Are long time gamers less impressed with graphics than newer gamers?

[naznatips]

Smidlee said:

gebx said:

So true...

Time and money are a finite resource.

The more money and time spent on graphics and "realism", the less is spent on the mechanics, story, gameplay.

As some developers have noted that graphics often sells games so ugly graphics can mean poor sales, thus less money on mechanics, etc. Of course there has to be a balance.

 

You should have read sqrl's post though. A game can have good graphics without focusing on them. Examples: Left 4 Dead, Super Mario Galaxy, Half-Life 2 (and episodes) etc.

Good graphics and great graphics aren't the same. IMO the worst offender to the "graphics make the game" curse this year was Bioshock, which butchered their storyline and cut the game short with some relatively poor gameplay mechanics for great graphics.

Call of Duty 4 is an offender too, and although I love the game (god knows I've devoted dozens of hours to it online) the single-player is criminally short, clearly due to too much focus on the technical aspects of the game.  Heavenly Sword is another example.  A 6 hour single-player only game should be butchered by reviewers and gamers alike.  That's just ridiculous.