I know there are obviously people who really care about the game's graphics, but i know there are people that have the same opinion as me. In all honestly I would STILL play kingdom hearts 3 if the graphics are really bad(which I really doubt by the way) while everybody else aren't going to play it because of the same reason. Yes, I appreciate the graphics, but I won't like the game itself if I don't like the story and gameplay. 

Edited March 13, 20169 yr by Zeldablade7

AAA games should be held to a AAA standard. They have big studios and usually, the budget for whatever they want to make. They should use it. I'm not saying the graphics have to be the best in the world, but for Kingdom Hearts, it should be better than the HD remakes' quality.

 

Indie games are made by mostly starving game devs, so we often judge them by quality of story and game play, rather than graphics.

Honestly, I don't really care about the graphics. Plus, I've been a PS2 user for about 14 years. I haven't really experienced PS3 and PS4 graphics. 

Depends: if it's a big budget deal, i expect a little of it: at least give me my money's worth.

But if it's a cdrom game, I jusy accept what it give out: it's not going to be stunning HD on a 20 buck game disc. 

 

So...I guess yes and no, depending on the game. 

Depends on the game. For a game like Minecraft, which doesn't have great graphics it's fine, because it doesn't really need it. For an action packed game like Assassin's Creed and. Call of Duty, it's necessary because your surroundings need to be clear and visible.

How do you could not care about graphics? It actually defines the cinematic experience and a game like KH heavily depends on the presentation.

 

I want the keyblade war to look like a war with all the special effects and stuff and not like action figures who are clashing each other in a land full of pixel keyblades.

How do you could not care about graphics? It actually defines the cinematic experience and a game like KH heavily depends on the presentation.

 

I want the keyblade war to look like a war with all the special effects and stuff and not like action figures who are clashing each other in a land full of pixel keyblades.

I respect your opinion, but it's because I don't have to care. I honestly focus on the story and gameplay way more then the graphics. Great graphics are nice, but it's not of the main things I focus on. Heck, I have tales of zestiria on the lowest settings in order to play it on my pc and I didn't stop playing the game JUST because of the downgraded graphics my pc has. 

Edited March 13, 20169 yr by Zeldablade7

I like the graphics, but if the game has a good story, then I really don't care whether the graphics are good or not.

Graphics in games are nice, but not necessary... to a ceirtan limit, some games just can't be played due to graphics (although I can't think of any at the moment )

You dont have to worry about this argument on console games as much, but pc gamers are real sticklers for not beign framelocked or haveing 4k resolution, like its so important to you that it dosnet matter how te game plays at all, a lot of games catch shit for this unfortunately

I know there are obviously people who really care about the game's graphics, but i know there are people that have the same opinion as me. In all honestly I would STILL play kingdom hearts 3 if the graphics are really bad(which I really doubt by the way) while everybody else aren't going to play it because of the same reason. Yes, I appreciate the graphics, but I won't like the game itself if I don't like the story and gameplay. 

 

 

AAA games should be held to a AAA standard. They have big studios and usually, the budget for whatever they want to make. They should use it. I'm not saying the graphics have to be the best in the world, but for Kingdom Hearts, it should be better than the HD remakes' quality.

 

Indie games are made by mostly starving game devs, so we often judge them by quality of story and game play, rather than graphics.

 

 

Honestly, I don't really care about the graphics. Plus, I've been a PS2 user for about 14 years. I haven't really experienced PS3 and PS4 graphics. 

 

 

Depends: if it's a big budget deal, i expect a little of it: at least give me my money's worth.

But if it's a cdrom game, I jusy accept what it give out: it's not going to be stunning HD on a 20 buck game disc. 

 

So...I guess yes and no, depending on the game. 

 

 

Depends on the game. For a game like Minecraft, which doesn't have great graphics it's fine, because it doesn't really need it. For an action packed game like Assassin's Creed and. Call of Duty, it's necessary because your surroundings need to be clear and visible.

 

 

How do you could not care about graphics? It actually defines the cinematic experience and a game like KH heavily depends on the presentation.

