I don't think "graphics whores" are anything new. Console fanboys have been warring about graphics forever. I agree with others that I don't understand why one can't appreciate both gameplay and graphics, that for some reason they must be completely separate. Or indeed why appreciating good graphics is seen as such a shallow and vulgar thing by some people.

Because the Wii is the current graphically inferior console, Nintendo fans are the current accusers of "graphics whores", but perhaps we should remember back to the N64; "the fastest, most powerful games console on earth" as we used to tell everyone. Or indeed the SNES beating the Genesis, partly due to the amazing graphics it was able to produce with the likes of Donkey Kong Country.

i don't like the trend of pseudo photo-realistic hd graphics because it makes game development a lot more expensive. therefore only the real big publishers usually provide the blockbusters. and because only they do, they mostly create what they know will sell. 9 out of 10 games are sequels to some 1st/3rd/actiongame-shooter nowadays. there is, sadly, not a lot of innovation in the blockbuster titles because the risk of a flop is too big.

of course this leads to a lot of small indie games, but those are usually more like "minigames" with a very small budget. - still they may be the best games. and most medium sized publishers are struggling to stay alive because they can't compete with the big boys in terms of $$$, which means their games will not be shiny enough for todays gamers.

so yeah, to me too much pursuit for better graphics DOES lead to less varied gameplay in the top tiles.

oh,  of course i like good looking games, but a great game shouldn't have to cost multiple tens of millions to make! THAT is what is hurting, not the graphics itself.

Excellent point. I totally agree that the pursuit of ultra-realistic graphics is worrying in terms of cost. I think the cost of video game development these days is frightening. It was always my dream when I was a kid to be a games developer, but nowadays, looking at the cost, man hours and risk of making a single video game it doesn't really appeal at all. I would love to see a situation where the smaller, simpler, lower-budget games that are seen on the consoles' download services and handhelds are treated with the same reverence as the AAA mega-budget blockbusters, rather than just as cute throwbacks that are kind of pushed to the peripheries. I do appreciate amazing graphics, but not if it's unsustainable.

I can understand someone don't care for realistic graphics with a game like Mario Kart but for  a racing sim I want to cars looked close to real cars.

 I have the Wii and I don't see where it has any kind of monoploy on gameplay. LBP ,VC, 3D dot hero are on a HD console without killer  "realistic" graphics.

se "the direct antithesis of developer efficiency" ha ha ha.

i couldn't find a more inefficient developer if i tried cause most are out of business

Lmao and five years on special effects.

na, he didnt have that much time. He did quite a few documentaries.

No wonder why he named his precious metal unobtainium lmao.

I've also noticed that people are more concerned about graphics and HD more than anything else this generation. Sure,it is nice to play a pretty looking game, and I understand that certain games could not be made without superior graphics. However, there are some people who won't even play certain games because the graphics are not good enough for them. I don't have this problem, because I can still play the older games and enjoy them regardless of how the graphics look. 

Classic case of oversimplification to be honest, coupled with picking an abritary line in the sand - in this case the Wii vs HD consoles.

Sure, there's a vocal minority that put graphics on an odd pedestal where they attribute more weight to them than makes sense overall, but let's not forget the 'video' in videogames.  Visuals are a key element of the medium and with tech advances it is quite correct they should improve.

It's easy to see the Wii as pure and the HD consoles as graphic whores, but compare the Wii to early games and the Wii is the graphic whore.  Should we still be staring a black and white blocks?

Graphics deliver the visual design and experience, and for some genres in particular they are vital for immersion and the effectiveness of the game.

Now I admit I find the guys arguing over pixles to be annoying at times.  Who doesn't?  But don't over-simplify.  From the beginning graphics have been a key part of the lure and the experience, coupled with gameplay as well of course.  Super Mario Galaxy is a visually impressive game and wouldn't work nearly as well with weaker graphics, and neither would titles like Uncharted or Heavy Rain for that matter.

Something like Red Dead Redemption in my views needs to be as high res as possible to sell the experience of being there.  In fact, truth be told I'd like the game to be at PC levels of resolution vs PS3/360 and it would make the experience of that particular game more enjoyable.

I remember loving text based adventure games - but that doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer a Matrix like simulated reality where I'm really wandering around the caverns vs reading a description of them where it available.