By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Do graphics add gameplay?

That's like asking me to choose between an ugly smart girl and a beautiful smart girl.



Around the Network
Galaki said:
That's like asking me to choose between an ugly smart girl and a beautiful smart girl.

 

That's a rather bad analogy. I see a great looking girl naked and immidiately has an affect on me, or anyone else (straight men of course). Meanwhile looking at a good looking game does absolutely nothing. Crysis was a very mediocre game with great graphics, for instance.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

vlad321 said:
Galaki said:
That's like asking me to choose between an ugly smart girl and a beautiful smart girl.

 

That's a rather bad analogy. I see a great looking girl naked and immidiately has an affect on me, or anyone else (straight men of course). Meanwhile looking at a good looking game does absolutely nothing. Crysis was a very mediocre game with great graphics, for instance.

 

My analogy is to assume the game is good with gameplay while the ugly/beautiful is the graphics.

I'd take good gameplay with beautiful graphics.



Galaki said:
vlad321 said:
Galaki said:
That's like asking me to choose between an ugly smart girl and a beautiful smart girl.

 

That's a rather bad analogy. I see a great looking girl naked and immidiately has an affect on me, or anyone else (straight men of course). Meanwhile looking at a good looking game does absolutely nothing. Crysis was a very mediocre game with great graphics, for instance.

 

My analogy is to assume the game is good with gameplay while the ugly/beautiful is the graphics.

I'd take good gameplay with beautiful graphics.

Yeah me too, but there are games with horrible graphics that I'd take over most games that have come out in the past few years. In your analogy, I'm talking lepers here.

 



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Nope they do not. They enhance visuals. They offer new ways to play. They can convey ideas differently, but no. no extra gameplay plus.



Squilliam: On Vgcharts its a commonly accepted practice to twist the bounds of plausibility in order to support your argument or agenda so I think its pretty cool that this gives me the precedent to say whatever I damn well please.

Around the Network

Gpraphics add to immersion which makes the gameplay more worthwhile.




I would argue that graphics are now and have always been an important part of gaming. You see, back in the day developers always tried to make their games look and play great just as they do now.

It's just that games which looked great 10 years ago are now considered not so good looking and people say "Oh look that's a great game and it has poor graphics so that proves you don't need great graphics and only gameplay is important"

While I do believe gameplay is key, it greatly benefits from good visuals because they add a level of immersion and wonder. Visuals and audio are some of the components which when combined with great gameplay mechanics and done properly deliver a solid gaming experience.




 

 

Branko2166 said:

It's just that games which looked great 10 years ago are now considered not so good looking and people say "Oh look that's a great game and it has poor graphics so that proves you don't need great graphics and only gameplay is important"

 

Exactly, your hot wife 20 years ago isn't as hot now, is she?

As technology progress, we'd naturally expect more and more. Some games don't require as much pixels as others.

I think we're at the point where facial expressions are becoming important. Again, some games will not be needing that.



Galaki said:
Branko2166 said:

It's just that games which looked great 10 years ago are now considered not so good looking and people say "Oh look that's a great game and it has poor graphics so that proves you don't need great graphics and only gameplay is important"

 

Exactly, your hot wife 20 years ago isn't as hot now, is she?

As technology progress, we'd naturally expect more and more. Some games don't require as much pixels as others.

I think we're at the point where facial expressions are becoming important. Again, some games will not be needing that.

 

If we're going with the wife analogy i dont know wtf you are doing with the newer games then. Honestly GFX in video games are just like GFX in movies. Remeber Pirates of the Carribbean? Then remember what happened when they started throwing in "grpahics" in the sequels?



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

@ vlad , I really don't get your point i'll assume that no one else did either.