Photorealism: Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter NigelMills
- Start date
What's wrong with Q2 graphics?
And I guess Murphy's hit the jackpot.
Still, personally I couldn't care if RO would be visually like some ancient game as long as the gameplay itself works.
Sure, the visuals mean more or less, but I guess I am one of those suckers who barely care about any kind of visual quality. I still even sometimes 'drool' for some old games due their visuals. Dunno is it for some retroistic feel or I still think they are pretty. Take Dark Forces II as an example
Upvote
0
What I'd most like to see is the progression of AI. AI seems pretty unchanged throughout the years, and it could use some major upgrading.
Upvote
0
And then when you get a new comp gameplay will still be more important than graphics. Unless you suddenly lose your good judgement. Why do I like playing BLOOD (a FPS from 1997) TONS more than say STALKER? What Nimsky said is right. Many developers have forgot how to imagine, innovate and fantasize for the most part. They use graphics as their crutches.Gameplay>Graphics
At least untill I can afford to get a new comp
Upvote
0
I can't believe people don't care about graphics.
Sure, gameplay > 1000x graphics, but I doubt many of you would enjoy RO with the graphics of GLQuake.
Sure, gameplay > 1000x graphics, but I doubt many of you would enjoy RO with the graphics of GLQuake.
Upvote
0
Graphics help, they are like the 'lure', but it is the gameplay that 'hooks' you.
I will never buy a game on graphics alone. I will have to wait for reviews from 'trusted sources' before I buy a game for myself again.
I will never buy a game on graphics alone. I will have to wait for reviews from 'trusted sources' before I buy a game for myself again.
Upvote
0
It seems to me that game makers are continually targeting a certain constant age group of people rather than having a progression of gameplay & ideas and are making games for those static group of people they are targeting. So the people they are targeting exist within a certain group and once they are out of that group (older) they are out of consideration. So an older gamer sees these new games coming out and since he's been around a while he knows what's been done to death and what's innovative and original. He sees these new games and there is nothing remarkable about many of them other than being able to kill people/things in greater graphical detail than previous games. Graphical updates of old tired ideas aren't interesting to him but to the group being targeted it's "new to them" so to speak and they love it. Game makers don't seem to be progressing, just adding a thicker layer of frosting to the "cake" each year. I know there are probably exceptions ( I can't really think of any right now though) but not enough IMO.
Upvote
0
Graphics help with the immersion and also realism. I dont know about you, but when I am in a fireifight I dont want everything around me to look like a cows anus.
Upvote
0
Yeah but not with gameplay. Most these new games aren't breaking any new ground other than graphically.
Upvote
0
You are right, but I wonder if its the lack of ideas or the lack of ability to make them work. we all know what would be great to have in a game: endless ways to aprroach the targets i.e. freedom of movement, play styles and plot progression, AIs that you couldnt tell them apart from human players, NPCs with individual traits (something beyond good or bad, friend or foe) that will be manifested in non scripted ways etc.
What do you think- are the delays of Crysis and HL2:ep2 are because of the fancy "frosting" or because they are really struggling there to make the nonlinear section (HL2) and the "make your own entertaiment" concept (Crysis) work?
Even if the answer is both its still a good sign as to where are the winds blowing in the gaming industry.
Upvote
0
I don't follow what's going on with all these upcoming games. Far Cry was admittedly very cool and amazing to me (basically because it was the first FPS set in a jungle environment that was huge and visually stunning & didn't give you PC an aneurysm to run it). It was definitely one of the most amazingly optimized & visually amazing game engines I've ever seen. But the plot was total garbage (Generic Rambo guy wipes out an entire battalion of Mercs). Bearable one time but I don't have the desire to relive a similar scenario with upgraded graphics & physics (and possibly better AI) (Crysis). It's cool and all I'm sure Crysis will be amazing and all that but I just wish a company with access to a cutting edge game engine would use it for more than just another predictable arcade romp. Probably not ever going to happen though. It seems the 2 will never intertwine: A realistic sim level FPS on a cutting edge engine. It always seems to be one or the other (Sim level + sub par engine OR arcadey FPS + cutting edge engine) but not the best of both worlds. Ah well, that's the way it is, nothing much I can do except complain about the state of current games.
Upvote
0
There has actually been study on the area, and they found that gameplay is what ultimately attracts us, and keeps us immersed, we will even immerse ourselves in abstract and cartoony worlds, aslong as the gameplay is good enough to pull us in and keep us interested.
Good graphics will only interest us initially, they can help pull us into the game faster, but we wont stay immersed if the game is not good and involving, or if we encounter blatent errors or bugs that upsets our view of the world or situation the game puts us in.
They also found something very interesting, we dont like photo real NPC's, NPC's that look, sound and try to act real are a problem for us, because subconciously, we try to connect with them emotionally, but there is nothing there.. and that desturbs us (Example: Alyx Vance from HL2-Ep1, ever felt that there was something wrong.. or even slightly creepy about her? something that you coulden't quite put your finger on..), but we have no problem with more abstract charectors, either because they dont look real, are pure fiction, or act outrageous enough that we see them like an act.
We dont care about enemies though, they can look as real as they want to, we dont connect with them, we see them as challenges that must be overcome.
Good graphics will only interest us initially, they can help pull us into the game faster, but we wont stay immersed if the game is not good and involving, or if we encounter blatent errors or bugs that upsets our view of the world or situation the game puts us in.
They also found something very interesting, we dont like photo real NPC's, NPC's that look, sound and try to act real are a problem for us, because subconciously, we try to connect with them emotionally, but there is nothing there.. and that desturbs us (Example: Alyx Vance from HL2-Ep1, ever felt that there was something wrong.. or even slightly creepy about her? something that you coulden't quite put your finger on..), but we have no problem with more abstract charectors, either because they dont look real, are pure fiction, or act outrageous enough that we see them like an act.
We dont care about enemies though, they can look as real as they want to, we dont connect with them, we see them as challenges that must be overcome.
Upvote
0
Of course they do enrich gameplay, think of for instance dynamic shadows and dynamic lighting.
Sure, you might be able to hear someone who's firing, but if you see the light flashes you know his exact location.
More foliage (consider this as a graphics-thingy) means more concealment, so the enemy can advance without being detected.
Sure, gameplay is a thousands-factor more important then graphics, but you can't say graphics don't matter.
New games suck because the entire game industry is a huge lucrative market so they'll squeeze for instance WW2 until the majority of games doesn't buy those games anymore.
A perfect combination of gameplay and graphics in Half-Life 2, sure it might not be interesting for realism-gamers and yes I know it has lineair gameplay, but it's gameplay perfectly fits it's then almost photorealistic graphics.
Upvote
0
Unfortunately there are very few games that actually accomplish that, its always leaning to one side or the other. Except with low-budget games that is, in which both the graphics and gameplay are horrible.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
great graphics are fine with me, just as long as it's not all that the developers are relying on to sell their game. also, I have never suffered from this "uncanny valley" thing, I would welcome photorealistic NPC's with open arms.
Upvote
0