Revelation - Improved Graphics does not mean Improved Game!

[Defender2516]

For over the years since the dawning of Ping Pong.. Gamers around the world have had a strong desire for better, more realistic graphics in a video game.

 

 

 

People believe that a game with better graphics, obviously leads down to a course of it being a better game.

 

 

 

Revelation? No, it doesn't! EEEK!

 

 

 

Look at cartoony WoW. It certainly does not have very realistic graphics at all, but its the most popular MMORPG in the world.

 

 

 

So whats the deal? Why are gamers like us so infused with better graphics, only to walk around disappointed with a decent deck of pixels and eye candy images filling our computer screens?

 

 

 

The answer is simple. All along, we used the wrong term to describe our desires.

 

 

 

When we said we wanted Realistic Graphics, what we really meant to say is "We want realistic gameplay". One can only assume you get realistic gameplay, only if the graphics can match it.

 

 

 

So if we tagged up Runescape 3, made it look all buffy and shiny, would it be a better game than Runescape 2? Absoutely not! Gameplay decides that.

 

 

 

What produces the gameplay of a game? The Engine.

 

 

 

The Engine is the very core to our pleasures and delights in a game. Whoa, wait a second now.. why excatly is the engine so important?

 

 

 

The Engine Divides Graphics with Freedom.

 

 

 

Hey, what if in Runescape you could make a magic fireball so big, that it shot out of your hands, and anyone it hits was burned to a crisp and the tree's were caught on fire? Only to burn to ashs moments later.

 

 

 

Its not so much a matter of "graphics" to give you this kind of quality is it? Or this kind of freedom? No, Its a matter of "can the engine produce it?"

 

 

 

The very engine in a game is the Freedom Producing Quality us gamers come to expect and enjoy while forking over cash in terms to the developers to produce extra freedom/funfilled enviroments.

 

 

 

So why is the game development industry as a whole spend millions to develop massive MMORPG's, only to come up short on the end side?

 

 

 

Yes, they have great eye candy features.

 

Yes, they have great detailed graphics.

 

Yes, they have alot of nifty features.

 

 

 

But they don't give the player Free Will. Often the Engine has its hands tied by its back, telling players what they can and can't do. Thats what makes games dull, boring and repetitive.

 

 

 

Its the new things we try to think of and attempt to do, that makes it seem infinitely boundless and a new world each time.

 

 

 

 

 

To prove my point, here is a video of a game with killer graphics. But you want to know what the shocking point is?

 

 

 

This is a game developing company that chose not to work on graphics as its "big time thinger for the reason you should play and spend money on".

 

 

 

No, the whole reason they made this game is to improve the games "engine". While watching the video, just look at how much freedom you will have in this game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is what i'm talking about! Engines produce Freedom! I think its time we should let the game industry know and let Jagex know, pretty graphics is nice, but we desire more freedom, and only the engine can do that!

 

 

 

The sad part is, the game is FPS. What if this Engine had been used to to create a MMORPG?

 

 

 

You could image the chaos (and the lag, lol) that it could create! But it was be awesome, it would be kewl, it would be worth it!

 

 

 

So what is your take on improved graphics? I think graphics now days are only bonuses to a game's presentation, but not its true apperance. Your freedom in game, is what games are really about!

 

 

 

~Defender~

[warren211]

Quite a speech there.

 

 

 

*takes deep breath*

 

 

 

However, graphics are quite important too. I'm sure Halo games wouldn't be the same if they were revved back to the ancient 2D graphics with little guys in white costumes shooting tiny yellow pixels at a big green glob on a black background screen with curious repetitive music.

 

 

 

*inhales gain*

[Defender2516]

Quite a speech there.

 

 

 

*takes deep breath*

 

 

 

However, graphics are quite important too. I'm sure Halo games wouldn't be the same if they were revved back to the ancient 2D graphics with little guys in white costumes shooting tiny yellow pixels at a big green glob on a black background screen with curious repetitive music.

 

 

 

*inhales gain*

 

 

 

You know what though? You actually proved my point.

 

 

 

In a 2d enviroment, the engine is very limited to what you could do in a 3d world, which is why it wouldn't be fun!

 

 

 

You simpley cannot produce halo now, and have excatly everything the same on a 2d board. There would be too many game engine restrictions!

 

 

 

Now I admit, I don't want to see some low detailed images myself, and no one does, but putting that aside, graphics does not produce the "Fun factor" in video games, the engine and your freedom of the game does.

 

 

 

~Defender~

[Blackspells]

I liked that video u posted :D

[Freesia]

The first impression you get about a game when you first started it without any knowledge prior to the game is usually about it's graphics. If it ain't that good, it's a first bad impression for the player. Now some would stop playing and some would continue checking the game out. The one that checked out the game realises it has awesome content. You get x% of people playing the game instead of full 100%. Therefore, graphics still plays a minor role for starters

[Ryuuka]

Crysis is old news, though it rules like hell :thumbsup:

 

 

 

first time i saw it i thought it was a movie :ohnoes:

[jedidude77]

i'm weird like this too, i honestly don't care about graphics as most do, i admit that graphics do make up an important part of the game, but if the gameplay is amazing (like RS) i practically forget about the style of things i'm looking at.

 

 

 

I mean, i'll play the original final fantasies anyday.

[mrpez]

Revelation - If you don't like it, don't play it.

[snake6man]

Its both, imo. I'll play a game with sucky grafics but awesome gameplay (snake/ worm ftw!) and I'll also play a game with awesome grafics (like the one you showed)

[dwarfie76]

Coming from a time when graphics cards were a luxury most couldn't afford and most games either had no graphics, or the graphic equivalent of ascii art I heartily agree with the sentiment that graphics do not equal gameplay.

 

 

 

I spent months of my life playing text-based adventure games. I still dig out a copy of original Zork and give it a whirl every now and then. It's like reading a book compared to watching a movie, the movie representation rarely matches what your imagination can conjure up from the words of a talented writer. Not to say that good books can't be turned into good movies, or that good games can't benefit from good graphics... but the arrangement of pixels on a screen doesn't ever make or break a game. If the game was crap to begin with then no amount of fancy graphics will ever save it.

[gameboypen]

*cough* wii vs PS3 and Xbox 360*

 

 

 

Wii - better gameplay =D>

 

PS3 and 360 - :notalk: eye candy (some good games though)

[Kilo]

Revelation - If you don't like it, don't play it.

 

 

 

Are you saying he should quit because he was revealing something to us? Far be it from you to tell anyone to quit. He is stating his opinion and instead of shrugging it off, take in the big picture of what he's saying and reread his post.

 

 

 

"O no! he's suggesting something! Quick get to the bunker!"

[Celt23]

What if you could have BOTH realistic graphics and free will? If it's easily accessable like RS then that would make a killer game. Not a realistic idea at this time though.

[headshot007111]

Graphics don't affect gameplay, but it certainly makes a game more interesting. For a while atleast, while u go around seeing how it looks lol.

[retaxis2]

won't we all be a lot happier if runescape had kickass graphics?

[Happysniff]

Yeah, whilst where on the topic of better graphics

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=69SHZrdbZTM

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2DQrFW5YT1Q

 

 

 

Some guy is making Runescape look better. The graphics he is making are far better then I have ever seen on MMORPGS. But of course, Jagex aren't making this and this will probably never be implemented.

[Defender2516]

Yeah, whilst where on the topic of better graphics

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=69SHZrdbZTM

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2DQrFW5YT1Q

 

 

 

Some guy is making Runescape look better. The graphics he is making are far better then I have ever seen on MMORPGS. But of course, Jagex aren't making this and this will probably never be implemented.

 

 

 

Wow, just think of the freedom Runescape would have with a 3d engine like that! Makes me want to scream "scrap java and go for this!", just remove the army uniform. :XD:

 

 

 

Oh and as for Crysis, it doesn't "just" have killer graphics, it probably is one of the most FREE games, in terms of what you can do, to ever exist.

 

 

 

For example: the mountains you see in the long distance? No, they aren't just images to look pretty! You can actually go to them if you start walking to them.. climb them, ect.

 

 

 

~Defender~

[sebbeberg]

I totally agree about the grapics vs gameplay thing.

 

Look at this game. does i have extremly good graphics?

 

No.

 

But it is one of the best games i've ever played.

 

[Syd]

Yeah, whilst where on the topic of better graphics

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=69SHZrdbZTM

 

 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2DQrFW5YT1Q

 

 

 

Some guy is making Runescape look better. The graphics he is making are far better then I have ever seen on MMORPGS. But of course, Jagex aren't making this and this will probably never be implemented.

 

Oh boy.. =P~

 

Me want this!! :D

 

But yeah, that would cause enormous lag with like this much of players playing..

[VipLink]

I agree... bring back RSC :P

[Soma2035]

*cough* wii vs PS3 and Xbox 360*

 

 

 

Wii - better gameplay =D>

 

PS3 and 360 - :notalk: eye candy (some good games though)

 

 

 

It's been 5 months since it's release and most stores still don't have Nintendo Wii in stock... :P

[jimbob9999]

Graphics are usually a good indication of the power something can utilise.

 

Oblivion has amazing graphics, and it can really immerse you in the game, when you can stand on a mountain and see the entire game world stretch before you it can really get the adrenaline pumping and make you want to explore.

 

 

 

Things like physics can give you a real sense of power, imagine smacking somebody to the floor and things bounce off the tables around you, the better things lik physics get the more immersed developers can make the player look at a game like portal I doubt that kind of gameplay could be produced on a PS2, probably not even the Xbox.

 

 

 

As some people like to say, it's not what you have, it's how you use it. When in truth what you can do is limited by what you have, as impressive as Crysis is, I'm yet to see any hands on impressions although Far Cry was pretty damn good.

 

 

 

Now freedom can often take away from the game, because then they just don't know what to do, often limiting what the player can do, so as to unlock more options is the way to go. Again, it's really about creating a balance, and I don't believe there's a perfect balance because everybody has different tastes, some people would like to have an ability in the game where it takes months to get it, where some people want to be able to do everything at once, you can't please everybody.

[jimbob9999]

*cough* wii vs PS3 and Xbox 360*

 

 

 

Wii - better gameplay =D>

 

PS3 and 360 - :notalk: eye candy (some good games though)

 

 

 

It's been 5 months since it's release and most stores still don't have Nintendo Wii in stock... :P

 

 

 

You cannot simply say the Wii has better gameplay, because simply the Wii's hardware (by this I mean the Wiimote) allows the Wii to do things the PS3 / 360 can do whilst the 360 and PS3 have things the Wii cannot do.

 

 

 

Also for sales, keep in mind the sales difference. People can put down $250 on the Wii based Zelda and the promise of more first party titles whereas the 360 you have to put down $300, but most will go for the $400 seeing as you don't have to buy something to save on.

 

 

 

Also, the 360 has far more highly rated games than the Wii, the Wii has WarioWare, Super Paper Mario and Twilight Princess and a load of sloppy ports with the odd decent third party title.

 

 

 

The 360 has Gears of War, Oblivion, Saints Row, Dead Rising, Lost Planet, DOA4, PGR3, Viva Pinata, PD0, Kameo, GRAW 1 & 2, Crackdown, COD2 & COD3, Rainbow Six Vegas, Blue Dragon, FEAR etc.

 

 

 

Also keep in mind the 360's live arcade is getting far more new IPs than the Wii's virtual console, the 360 has a year lead and thus has far more AA and AAA games and there's nothing stopping the Wii doing a Gamecube and having it's sales grind to a (near) stop, it happened to the PS3 in the UK recently, after the initial rush it's seen a slump until later adopters have reason enough to spend ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã425 on one.

[Dazzuh]

That video was awesome, and BTW RSC is already here, don't need to bring it back..

[Who]

*cough* wii vs PS3 and Xbox 360*

 

 

 

Wii - better gameplay =D>

 

PS3 and 360 - :notalk: eye candy (some good games though)

 

 

 

It's been 5 months since it's release and most stores still don't have Nintendo Wii in stock... :P

 

 

 

You cannot simply say the Wii has better gameplay, because simply the Wii's hardware (by this I mean the Wiimote) allows the Wii to do things the PS3 / 360 can do whilst the 360 and PS3 have things the Wii cannot do.

 

 

 

Also for sales, keep in mind the sales difference. People can put down $250 on the Wii based Zelda and the promise of more first party titles whereas the 360 you have to put down $300, but most will go for the $400 seeing as you don't have to buy something to save on.

 

 

 

Also, the 360 has far more highly rated games than the Wii, the Wii has WarioWare, Super Paper Mario and Twilight Princess and a load of sloppy ports with the odd decent third party title.

 

 

 

The 360 has Gears of War, Oblivion, Saints Row, Dead Rising, Lost Planet, DOA4, PGR3, Viva Pinata, PD0, Kameo, GRAW 1 & 2, Crackdown, COD2 & COD3, Rainbow Six Vegas, Blue Dragon, FEAR etc.

 

 

 

Also keep in mind the 360's live arcade is getting far more new IPs than the Wii's virtual console, the 360 has a year lead and thus has far more AA and AAA games and there's nothing stopping the Wii doing a Gamecube and having it's sales grind to a (near) stop, it happened to the PS3 in the UK recently, after the initial rush it's seen a slump until later adopters have reason enough to spend ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã425 on one.

 

 

 

Of course the 360 has more better games. Its been out for like a year and a half. The Wii is only like half a year. There are many great current games like Twilight Princess and Sonic and the Secret Rings. Also alot of great anticipated games such as Super Mario Galaxy and SSBB. Nintendo was always about gameplay, which is why I only buy their systems O:)