By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
dorbin2009 on 26 June 2009

honestly when did graphics become such a talking point in video games?

I am so sick of this. Graphics are not the end of the world and people need to realize this. I own a 360 personally and yes, I enjoy great graphics, but why in the hell do you think people get so excited at XBLA remake releases?

Because great games do not need graphics to be successful. They never did.

Hell I still remember booting up Scorched earth on my DOS computer 20 years ago. And the game used practical stick figures.

As for the wii, does it really matter if the graphics as good as a PS3? No, it doesn't. You are going to play the games and enjoy them, mainly because its one of the only damn systems I can get my girlfriend to enjoy. And that's not a cliche or a bad thing!

The market changed a long time ago and fanboys are still struggling with the concept.



Around the Network
Words Of Wisdom on 26 June 2009
dorbin2009 said:
honestly when did graphics become such a talking point in video games? 

When the technical specification differences between consoles became so large.  Even last generation, the technical differences between the PS2/GC/Xbox weren't that large.  You could see the same game on all 3 consoles at varying levels of quality that weren't too far out of each other's league.

Also, Scorched Earth is awesome.  If you still enjoy it then you should try Scorched 3D.  It has better graphics too. 



dahuman on 26 June 2009
mike_intellivision said:
dahuman said:
mike_intellivision said:
dahuman said:
This thread is some funny shit =D and I have to speak for Daemon for a sec here, there are people who don't like the Wii, and I can fully understand it, Daemon Hatfield is one of them, but that doesn't mean he doesn't like the good games on that system, good games will be good games. I don't always like what I see on the Wii myself, but that doesn't take my enjoyment away from good games on the system. it is only a problem when people think all Wii games are garbage simply because they don't like the system and ignore the good games on that particular console altogether. Haters are worse than Fanboys and are even lesser a real gamer, keep that in mind =P.

You are right that he has a right to his opinion.

But and does like good games.

But his opinion is that are no good games.

Which basically would seem to invalidate this argument.

 

Mike from Morgantown

go read his blog, I've never really felt his reviews were biased when he was on the Nintendo team, he does have some fav games on Wii.

I read his response. His defense sounds a lot like when someone says ... "I am not against X, I have friends who are X."  His posted game collection shows only three Wii games -- Zelda TP, Metal Slug Anthology, and Wii Sports.

 

But honestly, this statement I think is the clincher: "And the IGN Nintendo team is constantly calling the Wii and Nintendo out on everything that is wrong with the platform."

This leads to two questions.

1. Do they do this for the other platforms? I don't know, I am asking seriously for point of fact.  My feeling is they don't do it as much but I cannot say for any certainty since I don't own the other two platforms and don't follow the traffic surrounding them nearly as seriously.

2. Do they realize that it is selling the most because it is not the other two platforms. That what they do not like may be what the general public likes?

 

Mike from Morgantown

I think he's just a lucky bastard because he doesn't have to buy a lot of the Wii games if he can play them at the IGN office building lol, a lot of them are single player after all or party games, which means he really does love Zelda TP hahaha. I can also tell you that the IGN 360 team is constantly bitching about the 360 as well, it's positive critisism and the PS3 team is a little more defensive because PS3 is dead last but they still mention the need for price drops and say the GO @ 250 is a little meh(the only team on IGN that's a little meh imo, and their podcasts are too loud and annoying lately with all the screaming.) These guys are gamers, they might have preferences on systems or games, but they don't ignore good games on any platform. oh and Greg Miller sucks at the Wiimote, what a little bitch.



dahuman on 26 June 2009
Samus Aran said:

Mike: IGN gives fair reviews and they tend to give games a higher score then other review sites for wii gamesor about the same as most. I don't think Matt hates the wii or Nintendo. However, he does hate Sonic lol. That sonic and the black knight review was soo funny.

My biggest complaint and the reason why I do not own a HD console yet is because ps3 and xbox360 games are 95% the same. I don't even get why fanboys of ps3 and xbox360 fight each other. I'm thinking of buying a cheap xbox360 though for like 150 euros? That's a good price for a console with a good game library. Every game will also have good graphics for me then because the wii doesn't shine in that department.

Sonic as of late..... I can't say I disagree with him, I want a good new Sonic that'd would have SMG standard aka 9.0+ average.



dahuman on 26 June 2009
volrath50 said:
In my old high school (Ontario, Canada) C+ would translate to around a 68%.

Though, even as a Wii lover, I feel the lower scores for Wii games, in general, is warranted. Not because the graphics are worse than the PS360, but because, for the most part, developers do not put a ton of effort into the games. Sadly, sales figures where games like Carnival Games sell twice as much as Metroid Prime 3 encourage this. Which sucks, as when developers DO put effort in (No More Heroes, for instance), the games are incredibly fun. Despite this, I still find myself playing my Wii more than my PS3/360.

I was playing some PS2 recently, and that really shows off the lack of effort many developers put into Wii games. The best PS2 games, such as God of War 2 and MGS3 look almost as good as a weak 360 game. The Wii is around 3 times as powerful as a PS2, so it's sad the number of games that fail to even meet PS2 standards of excellence.

In short, the lack of effort by Wii developers sucks. I like good Wii games more than good 360/PS3 games (though I love those too.)

the Wii is more than 3 times more powerful btw =P a lot more.



