Do graphics...actually...matter?

[ShinRa]

Is it me, or are we reaching a point where graphical intergrity actually counts for something? I used to be one of those "GRAPIX DONT MEAN SHIT" kind of guys...but lately...I don't know. I recently downloaded some ROMS to relive some old gaming culture. Was playing some N64 and PS1 (yes...ff7...my avatar...) and just couldnt get back into it. I feel as though the pixelated days are behind me. I love the classics and they're a big part of my history but they're not as playable as I would expect them to be. And I'm starting to wonder if I can't get into these games because of the visual drawbacks. Do you guys feel like you need decent graphics to be drawn into a game these days?

 

[Lobster]

It really depends on the game for me. About a month ago I had a fresh look at Ocarina of Time after rescuing my N64 when our attic roof collapsed. It was still amazingly enjoyable and I proceeded to play through the entire game. After that I went ahead and dug out Goldeneye to see if the same was true. Sadly it was not. Nostalgia can be a painful thing!

I think that certain genres age better than others. Those that strive for a kind of tangible realism tend to look more ridiculous with each passing year, where as games that have a more abstract artistic style remain engaging because they establish their own rules on how the world should look.

Just lately I have been viewing a lot of older games differently. Some that I used to be obsessed with don't seem anywhere near as deep as they once did, while others that I used to find dull or intimidating are getting a second wind.

 

[Shem]

Funny, was just playing Half-Life today for some reason, I don't know, I just didn't have any other games in my collection that I felt like playing. And it's convenient that I was playing it today, for if I hadn't been, I'd have no game to talk about that goes along with this discussion of if graphics matter, except for Dark Forces which is somewhere collecting dust in my closet, God bless it. No, but seriously, I mean, I had forgotten how fun Half-Life was despite its dated graphics. It really is an ugly game when you compare it to the PlayStation 3's Uncharted series or even its sequel Half-Life 2, but I really don't care. It's still fun as hell, and actually a lot more entertaining than most of the shit these mainstream video game companies produce nowadays (I'm looking at you, Activision, and whoever else is spearheading the movement to make Call of Duty games every year). But don't get me wrong, graphics do play a role in how I regard a game, but the more amazing the game is, the more engaging the story is and how fun the gameplay is, the less I care about how it looks. Christ, if the people behind the game are able to make it fun without it looking like Crysis, then that's fine. Hey, do you see anyone talking about how amazing Crysis was, that it was the best game ever? Of course not, because it was terrible but was absolutely stunningly beautiful. And Half-Life is like a dilapidated wheelchair in comparison, but PC Gamer called it "the best game ever," IIRC. So, yeah, graphics do matter, to an extent, but if the game's just godawful, the graphics won't save it, and contrariwise, if the game has a wonderful story and great characters and lots of action, the graphics are just a finishing touch. Half-Life is a great example, and now I need to go back to finish that sucker oh lol I think I wrote a bit too much

 

[Krynn72]

Stylized games will look ok when dated, but stuff that was "holy shit, so realistic" back in the day is god awful now. And yeah, that can totally turn me off to a game.

 

[morgs]

Graphics don't matter to me much, however anti aliasing is a must for me. It's the uncanny valley that you really have to watch out for.

 

[Bad^Hat]

For me it's less about stylization vs. realism and more about whether the game still conveys a nice, tangible feel to it. I've always liked the Half-Life engine because everything feels very real and solid and tactile, in a physical sense. Compare to something like the original Unreal, which always felt a bit weird and plasticky to me, and aged kind of horribly. Another thing that helps this feel is how smooth and well animated the game is. Actually, I've always preferred a game with good animations to one with nice textures and loads of shaders and shit which has stiff, unwieldy characters and objects. It also depends on the atmosphere the game is trying to convey, I guess. A game like Ocarina of Time will always feel "convincing" because they nailed the atmosphere of that world within the graphical limitations they had, whereas a game where the visual style was more detached from the world itself won't retain that feel.

 

[morgs]

I too am a big fan of the half life engine. If you see a small lip on a wall, you can jump on it, for example. So many game engines today give us a 3D world, but it's like it's not there, not solid. You see chars, tables and shelves yet they seem to be surrounded with invisible walls. What syou see in half life is what you get.

 

[Vegeta897]

Stylized games will look ok when dated, but stuff that was "holy shit, so realistic" back in the day is god awful now.

This, basically. Style/aesthetics over polygon count any day.
I wouldn't say old games that look crappy because they didn't implement style over an attempt at realism scare me away though. Maybe it's just me, but I find the low-poly models of the early 3D years to be quite charming.

And of course what Badhat said, if we want to move into the discussion of visuals vs. gameplay. The feel of course always trumps anything, except in some cases where feel may not be important to enjoying the game. And what he said about a game being able to convey an atmosphere effectively.

