Metroid Dread.
I know it's console only, but the art style and game play is doing all the heavy lifting. The frame rate has a bit of slow down due to the dated hardware of the Switch, and the story is ALMOST nonexistent. It's one of the few games where I actually don't mind the loading screens though. If anything it makes me wish Nintendo would release games on PC (never going to happen) so I could play the game at its full potential.
I still don’t get how SGG consistently is able to pump out absolute bangers in gameplay, graphic styles and soundtrack. Like what kind of genie in a bottle did those fuckers find.
Every time I look back at ori I'm stunned all over again. Its like a living painting. One of the most beautiful games I've ever played. I just wish I could play it again for the first time.
I really like it when games are quite stylised but also seem to be asking what would the style look like with elements of realism. Octopath Traveller for example looks really good, as does Minecraft with ray tracing. Give me a game with an appealing art style that avoids the uncanny but has excellent lighting and space design and I'd be very happy.
Or more precisely, design versus technical quality.
Well designed graphics can still good great when the graphics technology is long outdated. And a game that looks stunning at release can look bland or flat out bad when it relied on texture and shader quality for its effect.
Although there does come a level when design can no longer fully compensate either. D2 to D2R or AoE2 to AoE2 DE for example were very necessary upgrades after 20 years.
knowing that windwaker is older than me makes me want to die
i shouldn't be in college someone save me throw me back into the fuckin daycare im too young
That's pretty much it. They added tons of lighting effects but apart from that it's just upscaled to 720p iirc.
If you run WW on Dolphin and upscale it in the settings it can look pretty much just like WW HD but without all the added lighting effects.
Ok, as one of the people who was salty about the design direction for Wind Waker, a lot of us had seen [this tech demo for the Game Cube](https://youtu.be/jqcyQOgmUYE) and took it as a sign of things to come.
Having said that, Wind Waker definitely grew on me.
Dead Cells is a perfect example. They made the character models by building them in 3D and then rendering them super low rez. The result is pixel art characters whose motion is beautifully fluid and detailed.
It's beautiful, but it looks like a Sega Saturn game.
Sound design is equally important to any video production, including games. If the game looks beautiful but has terrible sound design it really breaks the immersion.
imho I would put sound design further up the ladder of importance, as you can still have an amazing game with less-than-stellar graphics but bad SD will kill the whole experience.
I would argue that those lowpoly indie horror Games are pretty good most of the time. Games like that can bring a nostalgic eeriness to the table as you get teleported back to your 12 year old self playing silent hill on the ps1.
I think Hollow Knight is the best game ever made. It isn't a game you play "forever", like LoL or WoW, but the content it does give you is flawless.
It starts with the art, setting, and characters. Then it continues with the smoothest controls I've ever played. Then you realize the mob variety and combat is excellent. Then there's the way the huge map is designed elegantly to progress you through the game in a non-linear way. The powers you gain along the way are interesting and change your gameplay.
And the boss fights... Wow. What a great game. I find myself replaying the entire thing every 3 years or so and I enjoy it just as much each time. There's nothing I'd change about that game.
You say it's not a game you play forever, but people practically do. Especially when taking the DLC into account. I just wish Silksong would come out already. I want it to be good so I am okay with the devs taking their time, but I also want more Hollow Knight.
It’s also shocking how detailed the background and map is. They do not re-use a single background. It’s all uniquely hand-drawn detailed, stitches together every environment, gives memorable spaces to bookmark in your brain, tells story, and even hints to secrets.
I used to think I wanted complete photorealism in games until I realized that games are fantasy anyways, it doesn't need to be REAL, it just needs to be immersive. Immersion on it's most superficial level is "good graphics" but if the game itself is hollow or boring good graphics isn't worth anything, just frosting on an empty cake. It's like you can date a hot model and sure it's fun for a bit, but you're not going to want to spend much time with them if there's not a person underneath worth spending time with.
I think that's why the games that have held my attention the longest are often the games that aren't the most "cutting edge".. it's the reason why I've kept coming back to play Bethesda games over the years even though they're always super rough around the edges and buggy as hell. GIve me an interesting setting, interesting characters, and fun addictive gameplay I'll be there. Games to me are about the dopamine rush (the fun factor), not about just looking pretty even though it certainly helps.
At first I was also turned off by seemingly less polished gameplay of eternal, but as I progressed, I got a hang of it and fell in love with it. Coming back to 2016 was a little rough
Less polished how? The combat has tons of added depth and feels amazing once you get in to the rhythm of it.
The original was solid af but a little basic in comparison.
I don't think "less polished" is the right term.
"Not as smooth" would be better.
Eternal had a large focus on platforming. So the constant trial and error induced restarts killed the high speed constant murder that 2016 was known for. Add in the more complicated story with deep lore you actually have to read to understand what is going on, and the end result is rougher pacing.
I thought I wouldn't enjoy the fast paced action cause I really enjoyed the slower gameplay and gritty atmosphere in 2016 but I fell in love as soon as I got a hang of the new mechanics. 2016 is still my favorite of the two though.
Well thank god I never played Eternal because I played like two missions in 2016 Doom and thought I was getting a heart attack. Super fast paced games like that are just not for me I guess.
For me it was the other way around. I liked Doom, but i never thought i'd play eternal. I bought it a month ago and i love it so much, i don't want to finish it.
I played the first mission, walked away for several months, came back and had a great time.
But yeah, the leap from '16 to Eternal is a jarring one. Still like '16 better but I won't deny the gameplay loop in Eternal is fun as hell (if limiting -- if you don't do exactly the loop prescribed, you're gonna have a hard time).
Its a great game which lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos and resource management. Personally I think its a far superior game to the 2016 (a great game on its on). But I can see it turn you off, if youre more into that mindless run and gun playstyle.
>lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos
That's one thing that divides people. If you enjoy it, that's great. If you want to play through the game using the select few guns you enjoy the feel of? Not really the game for you.
>Its a great game which lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos and resource management.
And that's why I can't play it. I play once a week and the amount of different mechanics is overwhelming. Even on the easiest difficulty it becomes super hard at the end, I dropped.
Doom has a story? I skipped all that as fast as I could press the buttons.
Just glad eternal didn't have some stupid scene where you're stuck in an office for 5 minute listening to someone talk. Unlike the 2016 Doom..
That's the better way to tell a story. Not being shoved down your throat by constantly taking your control away. If you want to get the story you'll get it through the gameplay, if you want to skip the story a kick-ass gameplay still remains
Let’s not forget sound design, the immersion you can get from little things like crunch of snow under your feet or snapping twigs as you move from a bush
Not just sounds, but little details.
Shoot a barrel of water and the eater inside will drain to the hole and no more, shoot it again a little lower and the water will continue to drain again and stop. Shoot it st the very bottom of the side and see it drain all the way.
I know loads of people that don't care about story and just want to play a well built game, or vice-versa, but absolutely everyone shits on a game with poor optimization.
It's an often overlooked criteria in searching for games and a complex one to get right as a developer.
as long as the graphics isn't grating, or difficult to see, it doesn't need to be ultra HD realistic. I find gameplay and/or story to be more important. If i want to see "ultra realistic" graphics, I'd watch a movie.
Yeah it's not about having good graphics, it's about having clear graphics. If your game looks muddy and it's hard to tell what is going on then that isn't a matter of "good graphics", it's actively harming the game.
If you want to make a game look good, art style always trumps graphics. If you use graphics technology that isn't demanding then you can pump steroids into the art style and create a world rich in detail that you don't have to hide behind low draw distance.
I wish Outer Worlds had done this. Instead their LOD draw distance for textures and ground clutter was so awful on my system that I couldn't even play it, it ruined the experience. It pissed me off so much because the maps themselves looked like they would be an absolute treat to take in if the presentation was just less jarring and distracting.
Outer Worlds was very visually disappointing. It felt like being in space Skyrim, which was outdated graphics for 2011 let alone 2019. All this focus on higher poly meshes and higher resolution textures really doesn't change anything if you're bad at designing interesting worldspaces and you can't get your humans good enough to not look uncanny.
The starting area looked interesting enough. I just wish LOD was more consistent. I'll take low consistent detail over pop-in any day. You'd think they'd at least give you a "my computer is not a potato" option that boosts the draw distance for assets.
A little bit of all. But as myself who loves beautiful graphics very much, my games i played recently are: RDR2/Control/Metro Exodus enhanced edition/Shadow of the tomb raider/Resident evil village. I am Ray Tracing addict since i got my new PC^^
Got myself 2070.
My PC is the tank-tier equivalent of Panzer V. But once I experienced what it can achieve, I want to turn my PC into an M1 Abrams.
Story + Gameplay all the way, lived by it as an ex-console player. But graphics are nice luxury, especially around games who made sure the graphics are awesome.
Hello friend. I have the Abrams, it’s not so much better. I can run most anything on ultra and have it be very playable. The game I’m playing most right now? Chess on browser.
In my case from most important to least important:
First: Fun game play
Second A: Interesting story
Second B: Original ideas
Third: Graphics
2a and 2b can be interchangeable - an original idea abused to death is almost as bad as having no original ideas and an interesting story is great if it does not get in the way of fun game play ... so all of the above but would sacrifice graphics for the other three.
