Do Graphics Matter To You? If you saw a game that had absolutely terrible graphics would you not play it? I Know some people do, But does anyone on this forum do that?
Do Graphics Matter To You? If you saw a game that had absolutely terrible graphics would you not play it? I Know some people do, But does anyone on this forum do that?
I Need a life....Wait! I DO HAVE ONE! CLASSIC GAMES ARE!
Of course.
Yes they matter.
Is this a trick question? Do I win a prize?
They don't matter to me, as long as you can tell what you are doing . When i see bad graphics, i just laugh and get on with the game. Good graphics to me are just an added bonus. But if it's the same game on 2 different systems and one looks a little prettier, of course i'll get that one.
Last edited by Junkyrdsalesman; 12-20-2011 at 04:53 PM.
Yes, of course they matter!
Which is why I really like my Colecovision better than my Intellivision. Donkey Kong looks so much better!
Yes, graphics matter to me. The look of a game is a big part of what sucks me into the video game's universe. I can't imagine me beating Okami three times (twice on PS2, once on the Wii) if I hated the way the game looked. Taking a further note from Okami's aesthetics, I don't need realism. I think many of Activision's 2600 games (Pitfall!, Pitfall II, Seaquest, Chopper Command, etc) look great and all the graphics are is a bunch of well placed, blocky, yet colorful pixels. With all of this said, if a game is engaging enough, I can overlook a certain amount of crappy graphics, I suppose. Nothing is coming to mind at the moment, but I'd like to think I'm not too shallow as a gamer.
Graphics don't matter as much to me as good art direction and style does. I happen to find that games who look visually interesting or distinct are usually better games then those who chose the more typical and boring route.
Graphics are either boring or interesting to me, I would only ever consider them "bad" if they interfered with gameplay. Things like popup, texture errors, etc. for 3D games and things like ill defined foreground/baclground, hitboxes larger then sprite, etc for 2D games.
not that much. grew up on 8-bit games.
The Paunch Stevenson Show free Internet podcast - www.paunchstevenson.com - DP FEEDBACK
Nope. If they did, I would have thrown away my Atari 2600 years ago. That said, I always like to see what someone can pull out of a classic machine graphics-wise. Look at the later 2600 games compared to Combat. Look at the final games for the C64 (commercial anyway) as opposed to the first releases.
Donkey Kong on the INTV looks good... now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErMgBMGirEE
Yes they do, as long as the graphics look like they were well done with whatever technology was available at the time or for whatever style they were trying to accomplish they're fine with me.
Just compare most NES games to the graphics of Action 52, I might not have a problem with 8-bit graphics but the graphics in Action 52 suck. It sucks for other reasons too but the graphics definitely suck with that game. People complain about the Atari 2600 version of Pac-Man for being crap, someone else made a homebrew version with better graphics. Both versions are still old Atari 2600 style graphics but one version is much better.
I can certainly enjoy and appreciate good artwork, but its not a game-breaker for me. Graphics, depending on how they're done, can be the icing on the cake or a fly in the ointment.
Yeah, they matter. Not necessarily in a technical sense. I really like Comix Zone's graphics, for example.
Yes and no. For classic gaming obviously game play was the most important factor. Was a game fun to play and had great playability. If so, then graphics/sound mean nothing. With new games I would say yes. Why play a game with crummy graphics on a system that can dish out far superior capabilities? Shame on the developers for not taking advantage of the console's graphics capabilities.
Graphics do matter to me, but not as much as gameplay. So, yeah I can play old games with bad graphics and still enjoy them.
All your games are belong to us!
People need to learn the difference between graphics and aesthetics.
Graphics mean nothing to me. Graphics are the least important thing in gaming. They just allow more lighting and polys to be added. But if it has bad or no aesthetics it can still be an ugly game even with great graphics. Aesthetics do matter more. The things I look into most for games for me to enjoy are. Aesthetics,Music,Good gameplay.
Xenoblade. The graphics are not very good. However it has great aesthetics making it a beautiful game.
Graphics don't matter to me, but in some cases designs do. For instance, I tried playing Psychonauts once and couldn't get past those godawful character designs. It might be a great game, but damn are those characters ugly.