Graphics are important for making something immersive, but I feel some games go too far and sacrifice scale for graphics. While games like planetside may not have had the best of graphics for their time, it is pretty damn awesome playing with so many other people.
[QUOTE=Polaco202;33294179]I'd like to bring the example of Deus Ex: HR. A good game by itself but the amazing attention to detail and the art style and quality, that bumps it up to a great game.[/QUOTE]I'd also like to bring up the first Deus Ex game, which has pretty bad graphics (even for the time period) and it's widely considered to be one of the best, if not THE best, game of all time.
Call me unimaginative, but what kind of bothers me is how everyone is equating good artistic direction with games that have overly cartoonish themes and silly-looking objects. While I'll admit that this is mostly subjective territory, I find that there are plenty of games that are semi-realistic in design and have terrific art direction, like Half-Life/Half-Life 2, Medal of Honor: Frontline, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Company of Heroes, to name a few.
Not everyone like's cartoonish-looking games, ya know.
[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;33357427]Call me unimaginative, but what kind of bothers me is how everyone is equating good artistic direction with games that have overly cartoonish themes and silly-looking objects. While I'll admit that this is mostly subjective territory, I find that there are plenty of games that are semi-realistic in design and have terrific art direction, like Half-Life/Half-Life 2, Medal of Honor: Frontline, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Company of Heroes, to name a few.
Not everyone like's cartoonish-looking games, ya know.[/QUOTE]
simplicity in design != cartoonish if thats what you are implying?
[QUOTE=Kwaq;33357544]simplicity in design != cartoonish if thats what you are implying?[/QUOTE]
No. I never implied that.
[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;33357427]Call me unimaginative, but what kind of bothers me is how everyone is equating good artistic direction with games that have overly cartoonish themes and silly-looking objects. While I'll admit that this is mostly subjective territory, I find that there are plenty of games that are semi-realistic in design and have terrific art direction, like Half-Life/Half-Life 2, Medal of Honor: Frontline, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Company of Heroes, to name a few.
Not everyone like's cartoonish-looking games, ya know.[/QUOTE]
Terrific as in really bad or really good? I suppose it's the second one, but still.
I think hl2 art direction for example would look 100 times better if it had more polies and higher res textures. I mean actual art direction, not some fanmade stuff (cough cinematic mod cough)
Artstyle is more important than graphics, in my opinion.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33357939]Terrific as in really bad or really good? I suppose it's the second one, but still.[/QUOTE]
I thought it was obvious that I was referring to the latter, but now that you mention it, the alternate meaning of the word "terrific" can certainly describe some of the atmospheric elements that a few of my aforementioned games possess.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33357939]I think hl2 art direction for example would look 100 times better if it had more polies and higher res textures. I mean actual art direction, not some fanmade stuff (cough cinematic mod cough)[/QUOTE]
Higher poly count and higher resolution textures are still within the realm of graphics though, not art direction. Technically what Cinematic Mod tried to do was more along the lines of enhancing/altering HL2's art direction in addition to its graphics, but I think it failed miserably in that regard.
[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;33359731]
Higher poly count and higher resolution textures are still within the realm of graphics though[/QUOTE]
We are discussing graphics here after all.
As I said before, artistic direction doesn't matter in terms of graphical quality, graphical quality being things like quality of the models, textures, lighting and after effects. Take Alice: Madness Returns:
[IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7jAxyDneFHk/Tgjk-r27tyI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/itEeTx-ajdg/s1600/Cards_view_656x369.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://files.g4tv.com/ImageDb3/266695_S/alice-madness-returns-screenshots-cheshire-cat-needs-a-sammich.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4815307833_baeaab6832_z.jpg[/IMG]
Alice has an amazing style to it, but the graphics are let down due to a low texture resolution, and dodgy animations. Notice the ground texture on the second image.
[editline]21st November 2011[/editline]
Also if you focus on textures in the third image, you'll notice that they are low resolution. Look at tree to the right, and ground textures on bottom left.
Graphics shouldn't be an issue as long as they're good enough for the current generation, but some games benefit from having a less sophisticated style, like minecraft, because it somewhat adds to the feel of the game and defines its simplicity
[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;33294029]good graphics implies powerful machinery, which implies better A.I, more enemies, more complexity, etc.[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Just because you have good artists doesn't mean you have good programmers. The graphics can be terrible, but there can be very powerful machinery, AI, enemies, and so on.
