its all about the gameplay

[atomicpower93]

what if, most game designers instead of focusing on silly mac off graphics that need £1000, $1000+ machines when they can focus on making a good game, why! (although some games that have mac-off graphics are truly good)

[LlamaMaster]

1. Pointless thread.

2. If this had a point it would go in the tech section.

[Archon23]

You know what'll happen? Do yah? Well all that'll happen is we'd get the same game just with piss poor graphics.......

[FRain]

^
That is uber epic fun.

[Dr Nick]

1. Pointless thread.

2. If this had a point it would go in the tech section.Correction, if this had a point, it'd probably be posted by another user, and with evidence and sources.

[Tweek]

Correction, if this had a point, it'd probably be posted by another user, and with evidence and sources.

couldn't have put it better myself.

[Mr Buckshot]

Atomicpower93, your "suggestion" already exists in the form of casual games like Bejeweled 2 (omg so addicting that I bought a product key after my trial ran out). They have great gameplay and will run on old machines.

And graphics are important to making a good game. The gameplay may be good, but graphics will help to draw in more users. The truth is, if Halo used the Half-Life 1 engine, I doubt it would sell as well as it did.

I value gameplay over graphics, which is why I don't bother with the best of the best video cards, but I do want my game to look fine and show that it's revolutionary in some way...so I still get a capable midrange card.

By the way, you don't need to spend $1000 on a PC, even to run BioShock on medium-high settings. $600 is enough if you build your own. If you want to get a laptop, though, then that's where $1000+ comes in, but I think $1200-$1700 is a fair price for a gaming laptop.

Seriously, if you want a good game that doesn't command a premium PC, go play a casual game or an old pre-DX9 game or something.

[Pooky]

why don't you try playing Jedi Knight 2 or Metroid Prime. Those games looked awesome for their time AND play great.

[atomicpower93]

lol, played both

[OmegaDragon]

Final Fantasy 7.

Models that were box like, pre-rendered backgrounds and cinematic scenes, a world map that was mostly flat without counting the mountains separating the areas and the islands; bad graphics (compared to today), awesome gameplay.

[rossmum]

Go play Red Orchestra: Ostfront.

Now.

[Atty]

Most developers got into the business to make money, not because they had a great idea for a game franchise. They make games with flashy graphics to sell them because thats what most people look at, its the almost the easiest thing to do to get a game sold. They aren't making games to awe people with their story and game play, they are making them to sell them.

[Mr Buckshot]

Go play Goldeneye 007 and Perfect Dark 1 on an N64 emulator.

Look like crap by today's standards but Goldeneye revolutionized console FPS gaming.

[rossmum]

Go play Goldeneye 007 and Perfect Dark 1 on an N64 emulator.

Look like crap by today's standards but Goldeneye revolutionized console FPS gaming.
Similar to Halo, really.

Halo was amongst the first games to feature weapons with an integral melee feature, which really changed games a lot. It also introduced a fair load of other stuff previously unheard of and it didn't look half bad for its time (hell, it still looked better than a lot of games up until 2003 or so), yet people still pay out on it and call it generic and shallow. Wow, ok, let's all call a game with more depth thank most shallow guys :downs:

I just replayed it through in preparation for my first playthrough of H3 in about a week, I still can't believe how advanced it was for its time.

[jahrain]

Go play some SNES RPG games like chrono trigger, Seiken Densetsu 3/secret mana, tales of phantasia and FF6/3. Those games were developed back when gameplay and story mattered most and graphics were not a priority to sell games.

[Dr Nick]

Go play some SNES RPG games like chrono trigger, Seiken Densetsu 3/secret mana, tales of phantasia and FF6/3. Those games were developed back when gameplay and story mattered most and graphics were not a priority to sell games.
Hey! I'm playing Chrono Trigger right now! On my PSP!

[Pooky]

lol, played both
What the fuck are you bitching about then?


I just replayed it through in preparation for my first playthrough of H3 in about a week, I still can't believe how advanced it was for its time.
While I agree if you truly want 'advanced for its time' play metroid (the first one).

[n00b1n8R]

is this thread only about FPS's?

if so then there's the origional doom (chainsaw? BFG? awesome 3D environment?)

[Tweek]

doom had no ceilings though!

[n00b1n8R]

yes it does :raise:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/Doom_gibs.png

[Pooky]

is this thread only about FPS's?

if so then there's the origional doom (chainsaw? BFG? awesome 3D environment?)

Metroid 1 isn't an FPS :downs:

[n00b1n8R]

shooters then :P

[atomicpower93]

is this thread only about FPS's?

if so then there's the origional doom (chainsaw? BFG? awesome 3D environment?)

no not really but fps gets the best graphics (mostly but not always)

[Botolf]

My view on the matter is that graphical fidelity is overrated. Sure, it's important for helping immersion and all that, but it's way too overrated by people who buy the games. People saying they won't buy a game because it isn't pretty enough (even if the damn thing is still "next gen") makes me roll my eyes and urges me to fill their misguided heads with some common sense. You play the games because they're FUN, PERIOD. If a game isn't fun, you don't play it! Graphics are NOT a redeemable quality if the game isn't fun! All the whining and obsessing over the new shiny game, the new shiny engine, the new shiny graphics card, etc, etc, etc, are making me irritated at this concept of "next-gen". As far as I'm concerned, the faster we hit that wall of photorealism, the better, I've had it with this stupid "I want more eye-candeez now hurr hurr" mindset. So go ahead, Crysis, push that barrier as far as you can, you're not suckering me out of my money with pretty looks, but I welcome ending this surface-deep arms race, if for only a little while.

Sorry, a bit of a rant :XD:

[Con]

Combination of the two IMO.

[Archon23]

Still I do wish they brought back good storylines to the mix........

[Botolf]

Combination of the two IMO.

I concur, but I feel graphical realism and effects are being far too overvalued for games, focus on graphical polish and good presentation, and core gameplay values, worry about realism and effects little.

[Dr Nick]

I just hope CryTek doesn't fuck up another game.

I mean Far Cry ended 4 times!

[Limited]

Wow, what an igorant statement. So you've obviously looked ahead at the games that are coming out, how consoles work and everything? Dont think so.

Wii is ALL about game play
Next Gen is nearly at the point when you cant improve on the gfx, quite alot of developers now are concentrating on gameplay, Crytek, they are, sure crysis is visually stunning but the gameplay of it is also great. thanks to the suit :D

You can hypothesize, but back it up with facts. :O

[Pooky]

My view on the matter is that graphical fidelity is overrated. Sure, it's important for helping immersion and all that, but it's way too overrated by people who buy the games. People saying they won't buy a game because it isn't pretty enough (even if the damn thing is still "next gen") makes me roll my eyes and urges me to fill their misguided heads with some common sense. You play the games because they're FUN, PERIOD. If a game isn't fun, you don't play it! Graphics are NOT a redeemable quality if the game isn't fun! All the whining and obsessing over the new shiny game, the new shiny engine, the new shiny graphics card, etc, etc, etc, are making me irritated at this concept of "next-gen". As far as I'm concerned, the faster we hit that wall of photorealism, the better, I've had it with this stupid "I want more eye-candeez now hurr hurr" mindset. So go ahead, Crysis, push that barrier as far as you can, you're not suckering me out of my money with pretty looks, but I welcome ending this surface-deep arms race, if for only a little while.

Sorry, a bit of a rant :XD:

As much as I agree with you about smacking graphics whores upside the head, it's not really fair to tell people what they are and are not allowed to like about games. Some people clearly do play games just for the graphics and that's their deal.

[Dr Nick]

Wow, what an igorant statement. So you've obviously looked ahead at the games that are coming out, how consoles work and everything? Dont think so.

Wii is ALL about game play
Next Gen is nearly at the point when you cant improve on the gfx, quite alot of developers now are concentrating on gameplay, Crytek, they are, sure crysis is visually stunning but the gameplay of it is also great. thanks to the suit :D

You can hypothesize, but back it up with facts. :OAre you talking to me?

[Botolf]

As much as I agree with you about smacking graphics whores upside the head, it's not really fair to tell people what they are and are not allowed to like about games. Some people clearly do play games just for the graphics and that's their deal.
I'm just saying playing games for graphic fidelity is stupid (my opinion, I know), and is not what the games themselves were intended to solely provide. I don't know, maybe I'm just a gameplay-purist? :p


Wow, what an igorant statement. So you've obviously looked ahead at the games that are coming out, how consoles work and everything? Dont think so.
So you're telling me instead of innovating to get an advantage over competitors when however long from now most games will look photorealistic, developers will just sit on their laurels and turn out vast libraries of similar games like today? Pretty bad business choice if you ask me.


Wii is ALL about game play
Next Gen is nearly at the point when you cant improve on the gfx, quite alot of developers now are concentrating on gameplay, Crytek, they are, sure crysis is visually stunning but the gameplay of it is also great. thanks to the suit :D

You can hypothesize, but back it up with facts. :O
I'm talking all areas of gaming, not just limited to consoles. I didn't say all consoles and games were concerned with graphical fidelity, I implied most did (I fully realize the Wii's focus on gameplay :rolleyes:).

@Crysis: Well, for pushing the limits of graphic realism so far, I was hoping it would throw some truly radical gameplay dynamics in as well. Slowing down time, super speed, destructible environments, physics toys, etc, it's like I've seen it all before :(

[Limited]

Dr Nick, I ment the topic maker.

Secondly, if you look back into history, gameplay was top of the list, since then people have wanted better and better graphical games, as well as gameplay, but the past few years graphically more. The future? Well, like I said earlier, game developers are working on game play more, they are relising that amazing graphics only apply to a certain type of gamer and there are plenty more gamers out there now that dont really care that much about graphics. Sure next gen is about graphics, but the consoles and computers are also getting more powerful for physics, AI and other aspects of a game which contribute to it all.

How do you plan for the future? Look into history and look what make the amazingly great games great, most of the time, gameplay wins. Tetris revolutioized gaming, simple idea, simple game but came up tops.

Each next gen console has its own "gameplay" features that can be tapped into and used alot more than they currently are. Although the Wii has been whored out enough :)

This is all facts, not just one persons opinion, unlike most of the posts on here.

[Botolf]

Oh, thought you were talking to me :p

Or are you? :raise: