Graphics Or Game-play?

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

What’s more important for a game?

Good Graphics.
6
13%
Good Game-play.
40
87%
 
Total votes: 46

User avatar
Scapegoat
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Scapegoat » Sun Jul 01, 2007 5:15 pm

Good graphics could improve good gameplay for the whole life of the game, but would only improve poor gameplay for about 20 minutes.

Poor gameplay can ruin a gorgeous looking game, but good can make something that looks like like on-screen vomiting worth playing.

Gameplay > Graphics

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:52 am

Nope, bad graphics can destroy even the best playing game.

For instance, if the graphics consisted entirely of the word "ARSE" changing colour occasionally. It wouldn't matter if a good game was under there, you couldn't see it.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

User avatar
Scapegoat
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Scapegoat » Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:59 am

Dudley wrote:Nope, bad graphics can destroy even the best playing game.

For instance, if the graphics consisted entirely of the word "ARSE" changing colour occasionally. It wouldn't matter if a good game was under there, you couldn't see it.
Now you are confusing bad with unfunctional. Rogue has "bad" graphics, and I'm pretty sure that, with effort, you could spell out ARSE, but that doesn't stop it being playable.

But the important part is that the "bad" graphics don't get in the way of the gameplay.

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Mon Jul 02, 2007 4:30 am

Plenty of games have had non-functional gameplay too. The best game is useless without graphics, the best graphics are useless without gameplay.

Good graphics ENHANCE playability.

The question is like asking "What's best for racing? A fast time round a track or a good top speed."

Obviously the ANSWER is A). But you simply can't ignore than B is a component of A.

Forza 2, Viewtiful Joe, Jet Set Radio, Shadow of the colossus. All would be massively compromised on machines with less power and worst graphics. Graphics are not a replacement for gameplay, they're part of it.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

Bub&Bob
Posts: 6833
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:24 am

Post by Bub&Bob » Mon Jul 02, 2007 7:38 am

I think that ICO is one of the most amazing gaming experiences ever. However, I wonder if that would be the case if it had Dragon 32 style graphics? (for the record I think it would)

I wonder if this question will be relevant in 5 - 10 years time though....
The dry fart for Barry MacDermot and all the cancer patients in the Glamorgan testicle ward

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by stvd » Mon Jul 02, 2007 8:09 am

Bub&Bob wrote:I think that ICO is one of the most amazing gaming experiences ever. However, I wonder if that would be the case if it had Dragon 32 style graphics?
Don't know about Dragon 32 graphics but ICO with ZX Spectrum graphics is Ant Attack. And it's still a great game. :)

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:44 pm

stvd wrote:
Bub&Bob wrote:I think that ICO is one of the most amazing gaming experiences ever. However, I wonder if that would be the case if it had Dragon 32 style graphics?
Don't know about Dragon 32 graphics but ICO with ZX Spectrum graphics is Ant Attack. And it's still a great game. :)
Yeah , but Ant Attack has great graphics!

Graphics which function well = good graphics
Graphics which don't function well = poor graphics

I'm still waiting for someone to name a game with poor , jerky graphics (takng into account the capabiliies of the machine) but which has great gameplay. There are very few that I can think of , where you battle against the graphics because the gameplay is so captivating
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
Celebaglar
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 8:34 am
Location: The Fish Mines of Gloom
Contact:

Post by Celebaglar » Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:47 pm

paranoid marvin wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to name a game with poor , jerky graphics (takng into account the capabiliies of the machine) but which has great gameplay. There are very few that I can think of , where you battle against the graphics because the gameplay is so captivating
Elite on the C64 comes to mind. Great game, awfully slow and jerky graphics, specially when things were hectic.

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:15 pm

Celebaglar wrote:
paranoid marvin wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to name a game with poor , jerky graphics (takng into account the capabiliies of the machine) but which has great gameplay. There are very few that I can think of , where you battle against the graphics because the gameplay is so captivating
Elite on the C64 comes to mind. Great game, awfully slow and jerky graphics, specially when things were hectic.
Yes , this is one of the games I had in mind. If you were a C64 owner , you persevered because you knew that under the crippled graphics engine , there was a game of pure gameplay

But having all the different machines to pick from , how many people choosing to play this game now would load up the C64 version? Why choose the Beeb or the Speccy or the Amiga/ST , even PC version over the C64?

I thought it was the gameplay and not the graphics that mattered? :wink:
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
Celebaglar
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 8:34 am
Location: The Fish Mines of Gloom
Contact:

Post by Celebaglar » Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:54 pm

paranoid marvin wrote:I thought it was the gameplay and not the graphics that mattered? :wink:
I don't think anyone claimed that. Graphics do matter, but gameplay matters more. Without great graphics gameplay can still get people playing the game, but great graphics without gameplay means you lose interest after about five minutes, no matter how good the graphics are.

