The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Not really! Graphics are very important, read on…
What makes a good game, obviously gameplay really, because if a game isn’t fun no-one is going to want to play it, but everyone says graphics aren’t important, is this strictly true?
If you came across two games in a shop that you had never ever heard of, and they were the only two whose descriptions appealed to you, after looking at the pictures which would you get, just because one has better graphics than the other definitely does not mean it will be the better game, but who is to say the other one does not have terrible graphics AND gameplay. (this is a completely theoretical situation, don’t come out with “I wouldn’t buy a game I’ve never heard of” please…)
The truth is the graphics would influence your decision, whether you like it or not, and in situations where people say graphics aren’t important that isn’t strictly true either, however much you like a series of game you don’t want to see horrible frame rates, or single-textured characters.
Graphics ARE important, can you imagine playing a fast paced game with very basic textures, or clashing colours, with loads of bright reds and the like, graphics are the fourth dimension of a game, the atmosphere, the tension and the communication between the game and the player are controlled by the graphics.
Graphics are an integral part of every game, and this is undeniable – as important as gameplay is, graphics cannot be discounted as unimportant.
Look at Resident Evil on the gamecube, as good as it was on the playstation, the gameplay itself remains almost unchanged, yet it is a vastly superior game, because of the atmosphere created by the sublime graphics.
Thoughts?
What makes a good game, obviously gameplay really, because if a game isn’t fun no-one is going to want to play it, but everyone says graphics aren’t important, is this strictly true?
If you came across two games in a shop that you had never ever heard of, and they were the only two whose descriptions appealed to you, after looking at the pictures which would you get, just because one has better graphics than the other definitely does not mean it will be the better game, but who is to say the other one does not have terrible graphics AND gameplay. (this is a completely theoretical situation, don’t come out with “I wouldn’t buy a game I’ve never heard of” please…)
The truth is the graphics would influence your decision, whether you like it or not, and in situations where people say graphics aren’t important that isn’t strictly true either, however much you like a series of game you don’t want to see horrible frame rates, or single-textured characters.
Graphics ARE important, can you imagine playing a fast paced game with very basic textures, or clashing colours, with loads of bright reds and the like, graphics are the fourth dimension of a game, the atmosphere, the tension and the communication between the game and the player are controlled by the graphics.
Graphics are an integral part of every game, and this is undeniable – as important as gameplay is, graphics cannot be discounted as unimportant.
Look at Resident Evil on the gamecube, as good as it was on the playstation, the gameplay itself remains almost unchanged, yet it is a vastly superior game, because of the atmosphere created by the sublime graphics.
Thoughts?
Page:
But would you not agree that graphics enhance the atmosphere of a game.
I disagree. But then I'm quite happy playing FFIV-VI which only look any good on a 14" TV from about 3 metres away. And I still play the original Master Of Orion, which is 1994ish, and has huge blocky graphics, and the original Civ, and Llamatron.
I see my post has been forgotten in the hands of time.
I agree entirely, I mean look at tetris!
Memorandum wrote:
> Then suppose you were a rich idiot, and they were the only two games
> left in the world ever,
If that were the case, I'd kill myself over the fact that there were only two games in existence, what kind of life would that be?!
> Then suppose you were a rich idiot, and they were the only two games
> left in the world ever,
If that were the case, I'd kill myself over the fact that there were only two games in existence, what kind of life would that be?!
I agree with you completely Lou Role, especially about GTA, the gameplay in it is unsurpassed, but by improving the graphics they make it a more attractive game, and it encourages more exploration, as if the city looks nicer, people are going to want to see it more etc.
Anyone agree?
Anyone agree?
Heh. Nice one BEARDY.
Can I call you that??
*No*
OK, sorry....
Can I call you that??
*No*
OK, sorry....
Nuggetandchip wrote:
> BEARDS how do you become a staff?
You answer an advertisment and go to an interview.
>do you get paid?
Yes. Just about.
> Can you still win
> games? Or do they pay you a game a week?
No.
> BEARDS how do you become a staff?
You answer an advertisment and go to an interview.
>do you get paid?
Yes. Just about.
> Can you still win
> games? Or do they pay you a game a week?
No.
Don't spam up my thread. Idiot.
BEARDS. wrote:
> A small purple marmot from Turkey that has an infected foot and so is
> hobbling gently down the road.
BEARDS how do you become a staff? do you get paid? Can you still win games? Or do they pay you a game a week (your choice)
> A small purple marmot from Turkey that has an infected foot and so is
> hobbling gently down the road.
BEARDS how do you become a staff? do you get paid? Can you still win games? Or do they pay you a game a week (your choice)
Page: