I have seen threads with battles over few better rendered pixels and threads which bode graphical greatness of one system over another. Best ones there is are comments like "If racing game doesn't look as good as GT5, its piece of crap.". Do you really think this way? Whenever new games come the only thing ppl are discussing is graphics of those games. Does better graphics really make better games? Or is there nothing but graphics in games today so its only battle of graphics?

Me? I still play sometimes games with even ascii graphics, because they are still incredible. I think new games seem to be very shallow when it comes anything else than graphics.

Discuss, ty...

From a technical perspective I'm not nearly as impressed with improvements in graphics as I once was; part of this could be my age and the fact that I have watched videogames evolve from the Atari 2600. At the same time I totally notice the difference in the artistry of a game and (as an example) am somewhat disapointed with how ugly Warhammer online is when compared to World of Warcraft.

well its not just grafix, but grafix has always been part of it. its part of something being a good game. for example if mario galaxy had ninja bread man grafix, the game would be worse off and less appealing.

I am a Nintendo fan and I will say that graphics are extremely important. Graphics are the first thing you notice when you see a new game. A lot of game designers were artists before they were game designers. They want to make games that represent fully what they have imagined. By limiting the ability of the console to create next generation graphics, you limit the games that certain developers want to make. Also some games don't get ported over to your system. But Nintendo wants to make a profit from day one. Hats off to them, their strategy works. They will have enough money now to fail at creating 2 or 3 more systems. But the hardcore crowd, or those that see themselves as hardcore, love graphics. I also believe graphics are an important part of the immersion process. Each generation has been about outdoing the rest, and in the past it was about graphics. Now of course the big companies will try to implement motion controls but we've always come to expect a bump up in graphics. If consoles had graphics that looked like the NES days then PC's would be getting all the attention.

i care graphics on shooters, but not on rts or rpg

Graphics are important but not as important as gameplay

Graphics are cool and all but it but it's definitely not the most dominant factor in a video game for me.

If graphics was important Mega Man 9 wouldn't be a good game, but it is

Of course graphics matter, that's why for high profile games are pushed to the max on Wii (for example Mario Galaxy), PS3 (Killzone 2) and 360 (Gears).

It's not really about just the amount of pixels or level of AA, they mainly reduce jaggies or increase detail and that's only part of the whole graphics thing (some art styles and design decisions result into more need for them). It's a combination of art direction, lighting, animations, special effects, loosely related stuff like action on screen / destructibility / frame rate, etc, etc.

It's the same as asking if the image quality, special effects, environmental settings, costumes, camera work, etc, etc matter in movies. Of course they do, look at Lords of the Ring, Star Wars, Ice Age, etc, etc. Of course you also need a good story, good actors, good music / sound effects, etc.

Movies are an odd comparison because few people would argue that an excellent drama movie really needs a huge special effects budget in order to make the movie better ...