Around the Network
KungKras on 26 June 2009
fmc83 said:

You know guys, once there was a time, where games' graphics were compared to the console they were on. Happened to NES and Master System, happened to SNES and Mega Drive/Genesis. The MD/Genesis had better graphics to offer then the SNES, but this wouldn't cost the SNES-game score points in the graphics section). Happened as well to Game Boy and Game Gear. Maybe I was pretty young back then, but I still remember this.

It slowly changed during the N64-PS-area, because the storage problem and therefore the N64 wasn't capable of showing as great video sequences as the PS.

This gen, the problem is that the gen before there where 3 consoles (if you don't count the Dreamcast in) all competing for the best graphics. So then a graphics comparision made sense.

What the reviewers don't seem to get is, that this gen there are 2 consoles fighting over graphics and one fights with a totally different control scheme. So it makes no sense like last gen to compare graphics, because the Wii will always loose. But that's what everybody knows, and the readers want to know, how the game's graphics are compared to what's possible on the console it's on.

As it makes no sense to say that Tiger Woods for PS3/X360 is bad due to the lack of motion controls, it simply makes no sense to judge wii games for graphics the wii are not capable of.

It even becomes more ridiculous if you would include all the handhelds in this standard.

The Megadrive did not offer better graphics than the SNES. They were different, but alike. MD did parallax scrolling better and could handle much more stuff on screen while SNES had much more colours and had transpanrancy effects and mode 7 graphics.



I LOVE ICELAND!

volrath50 on 26 June 2009
KungKras said:
fmc83 said:

You know guys, once there was a time, where games' graphics were compared to the console they were on. Happened to NES and Master System, happened to SNES and Mega Drive/Genesis. The MD/Genesis had better graphics to offer then the SNES, but this wouldn't cost the SNES-game score points in the graphics section). Happened as well to Game Boy and Game Gear. Maybe I was pretty young back then, but I still remember this.

It slowly changed during the N64-PS-area, because the storage problem and therefore the N64 wasn't capable of showing as great video sequences as the PS.

This gen, the problem is that the gen before there where 3 consoles (if you don't count the Dreamcast in) all competing for the best graphics. So then a graphics comparision made sense.

What the reviewers don't seem to get is, that this gen there are 2 consoles fighting over graphics and one fights with a totally different control scheme. So it makes no sense like last gen to compare graphics, because the Wii will always loose. But that's what everybody knows, and the readers want to know, how the game's graphics are compared to what's possible on the console it's on.

As it makes no sense to say that Tiger Woods for PS3/X360 is bad due to the lack of motion controls, it simply makes no sense to judge wii games for graphics the wii are not capable of.

It even becomes more ridiculous if you would include all the handhelds in this standard.

The Megadrive did not offer better graphics than the SNES. They were different, but alike. MD did parallax scrolling better and could handle much more stuff on screen while SNES had much more colours and had transpanrancy effects and mode 7 graphics.


Don't forget the Genesis/Mega Drive had BLAST PROCESSING! BLAST PROCESSING! YOU CAN'T COMPETE WITH THAT! :)

 

I think when I was a little kid, I actually got into a fanboy war with some SNES owner, and IIRC, I actually used "blast processing" to bolster my arguements. Ironic now, that, years later, the SNES is my favoirte console of all-time.



KungKras on 26 June 2009
volrath50 said:
KungKras said:

The Megadrive did not offer better graphics than the SNES. They were different, but alike. MD did parallax scrolling better and could handle much more stuff on screen while SNES had much more colours and had transpanrancy effects and mode 7 graphics.


Don't forget the Genesis/Mega Drive had BLAST PROCESSING! BLAST PROCESSING! YOU CAN'T COMPETE WITH THAT! :)

 

I think when I was a little kid, I actually got into a fanboy war with some SNES owner, and IIRC, I actually used "blast processing" to bolster my arguements. Ironic now, that, years later, the SNES is my favoirte console of all-time.

Yea, I forgot about the BLAST PROCESSING xD. You can't argue against the blast processing!

SNES is my favourite console as well, with megadrive being a very very close second.



I LOVE ICELAND!

atma998 on 26 June 2009
Dno said:
senortaco said:
masterb8tr said:
Phoenix_Wiight said:
Yea, the more people that become idiotic "core" gamers, the more biased reviews will start to appear.

HD games, for the most part, on MOST websites get +5 points higher than Wii games just because they're HD.

It's balls annoying, but we gotta live with it.


well if a game has stunning visuals i think its fair to give it 5 points higher, in comparison to a game that looks like shit.


really this is suppose to ADD too the discussion? ...REALLY?


people have to get over that other people LOVE looking at graphics. Fact: graphics do add to the realism of the game which can (in some games) add to the fun.

Some people love graphics that the wii can not provide and in the graphics part of the review it SHOULD get a low score because people can purchase a better game with better graphics on another console.

Why should mario galaxy get the same score  in the graphics side as ratchet is crazy and maskes no sense. HD graphics do help games get higher scores because it takes time to make it look real and you have that wow factor in games like killzone2 , mass effect, ff13, uncharted etc. these games should NOT have the same score as wii games in the graphics part of the review.

A reviewer has to score, and compare the game to what is out there already. if i own killzone 2 then why would i want the next new FPS on wii? thats what the reviews scores are trying to say.

Also all reviewers rate Nintendo games basied anyway so its not just the HD consoles.

If we follow your logic, then every DS and PSP games should have shitty scores in comparison to PS360 games. That makes no sense at all.



dahuman on 26 June 2009

meanwhile all big budget PC games will get perfect 10s -_^b