To get back to the Elite example, when I did play the C64 version I didn't have the option of playing the others. The C64 was all I had, but despite what were awful graphics I kept playing. Sure I'd prefer better graphics, but that wasn't the question.

User avatar
Scapegoat
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Scapegoat » Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:32 pm

paranoid marvin wrote: I'm still waiting for someone to name a game with poor , jerky graphics (takng into account the capabiliies of the machine) but which has great gameplay. There are very few that I can think of , where you battle against the graphics because the gameplay is so captivating
There was one on the Atari 800 called Journey to the Planets that springs to mind. http://www.atarimania.com/detail_soft.p ... ON_ID=2688

Some of the most gopping graphics you have ever seen (two whole frames of animation!!!), colours that make your eyes bleed, but fiendishly compulsive puzzles that I couldn't stop playing.

This is perhaps one of the most extreme examples I can think of, especially when you consider a combination of graphic and gameplay loveliness like Necromancer was around at the same time:
http://www.atarimania.com/detail_soft.p ... ON_ID=5982

Also, I was under the impression that the discussion was about dull, boring, zero effort graphics that add nothing to the experience, not graphics that are so flawed that it adversely effects the gameplay. Have the goalposts been moved to suit the argument?

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26995
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Post by Antiriad2097 » Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:08 am

Scapegoat wrote:Also, I was under the impression that the discussion was about dull, boring, zero effort graphics that add nothing to the experience, not graphics that are so flawed that it adversely effects the gameplay. Have the goalposts been moved to suit the argument?
Sort of. Its not so much moving the goalposts, just that the discussion naturaly brought it up. Plenty of games have gameplay so bad it 'breaks' the graphics, but its hard to fid an example of a terrible looking game where you persevere because the gameplay has hooked you.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:23 am

Well , right from th start , I (as well as Dudley ) have been saying that you can't have one without the other

For me 'good' graphics is NOT a visually attaractive freeze frame from a game - to have good graphics , they miust be smooth and well animated , nice to look at , but not in such a way as to be detrimental to the gameplay

That is why ROTR has terrible graphics , in fact I can't believe that anyone could say they were anything but. Ok , they may look good in a mag , but with about 3 frames of animation , they were appalling in action. If this game had had smooth animation , then the game may not have been half as bad as it was - certainly not still being villified to this day

On the other hand , Prince Of Persia (orignal) looked to have quite basic graphics in the mag - but one play showed how well they were animated , and this made the game into a fantastic experience , with the player feeling that they had total control of their character - any sudden traps could be avoided , and death for the Prince always lay solely in the player's hands
Last edited by paranoid marvin on Wed Jul 04, 2007 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Wed Jul 04, 2007 6:02 am

And PoP would probably now be a footnote without the graphics. The smooth rotoscoped animation was a key feature of the title, it MADE the gameplay.

Sonic 1 is another good example, its gameplay is created by the graphics, as the broken recent GBA port proved.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

User avatar
GarryG
Posts: 3249
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:33 am
Location: The cold wet bit above England...

Post by GarryG » Wed Jul 04, 2007 6:45 am

Dudley wrote:Forza 2, Viewtiful Joe, Jet Set Radio, Shadow of the colossus. All would be massively compromised on machines with less power and worst graphics. Graphics are not a replacement for gameplay, they're part of it.
So (for example) why do many people prefer the spectrum version of Bomb Jack above all others then, including the original?
IMO it's because of the smooth game-play, yes the graphics are good for the Specie, but other versions (especially the Arcade board original) had better.

And don't just say 'fanboys' that's a cop-out not an answer ;)
Dudley wrote:And PoP would probably now be a footnote without the graphics. The smooth rotoscoped animation was a key feature of the title, it MADE the gameplay.
But that’s my point Dudley, the many-framed graphics were a feature of the game and an integral part of the game-play. I agree this approach made what could have otherwise been an average and forgettable game into a classic. I was talking about fancy graphics with little real game, or a very generic and otherwise forgettable game mechanic underneath. In that case I think the graphics are a bit of a quick-fix cheat and the game will not hold any lasting appeal.

paranoid marvin wrote: I'm still waiting for someone to name a game with poor , jerky graphics (takng into account the capabiliies of the machine) but which has great gameplay. There are very few that I can think of , where you battle against the graphics because the gameplay is so captivating
Many people like 'Blue Stinger' on the DC, more than similar games with much better implemented graphics. They site the game-play of this as the primary reason for liking it more. It has to be said that the graphics do have some fairly obvious problems, and yes IMO the game has to ‘battle against’ these graphics, many people seem to think it manages this admirably!
The opposite end of this coin would be the top-notch graphics implementation of the Shenmue games; again some people don't like these because of the game-play, while others love them!
Last edited by GarryG on Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:24 am, edited 4 times in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests