Reviews - Should Graphics Effect The Score?

[Bodhesatva]

Look, Fumanchu, you cannot possibly argue that graphics are not superficial. They are the DEFINITION of superficial: what you see on the surface. That is what superficial means: what you see on the surface. Graphics are superificial.

You're essentially arguing that, since special effects are only in, say, 70% of a movie, it isn't relevant, while graphics are in 90% of a game (not "all the time," as you suggest, as there are start screens, menus and select screens, etc.) it is totally different! Come on now, special effects aren't denigrated in film because they are only in 70% of the movie, but because they are cosmetic. It wouldn't matter if they were in 10% of the movie or 95%. That issue does not go away with video games.

Please. This argument is ridiculous, and your examples (which presumably were intended to argue in your favor) have done nothing but reinforce my position.

It's fine if you care about graphics, just as it's fine if you happen to like pulp fiction like Transformers or 300 or whatever crap Hollywood pumps out. But if we want video games to be taken seriously -- and I do -- the fascination with the superficial needs to end with reviewers. Graphics are, by definition, superficial.