Are devs making graphics way too much of a priority?

[Biggerboat]

ChronotriggerJM said:

Biggerboat said:

ChronotriggerJM said:
Well back on topic, when people think gen gaps it's sadly usually pointed at graphics, the "next gen console" always seems to imply which one has the prettiest output. I mean what it the wii had WORSE graphical output then the Gamecube? Still unique in its own right for sure, but I don't think anyone would consider it a next generation nintendo platform. They consider it something in its own class lol.

I agree with what you're saying but I personally think it's a flawed outlook to think next gen = cutting edge visuals and I'd say it has developed due to too many gens failing to deliver anything of significance other than better graphics. I'm pretty sure if asked most gamers would say that the big difference between the SNES/MegaDrive & PS1/N64 gen was graphics when actually it was the jump to 3d.

Oh yeah for sure for sure, but another part of it was also the grahpics, the overall look of the game. I mean when we wen't 3d, we still platformed, role played etc etc etc. Then when dreamcast, ps2, game cube etc etc... it was a big graphical overhaul. Presentation is where the "next gen" lies nowadays, I mean you'd still consider the SNES to be the next gen version of the NES right?

I absolutely do see the SNES as the next gen NES. Graphics are ONE of the things that can define a generational leap but a lot of gamers seem to see them as the ONLY thing that can, imo basing a next gen console primarily on better graphics is pretty boring ie. SNES, GC ,360, PS3 compared to say Wii, PS1 and N64 which were based around far more exciting advancements ie. transition to 3d and new interface.