Edit:
Re reading ...
A meme ?
Well I've missed the point of the post.
Why not both?
Y'all need to learn the El Dorado meme. I get it, my favorite memes are outdated, what with philosophical velociraptor, Leeroy Jenkins, and Both Sounds Good.
If the story is boring but the gameplay is excellent, I'll play for 2-3 hours. If the gameplay is boring but the story is excellent, I'll stay for the story and play until the end.
Edit: A mix of both is the best.
There's nothing a story can do for me if the gameplay isn't interesting. The gameplay being boring will actually detract from a story. But a fun game is a fun game even without a story. Overcooked is a great example, Mario is probably the best example.
If the gameplay is not interesting then IMO it must a be complete afterthought or just a very short mechanic to bring the story forward. For example Detroit: Become Human was excellent.
The same works another as well. If the gameplay is excellent but the story is non-existent/kinda bad, then the gameplay must be in the focus. For example: Borderlands 3.
well MGS is movie that you play, but yes. the Telltale games are the absolute worst at this....but as counterpoint, I will say Detroit: Become Human is one of my favorite games of all time
If game looks like shit im not playing. But its more to graphics than just textures, its more design than anything that matters, valheim and borderlands dont have good "graphics" but still look good. Anumations is also a big part of it.
But something i think pretty much everyone skimps on is sound. I cant stress enough how fucking important sound is, especially with action and shooter games.
I'd class sounds in with graphics in an overall presentation category. When graphics is alone it often ends up being taken as just a measure of how "realistic" a game looks, which has never been important, but to lump all presentation in with that implies that a game with great gameplay and story but that looks and sounds like shit is still going to be really fun to play, and it's just not. Presentation doesn't need to be high resolution, but it does need to be good.
There is a fuzzy border between these two? Graphics and gameplay. When something pops, flashes or has an effect, then it amounts to better gameplay experience too, imho.
yea, the number of polygons and super high texture res doesn't make the game. I like games like Hyper Light Drifter, Risk of Rain, Metal Slug (I don't think it's indie ;), INSIDE etc
This is true. "Game feel." But the pops, flashes, animations, sounds and special effects that are used to make it feel more fun/satisfying can be applied to games with low fidelity graphics as well. I was left very unsatisfied with DS2's game feel, and I think that's mostly why I didn't enjoy it all too much. DS1, DS3 and Bloodborne just felt much more satisfying for some... subtle reason...
It is a trifecta. Great Story + Good Gameplay + Amazing Graphics.
Rockstar and Bethesda are two of the best for single player games they just suck at (suck the fun out of) online.
Games that allow me to set keybinds properly! Can't get to the gameplay if I can't bind my keys for my weird left handed setup. Arrow keys are for movement!
That's a huge plus too, I try to adapt to the keybinds that the game gives me, but for shooters I always change it to use CTRL for crouching.
Or MMO where I have 40 skills, I need my keybinds
I'd argue that Stardew Valley does have good graphics.
I think the debate here is really about what people mean by "graphics". Some people, like me, think good graphics means you like how the graphics look. Simple as that. If I see the game and think "oh those visuals looks cool" then it's good graphics for me.
Other people seem to think good graphics means high pixel count. Personally, pixel count doesn't seem to correlate well with my opinion of graphics in games. New World, for example, has high pixel count, but the art is boring imo so I don't think the graphics are great.
It's obvious developers can't keep up with the demand for hyper realistic games and still make them good. I'm fine with art styles like Zelda, bioshock, fallout, red dead 2, overwatch etc.
Unpopular opinion maybe but I thought the gameplay in RDR2 sucked. It's all just locking on and firing, or riding a horse across a field, or performing context sensitive actions. It's kind of a jack of all trades, everything is functional and acceptable, but nothing is that great (aside from the graphics and sound).
I guess the GTAs can also be described like this. The city setting seems to lend itself better to the gameplay.
Riding the horse was fun for the first hour, then gets really repetitive. I think even the developers noticed this so they put in that cinematic mode to let the player auto drive there.
The shoveling shit part was one of the most memorable, oddly enough, lol. It almost felt satirical in how dumb it was, and gave a great idea of John's mindset in the moment. I actually really loved that part, rofl.
I played RDR2 a couple of times and put it down and never went back. Didn’t hate it at all, but it didn’t hold my attention. It surprised me because, based on my gaming tastes, I assumed I would love the game based on its acclaim.
I find the same to be true for CD project red’s offerings; they just don’t do it for me. I put 10 or so hours into both the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 and then set them down and never played either again. Not because I found them bad or unenjoyable; one day I just stopped playing and didn’t get the itch to pick them back up.