 

[Naph]

Stylised graphics can be nice, but going back years can take it's toll. If you really want to relive the old games you have to familiarise yourself with the standard of games of that year. But early 3D rendering will never look good. I'm sorry ReBoot.

 

[ríomhaire]

It's not just graphics though: older games tend to play significantly worse. Devs have gotten better at making games, standards have been set up and are adhered to and proper analogue control exists now. I was playing Majora's Mask again recently and I still love the game but the old graphics are not the hardest thing to deal with: The old gameplay is. Wind Waker, Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword all play much smoother than their N64 counterparts. The idea that the only thing that's improved with games over the years is graphics is a load of crap.

That said considering the game I'm currently playing though bad graphics and clunky controls don't bother me massively.

 

[Naph]

That's pretty generalised. I've prayed to the dev gods on certain modern games to handle like older games. The original Unreal Tournament as a gleaming example. Perhaps console games aren't classified so generally though, as they don't allow remapping of controls and have to centre their UI to the limits of the controller. A game is a game, but in different platforms it can really depreciate by having it's own set of modern expectations or equivalent.

 

[Vegeta897]

The idea that the only thing that's improved with games over the years is graphics is a load of crap.

Wait, who said this?

 

[ríomhaire]

Wait, who said this?

I have no idea. I got a bit carried away at the end. My original point was supposed to be: Old games are not only hard to get into because of dated graphics; the mechanics are often dated as well.

 

[bobtheskull]

Lots of valid points here. I've always believed that graphics don't matter if the gameplay/story is strong. At the beginning of December my mobo finally died and I was too skint to replace it. I had to go back to old consol games that hadn't been played in years. Played through FF7, Mario 64, Super Mario World, Street Fighter 2, Burnout 3, and various others. As dated as they look, I was still fully absorbed in them. Tried FF X, FF XII, Mario Galaxy, even Skyward Sword, and couldn't get into them at all. It was weird. Maybe I was on a nostalgia kick or something. When I got my rig up and running again last week, the first thing I played was Borderlands 2. Then a quick go on Fallout 3. I guess it depends on my mood, but 99% of the time, it's down to gameplay/story. I Might think, ooooo that looks amazing, but I generally have to have a go on the game through a demo, or a friends copy, before I consider getting it myself.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Yes, of course they do.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Depends on the character of the game

 

[Adabiviak]

I think of graphics like the frosting on a cake - it can make or break the cake. There can be very good cakes without frosting, but most of my favorite cakes have excellent frosting. It's taste like anything else. As I think about it, the Physx in Borderlands 2 is a wonderful frosting. I keep a singularity grenade on me for just that reason... every time I come across some water or slag/acid from a recent firefight, I toss one in.

 

[Ren.182]

As I think about it, the Physx in Borderlands 2 is a wonderful frosting. I keep a singularity grenade on me for just that reason... every time I come across some water or slag/acid from a recent firefight, I toss one in.

Wow I didn't realise PhysX Made such a difference in Borderlands 2. Usually in games it just affects what is already in the game for non-PhysX users and boosts them up to a much higher level, but in BL2 it actually adds a few features which are completely missing from the non-PhysX version. Completely changes the look of the game :O

Worth a watch:

I think my next GPU will have to be able to support PhysX

For me, I like to run my games on high to see the games at their best. But I still enjoy older games. As others have said, the games which didn't go for "realism" always age better than those that did. I'm currently playing Theme Hospital again at work and having a blast with it, I think the graphics in that are still good by today's standards. The sprites are awesome in it.

 

[Adabiviak]

Aww, they didn't throw a singularity grenade into a soup of slag, acid, debris, and flowing water? Good times. Anyway, what video card do you have? If you're using ATI, I believe you can set Physx to run off the CPU (if your CPU has the stones for it).

 

[Ren.182]

I have two Radeon 5850's. They're a few generations old now but still manage to play everything I throw at them on high so I'm happy. I have a i7 2600k @4.30GHz so I could probably run it on the CPU.

 

[Stigmata]

I too am a big fan of the half life engine. If you see a small lip on a wall, you can jump on it, for example. So many game engines today give us a 3D world, but it's like it's not there, not solid. You see chars, tables and shelves yet they seem to be surrounded with invisible walls. What syou see in half life is what you get.

This might be my biggest problem with modern games. Everything is just so... prescribed. You're not allowed to explore the boundaries of how the game works. Every little object has a huge collision box to make sure your precious avatar doesn't get stuck on the environment (though he invariably gets stuck on something else), every outdoor area is rife with invisible walls. Maps and levels are little more than a series of Skinner boxes; walk forward, experience cutscene, walk forward, enemies appear and you shoot them in the head, walk forward, open this door, walk forward, checkpoint save. There's no adventure, and when there is (see Skyrim), everything else suffers because of it.