Graphics Q

[Alienblue]

How important are graphics to you?

I have a feeling this may depend on the generation you grew up in. If, like me, your first system was the Atari 2600, you truly believe that Great GAMEPLAY is FAR more important than great graphics. IF-IF you can have both, fine! But if you must sacrifice one for the other-graphics should go out the window before good gameplay. Sadly, I think a greeat deal of mordern games sacrifice the game for pretty pictures.

As am example: 2600 WARPLOCK. I've not seen worse graphics! Your "ship" looks like a green smudge, the enemy ships are blobby hats in pink and green-ech! But they fly in mesmerizing patterns, control is TIGHT, and play UNUSUAL (you play in center screen). I play game after game of this-it's fun!

Now, Planet Puzzle League on DS has both perfect play AND beautifuly animated backgrounds-well, sure it has a lot more power than the 2600's 2-16K. Also fine. But when a game is all ABOUT graphics...doesn't it cease to be a game and become a passive experiance-a computerized MOVIE? I think so.

And I think more people are realizing this; hence the popularity of DS over PSP and Wii over PS3/360.

How do you feel-and be honest, what was your first era system?
2600, NES or PS2!?

[The RPG Critic]

[QUOTE=Alienblue]How do you feel-and be honest, what was your first era system?
2600, NES or PS2!?[/QUOTE]

My older brother (10 years my senior) let me use his Atari 2600 and later his Commodore 64 to play games when I was around 8 or 9.  I didn't have an NES until 1992 or 1993, and even then, I didn't have too many games for it.

I'm all for glitz, but not glitz at the expense of the game itself.  It's like getting dog poop wrapped in a Neiman Marcus holiday box - all show, unpleasing contents.

[Dennis]

I also grew up with the 2600 and agree with you that graphics are secondary. 

I was just talking to a co-worker the other day who said she was looking forward to some new game based on a movie (I forget which one).  I told her it would probably suck, as most games based on movies do, and she said, "But look at the graphics... how bad could it be?!?"

[Anayo1]

Some games inherently lend themselves to simple or quaint graphics. Wario Ware or Wii Sports, for instance. These games are really quite modern, but their graphics are simple, reflecting the nature of the game itself. Most of the time, though, it's not unfair to expect a game's graphics to be made competently up to par with what the hardware is capable of.

[ActRaiser1]

I grew up playing the 2600; however, I have noticed myself being more interested in games with gripping storylines such as KOTOR than being in it just for the sake of gameplay or graphics. 

You're right, gameplay is key first though, with the story second (for adventure games), followed by graphics.

Bud

[Koopa W.]

[QUOTE=The RPG Critic]

It's like getting dog poop wrapped in a Neiman Marcus holiday box - all show, unpleasing contents.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you, John, for an image I will never be able to get out of my mind.

[qubit]

I actually grew up with the PS1  but I still think that gameplay is definitely over graphics, but the latter also helps the former become more convincing.

[Blah]

[QUOTE=qubit]

I actually grew up with the PS1  but I still think that gameplay is definitely over graphics, but the latter also helps the former become more convincing.

[/QUOTE]

That's what I was thinking. It's not so much the graphics as the atmosphere.
One example is Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. Sure, it has crappy graphics now, but the sound and style makes you feel like you are a blond boy in emerald clothing trying to save the world (disturbing an image as that may be).

[Michael D]

To me, graphics aren't the major factor in regards of a good game.  The only time that they are is when a game has a bad framerate, a visual issue that in turn affects the game's playability. 

As far as how I tell if a game has good or bad graphics, I compare each game I play to others on the same system.  I also look for a sense of artistry to the visuals to determine if the style of them suits the game.  For example, many blame the Nippon Ichi RPGs (Rhapsody: A Musical Adventure, Phantom Brave) for having simplistic graphics for their respective systems (PS1 for Rhapsody and PS2 for Phantom Brave), but I defended them on artistic grounds, due to their beautiful hand-drawn backgrounds and detailed character animations that add to the unique experiences of both titles. 

But as you can expect, certain standards (like the one I outlined) will change as new games come around.  To use the same example, Altus' Odin Sphere uses a similar graphical style to the Nippon Ichi titles, but they are so beautiful and take full advantage of the PS2's capabilities that I'll have to hold that standard to any upcoming Nippon Ichi titles (or any other games that utilize that style).

[QF]

Gameplay over graphics but most games prior to NES era I can't play. They're just blocks. The Vectrex is an exception though.