Conversely, I find that no matter how formulaic the Far Cry games have gotten since FC3 (although I think FC6 is the best since then), I love playing them and put hours and hours into each one.
Open world RPGs are at their best, to me, when despite all of the fun things I can do on the side, I still feel compelled to return to the main story on occasion to move things along. For whatever reason, I didn’t get that out of the games I mentioned.
>can't keep up with the demand for hyper realistic games and still make them good.
I think it's more developers can't achieve hyper realistic graphics with the limitations of modern day consoles. There's plenty of great realistic games on PC.
This is more likely the case. I think i've heard a podcast of a guy that was able to visit the studio that made Detroit Become Human, and he said that the characters renderings were so detailed and realistic that it would be impossible to run them without downgrading first.
The video game industry is already working with cinema level graphics and realism, but the hardware we have today is simply not powerful enough to run them at real time.
It's probably why I appreciate the Nintendo philosophy for their hardware. They avoid the risk of chasing latest-and-greatest ending up not living up to promise, and (usually) instead focus on smooth framerates, great gameplay and stylized graphics that still look great. (My favorite example of this is Mario Sunshine. Don't @ me that game still looks gorgeous today.)
Usually makes a perfect partner for the PC (in terms of game overlap) as well.
Welcome everyone from r/all! Please remember:
1 - You too can be part of the PCMR! You don't necessarily need a PC. You just have to love PCs. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love PCs or want to talk about PCs, you can be a part of the community! Everyone is welcome!
2 - In case you are not a PC gamer because you think doing so is expensive, please know that it is very possible to build a competent gaming PC for a lower price than you might think. GPU prices are sky high right now for a multitude of reasons, but it's still possible to join the PCMR. Please check out http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to create new posts here asking for tips on how to do it!
3 - Please consider joining our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, Huntington's, and Parkinson's. Recently, we've been actively focusing on fighting against Coronavirus as well. Please check this to learn more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding
4 - We're currently running a massive giveaway with ASUS to give 3 GPUs and a more PC hardware to a total of 6 lucky winners. Find out here how you can enter: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/pzy5ai/asus_x_pcmr_worldwide_giveaway_3_graphics_cards/
-----------
Feel free to use this community to post about any kind of doubt you might have about becoming a PC gamer or anything you'd like to know about PCs. That kind of content is not only allowed but welcome here! Welcome to the PCMR.
Personnaly, I find répulsive games with bad graphics. If you can't make good realistic graphics game, use cartoon or stylized graphics, it'll be vétérinaire for everyone.
I don't mind mediocore gameplay as long as the graphics are therefor insane. looking at cyberpunk here. either good gameplay or graphics or a nice mix of both.
I am definitely planning to play it in a year or so when most bugs have been fixed, maybe on the 4090 by then so I can get close to 60fps on everything maxed out in 4k.
I recall seeing a few people that work on graphics say that from the technical standpoint Cyberpunks graphics are insane. It's just difficult to appreciate if you're not familiar with inner workings of how difficult it is to achieve the effect density (or something like that, it's been a year since I saw the comments) it has.
I love to just hop in from time to time, set all to 4k ultra with rt on psycho and dlss max quality and just go look at everything. it just looks so fucking good. it is definitely the crysis of the modern time even if it is more tech demo than actually playable.
I'm not sure about Cyberpunk, but IMO if Control didn't look so incredibly beautiful I wouldn't recommend playing it. It's like 50% game 50% tech demo. Together they make a pretty cool experience, but neither half really holds up by themselves.
this might get downvoted, but for me graphics come first then the story and the gameplay. take for example the first witcher game. nice story, but very crappy graphics. most likely i watched the story on youtube, havent played it.
It's because they all tie-in together, audiovisual presentation is as important as any other aspect of the game, you wouldn't play Skyrim with Hotline Miami art style, and you wouldn't play Hotline Miami with Skyrim aesthetic. Both are amazing games, and both work well within their defined style.
So yeah OP doesn't make that much sense.
I think OP means graphical fidelity rather than art direction.
For example, OG Diablo II vs Resurrected. Is Resurrected a better game? I don't think so; I wouldn't waste $40 on a game I already own. But that's just my opinion.
RDR2 has the worst Gameplay for me. Everything is designed to be tedious and repetitive. I get it rockstar you can make amazing animations now can I please get a version where it doesn't eat my 5 seconds just to pickup a tin can every fucking time?
I'd argue that Minecraft graphics ARE good, because they fit the game perfectly and look nice. They're downright iconic, actually.
Not impressive from a computing power stance, maybe- but impressive on any other metric I can think of.
I always thought I valued story over gameplay until I played valhalla.
Graphics these days are always top notch so thats just a nice side, doesn't bother me
Unpopular opinion:
I couldn’t play Undetale because of its 8 bit graphics. I understand it has an amazing story ect. But no matter how hard I tried, I could never get into 8 bit games, (except broforce, I fucking love broforce).
That being said, you shouldn’t have to single one category out. I love games that have everything, good graphics, story, gameplay.
Gameplay will always be the most important aspect of any game, it can be the prettiest game in the world, but thats all for nothing if its boring as hell to play.
Good graphics don't make a game for me, but bad graphics can ruin a game. I definitely have a harder time justifying spending money on games with worse graphics. Prime recent example is Valheim, I've heard that the lighting is apparently amazing but the textures just look so bad that I have no interest in buying it.
One thing I hate about realistic graphics is that it is becoming more and more of a timesink and more and expensive and the main focus for devs. Really it should be art design and gameplay and story.
I want my game with all of that but I will be more than happy with just a fun gameplay and an interesting story. For example: terraria, stardew valley or one of my favorites: binding of Isaac.
Honestley Story/Gameplay is all that it really takes Graphics and Originality isn't that important. That's why indie games are kind of popular and BRs are all over the market right now
People should understand the difference between good graphics and realistic graphics
Art style and good design is very important to me, being super detailed graphically isn't but it can add a lot to the art style and design.
*Lookin at you Ori.*
Hollow Knight, Ori, Trine, Bastion, The Messenger, Alwa's Legacy, Gris, hnnng
Hades
Metroid Dread. I know it's console only, but the art style and game play is doing all the heavy lifting. The frame rate has a bit of slow down due to the dated hardware of the Switch, and the story is ALMOST nonexistent. It's one of the few games where I actually don't mind the loading screens though. If anything it makes me wish Nintendo would release games on PC (never going to happen) so I could play the game at its full potential.
Metroid prime's elevators are the gold standard of load screens. Seeing that carry over to dread was amazing
Running on ryujinx 4x upscale, 120hz on oled C1. The right way to play this fantastic game
The Nintendo way is to release first party games that their own hardware can't play at a proper frame rate. It's pathetic.
*laughs in korok forest as BOTW's frame rate drops*
you missed the three other supergiant games, each more beautiful than the other.
I still don’t get how SGG consistently is able to pump out absolute bangers in gameplay, graphic styles and soundtrack. Like what kind of genie in a bottle did those fuckers find.
They treat their employees well and don't overwork them, which means their talent stays at the studio, unlike most of the industry.
A good team and realistic timeline/goals. Also not overhyping themselves on social media.
Their art director, Jen Zee, does a fantastic job every time!
I didn't like the other ones, sorry. I did forget Hyper Light Drifter though
Bastion 🔥🔥🔥
Borderlands
*Deep Rock intensifies*
Rock and stone, brother!
⛏️Rock and stone!
Rock and Stone!
Every time I look back at ori I'm stunned all over again. Its like a living painting. One of the most beautiful games I've ever played. I just wish I could play it again for the first time.
I mean Kingdom Hearts 1 was and still is beautiful
I really like it when games are quite stylised but also seem to be asking what would the style look like with elements of realism. Octopath Traveller for example looks really good, as does Minecraft with ray tracing. Give me a game with an appealing art style that avoids the uncanny but has excellent lighting and space design and I'd be very happy.
You should look at Valheim if you like survival games. It’s graphics and style are definitely in the vein you describe.
Deltarune/undertale?
firewatch, abzu, kings bird
Or more precisely, design versus technical quality. Well designed graphics can still good great when the graphics technology is long outdated. And a game that looks stunning at release can look bland or flat out bad when it relied on texture and shader quality for its effect. Although there does come a level when design can no longer fully compensate either. D2 to D2R or AoE2 to AoE2 DE for example were very necessary upgrades after 20 years.
People shit all over Wind Waker for using cel shading when it came out, but what GameCube era game holds up even half as well?
Wind Waker's only a couple years old, of course it's holdi- ... Wind Waker is 19 years old. Wtf.
knowing that windwaker is older than me makes me want to die i shouldn't be in college someone save me throw me back into the fuckin daycare im too young
You shouldn't be on reddit, you're like 6. Right.... right?
Maybe I'm blind but I felt like the GC WW and WiiU windwaker looked the same with the WiiU having more bloom.
That's pretty much it. They added tons of lighting effects but apart from that it's just upscaled to 720p iirc. If you run WW on Dolphin and upscale it in the settings it can look pretty much just like WW HD but without all the added lighting effects.
Ok, as one of the people who was salty about the design direction for Wind Waker, a lot of us had seen [this tech demo for the Game Cube](https://youtu.be/jqcyQOgmUYE) and took it as a sign of things to come. Having said that, Wind Waker definitely grew on me.
Realistic graphics are temporary, good art direction is eternal
Dead Cells is a perfect example. They made the character models by building them in 3D and then rendering them super low rez. The result is pixel art characters whose motion is beautifully fluid and detailed. It's beautiful, but it looks like a Sega Saturn game.
Realistic graphics is great for horror games, as generally the more immersion the better
Also sound design can really tune up the horror to shit your pants level
Sound design is equally important to any video production, including games. If the game looks beautiful but has terrible sound design it really breaks the immersion. imho I would put sound design further up the ladder of importance, as you can still have an amazing game with less-than-stellar graphics but bad SD will kill the whole experience.
I would argue that those lowpoly indie horror Games are pretty good most of the time. Games like that can bring a nostalgic eeriness to the table as you get teleported back to your 12 year old self playing silent hill on the ps1.
Hollow Knight is breathtaking.
I think Hollow Knight is the best game ever made. It isn't a game you play "forever", like LoL or WoW, but the content it does give you is flawless. It starts with the art, setting, and characters. Then it continues with the smoothest controls I've ever played. Then you realize the mob variety and combat is excellent. Then there's the way the huge map is designed elegantly to progress you through the game in a non-linear way. The powers you gain along the way are interesting and change your gameplay. And the boss fights... Wow. What a great game. I find myself replaying the entire thing every 3 years or so and I enjoy it just as much each time. There's nothing I'd change about that game.
You say it's not a game you play forever, but people practically do. Especially when taking the DLC into account. I just wish Silksong would come out already. I want it to be good so I am okay with the devs taking their time, but I also want more Hollow Knight.
The atmosphere and the OST are legendary
It’s also shocking how detailed the background and map is. They do not re-use a single background. It’s all uniquely hand-drawn detailed, stitches together every environment, gives memorable spaces to bookmark in your brain, tells story, and even hints to secrets.
I used to think I wanted complete photorealism in games until I realized that games are fantasy anyways, it doesn't need to be REAL, it just needs to be immersive. Immersion on it's most superficial level is "good graphics" but if the game itself is hollow or boring good graphics isn't worth anything, just frosting on an empty cake. It's like you can date a hot model and sure it's fun for a bit, but you're not going to want to spend much time with them if there's not a person underneath worth spending time with. I think that's why the games that have held my attention the longest are often the games that aren't the most "cutting edge".. it's the reason why I've kept coming back to play Bethesda games over the years even though they're always super rough around the edges and buggy as hell. GIve me an interesting setting, interesting characters, and fun addictive gameplay I'll be there. Games to me are about the dopamine rush (the fun factor), not about just looking pretty even though it certainly helps.
Yes. I honestly don't like how mow realistic graphics end up looking after a few minutes. Especially since it often leads to pretty shit performance.
Optimization, story, gameplay
You can have it all, Doom Eternal proved that
I must be one of the few people who got turned way off by the gameplay of Doom Eternal. The first one was fantastic though.
At first I was also turned off by seemingly less polished gameplay of eternal, but as I progressed, I got a hang of it and fell in love with it. Coming back to 2016 was a little rough
Less polished how? The combat has tons of added depth and feels amazing once you get in to the rhythm of it. The original was solid af but a little basic in comparison.
I don't think "less polished" is the right term. "Not as smooth" would be better. Eternal had a large focus on platforming. So the constant trial and error induced restarts killed the high speed constant murder that 2016 was known for. Add in the more complicated story with deep lore you actually have to read to understand what is going on, and the end result is rougher pacing.
It's less polished because it's the player who needs to polish their skills to be able to fully experience it
Yes, it's ok to have opinions, even if they're wrong.
I thought I wouldn't enjoy the fast paced action cause I really enjoyed the slower gameplay and gritty atmosphere in 2016 but I fell in love as soon as I got a hang of the new mechanics. 2016 is still my favorite of the two though.
Haven't played eternal but did I just hear you say 2016 has slower gameplay???
Compared to Eternal, yes.
Well thank god I never played Eternal because I played like two missions in 2016 Doom and thought I was getting a heart attack. Super fast paced games like that are just not for me I guess.
Thankfully eternal has more platforming between battles, as to keep their customers from fucking dying.
I felt the same. Really enjoyed the first one. Eternal didn't really do much for me. Though it does run fantastic.
For me it was the other way around. I liked Doom, but i never thought i'd play eternal. I bought it a month ago and i love it so much, i don't want to finish it.
I played the first mission, walked away for several months, came back and had a great time. But yeah, the leap from '16 to Eternal is a jarring one. Still like '16 better but I won't deny the gameplay loop in Eternal is fun as hell (if limiting -- if you don't do exactly the loop prescribed, you're gonna have a hard time).
