Graphics over gameplay

[Mutley]

Hi all,

Just interested to know everyones thoughts, and maybe start another debate...

Given how games are developing these days visually, do you think that gameplay is giving way to graphics? How important are good graphics in relation to gameplay?

Can you give any examples for either side?

I was prompted to think about this when playing both DOD and DOD:Source last night. DOD is still an excellent game, with really ageing graphics. But you just don't seem to notice them. But when you switch to DOD:S, its a whole new experience. But is it a better one, or just different?

Also, I was playing the flash version of PacMan. You can't get much simpler. I'd forgotten how totally addictive that game is...

Mut.

[UKMuFFiN]

battlefield 2 = awsome graphics (if you can get there) and awsome gameplay....

i think its mainly the major games by the big game developers that can pull off both

[0iD]

You can have the best looking game in the world, but if the gameplay is pants it wont sell. But if you have a brilliant game & the graphics are mediaocre then it probably will sell better, but not as good as it should. It's a fine line isn't it between where the development budget goes.

Unless it's tetris, as i'm still an addict.

[Mutley]

I think good graphics is the "easy" route to follow. Yes, it requires a bit investment in technology and expertise but its pretty linear. However good gameplay is a little more complex and convoluted. Certainly harder to define. I think everyone can agree on what good graphics look like, but perhaps not so in respect of gameplay.

As an example, theres often argument on linear over open gameplay, with the GTA series being a good example of a game that treads a good line between both. Personally I'm not sure there is much in the argument - if you took linearity entirely out of an FPS for example, there would be no game. How do you tell a story, with you as the character, if the game doesn't provide some direction to a designed conclusion?

[TiG]

Gameplay > Graphics, simple as.

World of warcraft has very cartoony graphics and was slated for the graphics till you played it and became immersed.

Sometimes the game writers forget that simplicity itself can be the most highly entertaining for of gaming.

TiG

[0iD]

And I thought XIII was one of the most underrated games of recent times too. Again with comic style graphics.

[Applecrusher]

World of warcraft has very cartoony graphics and was slated for the graphics till you played it and became immersed.

*sigh* i was silly enough to buy another time card.. My Girlfriend hates games now

But I agree, it doesnt need awesome graphics, but hey still need to be half decent, I wouldnt go back to HL1 graphics after seing HL2 for ecxample..

[Mutley]

Maybe its also about what we get used to, as consumers, and then what we expect.
If HL2 came out looking like HL1, it would get panned. Even if it was a long game, with totally immersive gameplay, amazing AI, incredible story etc.

Our expectations are so much higher as graphics evolve, but who is driving that? I guess its a symbiotic relationship between gamers and developers...

[cheechy]

This debate has been around as long as gamers have been playing games at home......

.....I remember having this debate about the Spectrum for goodness sake (he says showing his age)

We almost say that graphics make a difference - and I agree with that. Realism can make a big difference in the whole 'feeling immersed' thing. If you dont believe whats going on then you may not be inclined to play.

For me it depends on the genre. If its something like BF2 or HL2 then graphics are everything. Something like Tetris doesnt need it - but then who plays Tetris nowadays.........

[directhex]

give me Super Metroid any day of the week

[Mutley]

Thats an interesting point - I guess it depends on the type of game. From what I read about FEAR, the graphics are used to very good effect to drive the gameplay. Would be a crap game if it looked like Quake.

I know its an old debate...but worthwhile none the less.

I too remember old gameplay discussions. Except for me it was the Commodore 64 (Vic 20 before then). Of course it goes without saying that my C64 pwnd your Speccy....(flame war!).

[Grey M@a]

There are not many games today you can play 15 years in the future Look at the likes of space invaders, robotron, speedball 2 all big games in the past but still you can waste hours playing them. Can you see yourself playing HL2, FEAR, STALKER, Call of Duty etc etc in 15 years time and still getting the same amount of enjoyment out of them as you did the first time you played them.

As for the tetris comment above, you'd be suprised how many still play tetris, there are championships dedicated to it 0.o

Yes graphics have come a long way since the days of the good old atari's and spectrums, they didn't have the graphics but boy do the games suck you in and you can play for hours, today you generally find on forums, gaming press, game shows etc etc all comment on the good graphics first then ask the question of how they play. It should be the other way around as games these days can get a good rating based around the graphics and gameplay is like an after thought.

[Mutley]

Grey M@a, love the sig dude. Actually made me feel quite sick. :-)

[Lee H]

And I thought XIII was one of the most underrated games of recent times too. Again with comic style graphics.

Agreed I still play XIII on the xbox as its a crazy game and the cell shading is a superb twist to standard graphics, and I bet this game would have played worse if it was a standard "FPS" style game with standard graphics.

I prefer gameplay over graphics anytime. Thats why you'll fine me playing older games with slightly older graphics due to their playability

[directhex]

i spent the evening playing Gremlins 2, yesterday, on my NES (which works great on my lcd hdtv)



omgclassic!

[Mutley]

Agreed I still play XIII on the xbox as its a crazy game and the cell shading is a superb twist to standard graphics, and I bet this game would have played worse if it was a standard "FPS" style game with standard graphics.

I prefer gameplay over graphics anytime. Thats why you'll fine me playing older games with slightly older graphics due to their playability

Sais the guy with 6800 GTs in SLI...;-)

I agree. I go back and play some of the older games I've got. When I first played them, my PC back then would struggle. I can play them now, and they are smooth as glass. Games like Jedi Knight 2, GTA 3 and so on (not so old games really).