Readers are reminded that this should be considered personal opinion, and in no way represents StartGame’s view on the issues covered.
I’m always a bit wary when I see a game with absolutely fantastic and realistic graphics. I’m inclined to think that it’s all style and no substance, that the devs have sacrificed content or gameplay to make a rubbish game all shiny and polished. Of course, I’ve been proven wrong many a time, and there are some fantastic games out there that look simply gorgeous to boot. But, let’s take a look at a few “bad” games (in today’s climate, where apparently looks are everything) just to kick things off.
Take PS1 classics as a for instance: there are some brilliant games on the platform (G-Police, Final Fantasy VII through IX, Oddworld: Abe’s Oddyssee and Oddworld: Abe’s Exodus, Crash Bandicoot, Crash Team Racing, MediEvil 1 & 2), but a common complaint is that they look comparatively poor when compared to some of the other PSN titles, because the graphics haven’t been upscaled or improved in any way. Does this really matter? These games were fantastic on the PS1, so why are they suddenly crap when you’re able to download them for your PSP or PS3?
Heavy Rain was heavily criticised because of its graphics: it was deemed unpolished and therefore unfinished. Yes, some of the facial expressions and movements were odd and creeping ever towards uncanny valley territory, but when you take the gameplay and the story, the grittiness just gives it more impact. In fact, in my opinion, it’s one of the finest examples of good graphical processing in modern gaming; not fantastic, but not bad.
Another one to suffer from this is Alpha Protocol. Yes, it doesn’t look the best, and yes, the gameplay and story aren’t the best, but as an overall package it’s pretty entertaining and a solid title with some nice ideas.
But, I do see so many games that look absolutely gorgeous, particularly if they’re cartoonish: Machinarium, Braid, World Of Goo, LittleBigPlanet, Modnation Racers and so on, which are all fantastic titles with a bit of substance.
Admittedly, it’s easier to create something beautiful with a pencil and a piece of paper than a sculpture, but even the more realistic games can look exceptional and have the proper gameplay and story to boot. Assassin’s Creed II, the Uncharted series, Killzone 2, WipEout, Burnout Paradise, Mirror’s Edge and games like these, all look exceptional and play properly. AAA titles usually do go all out though, so that’s unsurprising.
OK, we need a bit of an analogy, purely to boost the word count and make it look like I know what I’m talking about. Let’s take a “real” example here: would you rather hang out with the blonde bimbo who’s got a bust and IQ to match her bust, with all the warpaint on but with nothing of any interest or value to say, or the cool guy who tells brilliant stories and has a good sense of humour, but looks like his face has been mangled in a mangle and then dipped in acid, left out in the sun to bake and run over with a few heavy lorries? Well, I know that I’d like to take the blonde bimbo and do very naughty things with her, but I’d rather hang out with the cool guy to be perfectly honest.
Are gamers so blinded by bling and brown, shiny lense-flare and perfectly-rendered CGI in crisp 1080p full-colour visuals that they’ve lost sight of the proper issue that comes with gaming? The actual game seems more important to me, but I could be backwards in thinking this and everybody else is right in thinking the visuals are more important.
You just need to ask yourself: do I want the unfulfilling shiny-shiny or the emotionally deep and rather good eye-stabby? I always thought us gamers were made of sterner stuff, but I’m seeing a worrying trend that we’re losing more and more of our number to the more vapid side of life, rather than sticking with the established good gameplay. I want to be entertained, not placated with a pretty picture, though it doesn’t hurt to look at something nice.
And no, I’m not against games looking good either, I just want them to talk the talk AND walk the walk, and it’s mostly down to the developers on this one. Notice how it’s usually the indie and smaller devs who put more effort into their games and go all out?
My final thought: You can gild crap and stick as many gems as you like onto the outside of it, but it’s still crap.
Peace, Love and Good Gaming
mynameisblair (94)
wick15 (18)
toutski (14)
Daywalker (12)
gazzagb (11)
Well since I have a Wii you know where I stand on the graphics issue!
Seriously though, a lot of games do get overlooked if they don’t have lighting effects, realistic fires and explosions et al. Not really a problem on my platform/s and all the better for it!
Yeah your right some developers do try. Look at High Voltage poised to release the Conduit 2 shortly again on the Wii. As you say though if it’s a turd it’s a turd (The Conduit was average for anyone who hasn’t read my review!).
It’s a shame that some people will purely base their games choice on graphics but that’s the shallow gamer for you. I’ll weigh up the pro’s and con’s the thing that makes the most difference to me is the price and as long as it’s fun.