[QUOTE=Quark:;33366306]Not at all. Just because you have good artists doesn't mean you have good programmers. The graphics can be terrible, but there can be very powerful machinery, AI, enemies, and so on.[/QUOTE]
I think it does
if a company is well-off enough to hire top-notch artists I'm sure they can also get similarly talented programmers as well
Of course graphics are imoportant, games are about the feelings isn't it? Why not add some badass quality graphics to improve it?
depends on the type of game
[QUOTE=Antdawg;33359907]As I said before, artistic direction doesn't matter in terms of graphical quality, graphical quality being things like quality of the models, textures, lighting and after effects. Take Alice: Madness Returns:
[IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7jAxyDneFHk/Tgjk-r27tyI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/itEeTx-ajdg/s1600/Cards_view_656x369.jpg[/IMG]
Alice has an amazing style to it, but the graphics are let down due to a low texture resolution, and dodgy animations. Notice the ground texture on the second image.
[editline]21st November 2011[/editline]
Also if you focus on textures in the third image, you'll notice that they are low resolution. Look at tree to the right, and ground textures on bottom left.[/QUOTE]I see that but I don't get what point you're trying to make.
[video=youtube;kmoU5dtKvi0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmoU5dtKvi0[/video]
Was an awesome game. The graphics aren't super amazing, but it's still fun. As long as the games aren't a poly mess it's fine.
[b]EDIT:[/b] Even then, I'm more of a classic gamer, obscure indie gamer, or sandbox gamer, so I have a bit of a bias.
The problem is the market though.
Games need to have either amazing gameplay to the point that many people support it despite the graphics (e.g. Minecraft) or average gameplay with great graphics to sell good.
As a gamer, I look for fun gameplay. There are some though, who will look at a game with amazing graphics and just run around screaming "THESE FUCKING WALLS, THE PEOPLE, THEY LOOK SO REAL, FUCK" and enjoy themselves, despite the gameplay itself not being much fun.
If it's in between that it probably won't be successful.
I agree that graphics are an important part of a game, but on the other hand, it isn't [i]the[/i] most important part of a game.
I've heard quite alot of people say that graphics are the most important thing a game has to offer. If the graphics are shit for them so is the entire game which is just ridiculous. Some of them said Metroid prime 3 is shit because it's graphics are subpar with today's standards, even if they hadn't tried it.
Well some people need them HD's with the 1080p's or else Samus just ain't cool enough.
...which is retarded. A game is a game, and while the graphics are a good chunk of it it's like dissing an album because you don't like the album cover. Don't judge a book by it's cover.
Time for Super Mario Bros. 1.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;33398821]Well some people need them HD's with the 1080p's or else Samus just ain't cool enough.
...which is retarded. A game is a game, and while the graphics are a good chunk of it it's like dissing an album because you don't like the album cover. Don't judge a book by it's cover.
Time for Super Mario Bros. 1.[/QUOTE]
well if we're being fair in comparison, it's more like dissing an album because the production quality is low
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;33399026]well if we're being fair in comparison, it's more like dissing an album because the production quality is low[/QUOTE]
Totally untrue. You could have the best damn game with minimal gameplay-related glitches while having sub-par graphics.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;33399142]Totally untrue. You could have the best damn game with minimal gameplay-related glitches while having sub-par graphics.[/QUOTE]
and you could have the best damn album with great writing, performance, and tone, while having sub-par production quality
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;33399160]and you could have the best damn album with great writing, performance, and tone, while having sub-par production quality[/QUOTE]
Actually, thinking about it that analogy makes more sense now that I think about it a bit more. lul. <3
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;33399160]and you could have the best damn album with great writing, performance, and tone, while having sub-par production quality[/QUOTE]
Except it's a little different in the music industry. Nobody enjoys having unwanted artifacts all over the song. Then again nobody enjoys a clusterfuck all over your screen either.
it also depends on what kind of game we are talking about. games like Skyrim immerse me much more because it looks pretty
[QUOTE=Recurracy;33399222]Except it's a little different in the music industry. Nobody enjoys having unwanted artifacts all over the song. Then again nobody enjoys a clusterfuck all over your screen either.[/QUOTE]Nobody enjoys poor production and presentation. Really.
No.
Not really.
Operation Flashpoint had an insane following well after the graphics became incredibly dated. Hell it still does to some degree. Morrowind too. Sure mods helped, but nothing dramatically updated the visuals, it was still dated.
But I'd like to make the point that I feel a lot of new games graphical presentation is over the top. If the idea is to get more and more realistic graphics, why the fuck are so many resources wasted on pretty effects that are seen NO WHERE in real life.
Raven Shield, as dated as it is now, still holds a special place in my heart. Aside from the unmatched tactical gameplay, it had very clean graphics. The models were all realistic, and the special effects were not over the top. It was a very reserved but clean presentation. At the time of release, it looked fantastic of course, as the UE 2 engine did back in the day.
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;33414014]
But I'd like to make the point that I feel a lot of new games graphical presentation is over the top. If the idea is to get more and more realistic graphics, why the fuck are so many resources wasted on pretty effects that are seen NO WHERE in real life.
[/QUOTE]Because it's supposed to look good, not realistic.
Also what effects are you talking about?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.