Well, now that my temporary insanity has been subdued (for now at least), I would like to act like a mature, intelligent person. So, I would like to figure out why graphics are such a big part of gaming to people. Obviuosly, someone is going to bring up the point that "graphics make a game". Well, when 'Pong' was released the graphics were thought to be amazing! You see it's all relative! From my point of view (hopefully that of many others as well), I would much rather play a wonderfully fun, hilarious, 8-bit game with bland graphics, where my friends and I can get a damn good laugh, than play an obnoxious, boring, game that has graphics that compare to paintings of geniuses past, where the only fun arrives at the moment when I turn off the game! One of my favorite examples, is Maxis' "The Sims". When I got the game it was great, but none of my friends had it yet. So, my tales of my genius Sims and my imbecile Sims went completely over their heads. So, the fun of "The Sims" died down for me. Then I finally demonstrated to my friend the amusement capabilities of this cool game. Now, we share our stories of the dumb and/or funny things our Sims did. And with the release of peripherals like the Transmogrifier, HomeCrafter, Art Studio, we share objects, walls, floors, skins! And I have managed to get WAY off the subject. Anyway, back to my original thought. It's like I always say, the games that were fun 20 years ago, can still be fun today under the right circumstances. In case of severe emergencies, never rule out smashing your head on the keyboard. Edited by - LobsterMan on 10/20/00 8:39:03 PM

quote: Original post by LobsterMan

From my point of view (hopefully that of many others as well), I would much rather play a wonderfully fun, hilarious, 8-bit game with bland graphics, where my friends and I can get a damn good laugh, than play an obnoxious, boring, game that has graphics that compare to paintings of geniuses past, where the only fun arrives at the moment when I turn off the game!

sure.

however; it''s a bit unclear whether you''re talking about playing old games, or creating new games with inferior graphics. if it''s the latter, I have a question:

once you have that wonderfully fun and hilarous game, why not add decent graphics to it?

Developers have a limited amount of time/money/people to make each game, thay have to decide how much of it they spend on graphics,how much on gameplay etc, so making a great game, then adding great graphics is not a viable option. Especially as changing the graphics engine after writting the code is generally a lot harder than if the graphics engine is done first.

Anyway, I think gameplay is more important, but there reaches a point where bad graphics will detract from the gameplay. There are also times when gameplay relies on such things as atmosphere, bad graphics can kill that, this is especially true of Adventure Games and Flight Simulators.(Intresting how those are the genres that require good graphics, and the two genres that are currently declining.)

The way I see it is it depends on the game - you can''t make generalisations about graphics for all games.
-Lethe

One other thing is worth mentioning. You might prefer to add gameplay, but the publishers will not see it that way. When i talk to publishers, they take a look at the game, maybe just for 10/20 seconds, and base their opinions of it on that. If I have a choice between adding deeper levels of gameplay or groovy animations and particle effects, I have learned to do the latter, not that this is what i would prefer, but I know that what will get a publishing deal.
Maybe this will change one day.....i hope so.

http://www.positech.co.uk

To paraphrase the topic question:
"Why are graphics such a big part of gaming to people?"

This can be answered from two different viewpoints: why does it make a difference to the consumer? AND why does it make a difference to the game?

A] Why does is make a difference to the consumer:
- 1} It attracts attention to the product.
- 2} It gives a sense of how much effort was put in to the making of the game. Note - this is superficial, but I don''t see too many people getting hired who didn''t shower and wore raggy jeans and a tee to their job interview.
- 3} People who just spent 500 smackers on a video card want something to show it off with (otherwise it would be like buying a Ferrari and keeping it in your garage all the time.)
- 4} (And of course -) Some people just want "better" graphics.

B] Why does it make a difference to the game?
- 1} A lot of information can be conveyed through graphics. For example, instead of printing a statistic out saying the character has 15 percent health left, the character could simply be dragging a leg and holding his arm while wincing in pain.
- 2} It makes the experience more immersive. The more details conveyed in the graphics, the less a gamer will think about that they''re playing a game.
- 3} It can make the experience more enjoyable. The atmosphere graphics convey can highten the mood.
- 4} It can actually allow for more complex gameplay to exist. If you ever saw one on the original flight simulators for personal computers, you will know what I mean. The text-only feed back limited the amount of information that could be relayed to the player and how fast it could be updated. In whole, the experience that is avaible today simply could not be without the graphics. As for the realism that is afforded, it seems unnescesarry outside of a professional flight school.

You could also think of it this way: Graphics are ornamental, true yes. But now think of this, how comfortable would you be at home without any sort of ornamental things around you. Take away your posters, cd''s, tv, lounge, doors, carpet, books, bookshelves, lighting fixures, paint jobs, curtains, and everything else there that you could live without. Now what have you got. Your house maybe a millions time better than your nextdoor neighbours but which will it be better to live in????????????????????

"So you're the one that designed that game are you?"
*Gulp* "Umm, yeah"

I agree that I may take up the stance; ''games don''t need graphics'', from time to time. This is not my true stance, as I could not bear to have no graphics in a game. It would be dull, and would lose some of its appeal. I still beleive, though, that great graphics are not needed. Just enough to get the job done. That way you can add more depth into your game. I don''t care how many 2D tile/iso games come out. They have the graphics that they need and if they have good gameplay and an addictive element in them then I will be all for it.

Graphics are NOT an addictive element

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

quote: Original post by dwarfsoft
I still beleive, though, that great graphics are not needed. Just enough to get the job done. That way you can add more depth into your game.
>

How does not having great graphics in your game allow for more depth. I don''t understand?



"So you're the one that designed that game are you?"
*Gulp* "Umm, yeah"

Basically the graphics and depth are only a mixed issue when it comes to development. Instead of thinking up good ideas and creating believable plot, characters, reasoning behind things in their games, they are trying to cram as many pixels into the screen per frame as they possibly can. If the next RPG used Zelda graphics, had a believable story, interesting plot, personal characters, and realistic AI then the game would be better.

If you could do both graphics and depth at the same time then GREAT, but one usually tends to get lost as the emphasis is put on the other...

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche