The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Everyone reckons the only important part of a game is the gameplay, then why do you think all of these "super-consoles" are coming out! Gameplay is very important but the better the graphics, the more realistic, and the more realistic, the better the gameplay. For example, would Half-Life be the great game it is if it was in 2D! Not a chance! And the same goes for plots. There are great games without great plots, but would Metal Gear Solid be the game it is today without the great plot???
Page:
Everyone reckons the only important part of a game is the gameplay, then why do you think all of these "super-consoles" are coming out! Gameplay is very important but the better the graphics, the more realistic, and the more realistic, the better the gameplay. For example, would Half-Life be the great game it is if it was in 2D! Not a chance! And the same goes for plots. There are great games without great plots, but would Metal Gear Solid be the game it is today without the great plot???
No Farras your wrong there. Graphics aren't the most important thing in games for most people is the gameplay in fact. If a game looked great but played crap, you wouldn't want to play the game again, not even to play the game to experience the type of great graphics the game has.
If a game had 3D environments and nothing around would you play the game? You wouldn't because you've got nothing to do, same if you have a shoot em' up with only 5 guns and stupid AI.
If there was one thing a developer would want is good gameplay. Final Fantasy wouldn't be so addictive and Tetris wouldn't be a classic, games wouldn't have gone very far without Gameplay, if we just had graphics. We would of had Hi Res graphics with no decent games to show off the gpaphics properly in some decent games.
If a game had 3D environments and nothing around would you play the game? You wouldn't because you've got nothing to do, same if you have a shoot em' up with only 5 guns and stupid AI.
If there was one thing a developer would want is good gameplay. Final Fantasy wouldn't be so addictive and Tetris wouldn't be a classic, games wouldn't have gone very far without Gameplay, if we just had graphics. We would of had Hi Res graphics with no decent games to show off the gpaphics properly in some decent games.
The reason for people buying new consoles because of their flash graphics is,er, the flash graphics. Sure, people want nice varied gameplay, but the games could be done on a smaller, less powerful console just as easily.
People want good graphics, it's only natural to want bigger and better things, it's human nature, right?! Big sound, Big graphics and of course the gameplay matters. Who'd buy a game without it, just because it had great graphics. Er, well, lots of people it seems, but that's beside the point. People will buy anything, look at Who Wants to be a Millionare - "the exciting computer game where you get to answer a small series of questions over and over again, with the bonus of Chris Tarrant's voice - hurrah!"
What was my point? I dunno, I just ramble on sometimes when the mood hits me, but graphics sell, whether you like it or not.
People want good graphics, it's only natural to want bigger and better things, it's human nature, right?! Big sound, Big graphics and of course the gameplay matters. Who'd buy a game without it, just because it had great graphics. Er, well, lots of people it seems, but that's beside the point. People will buy anything, look at Who Wants to be a Millionare - "the exciting computer game where you get to answer a small series of questions over and over again, with the bonus of Chris Tarrant's voice - hurrah!"
What was my point? I dunno, I just ramble on sometimes when the mood hits me, but graphics sell, whether you like it or not.
SNIPER wrote:
> No Farras your wrong there. Graphics aren't the most important thing
> in games for most people is the gameplay in fact. If a game looked
> great but played crap, you wouldn't want to play the game again, not
> even to play the game to experience the type of great graphics the
> game has.
If a game had 3D environments and nothing around would
> you play the game? You wouldn't because you've got nothing to do,
> same if you have a shoot em' up with only 5 guns and stupid
> AI.
If there was one thing a developer would want is good
> gameplay. Final Fantasy wouldn't be so addictive and Tetris wouldn't
> be a classic, games wouldn't have gone very far without Gameplay, if
> we just had graphics. We would of had Hi Res graphics with no decent
> games to show off the gpaphics properly in some decent games.
This post is great sniper I mean it apeels to me alot and prooves alot of facts. I agree on this totally and i think this should win todays gameaday prize!
> No Farras your wrong there. Graphics aren't the most important thing
> in games for most people is the gameplay in fact. If a game looked
> great but played crap, you wouldn't want to play the game again, not
> even to play the game to experience the type of great graphics the
> game has.
If a game had 3D environments and nothing around would
> you play the game? You wouldn't because you've got nothing to do,
> same if you have a shoot em' up with only 5 guns and stupid
> AI.
If there was one thing a developer would want is good
> gameplay. Final Fantasy wouldn't be so addictive and Tetris wouldn't
> be a classic, games wouldn't have gone very far without Gameplay, if
> we just had graphics. We would of had Hi Res graphics with no decent
> games to show off the gpaphics properly in some decent games.
This post is great sniper I mean it apeels to me alot and prooves alot of facts. I agree on this totally and i think this should win todays gameaday prize!
bluebeetle wrote:
> The reason for people buying new consoles because of their flash
> graphics is,er, the flash graphics.
Not quite. Let's not forget that new consoles have much more processing power than older ones. The upshot of this is: new consoles do not just offer better graphics; they increase the upper limit in what can be done with games, and in doing so raise the potential for great gameplay in the new console.
Better console = more possibilities = better gameplay.
See my post entitled "Gameplay - over criticised?" for my opinions on how it's not given credit for the improvements it HAS made.
> The reason for people buying new consoles because of their flash
> graphics is,er, the flash graphics.
Not quite. Let's not forget that new consoles have much more processing power than older ones. The upshot of this is: new consoles do not just offer better graphics; they increase the upper limit in what can be done with games, and in doing so raise the potential for great gameplay in the new console.
Better console = more possibilities = better gameplay.
See my post entitled "Gameplay - over criticised?" for my opinions on how it's not given credit for the improvements it HAS made.
Graphics or Gameplay?
I'll take both!
It really doesn't have to be or the other that makes a game, there are so many other factors to take into consideration.
You really shouldn't underestimate the importance of music, and sound effects.
How much would you have enjoyed MGS if "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" played constantly in the background?
So no, gameplay is not the only thing. A great game has great gameplay as it's number 1 priority, but also will have amazing graphics, atmospheric music, and the presentation has to be just right too.
meka_dragon PQMS8/00
I'll take both!
It really doesn't have to be or the other that makes a game, there are so many other factors to take into consideration.
You really shouldn't underestimate the importance of music, and sound effects.
How much would you have enjoyed MGS if "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" played constantly in the background?
So no, gameplay is not the only thing. A great game has great gameplay as it's number 1 priority, but also will have amazing graphics, atmospheric music, and the presentation has to be just right too.
meka_dragon PQMS8/00
Graphics are always improving on consoles, because people want better graphics... Grpahics on the back of a box, or on a TV ad will sell the game to most people, gameplay doesnt sell a game...
This isnt to say I dont want better graphics on a game, whenever I look at a game I look to see how good the graphics are... However if the gameplay is dodgy, no matter how good the graphics I wont go near...
Half-Life is a game with great gameplay... its not a choice of either/or, were not stuck with bad gameplay and great graphics, or great graphics and bad gameplay... we can have both... Its just most companies spend more time makig the grpahics look good, and not making the game play well...
Half-Life was released a couple of years ago looked great then , AND played great... In fact, the reason people still play Half-Life two years on (even though its starting to show its age, and not look so nice) is because of the gameplay... Half-Live Vs. the X-Files game anyone... X-Files has photorealistic graphics, Half-Life has the gameplay...
If at first you don't succeed, blame it on your parents.
This isnt to say I dont want better graphics on a game, whenever I look at a game I look to see how good the graphics are... However if the gameplay is dodgy, no matter how good the graphics I wont go near...
Half-Life is a game with great gameplay... its not a choice of either/or, were not stuck with bad gameplay and great graphics, or great graphics and bad gameplay... we can have both... Its just most companies spend more time makig the grpahics look good, and not making the game play well...
Half-Life was released a couple of years ago looked great then , AND played great... In fact, the reason people still play Half-Life two years on (even though its starting to show its age, and not look so nice) is because of the gameplay... Half-Live Vs. the X-Files game anyone... X-Files has photorealistic graphics, Half-Life has the gameplay...
If at first you don't succeed, blame it on your parents.
Armatige Shanks wrote:
Graphics on the back of a box, or on a TV ad will
> sell the game to most people, gameplay doesnt sell a game...
I suppose that this is true to a certain extent with some gamers, but most of the people I know buy games based on reviews, and word of mouth.
Reviewers rate the game on a number of factors, but the final score is mainly down to playability.
meka_dragon PQMS8/00
Graphics on the back of a box, or on a TV ad will
> sell the game to most people, gameplay doesnt sell a game...
I suppose that this is true to a certain extent with some gamers, but most of the people I know buy games based on reviews, and word of mouth.
Reviewers rate the game on a number of factors, but the final score is mainly down to playability.
meka_dragon PQMS8/00
This is all very true but.... a software company only have Graphics by which to sell a game at first. It doesn't matter how many reviews they have it is only one persons opinion but with the Graphics you can see how good they are from screen shots, stills and pictures on the box - unless you have chance to play the game before purchasing how are you going to know what the gameplay is like?
They have to aim for great graphics in order to get noticed! All in the name of marketing - but I don't agree that this is right for the future of gaming - games based purely on graphics surely are going to be played once and then left on the shelf - in order to create a GREAT game you need one where the graphics won't date but also one that players are going to want to play again and again - because of the GAMEPLAY.
They have to aim for great graphics in order to get noticed! All in the name of marketing - but I don't agree that this is right for the future of gaming - games based purely on graphics surely are going to be played once and then left on the shelf - in order to create a GREAT game you need one where the graphics won't date but also one that players are going to want to play again and again - because of the GAMEPLAY.
Page: