FileFront Forums

FileFront Forums (http://forums.filefront.com/)
-   Half-Life 2 General Yib-Yab (Off Topic) (http://forums.filefront.com/half-life-2-general-discussion-508/)
-   -   Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins (http://forums.filefront.com/half-life-2-general-discussion/87785-graphics-vs-gameplay-one-wins.html)

Brookster August 22nd, 2003 05:50 AM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
I thought Civ3s graphics left a lot to be desired too...I have to say I can take bad graphics as long as they're functional and clean. Sorry to go a little of topic here but everything seems to drift...On the subject of civ games I found them to be a little over rated...the concept didn't seem to work well to me, yet alpha centuri seemed great, and was a good buy when I picked it up second hand. Is there a gameplay difference or is it just me. Mabey I prefer future settings.

azzkiker August 22nd, 2003 09:49 AM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
I'll just wrap up my opinion....

Crap graphics = Bad Gameplay.
So, u cant really choose one over the other!

AlkalineTrio August 22nd, 2003 01:05 PM

Re: Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by azzr
I'll just wrap up my opinion....

Crap graphics = Bad Gameplay.
So, u cant really choose one over the other!

Your going to have to elaborate a bit more on what you mean there buddy because I don't quiet follow. I can't see how bad graphics make the gameplay bad. But thats just my opinion.

Blitz Krieger August 23rd, 2003 09:25 PM

definitely gameplay.Even the prettiest graphics can't save a crap game.But awesome gameplay can forgive a lot of ugliness.

talon010 August 24th, 2003 12:04 AM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
thats what i was trying to say further up.
Unreal II..... theres a good example.

azzkiker August 24th, 2003 12:50 AM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
If there's crap graphics ... there WONT be good gameplay. So, ur saying a game with crap graphics but good gameplay (zelda) ... is a good game?!

Brookster August 24th, 2003 07:11 AM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
zelda doesn't have crap graphics, it has acceptable 2D graphics (unless your talking about the nes one). I think all 16-bit 2D graphics are usually good, 8-bit always looks pretty terrible, and early 3D graphics are the worst. That's bad graphics. Doom, there was a game with bad graphics and pretty basic gameplay, luckly for them it was one of the first games of an upcoming genre, so everyone though it was revolutionary

Blitz Krieger August 24th, 2003 10:34 AM

Re: Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by azzr
If there's crap graphics ... there WONT be good gameplay. So, ur saying a game with crap graphics but good gameplay (zelda) ... is a good game?!

Umm..yeah,that's exactly what I'm saying.

ditchhopper August 24th, 2003 01:30 PM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
This is really a simple question. Its got to be gameplay! Whats the point of having an eye popping beautiful game if you absolutely hate the way it plays? The newest tomb raider springs to mind. The game has nice detail, killer graphics, and lara has never looked better. But the controls suck! They absolutely destroyed what was once a fun adventure game. Granted they had to do something cause it was getting boring but not this!!! I can think of many games I really enjoyed that had less than perfect graphics but the gameplay is what makes it interesting and keeps you going for that next level.

talon010 August 24th, 2003 11:28 PM

Re: Graphics Vs Gameplay - Which one wins
 
exactly what i was trying to say and azzkiller, crap graphics dosent mean bad gameplay. thats not waht i was trying to say...


All times are GMT -7.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.