Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Pixels vs. Gameplay
Chopes
Member Posts: 297
First off I would like to say that I am just trying to start up a discussion so I do not have an opinion on this subject.
Newer games such as Everquest II have some of the better graphics in MMORPGs. Is better graphics what people want or is it more of the game-play that keeps MMORPG companys afloat. Games such as Ultima Online has some good game-play as most would say, but the problem is that Ultima Online does not have the up to date graphics and sound that some of the newer games have. Many people do in fact like Everquest II, and I am not trying to say anything against it but if you had a choice of two games, one having the best content, with 2D graphics (just to be extreme) or a game with total immersion, having almost real graphics, with the most recent technology to supplement them, which would you choose. I look forward to viewing the results of this. There is a poll below if you do not wish to make a post but want to contribute.
Comments
I am all for the graphics! ((EQ2 baby!!!)) But, mostly, I am for the EXPLORING, if a game has AWESOME graphics, but terrible zones, its not for me.
I like EQ2 because I can explore many places, and each zone is massive! Things to explore can even be under the water too, thats another very apealing thing to me. Graphics are GREAT, and the exploring is GREAT
Then again, the Gameplay in EQ2 is getting MUCH better than what it was/
Fawd
I actually was not quite sure which choice to choose. It seemed to me you were saying so so graphics but great content or great graphics but so so content. The second option, gameplay, seemed to be the choice for those who prefer the former, but when I think of pixels, I also think of the era of yesteryear since no company really uses the expression pixels anymore. Polygons may have been a better choice since most assume a high poly count equates with great graphics.
I definitely want great content no doubt. But I also want great graphics. For example, I recently tried out DAoC because of how much everyone seems to enjoy it. I literally quit playing after one day. I just cannot play a game with what I consider to be a game with dated graphics (even with the Catacombs engine). The controls also didn't cut it for me, but that's another story. Given that, I would never touch EQ (the first one). Unfortunately, I suspect that's how most but the hardest of the hard core really are.
To me, it is like a trick question. Why? Because you need good graphics to get good gameplay to get better immersion. I think they all play a equal importance and need to be balanced for the game to be sucessful.
Without a doubt, gameplay is more important. I can still get very immersed in an old Super Nintendo RPG for hours and hour and those graphics are far inferior to todays graphics. I even bust out the Nintendo Emulator once in a while and enjoy hours and hours of fun gameplay.
Good graphics are nice, but not required in my book for a good game. I still play Asheron's Call once in a while, and those graphics are 5+ years old.
I played EQ2 where the graphics were top notch, but I didn't enjoy my time in game at all.
Bottom line, good graphics doesn't = good gameplay.
I voted for pixle but I like both. No option for that..... They are both importaint in my book. I cant sit and play a game that has crapy graphics but good game play and I cant play a game with good graphics and horrible game play. There has to be a balance.
I coulnt even play Buldurs gate cuz it just wasnt pretty enough for me. But I can sit around and play FFXI all day. I think it has a good balance but hey we can debate that point till the cows come home and never get anywhere.
So maybe I lied . Eye candy can make me play a game with some bad game play, It just make the game more barealbe. But Im not sure if a game with super sweet game play can make me play a game with less than avereage graphics.
gamertag - Swaffle House
Lets put it like this, I like to look at pretty things but to me gameplay is king. Gameplay is like water it's what makes up 70% percent of you and if you don't have it you die.
Now for all of you voting I think it's important to keep in mind that to me gameplay means the flow of combat, quests design and moster AI. Graphics on the other hand makes up World, Character, Monster design and Animations.
Also I think it's worht pointing out that all of you people mention EQII when you talk about pretty graphics. I think it's important to note that not EQII but another MMO which will remain nameless won the award for best art direction in a video game, not MMO but video game, at GDC. The reason I will not bring it up as I don't feel like we need to start a flame war here only that it's worth mentioning. Also for those of you not in the know the GDC stands for the Game Developers Confrence, which is an awards banquite and convention for those in the game industry by people in the industry. It is considered one of the highest honors you can receive in that perticular field.
Mr. Vice out
. . . so long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.
Voltairine De Cleyre
I cant play a game like Ragnarok.
However, if you get it ''acceptable'', the graphics dont matter at all past a point, all that matter is the gameplay(s).
Graphics is the size of your net catcher. The gameplay(s) is the efficiency of the net, once the net encompass fishs, does it bring them back or can they swin out of the net?