 

I want the keyblade war to look like a war with all the special effects and stuff and not like action figures who are clashing each other in a land full of pixel keyblades.

 

 

I like the graphics, but if the game has a good story, then I really don't care whether the graphics are good or not.

 

 

Graphics in games are nice, but not necessary... to a ceirtan limit, some games just can't be played due to graphics (although I can't think of any at the moment )

 

 

You dont have to worry about this argument on console games as much, but pc gamers are real sticklers for not beign framelocked or haveing 4k resolution, like its so important to you that it dosnet matter how te game plays at all, a lot of games catch shit for this unfortunately

no i feel graphics are important(not super important but still enough so), he explains it really well even though he is talking about fighters, but you can still compare it:

 

There sure have been a lot of these lately...

 

Anyway, I do care about graphics, but I also care heavily about the gameplay too. In the end a game is a game for a reason, so of course the gameplay should be the first thing to be considered. However, I feel that graphics can still be an important aspect of the game itself. How the game is depicted and stylized can make a pretty big difference as to whether someone will think the game is interesting to buy or not. Games are an art form, so really it all depends on the creator and the viewer itself. Just like how not all paintings are meant to be photorealistic to be seen as beautiful, not all games have to look super realistic to be seen as impressive. I mean I like both Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess and Wind Waker and they both have two highly different art styles, but the gameplay is pretty consistent throughout. I guess it just really depends on what kind of a gamer and person you are.

 

But I guess if were to put components of a game into a list of importance in descending order, I would probably put gameplay at the top, story underneath that, graphics underneath story, and then everything else after that. At times though some of these categories can hop around depending on the game. Like with the original Sonic games the gameplay and visuals were the top selling points, while the stories were kept pretty minimal.

It really depends on the game.  Sometimes I like my traditional 8-bit games over HD ones!

 

In all honesty, I'm in it mostly for the story and the gameplay.  Good graphics are nice to have on occasion but sometimes I feel that graphics can distract from an already amazing game.

For me, as long as the graphics are visually appealing, then they're fine by me.

 

For me, a game doesn't have to be realistic or look really great, but if it does, then great I guess. Sometimes, graphics don't have to look realistic but can still look gorgeous such as Journey.

Pretty much most people care about graphics now. I don't want to sit down playing KHIII or FFXV or P5 with dem FFVII PS1 graphics.

 

There's a standard, and if that standard is not met by the very least, they should be hounded for it, in my opinion, because all the technology is there, there's no excuse for shitty graphics. Unless you're an indie dev with a smaller budget, and even then, a lot of indie devs know how to make a damn sexy looking game. Shoutout to Ori and the Blind Forest and Child of Light.

There sure have been a lot of these lately...

 

Anyway, I do care about graphics, but I also care heavily about the gameplay too. In the end a game is a game for a reason, so of course the gameplay should be the first thing to be considered. However, I feel that graphics can still be an important aspect of the game itself. How the game is depicted and stylized can make a pretty big difference as to whether someone will think the game is interesting to buy or not. Games are an art form, so really it all depends on the creator and the viewer itself. Just like how not all paintings are meant to be photorealistic to be seen as beautiful, not all games have to look super realistic to be seen as impressive. I mean I like both Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess and Wind Waker and they both have two highly different art styles, but the gameplay is pretty consistent throughout. I guess it just really depends on what kind of a gamer and person you are.

 

But I guess if were to put components of a game into a list of importance in descending order, I would probably put gameplay at the top, story underneath that, graphics underneath story, and then everything else after that. At times though some of these categories can hop around depending on the game. Like with the original Sonic games the gameplay and visuals were the top selling points, while the stories were kept pretty minimal.

even though I AM a gamer, I LOVE games that have a story then video games that don't have a story at all because, like I said in a topic, it is the salt that enourages me to play and the learn the game. There's nothing wrong with having story and characters over gameplay 

even though I AM a gamer, I LOVE games that have a story then video games that don't have a story at all because, like I said in a topic, it is the salt that enourages me to play and the learn the game. There's nothing wrong with having story and characters over gameplay 

Like I said, it all depends on the game. Trying to decide which kinds are better is like trying to decide which genre of art is better, it's all subjective. Ideally I'd prefer all of my games to be a good solid balance of gameplay, story, graphics, characters, music, etc. Even though much of the games I play balance those out in different ways I still enjoy each of them. It's good and important to make sure that no matter what the game is entertaining to play through for as long as possible, whether that means making the gameplay awesome as hell or the story as deep and engaging as possible, a game should always be one thing and one thing only: FUN.

Like I said, it all depends on the game. Trying to decide which kinds are better is like trying to decide which genre of art is better, it's all subjective. Ideally I'd prefer all of my games to be a good solid balance of gameplay, story, graphics, characters, music, etc. Even though much of the games I play balance those out in different ways I still enjoy each of them. It's good and important to make sure that no matter what the game is entertaining to play through for as long as possible, whether that means making the gameplay awesome as hell or the story as deep and engaging as possible, a game should always be one thing and one thing only: FUN.

I see where you're getting at because why would people play a certain video game if they don't like it? Honestly even though I prefer story and characters over gameplay, if I don't like the gameplay, I'll tune out of the game and play a game that is more to my liking

Would give up good graphics for a decent game any day, aesthetic values are placed to highly in our work a day world.

I see where you're getting at because why would people play a certain video game if they don't like it? Honestly even though I prefer story and characters over gameplay, if I don't like the gameplay, I'll tune out of the game and play a game that is more to my liking

Lol, even if a game is deemed "bad" by the community, it all comes down to finding excuses or reasons to play it. I mean Sonic 2006 by comparison is a pretty poorly made game, but a lot of the ideas that went into it feel interesting to me, and since it is technically "playable" to a degree I can still enjoy it to some extent, just not in the same way I would enjoy a much more finished game like Sonic Unleashed.

Lol, even if a game is deemed "bad" by the community, it all comes down to finding excuses or reasons to play it. I mean Sonic 2006 by comparison is a pretty poorly made game, but a lot of the ideas that went into it feel interesting to me, and since it is technically "playable" to a degree I can still enjoy it to some extent, just not in the same way I would enjoy a much more finished game like Sonic Unleashed.

same here, but I only like sonic 06 because of the funny glitches 

Edited March 13, 20169 yr by Zeldablade7

How. Many. Topics. Have. You. Made. On. This.

 

This must be your third at least! Not trying to discourage you or anything, but I'm sure everyone gets the point now from your various other posts /statuses. You like story, that's great.

 

Personally, I think they're both important, but like mythril said, it also depends on the game.

How. Many. Topics. Have. You. Made. On. This.This must be your third at least! Not trying to discourage you or anything, but I'm sure everyone gets the point now from your various other posts /statuses. You like story, that's great.Personally, I think they're both important, but like mythril said, it also depends on the game.

thanks for telling me this nicely. I seriously need to stop that or someone will get fed up again.

Don't generalize and make a blanket statement. Deciding to speak for someone doesn't go well. You don't know how other people think unless you ask them. You could be wrong about me, ever thought of that? Maybe you are wrong about other people too.

In my honest opinion, I'm quite indifferent when it comes to graphics, ya know?  If a game has amazing, jaw dropping graphics, you can bet I'll be impressed, but in the end, graphics don't mean everything to me, ya know?  Just take Chrono Trigger and the early Final Fantasy games, for example!  They don't have mind-numbing graphics,(Though at the time, they were considered the most gorgeous graphics ever.) but they have great stories and great gameplay that really draws me in!  As long as a game has a good story and good gameplay, I'll overlook graphics!  That's not to say I don't think graphics aren't neat, cuz polished, beautiful looking settings and characters are great, ya know?

Edited March 14, 20169 yr by The Transcendent Key

Really graphics can make me enjoy a game more but they don't too often ruin a game for me. The polygons of n64 games are my favorite graphics of all time. I also really like the Gamecube graphics of games like Super Mario Sunshine and Smash Bros Melee. 

TLDR: Graphics can only help a game. If it is truly good then the graphics could be less than amazing