Boring column. I guess MMorpg.com is slowly dying. I remeber back then when the videos posted had up to 30k views. Now barely 2k views. Thats why they write those boring colums, no mmorpgs are coming out. And thats bad business for mmorpg. The mmorpg market is saturated. We barely get 1 new mmo in 4 months. Mobas are the new mmorpgs. Thats also why MMorpg.com post those informations about moba. I got offtopic.
"The reason I say this is because the average person will buy a game based on how it looks."
I think you need to seperate what matters for the business from what matters for the experience. There are two seperate questions here: can I be convinced to buy the box and will I enjoy what's in the box once I have it?
(well, there's also a subdivision of that second question: will I enjoy wrapping my imagination around the first hour vs how will I see the game in a month once my brain has abstracted away all the superficial details and I only react to revelevent information as if I was watching a raw feed of the matrix scrolling down my screen)
Graphics are not one of the most important things to me. I still play Lineage 1 on private servers sometimes. A game with 1990's visuals. Also graphic style is more important to me than technical graphical stuff. Like to me, WoW looks better than pretty much every other MMO out today, because I think it has a cool art style.
I think that they're 2 different teams that don't really have anything to do with the other.
The graphics people have a head start tho in that a company can license a really good graphics engine, while you can't do that if you're in the story/game play department.
All other things being even, the game with better graphics will win.
If two games have the same graphics, but one has better game play, the game with better game play will win.
Great graphics could give an otherwise mediocre game a much better reception, but it depends on what that game is competing against.
Concerning selling games, the game's graphics themselves might get the initial sale, but it's more likely that the advertising that's presenting the graphics gets the sale. In the 80s and 90s, video game graphics were pretty bad. Even the players at the time recognized how primitive the graphics were. The game boxes though, those looked great. Cheesy by today's standards, but still, they generally looked really good.
I don't know what all this means. I didn't read the article. Of course graphics matter. They just aren't the only thing that matters.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Gameplay is way more important than graphics, but it shouldn't look like a game from 2004 either. Then again I still enjoy EQ2 so that says something there in terms of graphics.
Originally posted by Psychow Graphics matter just like looks matter IRL. At least to get the consumer to try it out. Example: A) Hot babe, dumb as a rock. She's a cold hearted <*****> with an awesome rack.B) Fugly girl with a GREAT personality. Great cook and great with kids!! Based only on first impressions: Who's going to get picked up at the bar?
Trick question. The Fugly girl will not be at a bar because she sounds reasonably intelligent and she knows that the guys at the bar aren't looking for someone who is good with kids.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Why is it either/or? Of course graphics matter but they are only part of a game's appeal. To me, Precu SWG was perfectly acceptable and fine, and everything after that is just gravy.
This discussion is kinda like asking, when looking for a girlfriend, do you go for looks or personality? Anyone that is firmly in one camp or the other is a bit extreme as most people look for something in between, and both are a matter of opinion. If the requisite looks and personality are there and either exceeds expectations, consider it a bonus.
for me the all important is CONTENT AND GAMEPLAY. If the game has the best graphics in the world, and crappy content and gameplay then hell no. I guess im oldschool which important stuff comes first.
Graphics matter to a point IMO..I don't need nice looking graphics to enjoy a game, but if my avatar was a giant block for a body and a bunch of smaller blocks to make up the limbs I'd be turned off a bit.Id say games like Asherons Call would be close to my limit these days.
Yes, graphics matter big time. Especially considering the fact that considering today's technology there is no excuse to keep pushing out the WoW-level crud.
Before getting a hands on the games appearance is all most people have to go on. See the stills, watch the videos, pass or not the first check of eye candy. Only later will hands on feel enter into it.
if my avatar was a giant block for a body and a bunch of smaller blocks to make up the limbs I'd be turned off a bit
That's why I will never try minecraft.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.
if my avatar was a giant block for a body and a bunch of smaller blocks to make up the limbs I'd be turned off a bit
That's why I will never try minecraft.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.
if my avatar was a giant block for a body and a bunch of smaller blocks to make up the limbs I'd be turned off a bit
That's why I will never try minecraft.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.
Comments
"The reason I say this is because the average person will buy a game based on how it looks."
I think you need to seperate what matters for the business from what matters for the experience. There are two seperate questions here: can I be convinced to buy the box and will I enjoy what's in the box once I have it?
(well, there's also a subdivision of that second question: will I enjoy wrapping my imagination around the first hour vs how will I see the game in a month once my brain has abstracted away all the superficial details and I only react to revelevent information as if I was watching a raw feed of the matrix scrolling down my screen)
Graphics matter just like looks matter IRL. At least to get the consumer to try it out. Example:
A) Hot babe, dumb as a rock. She's a cold hearted <*****> with an awesome rack.
Based only on first impressions: Who's going to get picked up at the bar?
I think that they're 2 different teams that don't really have anything to do with the other.
The graphics people have a head start tho in that a company can license a really good graphics engine, while you can't do that if you're in the story/game play department.
All other things being even, the game with better graphics will win.
If two games have the same graphics, but one has better game play, the game with better game play will win.
Great graphics could give an otherwise mediocre game a much better reception, but it depends on what that game is competing against.
Concerning selling games, the game's graphics themselves might get the initial sale, but it's more likely that the advertising that's presenting the graphics gets the sale. In the 80s and 90s, video game graphics were pretty bad. Even the players at the time recognized how primitive the graphics were. The game boxes though, those looked great. Cheesy by today's standards, but still, they generally looked really good.
I don't know what all this means. I didn't read the article. Of course graphics matter. They just aren't the only thing that matters.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Trick question. The Fugly girl will not be at a bar because she sounds reasonably intelligent and she knows that the guys at the bar aren't looking for someone who is good with kids.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Why is it either/or? Of course graphics matter but they are only part of a game's appeal. To me, Precu SWG was perfectly acceptable and fine, and everything after that is just gravy.
This discussion is kinda like asking, when looking for a girlfriend, do you go for looks or personality? Anyone that is firmly in one camp or the other is a bit extreme as most people look for something in between, and both are a matter of opinion. If the requisite looks and personality are there and either exceeds expectations, consider it a bonus.
Or maybe they like good graphics???
That's why I will never try minecraft.
graphics = 40%
class balance = 40%
rest = 20%
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/graphics-vs.-aesthetics
Aesthetics matter, not graphics.
Best Regards, ...
Only later will hands on feel enter into it.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.
im sorry i have and will totally dissagree. If Minecraft and TONS AND TONS of content and there was stuff to do, you beat your sweet a$$ i would be putting minecraft first before anything else. Now if there was a game that had all the options content, gameplay so on so on, then i will see how the game is graphically but graphics doesnt factor in on if i will buy it or not.