A good sailor will value a smaller net that bring back the fishs. However, to make this exemple complete, time would invariably reduce the size of the net, slowly, but certainly...instead of attacking the solidity of the net...for some reason, the net material never broke unless you try to change it(hell-o SWG), it is just the overall size of the net that keep getting smaller.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Gameplay is important to me, but I ain't going to play a game that looks crappy. And actually as long as I have money you will not find me playing a 2d game *yukkkkk*
(unless that 2d game is really really oldschool hehe)
I do wish decent graphics (I just couldn't get into UO due to the crappy animations), but gameplay is at the top for me. I think Roma Victor will be the perfect game for me.
i think i can say gameplay is more important. here is why:
Graphic needs a minimum level to be acceptable. Anything over that level is icing on the cake, but not really needed. Style is also very important in graphics. every graphic artist can make you a human model, but only some can do it so they look good. Being immersed in the world is also more important than sheer polygon count. The world has to be credible per se.
Gameplay, however, must be at the top. So i would play an acceptable graphical game with great gameplay, but i won't play a great graphical game with acceptable gameplay.
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
Exactly. It's not an either/or question. The best game would incorporate great graphics and stellar gameplay. Unfortunately most of the emphasis is on the graphics right now, and it's getting worse IMHO.
PD
www.TheChippedDagger.com My 90-day 2D Java MMORPG project
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
If you don't like the gameplay in new games, then you will say they focused on graphics only. If you do like the gameplay in new games, you will say they have a good balance.
Frankly, I think EQ2 has the best gameplay now and that's why I play it. It also looks good, and if it didn't I probably wouldn't have gotten it in the first place. Graphics do create immersion, which can have a HUGE impact on your perception of gameplay.
For example, WoW's graphics look cartoony. Combine that with a low XP requirement, and a very young community age-wise, and you have my overall impression. It's too easy and it's geared too much toward newbies.
Graphics wouldn't stop me from playing or make me keep playing, but they do add to my overall impression of the game. It will always seem like a kids game to me. Whatever irony there is in who has more time to play, games that require significantly more time in to advance in levels seem more geared toward mature players who won't give up when they find out it takes a long term investment to become powerful in game.
Even EQ2 is a little on the easy side, but I didn't have that as a first impression because the graphics didn't look like they were made for the cartoon network (although WoW does look more adult swim than regular lame cartoons).
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
Nobody is perfect...My name is Nobody
If you are here, then it has to be both. Otherwise we would all still be playing pen and paper games or text based MUDs because they have the best gameplay by far.
If I had to give up a little on one, I would rather give a bit on graphics, but now days there is no reason we can't have both. My break down would be something like 55% gameplay and 45% graphics.
PS, when I mention graphics, I not only want graphics that look good, but perform great as well. I hate hitches, pauses, lag, and glitches. Graphics should look good, but they should also run smooth as silk on an average system (not just top of the line).
A refinement to this pole would be:
For those who chose graphics, when did you start playing mmogs? I would say that most started after UO and EQ. If you have started after those games, you don't really know good content, so you can't really make an informed decision. (some would say that even UO and EQs content suck compared to the original text muds) The content of the newer games pales in comparison to that of their parents. All new games have been dumbed down. All new games have massive problems. It didn't used to be this way. Even the old games now have massive problems, mainly due to bad decision making of their new owners.
If you've never experienced excellent content and gameplay, how can you be sure you wouldn't choose gameplay over graphics or play an insanely good game with low-end graphics?
nethervoid - Est. '97
[UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|AQW|DN|SWTOR|Dofus|SotA|BDO|AO|NW|LA] - Currently Playing EQ1
20k+ subs YouTube Gaming channel
Ok, as I see from most of your responces, people would rather have a great gameplay then have horrible graphics. As an add-on to this question I would like to ask acouple questions:
1.) Have you ever purchased a game on the same day that you discovered it (impulse purchase) or do you usually wait a week or more researching the game to make sure it is suited for your styles before purchasing.
2.) If you had a choice to purchase the newest video card or the newest MMORPG, which would you choose considering that playing the new MMORPG would mean not playing it at the peak preformance allowed.
3.) Do you use your own money to purchase the MMORPG and subscribe, or do you do a side job over the internet making a small amount of money devoted to your MMORPG life. (If you do not purchase nor pay the subscription costs for your games skip this question)
Free File Hosting at Origin Now - 100 Megabyte Max Upload Per File