Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 3, 2009 20:42:18 GMT -7
Alright, so my brother goes crazy for a good graphics engine and I don't even notice the difference. What're your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by millis on Mar 4, 2009 9:50:03 GMT -7
Graphics can be cool, but i much prefer a good story line over graphics.
|
|
|
Post by Pem on Mar 4, 2009 11:17:40 GMT -7
The graphics should compliment the game play, a pretty game which sucks is still a crappy game that is pretty.
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 4, 2009 14:35:09 GMT -7
Hm...that actually brings another question to my mind. What is the best part of the game? Storyline is always good, gives you something to push forward for. But game play is arguably the whole point of the game, the very foundation of it all. So which is more important? Or is it a fourth thing that I have arbitrarily left out because I like using the word "arbitrary"?
|
|
|
Post by millis on Mar 4, 2009 15:27:25 GMT -7
Gameplay has to be decent too, or you get fed up of it quite fast...
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Mar 4, 2009 21:22:57 GMT -7
The way i see it, the order of importance is 1: gameplay 2: storyline 3: graphics. Take Tetris. it had not plot and all it was was a bunch of squares, but the gamplay was good enough that people kept playing. Personally, if the game sucks to play, i don't care what it looks like or what the plot is; i will not continue playing it.
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 4, 2009 21:35:06 GMT -7
I'm not really sure Tetris is a good reference, it's a classic. It was made before games commonly had plots at all and the graphics of the time weren't great anyway. It's a good game, but nowadays it seem people just play it as a way to pass time when they've got nothing better to do.
|
|
|
Post by millis on Mar 5, 2009 0:39:30 GMT -7
Like my mum, though she prefers games of her era. 3D kills her brain. Take final fantasy games then, or pokemon. Final fantasy didnt have brilliant graphics at the start, really, was kind of sketchy. Not too bad but not brilliant. It had the same idea as pokemon. Gameplay was mostly made up of travel and battling creatures that popped up. Both had questionable graphics, yet both eep people coming back for hours and hours of gameplay. Because they have a story line to follow.
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 5, 2009 1:07:25 GMT -7
...pokemon has a story line? Right, back in the good old days, graphics didn't matter, gameplay mattered, and plot followed. But nowadays it seems like for any game to be called "good" it has to measure up to some level of graphics that people have become accustomed to. The wii's been often criticized for not stepping up the graphics from the gamecube, even though it brings whole new kinds of gameplay. The PS3 and 360 continue the mainstream and have some games that sell well because they're just beautiful to look at.
|
|
|
Post by millis on Mar 5, 2009 4:13:20 GMT -7
Pokemon has a set plot, not really a story line, but meh, it follows some kind of idea, get badges, train, aim to beat the elite four. Though, a lot of the people who play playstations and X boxes (my brother) seem more interested in the graphics and the two player options than the story. Bro used to just play the football ish part of his final fantasy game. Over and over. I used to play the story.
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Mar 5, 2009 15:14:12 GMT -7
If something is fun, you play it. if it isn't, you don't. plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by xephious on Mar 7, 2009 10:32:49 GMT -7
I say, you must have atleast SOMEWHAT good graphics, otherwise its herts yer eyes =3 Though a game should ALWAYS HAVE A GOOD PLOT/STORY AND NO RIPOFFS, And should not be ruushed.. *glares at Sonic '06*
|
|