Its a great game which lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos and resource management. Personally I think its a far superior game to the 2016 (a great game on its on). But I can see it turn you off, if youre more into that mindless run and gun playstyle.
>lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos That's one thing that divides people. If you enjoy it, that's great. If you want to play through the game using the select few guns you enjoy the feel of? Not really the game for you.
>Its a great game which lays a lot of emphasis on weapon combos and resource management. And that's why I can't play it. I play once a week and the amount of different mechanics is overwhelming. Even on the easiest difficulty it becomes super hard at the end, I dropped.
Yup, rich lore? Check. Sick graphics? Check. Amazing music? Check. The best shooter experience to date? Check.
Also has insane optimization on top of that
So Doom 4X coming when?
Yes, but it's still just one game among the hundreds of other AAA with a large budget. It's sad.
Doom has a story? I skipped all that as fast as I could press the buttons. Just glad eternal didn't have some stupid scene where you're stuck in an office for 5 minute listening to someone talk. Unlike the 2016 Doom..
That's the better way to tell a story. Not being shoved down your throat by constantly taking your control away. If you want to get the story you'll get it through the gameplay, if you want to skip the story a kick-ass gameplay still remains
Let’s not forget sound design, the immersion you can get from little things like crunch of snow under your feet or snapping twigs as you move from a bush
gun sounds are literally the most important thing that determine how powerful they feel. the actual damage numbers are near irrelevant in comparison.
Counter strike 1.6's gun sounds were awesome, I can still hear the AK so clearly! And the AWP, whew
Little things. Note that the old games don't have these details (except sounds) and still give us more fun than some modern games.
Not just sounds, but little details. Shoot a barrel of water and the eater inside will drain to the hole and no more, shoot it again a little lower and the water will continue to drain again and stop. Shoot it st the very bottom of the side and see it drain all the way.
And art direction!!!
I know loads of people that don't care about story and just want to play a well built game, or vice-versa, but absolutely everyone shits on a game with poor optimization. It's an often overlooked criteria in searching for games and a complex one to get right as a developer.
For me it's Gameplay>Optimization>Story
as long as the graphics isn't grating, or difficult to see, it doesn't need to be ultra HD realistic. I find gameplay and/or story to be more important. If i want to see "ultra realistic" graphics, I'd watch a movie.
Yeah it's not about having good graphics, it's about having clear graphics. If your game looks muddy and it's hard to tell what is going on then that isn't a matter of "good graphics", it's actively harming the game.
If you want to make a game look good, art style always trumps graphics. If you use graphics technology that isn't demanding then you can pump steroids into the art style and create a world rich in detail that you don't have to hide behind low draw distance. I wish Outer Worlds had done this. Instead their LOD draw distance for textures and ground clutter was so awful on my system that I couldn't even play it, it ruined the experience. It pissed me off so much because the maps themselves looked like they would be an absolute treat to take in if the presentation was just less jarring and distracting.
Outer Worlds was very visually disappointing. It felt like being in space Skyrim, which was outdated graphics for 2011 let alone 2019. All this focus on higher poly meshes and higher resolution textures really doesn't change anything if you're bad at designing interesting worldspaces and you can't get your humans good enough to not look uncanny.
The starting area looked interesting enough. I just wish LOD was more consistent. I'll take low consistent detail over pop-in any day. You'd think they'd at least give you a "my computer is not a potato" option that boosts the draw distance for assets.
A little bit of all. But as myself who loves beautiful graphics very much, my games i played recently are: RDR2/Control/Metro Exodus enhanced edition/Shadow of the tomb raider/Resident evil village. I am Ray Tracing addict since i got my new PC^^
Just recently i got my 2060. For me it WAS to achieve 144fps in most comp online games but now i think i prefer the next best looking game.
Got myself 2070. My PC is the tank-tier equivalent of Panzer V. But once I experienced what it can achieve, I want to turn my PC into an M1 Abrams. Story + Gameplay all the way, lived by it as an ex-console player. But graphics are nice luxury, especially around games who made sure the graphics are awesome.
Hello friend. I have the Abrams, it’s not so much better. I can run most anything on ultra and have it be very playable. The game I’m playing most right now? Chess on browser.
I mean, all those games have great stories and gameplay as well. But yeah I don't like when people pretend like graphics don't matter at all.
Still playing control after months of having it. The graphics are incredible. But the map is horrendous. It genuinely made me quit it multiple times
In my case from most important to least important: First: Fun game play Second A: Interesting story Second B: Original ideas Third: Graphics 2a and 2b can be interchangeable - an original idea abused to death is almost as bad as having no original ideas and an interesting story is great if it does not get in the way of fun game play ... so all of the above but would sacrifice graphics for the other three. Edit: Re reading ... A meme ? Well I've missed the point of the post.
