Reducing the graphics also helps to reduce load times and helps get all the content in. Using cartridges pretty much eliminates the loading times completely. Uncharted 2 could have been made on the Snes if the graphics were toned down (a lot) 

And no, the stunning graphics would not have that effect on me. I almost fell asleep during Crysis (man that game is boring). I'm sure U2 would be better, due to a combination of better gameplay and a more interesting art style. But that doesn't mean that you cannot love the graphics, it's just that they don't change how much I enjoy a game

It changes how you feel about the characters, not just what it looks like, that enhances the plot, and enhances the gameplay, as you care much more about the characters

Exactly.

A good developer (and i think it's safe to classify naughty dog as a good developer) can make you feel for characters purely with text. Books generally have better characterisation than movies or computer games.

by the logic that scottie uses no matter how technically advanced a game is it could theoretically be reduced to a mere shadow of the real thing and made into an atari game that looks the same as every other atari game. that argument could be made for every game ever made but it holds no water at all because the game would no longer be as good and that's why we advance the technology in the first place, to make the games better.

I can't believe you ignorant you are. Graphics don't do a game alone.... Physics, gameplay, plot, controls and everything does indeed contribute to how amazing a game is. But say, the SNES, do you think the SNES allows the physics properties that developing a game with ps3 dev kit does? Moreover, you do not realise that the cartriges have size limitations. The N64 could only read cartridges of 64MB max, what makes you think that a game that could not run on the N64 could run on an SNES? Do you realise how many lines of codes are needed for a game like Uncharted 2? Not everyone has a software engineering degree but it doesn't take much intelligence to discover the point that games are getting bigger and more complex year after year. Do you realise that a single bullet being shot in Uncharted 2 would be too much for the SNES processor to handle?

Another thing that makes games like Uncharted 2 better than others are the acting in the game. Do you realise that You could barely fit a fraction of the effects in the game on cartridge let alone all the voices from the interaction. The high criteria for a good game doesn't involve flashing sentences saying "Pow Pow... you're dead" instead of hearing actual gunfire and hearing your character die in agony as he falls.

Do you believe you are smarter than Nintendo themselves, that they would choose to move to CD/DVD rather than stay with cartridges? To prove your point, you are spurring out pointless arguments that you do not believe in yourself. Stating that you slept while playing Crysis? I have friends who didn't like the game and that is understandable but no true gamer would not appreciate the graphics in Crysis. 

Modern era gaming has a much higher place than before in graphics and sound. Games either rise or fall based on the graphical prowess of their engines. I for one prefer the modern Zelda's and Mario galaxy rather than the Old ones I had on previous nintendo platforms.

Yeah seriously scottie wth, your just arguing for the sake of it.

Are you telling me Call of Duty would have the same intensity on the snes? or that car racing games were as realistic on the snes?

And don't come back and say, "oh well i was only talking about uncharted 2" because you are clearly arguing that graphics arnt important at all, and that is completely false.

You unfortunately missed my point slightly.

I said that I care not for graphics, but only that the gameplay etc are unaffected.

Obviously, the 360 is capable of playing Uncharted2 with some minor graphical adjustments but no change to the gameplay

Equally obvious, the babbage engine is unable to reproduce the gameplay of Uncharted 2.

Even more obvious, then, is the fact that there must be some cutoff. If we arranged all consoles in a line from least powerful to most, there must be one console that can reproduce the gameplay, levels etc of uncharted but with reduced graphics, and one less powerful console that cannot. The SNES has some excellent 3d games with a steady framerate, many enemies on screen and no problems with cutin distance - Super star wars Empire Strikes back landspeeder levels for example. I therefore propose that a game could be made that plays identically to Uncharted 2, with reduced graphics. It will obviously be able to store this on a consle, because the textures can just be simplified until it does. I would like this game pretty much as much as Uncharted 2. I'm not saying you have to, if you like games with good graphics then you shouldn't let anyone tell you that you're wrong.

@ Shoestar - if i am ignorant then I obviously shouldn't even dare respond to you. Your awesome intellect is of course too much for me. if you actually care about hearing my responses to your points, then edit your post and remove the section that calls me ignorant. Don't worry, I'm not going to report you to the mods or anything, so feel free to keep it there if you think it's all that important to insult someone who disagrees with you on the internet

It wouldn't have worked on 360 because you wouldn't have been able to use Sixaxis to lean back while hanging, and that is why it's PS3 exclusive.

I've always felt that 'intensity' was a weird word to describe games. But the only 2 games I've played that I would describe as intense are F-zer GX for the gamecube and F-zero for the SNES

I never said that SNES games were  as realistic, all I said was that i do not care about realism

And no, I shant come back with that. I am not even arguing that graphics aren't of any importance, I am arguing (and i quote the very first thing I said in this thread)

"Graphics do not make a game, gameplay/plot/controls/everything that's actually important does"