Beauty is skin deep: Calling out the graphics pimps

[Parokki]

I fully agree with the article on how some of the rhetoric used to hype games, and argue over them on the internet is pretty ridiculous. Yes libellule, it's possible to find someone commenting on the gameplay of KZ2 if you really look for it, but practically all of the hype from the developers and media is graffixgraffixgraffix.

Too bad he only uses a PS3 game as an example, and a lot of people have trouble not seeing it as an attack on their console.

If I were to write something similar, then I'd take a slightly different approach. Graphics are important, but the important thing in good graphics is how a game looks, not how advanced the technology behind it is. To me games like Killzone 2 or Gears of War look like utter shit. Sure they have a zillion pixels per square zong, but the biggest real difference is how one is completely grey, and the other completely brown. On the other hand, games like Katamari or Psychonauts are very pleasant to look at, even on less impressive hardwre. There's also a bunch of Nintendo stuff, but I imagine I won't get away with mentioning them without this turning into round 205924 of the console wars. =P

If I had to name one of the shooters I've played as the one that looked the best, it would be Team Fortress 2. The graphics are clean and look nice, but the real treat is the extremely distinctive style that gives the game and every character a unique feel and personality. After that it's probably Halo 3, probably because it's a scifi shooter with actual colours, and the character designs are mostly very nice. I realise some games have slightly better effects and whatever, but that won't help with a artistic approach/graphical style/whatever that makes WH40k look like Viva Pinata.

Disagree with me? Well yeah, that's because this stuff is extremely subjective. It's not like anyone can agree on the best gameplay or writing either. Producing a phrase like "if I had to name the X that I thought looked the best" in a casual internet discussion is a pain in the butt, which might explain why most people prefer to say the best graphics. =P

The thing that annoys me the most is how some people keep switching between what they mean with good graphics. For example in the last "best graphics of last gen?" thread we had, several members were seriously claiming God of War or Final Fantasy XII had better graphics than any Xbox or Gamecube game. There's nothing inherently impossible about that, but these were the exact same members who were at the same time claiming the Wii could never have as good graphics as the HD consoles because of the less powerful hardware.

And just for the record, I don't think gameplay is everything in a game. Planescape Torment is one of my all-time favorites and has extremely shitty gameplay, but the writing is so far above anything else in all of gaming that I really don't care. Shadow of the Colossus has some serious gameplay issues, as well as a number of other faults, but the sheer awesomeness and beauty of it all (despite the PS2 hardware) made an ever-lasting impression on me. God Hand has some serious issues as well, but it's made by Clover, and thus automatically superb.

Gameplay isn't everything in a game, but using more advanced (which really shouldn't mean better) graphics sure as hell isn't more important.