now when somwbody makes a good fun game people look at the graphics i dont like that they say if it isnt good graphica its crap what happend to good gameplay i want to stop focusing on graphics and get to the gameplay
In my opinion, here is how the developers should prioritize things: 1) Gameplay 2/3) Concept 3/2) Sound 4) Graphics
'Shadow of the Colossus' has some of the best graphics on the PS2, but it has great music, concept, and gameplay. The biggest complaint was a slow framerate, but something had to be sacrificed. I wonder how it looks on the PS3.
I think it should be like this: 1- Gameplay 2- concept 3- graphics 4- Sound
More opinion added on this. 1. Gameplay 2. Concept 3. Sound 4. Graphics
But sound/visuals change based on the game. Say Call of Duty, I'd prefer graphics before sound, as there's less sound involved. Footsteps, gunshots, some dialouge and shouting. In a modern RPG, I'd rather sound. There's often lots of voice acting, and with all the dungeons and random encounters, you'll want nice background music so it hopefully doesn't get too repetitive. Or, well, any Wii game until Wii U comes out, or any handheld system. There's less room to see the graphics unless you've got something like a DSi XL, which stretches them, but the sound capabilities are getting much higher.
I think it is. No I don't think. I know it is 1 gaymeplay 2 sound 3 grAphics Since I don't know what concept is But I can add a point 4 4 how long can you play it
If you guys want both awesome gameplay and graphics you should look at the video at the bottom of this link: http://www.gameinformer.com/games/kingdoms_of_amalur_reckoning/b/pc/archive/2011/07/15/new-kingdoms-of-amalur-reckoning-shots-impress.aspx
I play games for gameplay. If the graphics are good, that's a plus. But if the graphics are terrible, it's not a minus. Like Fallout 3, that game has amazing gameplay but the graphics are horrible compared to other '08 games. And Halo Wars, I have no idea (or care) when that game came out because it's just terrible, but it has pretty good graphics for a few years ago.
The newest console I have is a Wii because I don't want to pay about $300 for a console. But also because most game makers of today worry about looks, which is why most FPS's strike me as the same as all the rest. Adventure games will soon be the only playable genre if game designers keep this mindset. Graphics is only good for advertisement. And advertising only goes so far.
Graphics is only good for advertisement. And advertising only goes so far
i second that really, companys just use it to get some attention and for braging rites, funny thing is if you play an older game for more than 10minutes you basically stop noticing how bad the graphics are
a good example of gameplay> graphics is crysis, the gameplay was really very samey and mediocre to me, the only people who liked it so much was for pc gamers ,because they just wanted to see how badly there monster pc ran the game
How about morrowind very old game. But good gameplay. If you Play it for 5 min you start thinking. Omg what an empty world but you keep plating for THE fun
I would rather a game have bad/no graphics if it had excellent gameplay.
I have played MUDs (multi-user dungeons) before -- simply terminal text -- and they are interesting and engaging. You do not need stellar graphics to have a good game.
Amnesia needs the visual effects, and if that game looks like minecraft, I bet it wouldn't earn 1/2 of the profit and popularity it has now. Prove me wrong, I dare you :}
What you're referencing with Amnesia is its "Aesthetic", the color scheme used by the game. The game actually looks like crap when well-lit, and at a distance, kinda fuzzy. But it works, the limitations of the graphics of Amnesia creates the atmosphere of fear, of loneliness.
Again, not graphics, aesthetics. Two totally different things. One is key to game design, one is just flashy and not necessary to quality.
I agree i would much rather play a game with amazing gameplay and terrible graphics yhan a game with average gameplay and graphics the graphics are more somthing thats nice but they dont really matter too much to me
Again, not graphics, aesthetics. Two totally different things. One is key to game design, one is just flashy and not necessary to quality.
This. It's a common misconception that art style / aesthetic as you've called it is equal to graphics.
Of course there are connections, Cartoon aesthetics living much older and more easy to look at as graphics - if you play something like Crysis 2 on max graphics then you change to Minecraft, the Frames and the graphics look rough, let's not lie. You get used to it, and it is a great game, but cartoony graphics do not get old! The aesthetic was to help the graphics, ultimately but it's still valid xD
