion and is what makes a game look great skyward sword is a great example along with many other wii games. there are lots of hd games that look like shit because of there crappy art style and when i see an art style i don't like i do have a hard time enjoying the game to an extent. In my opinion i think ocarina of time still has amazing graphics and what it did for the time was groundbreaking. and not just in graphics like all of you've mentioned game play and story are what does matter and i know i'm beating a dead horse but mass effect 3 had great everything except an ending and that ruined the hole game for me.

[Non-epic]

Well, this seems to be dead so I leave you all with this!

[Conker]

Nintendo doesn't always have the.. best decisions... heheh

 

No HD for a while? Taht's a biggie to me.

 

Holy opinion change, Batman!

[BullockDS]

(WARNING: LONG POST)

 

I believe graphics should be a major factor in development of a game, but no moreso than gameplay and graphics. However, the only time bad graphics bother me is unnecessary reuse of graphics; just because there were good graphics in an older game, doesn't mean they'll automatically fit in well in the newer game. Unnecessary reuse of graphics is a very telling sign of laziness on behalf of the art direction.

 

There ARE instances where graphics are acceptable to reuse (I'll only be talking 2D here; 3D games are obviously much more acceptable examples). Let's take two games from the Castlevania franchise and contrast them: Symphony of the Night (SotN) and Portrait of Ruin (PoR).

 

In Symphony of the Night, there ARE character/enemy graphics lifted from Castlevania X68k and Rondo of Blood. However, this is somewhat minimal, and even then, all the new graphics are specifically designed to compliment those reused visuals (plus, many of the reused characters/enemies received new frames of animation). As a result, the new and old seamlessly mesh together to provide top-notch eye candy for the player even to this day.

 

Portrait of Ruin, on the other hand, doesn't do so well in the graphics department. A great deal of graphic elements are taken from older games, with little/no work to remedy style differences; what's worse, not even the original graphics are consistent in style. These wide chasms in the spriting styles provide a jarring and off-putting effect in the graphics area. Other CVs have reused graphics before and since, but I pick on PoR due to it being the worst offender (Harmony of Despair notwithstanding).

 

To better illustrate my point, let's look at sprites from both games, shall we? (Spoiler'd due to large-ish pic)

 

 

 

The top row, from left to right: Alucard, original sprite; cloaked Richter; Winged Skeleton (Castlevania X68k); Corner Gaurd (new); Paranthropus (Rondo of Blood). Notice how the new sprites blend in well with the old sprites; it would be easy to see all of these in the same game.

 

Bottom row: Jonathan Morris (new); Fr. Vincent (new); Zacchino (new); Death (new); Blood Skeleton (CV X68k); Spear Gaurd (Rondo of Blood); Amduscias/Hellfire Beast (SotN); Killer Clown (Dawn of Sorrow). Notice just how drastic the art direction is for all these sprites, even between the original ones. Even after playing the game, I find it fairly hard to believe that these were all in the same game. I'm glad I played Portrait of Ruin, but its presentation was fucking messy, which is very much a bad thing, m'kay?

 

(TL;DR: graphics are only as important as gameplay and music; only time graphics annoy me is lazy reuse)

[Conker]

(TL;DR: graphics are only as important as gameplay and music; only time graphics annoy me is lazy reuse)

 

Yeah, well, here's the thing:

Graphics are below gameplay, as well as music being below it. Sorry.

[BullockDS]

Yeah, well, here's the thing:

Graphics are below gameplay, as well as music being below it. Sorry.

 

I love how you say this in a matter-of-fact manner in response to my opinion. I simply find that graphics are as important as gameplay and music, and no matter what you respond with, it will neither be fact that gameplay is the most important aspect for everyone, nor will it be true that graphics, gameplay, and music are equally important for all gamers. Sorry.

[Conker]

Wow, no need to respond so rudely(kidding). Well, see, a game isn't fun without good gameplay. See that? That is exactly why gameplay is, and always will be the most important part of a videogame.

 

Over everything else, gameplay can definitely make or break a game, which is why it's so important.

 

Also, I can say something similar to you:

"I love how you say this in a matter-of-fact manner in response to my opinion."

 

You don't realize it, but you're doing the EXACT same thing to me right now.

 

Anyways, I don't even see a reason for this topic to be open anymore. This topic was made because DekuPK5 was on a massive moron-rampage around the forum a long time ago just to get him to shut up and keep his opinions in one place, so now I see zero need for it to stay open, since he's been loooong gone.

[Arcaith]

I think what you're talking about here is stylistic consistency rather than overall graphics. Both are quite important though, since they do a great deal for setting the tone of a game. Where you are able, it is best to match the graphical style to the mood you are setting in the game. This has become easier with the advancement of gaming technology, however older games used other elements to set the tone, such as the style of play and other nonvisual devices.

 

I think one thing that people forget is that it's best to make a game using every aspect to its fullest potential. That's when you get truly outstanding titles. Games where gameplay or graphics are heavily focused on to the detriment of the other can often feel hollow and incomplete. One thing I really liked about Wind Waker and Twilight Princess was that the art direction reflected the tone of the story really nicely, and actually subtly evolved through the progression of the title. It's not something you see a lot in games these days.