[gdjman68wasdigi]

with all this talk of next gen, ps4, 720 etc, it seems yet again its all about the graphics.

i find myself enjoying a simple 30 year old game on a £300 piece of hardware

that tells me thats graphics are not that important to me or how much power a system has got..

and with Crytek claiming that Crysis 3 will look just as good as the first wave of 8th gen games, how much better can the graphics get.

have Nintendo cracked it with the gamepad,??

hard to say

[NorfolkBoy1]

Originally Posted by gdjman68wasdigi

with all this talk of next gen, ps4, 720 etc, it seems yet again its all about the graphics.

Except it's not is it? While there's a graphical upgrade in the tech being mooted to appear in the new consoles, it's not as 'ahead-of-the-game' as what was included in the 360/PS3 a few years ago.

what they seem to be focusing on more is processing and memory-usage, which finds benefits in far more than just graphical power, and is more likely to see apps running simultaneously, or vastly improved AI in games (far more important to me than improved graphics at this juncture).

[NorfolkBoy1]

Originally Posted by gdjman68wasdigi

and with Crytek claiming that Crysis 3 will look just as good as the first wave of 8th gen games, how much better can the graphics get.

IIRC games like Shadow of the Collosus and God Of War 2 looked better than most of what was released in the first year of the PS3/360, it's not unusual for devs to take a year to get to grips with the new technology they're working with.

The difference this time is that closer-to-PC architecture means it shouldn't take three years before we see an Uncharterd 2-like jaw-dropper.

[Davonator]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjikLCPeUdo

[Hotbird]

I think it largely comes down to the fact graphics are easily demonstrated through a video whereas its a lot harder to show improvements to physicals and more so AI though a video or advert. Its only when you play games with those improvements that you really understand the difference they can make.

[gdjman68wasdigi]

Originally Posted by Davonator

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjikLCPeUdo

liked it

[thomas2400]

Are graphics the most important of a game, no but anyone that says graphics don't matter is lying

If you have two games with the exact same gameplay,

Game 1 looks like a piece of shit
Game 2 has uncharted 3 graphics

you are going to go for the one with better graphics as nobody wants what they are playing to look crap

In terms of can the graphics jumping up between PS3 and PS4, in happens every generation, i didn't expect PS3 to be that much better than PS2 and look at the difference now

[bob2005]

Find myself playing Sonic 2 on the megadrive collection on 360. Still brilliant games even though it's 20 or so years old.

[gdjman68wasdigi]

Originally Posted by thomas2400

Are graphics the most important of a game, no but anyone that says graphics don't matter is lying

If you have two games with the exact same gameplay,

Game 1 looks like a piece of shit
Game 2 has uncharted 3 graphics

you are going to go for the one with better graphics as nobody wants what they are playing to look crap

In terms of can the graphics jumping up between PS3 and PS4, in happens every generation, i didn't expect PS3 to be that much better than PS2 and look at the difference now

i do appreciate the beauty of a new title on the latest machine but my point is, you can have just much fun with a title like Balloon Fight

take Nintendoland for example, so, so simple but lots of fun and the uses the Gamepad very well indeed.

Pac Man, the game is a legend, is part of gaming history and still addictive as hell 33 years down the line.

NSMB U, its the same old game essentially, but looks lovely and is bloody hard.

RE6, looked lovely, it was pretty gash though, hence probably all about the graphics
"lying", still as subtle as ever thomas

[NorfolkBoy1]

Originally Posted by bob2005

Find myself playing Sonic 2 on the megadrive collection on 360. Still brilliant games even though it's 20 or so years old.

Disagree strongly. I went back to the Sonic games on that same collection and found them horrible to play, and I grew up with those games!

[gdjman68wasdigi]

Originally Posted by NorfolkBoy1

Disagree strongly. I went back to the Sonic games on that same collection and found them horrible to play, and I grew up with those games!

isnt Sonic 2 regarded as a bit of a "masterpiece"?

maybe its a bit hard for you and your used to fancy graphics passing itself off as a "game"

im just kidding, we will see what Aliens has to offer on Tuesday, in the meantime ill continue to be enraged by NSMB U..

the desert levels are just too hard, its an example of a game that looks cute and childish but in reality, takes no prisoners

[NorfolkBoy1]

I just think nostalgia is overrated and agree wholeheartedly with the message of the video posted above by Davonator.

[gdjman68wasdigi]

Originally Posted by NorfolkBoy1

I just think nostalgia is overrated and agree wholeheartedly with the message of the video posted above by Davonator.

that could also depend on how old you are as well?

[NorfolkBoy1]

Not necessarily, I've been playing games since the days of the Atari 2600, I lived through these so-called 'Golden ages' and nothing when I was a kid prepared my for the feelings I had when I played Journey last year.

[gdjman68wasdigi]

the angry video game nerd makes me laugh,

he just says it how it is, the Rob the Robot episode was a classic

"can only play stack up or gyromite"

[Speedloafer]

Bubble Bobble, Snow Bros, Wrestlefest, Shinobi and many more, I play these regularly on emulator, still after all this time they are better than most of the garbage released these days.

[XxBlaKOuTZxX]

Too many games rely on their graphics as a selling point. I'm not saying that HD graphics are a bad thing but some of these games have little or no replay value. I still find myself returning to older games, such as those from the megadrive or snes era. It's not all about stunning graphics.

[whoever,hey]

Originally Posted by NorfolkBoy1

Except it's not is it? While there's a graphical upgrade in the tech being mooted to appear in the new consoles, it's not as 'ahead-of-the-game' as what was included in the 360/PS3 a few years ago.

what they seem to be focusing on more is processing and memory-usage, which finds benefits in far more than just graphical power, and is more likely to see apps running simultaneously, or vastly improved AI in games (far more important to me than improved graphics at this juncture).

But Sony and Microsoft haven't even announced the new consoles yet, so how can you say what they are talking about?

[flagpole]

How many times before have we asked how much better can graphics get?

[tnt]

Originally Posted by gdjman68wasdigi

with all this talk of next gen, ps4, 720 etc, it seems yet again its all about the graphics.

i find myself enjoying a simple 30 year old game on a £300 piece of hardware

that tells me thats graphics are not that important to me or how much power a system has got..

and with Crytek claiming that Crysis 3 will look just as good as the first wave of 8th gen games, how much better can the graphics get.

have Nintendo cracked it with the gamepad,??

hard to say

Sorry but what is Balloon Flight? I remember an ancient game called Balloon Flight. Surely you cant be refering to this game?

[gdjman68wasdigi]

Originally Posted by tnt

Sorry but what is Balloon Flight? I remember an ancient game called Balloon Flight. Surely you cant be refering to this game?

Balloon fight

A retro arcade platformer similar to joust, re released on wii u virtual console to celebrate 30 years of the family computer in japan

[NorfolkBoy1]

Originally Posted by whoever,hey

But Sony and Microsoft haven't even announced the new consoles yet, so how can you say what they are talking about?

Months and months of fairly consistent reporting on the technical layout of the new consoles.. the latest of which would seem to be fairly reliable:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df...rango-vs-orbis


No headline-grabbing sensationalism, just facts* and figures.

*or at least as much fact as they can be until it's all confirmed.

Just cause the consoles haven't been released yet doesn't mean nobody knows what will be inside them.

[Tal'shiar]

Graphics are the most important part of gaming = Wrong

Graphics in gaming does not matter = Wrong

THe extremes are always stupid. Graphics matter, but its more of a scale. PSX level graphics on a shooter would be truly awful and would just not work. But on a platformer with good art style, it would be fine. Its all to do with context.

And this argument that old games were better is often made by people who never actually played old school games. Sure Sonic still stands up well, and Mario is Mario, it will remain a classic. But I did play games from about 85 onwards, and a lot of stuff was crap then and is crap now. Plenty of cash grab bags of crap came out in the 8-bit era, 16-bit and so on. We just remember and list the good ones because they were good.

A good game will most likely always be a good game. Sonic works because it was a good game then, and still is. 20 years from now Sleep Dogs will be remembered as a good game, a long with Sonic, digger t rock, and so on.

Its the same way in the 40s, lots of good movies came out. But all the bad ones are forgotten, yet people think the era was good because the crap has simply been forgotten about.

Whilst Mass effect will be remembered fondly in the future, Kane and Lynch will be forgotten, and this era will be remembered as yet another golden age because people forget the crap and only remember the good.

All eras have plenty to offer in good games, but if you dig harder you will uncover huge amounts of crap as well. All era's are good, no era stands out as better when you take into account ALL the games of that era.

[Andy2]

I'm currently playing Doom and Doom 2 which came with the recent Doom 3. It only takes a short while to get used to the low res, rough graphics and the entertainment quickly shines through. If the game is good the graphics aren't that important.