Does graphics ever match creativity?

24	5211

offline

thebluerabbit

5,340 posts

Farmer

Posted March 6, '11 1:57pm UTC

i agree. creativity and a good story is the most important thing (in my opinion) in a game. and it really buggs me today when people buy games because they "look" good and hate games because they look "bad". its also annoying that video game makers now usually only care about the graphics. in my opinion the graphic isnt important because once you play a game that has a good story you just get used to it and doesnt matter (almost) how bad the graphic is you can understand and "feel" exactly what is going on in the game

offline

LazyOne

166 posts

Nomad

Posted March 6, '11 2:16pm UTC

I do enjoy some games with a nice plot, and creativity etc [Like Hammerfight and Magicka!], but I do judge the graphics as well. I don't want to buy a game with loads of glitches, no parallax, shadows etc.

I do think more commercial games, like FPS's, RTS's and all that do spend more time on macing their graphics out, as in a first person game they probably stand out more.

offline

Highfire

3,025 posts

Nomad

Posted March 6, '11 2:39pm UTC

Sure there is a visual enjoyment (which is fine) but if you enjoy games just for graphics you are not a gamer.

Quote from Totalbiscuit, keep in mind this is a loose quote at best:
"I find people who play a variety of different games that take them for what they are are gamers, not the ones who go 24/7 into a single one - they are not gamers."

Something along those lines.
Graphics amplifies Gameplay, and Gameplay amplifies Graphics. Gameplay MIGHT matter more, but there are a couple exceptions that require graphics to be the better.

Also music and audio amplifies them as well, for instance, imagine something really really cool happening where you all charge in on CoD like the idiots the pixels seem to be (I don't see anyone 360'ing IRL), whilst listening to something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GIyaiYCneM&feature=related

Yeah, without the singer that would probably be better, but it doesn't matter because that's better than CoD music ANYWAY.

Creativity and a good story, like what thebluerabbit said, is what kept me in World of Warcraft - I'm still interested in it! I don't play it, but I still like to know about the lore etc because it's possibly the most complex fictional story in the entire gaming industry!
The quality of it isn't bad in my opinion either.

By the way, the reason I so love Indie Developers is because they don't care too much for graphics. Like Magicka, yeah, it looks pretty neat and all - and even its gameplay is pretty simple, but its focus is just having the fun with friends. I often hear people reasonably complaining about oh how their stupid kid won't get off the Xbox, go outside and be creative (albeit I am probably one of them...), Magicka is just dumb fun, it's a way of being creative and I think it's better quality than any Call of Duty game!
Well, no, not really, just Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops.
But hell, this was made by EIGHT people, and in the first couple months its been out they've fixed more bugs in Magicka than what Treyarch or Infinity Ward has done with MW2 or Black Ops altogether!
I've already said it but man, CoD creators are just trolls that get paid.
Indie developers have no problem being creative, taking risks (as you might know Paradox took a fair-risk when making Magicka), and listening to their fanbase.

1. Second Chance (AKA Last Stand) - Hasn't been taken out, tell me who likes this perk? Especially when you have the choice of delaying the inevitable or something that could prevent it altogether?

One example.
I'm going to stop ranting, besides, I've been talking about Call of Duty - I think Crysis 2 or Battlefield 3 are the ways to go

- H

[quote]Sure there is a visual enjoyment (which is fine) but if you enjoy games just for graphics you are not a gamer. [/quote]\r\nQuote from Totalbiscuit, keep in mind this is a loose quote at best:\r\n"I find people who play a variety of different games that take them for what they are are gamers, not the ones who go 24/7 into a single one - they are not gamers."\r\n\r\nSomething along those lines.\r\nGraphics amplifies Gameplay, and Gameplay amplifies Graphics. Gameplay MIGHT matter more, but there are a couple exceptions that require graphics to be the better.\r\n\r\nAlso music and audio amplifies them as well, for instance, imagine something really really cool happening where you all charge in on CoD like the idiots the pixels seem to be (I don't see anyone 360'ing IRL), whilst listening to something like this:\r\n\r\nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GIyaiYCneM&feature=related\r\n\r\nYeah, without the singer that would probably be better, but it doesn't matter because that's better than CoD music ANYWAY.\r\n\r\nCreativity and a good story, like what thebluerabbit said, is what kept me in World of Warcraft - I'm still interested in it! I don't play it, but I still like to know about the lore etc because it's possibly the most complex fictional story in the entire gaming industry!\r\nThe quality of it isn't bad in my opinion either.\r\n\r\nBy the way, the reason I so love Indie Developers is because they don't care too much for graphics. Like Magicka, yeah, it looks pretty neat and all - and even its gameplay is pretty simple, but its focus is just having the fun with friends. I often hear people reasonably complaining about oh how their stupid kid won't get off the Xbox, go outside and be creative (albeit I am probably one of them...), Magicka is just dumb fun, it's a way of being creative and I think it's better quality than any Call of Duty game!\r\nWell, no, not really, just Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops. :D\r\nBut hell, this was made by EIGHT people, and in the first couple months its been out they've fixed more bugs in Magicka than what Treyarch or Infinity Ward has done with MW2 or Black Ops altogether!\r\nI've already said it but man, CoD creators are just trolls that get paid.\r\nIndie developers have no problem being creative, taking risks (as you might know Paradox took a fair-risk when making Magicka), and listening to their fanbase.\r\n\r\n1. Second Chance (AKA Last Stand) - Hasn't been taken out, tell me who likes this perk? Especially when you have the choice of delaying the inevitable or something that could prevent it altogether?\r\n\r\nOne example.\r\nI'm going to stop ranting, besides, I've been talking about Call of Duty - I think Crysis 2 or Battlefield 3 are the ways to go :)\r\n\r\n - H

offline

Freakenstein

9,503 posts

Jester

Posted March 7, '11 12:23am UTC

"I find people who play a variety of different games that take them for what they are are gamers, not the ones who go 24/7 into a single one - they are not gamers."

Highfire, this quote has nothing to do with what you quoted above.

Graphics amplifies Gameplay, and Gameplay amplifies Graphics. Gameplay MIGHT matter more, but there are a couple exceptions that require graphics to be the better.

Graphics amplifies Gameplay, and gameplay can stand on its own. Gameplay matters the most in any game, and there are no exceptions that require graphics to be better. If you truly believe that graphics are better than gameplay in some instances, then I recommend you play Xenosaga, for the entirety of the game is 80% cinematic and 20% time put into playing. If this is really how you feel about what matters most in a game, then this is perfect for you.

Also music and audio amplifies them as well

Possibly the only thing I agree with you in your entire post. When I play a game, I review how engrossing the story and plot is, how wonderful their music is composed and how well it relates to the game and environment itself, and, most of all, the game mechanics and concept itself. I could care less what it looks like.

It's why most young teens and children are playing CoD and other graphics-stimulated games while I'm still playing Diablo, Chrono Trigger, Evo, C&C:RA2, and Morrowind, realizing that I'm having more fun.

[quote]"I find people who play a variety of different games that take them for what they are are gamers, not the ones who go 24/7 into a single one - they are not gamers."[/quote]\r\n\r\nHighfire, this quote has nothing to do with what you quoted above.\r\n\r\n[quote]Graphics amplifies Gameplay, and Gameplay amplifies Graphics. Gameplay MIGHT matter more, but there are a couple exceptions that require graphics to be the better.[/quote]\r\n\r\nGraphics amplifies Gameplay, and gameplay can stand on its own. Gameplay matters the most in any game, and there are no exceptions that require graphics to be better. If you truly believe that graphics are better than gameplay in some instances, then I recommend you play [url=http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps2/519264-xenosaga-episode-i-der-wille-zur-macht]Xenosaga[/url], for the entirety of the game is 80% cinematic and 20% time put into playing. If this is really how you feel about what matters most in a game, then this is perfect for you.\r\n\r\n[quote]Also music and audio amplifies them as well[/quote]\r\n\r\nPossibly the only thing I agree with you in your entire post. When I play a game, I review how engrossing the story and plot is, how wonderful their music is composed and how well it relates to the game and environment itself, and, most of all, the game mechanics and concept itself. I could care less what it looks like.\r\n\r\nIt's why most young teens and children are playing CoD and other graphics-stimulated games while I'm still playing Diablo, Chrono Trigger, Evo, C&C:RA2, and Morrowind, realizing that I'm having more fun.

offline

sk8brder246

740 posts

Nomad

Posted March 7, '11 12:33am UTC

idk, im one of those people were if a game has bad graphics. i can hardly play it. that just makes me mad

offline

Drink

1,621 posts

Blacksmith

Posted March 7, '11 1:35am UTC

graphics arent everything they are just a nice plus i usually go for gameplay and or control scheme and the story line/online play but there will be a limit on the graphics i dont wanna play something all blocky like an nintendo 64 game

offline

Highfire

3,025 posts

Nomad

Posted March 7, '11 3:59pm UTC

Highfire, this quote has nothing to do with what you quoted above.

The quote I had was involved with what I said before or after it, maybe in a different post if it was before that post. It's that people who decide to take different varieties of games, and as mentioned, some games have graphics only-influences (though very little) are more like gamers. Loose relation, but still.

and gameplay can stand on its own.

I know that, however gameplay can also amplify graphics. Simple effects like destructible ground doesn't necessarily amplify it but gives a lane in which graphics can act on (explosions explosions explosions).

If you truly believe that graphics are better than gameplay in some instances,

I didn't imply that I merely stated that that is the intended case sometimes.
However I do believe that things that make you go "woah" is great, gameplay matters more, surely, however graphical games are simply more laid back (I can't remember the one but it basically has pretty colors, involves you shooting rings as it plays relaxing music as you fire... O.o )

for the entirety of the game is 80% cinematic and 20% time put into playing.

An obvious inbalance, however I'd like to say that I found Mass Effect 2's unique use of cinematics to be very immersive and special, which had me go to vote it game of the year, 2010...
The way it presented the story and how you even reacted to it was especially cool.

If this is really how you feel about what matters most in a game,

I don't
Things that require graphics more I feel is more like a movie if anything, that color-y game I was saying earlier? It's basically just listening to music, except you interact and partially create it.

playing CoD and other graphics-stimulated games

To be fair, I disagree with CoD being graphics-based. I'm pretty sure little work is put into it anyway because of the terrible gameplay (imo).
If they wanted something with sweet graphics (and not quickscoping), then they would probably go with Crysis 2 or Battlefield Bad Company 2 because we can all agree that blowing up a building or going invisible is much more awesome that shooting someone 70 yards (AKA 1 Call of Duty Map) away in the blink of an eye.

realizing that I'm having more fun.

Every now and again I skip back and play the old games, namely Age of Empires, however I cannot go back to them repeatedly simply due to how... old they can get (no pun intended). It's simply that it's the same story and same gameplay involved that makes it boring for me - honestly, I cannot devote myself to playing a game for more than 2-3 hours I don't think.
Unless it's with friends, in which case the whole situation changes.

there will be a limit on the graphics

Basically how I think of it, pixelated games I find hard to play (with the exception of Age of Empires 2), however great graphics doesn't give such a "wow" as gameplay would.

C&C:RA2

Great game by the way...

- H

[quote]Highfire, this quote has nothing to do with what you quoted above.[/quote]\r\nThe quote I had was involved with what I said before or after it, maybe in a different post if it was before that post. It's that people who decide to take different varieties of games, and as mentioned, some games have graphics only-influences (though very little) are more like gamers. Loose relation, but still. :D\r\n\r\n[quote]and gameplay can stand on its own.[/quote]\r\nI know that, however gameplay can also amplify graphics. Simple effects like destructible ground doesn't necessarily amplify it but gives a lane in which graphics can act on (explosions explosions explosions).\r\n\r\n[quote]If you truly believe that graphics are better than gameplay in some instances,[/quote]\r\nI didn't imply that :D I merely stated that that is the intended case sometimes. \r\nHowever I do believe that things that make you go "woah" is great, gameplay matters more, surely, however graphical games are simply more laid back (I can't remember the one but it basically has pretty colors, involves you shooting rings as it plays relaxing music as you fire... O.o )\r\n\r\n[quote]for the entirety of the game is 80% cinematic and 20% time put into playing.[/quote]\r\nAn obvious inbalance, however I'd like to say that I found Mass Effect 2's unique use of cinematics to be very immersive and special, which had me go to vote it game of the year, 2010... :D\r\nThe way it presented the story and how you even reacted to it was especially cool. :D\r\n\r\n[quote]If this is really how you feel about what matters most in a game,[/quote]\r\nI don't :)\r\nThings that require graphics more I feel is more like a movie if anything, that color-y game I was saying earlier? It's basically just listening to music, except you interact and partially create it.\r\n\r\n[quote]playing CoD and other graphics-stimulated games [/quote]\r\nTo be fair, I disagree with CoD being graphics-based. I'm pretty sure little work is put into it anyway because of the terrible gameplay (imo).\r\nIf they wanted something with sweet graphics (and not quickscoping), then they would probably go with Crysis 2 or Battlefield Bad Company 2 because we can all agree that blowing up a building or going invisible is much more awesome that shooting someone 70 yards (AKA 1 Call of Duty Map) away in the blink of an eye.\r\n\r\n[quote]realizing that I'm having more fun.[/quote]\r\nEvery now and again I skip back and play the old games, namely Age of Empires, however I cannot go back to them repeatedly simply due to how... old they can get (no pun intended). It's simply that it's the same story and same gameplay involved that makes it boring for me - honestly, I cannot devote myself to playing a game for more than 2-3 hours I don't think. \r\nUnless it's with friends, in which case the whole situation changes.\r\n\r\n[quote]there will be a limit on the graphics[/quote]\r\nBasically how I think of it, pixelated games I find hard to play (with the exception of Age of Empires 2), however great graphics doesn't give such a "wow" as gameplay would. \r\n\r\n[quote]C&C:RA2[/quote]\r\nGreat game by the way... :D\r\n\r\n - H

offline

colinvantveld

131 posts

Peasant

Posted March 22, '11 10:08pm UTC

I think creativity is definitely most important! People talk so much about those FPS games saying that the graphics are great and it is realistic, but they aren't nearly as creative and thus fun as like Super Mario Galaxy 2 or Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time.

offline

master565

4,103 posts

Nomad

Posted March 22, '11 10:12pm UTC

Well bioshock was the best of both worlds, it was one of the most creative games I'v ever played and the atmosphere of the game was the best i have ever seen in a game. It also had the biggest twist ever but thats irrelevant.

offline

ChillzMaster

1,434 posts

Nomad

Posted March 23, '11 5:42am UTC

I think the most glaringly obvious proof of the lack of significance graphics has in the gaming world is an indie game, Minecraft. The game quite frankly looks like **** compared to Dead Space, Crysis, and Red Dead Redemption, but its easily one of the best games ever released.

A diamond w/dirt on it is still diamond, just have to wash it off later on.

A stool polished to a shine is still stool, no matter how much glass you infuse in it.

offline

alexkresa13

132 posts

Nomad

Posted April 1, '11 2:00am UTC

No, of course not, but if your playing a game, the graphics have to at least be okay, or I wont play it.

offline

Moe

1,714 posts

Farmer

Posted April 1, '11 2:14am UTC

I couldn't care less for how a game looks, I only go for game play. I play games from the mid 90s still, I even play games with ASCII "graphics". For me a good looking game with poor game play is an interactive movie.

offline

Rifle1

102 posts

Nomad

Posted April 1, '11 2:42am UTC

Half-Life is a good game with a great plot, characters, graphics, and physics. So, for me, yes. Youtube Half-Life 2 sometime, and you'll see what I mean.

offline

Muse2223

372 posts

Nomad

Posted April 1, '11 2:51am UTC

Graphics are VERY important. Art direction is second only to gameplay in most games (IMO).

offline

sk8brder246

740 posts

Nomad

Posted April 1, '11 2:55am UTC

honestly i think grahphics make a game better. if the gameplay fails, if all else fails at least the graphics can redeem the game somewhat

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → Games → Does graphics ever match creativity?