The Order 1886 Review Thread - Meta: 66

[Game_God]

DonFerrari said:

Game_God said:

That is why so many defended it & still do!

This game shows exactly the pit the gaming industry is falling in: Shiny-shiny but crappy-crappy.

It's been a while that eyecandy has been the main break or make factor for videogames.

Gamers jump in mass into the hype pool, blinded by the visual eyecandy so devs abuse & cultivate this easy way of marketing/hyping games that rely heavily on graphic technical aspects (good technicians) rather than creative gameplay mechanics (good game designers), with propaganda focusing on the wrapping hiding the substance under the rug.

How gamers conditioned to react to eyecandy will now hype themselves if they can't rely on the graphic factor? That's why so many are defending it despite the evidence. The consensual metric is being proved flawed!

This time it seems the wine despite a good looking bottle, was more vinegar than a good vintage!

Will lessons be learned?

Gameplay > graphics! Always!!!

Never heard anything funnier. Easier to make great graphics than gameplay? This must be why production cost and team size of a AAA eye candy is a lot less than a small and "ugly" but solid gameplay right?

And is good to know you hold the absolute truth about what is importante in gaming and how we only jumped gens to improve world size and gameplay possibilities with graphics being marginal. Technical/graphical improvements areseveral fold bigger than gameplay/inputs on basically any gen transition. But why won't you recode pong to make its gameplay 8th gen like using all power for ai, map size, etc but leave the graphics equal. That should make a helluva game since original pong is still great even after decades.

Why so defensive, did I offend you?

Glad to hear that reading me was funny, at least you had a good laugh & it didn't cost you a penny!

Not to patronize you, but I've been working in the 3D modelisation & animation for 15 years now, so I know a bit about what I'm talking about.

All you need to have pretty graphics today is money, nothing more!

We have tools & enough competent artists in the industry to make pretty games. It doesn't even require particular artistic talent or creativity, I've met my fair share of 3D "artists" with as much artistic talent as a rock. They were good at mimicking reality with the tools they had & it was more than enough to produce great visuals.

Game designing on the other hand is quite different, despite having its technical intricacies, you need talent, a good share of it, in order to create, envision something that works as a game.

You need to put together gameplay, a visual identity, a musical ambient, an enticing story (when it's the case), undestand the technical limitations & pitfalls of your project & the feasibiilty of it within a budget & time frame. That dear DonFerrari, can't be bought by money.

Works the same for music, cinema... touching people is not a matter of money but talent! Graphics are a matter of talent but mostly of money & they are not nor should they be the driving force behind a good game. Gameplay does not exclude great graphics, in fact it should support it, but more & more eyecandy is the target of game producing as Ready at Dawn admited quite sadly, "graphics, story & then gameplay"... It should always be gameplay, replayability, graphics/music, story (if the scope of the game needs it)!

You should listen to me, because as you said it yourself: I "hold the absolute truth" ;P

I know I will make you laught at least, so all is not lost :P