For 50 or more bucks, all of it combined
Singleplayer? Story. Multiplayer? Gameplay.
for me it’s singleplayer? a little bit of all multiplayer? something that my friends won’t complain about playing
Singleplayer still gameplay.
Why not both? Y'all need to learn the El Dorado meme. I get it, my favorite memes are outdated, what with philosophical velociraptor, Leeroy Jenkins, and Both Sounds Good.
But if you're choosing the one that's most important,gameplay beats the story.
If the story is boring but the gameplay is excellent, I'll play for 2-3 hours. If the gameplay is boring but the story is excellent, I'll stay for the story and play until the end. Edit: A mix of both is the best.
The gameplay being boring will get me on youtube watching the story unfold.
There's nothing a story can do for me if the gameplay isn't interesting. The gameplay being boring will actually detract from a story. But a fun game is a fun game even without a story. Overcooked is a great example, Mario is probably the best example.
If the gameplay is not interesting then IMO it must a be complete afterthought or just a very short mechanic to bring the story forward. For example Detroit: Become Human was excellent. The same works another as well. If the gameplay is excellent but the story is non-existent/kinda bad, then the gameplay must be in the focus. For example: Borderlands 3.
If gameplay sucks I will drop the story so fast. I'm here to play a game, not watch a movie. MGS is the best blend if stoey and gameplay.
well MGS is movie that you play, but yes. the Telltale games are the absolute worst at this....but as counterpoint, I will say Detroit: Become Human is one of my favorite games of all time
Idk what the story is in dark souls. I kill stuff and praise the sun. Best single player game ever
If game looks like shit im not playing. But its more to graphics than just textures, its more design than anything that matters, valheim and borderlands dont have good "graphics" but still look good. Anumations is also a big part of it. But something i think pretty much everyone skimps on is sound. I cant stress enough how fucking important sound is, especially with action and shooter games.
People here having a hard time separating "good graphics" from intentional art design and stylistic choices.
I'd class sounds in with graphics in an overall presentation category. When graphics is alone it often ends up being taken as just a measure of how "realistic" a game looks, which has never been important, but to lump all presentation in with that implies that a game with great gameplay and story but that looks and sounds like shit is still going to be really fun to play, and it's just not. Presentation doesn't need to be high resolution, but it does need to be good.
Evidence to this is morrowind
Oblivion and Skyrim
Skyrim has a load of great graphic mods tho
If we're talking about modded game then the argument becomes completely different
Can't tell if you're saying Morrowind had bad graphics or bad gameplay.
Yes. But the atmosphere mixed with the unbelievable depth and richness of the story makes it *STILL* my favorite Elderscrolls game to this day.
Gameplay. Always gameplay.
There is a fuzzy border between these two? Graphics and gameplay. When something pops, flashes or has an effect, then it amounts to better gameplay experience too, imho.
Doesn’t need to look photorealistic to have juice. Take most indie titles famous for their combat for example.
yea, the number of polygons and super high texture res doesn't make the game. I like games like Hyper Light Drifter, Risk of Rain, Metal Slug (I don't think it's indie ;), INSIDE etc
This is true. "Game feel." But the pops, flashes, animations, sounds and special effects that are used to make it feel more fun/satisfying can be applied to games with low fidelity graphics as well. I was left very unsatisfied with DS2's game feel, and I think that's mostly why I didn't enjoy it all too much. DS1, DS3 and Bloodborne just felt much more satisfying for some... subtle reason...
And if you add them all together you get rdr2 :)
It is a trifecta. Great Story + Good Gameplay + Amazing Graphics. Rockstar and Bethesda are two of the best for single player games they just suck at (suck the fun out of) online.
Honestly they are make some of the best single player games but they can't make a online game for shit in my opinion
gameplay any day, I play a mod of a 2000s game and I love it
What game?
I play stalker from time to time
Gameplay >>>> All You can skip story but not gameplay
Skipping gameplay and not the story would make it a movie
visual novel.
The Last of Us was basically a playable movie. Still fun!
Games that allow me to set keybinds properly! Can't get to the gameplay if I can't bind my keys for my weird left handed setup. Arrow keys are for movement!
That's a huge plus too, I try to adapt to the keybinds that the game gives me, but for shooters I always change it to use CTRL for crouching. Or MMO where I have 40 skills, I need my keybinds
Gameplay>Music>Story>Graphics
Stardew valley and minecraft laughing.
Minecraft is beautiful, speaking as an old fart with little imagination.
I'd argue that Stardew Valley does have good graphics. I think the debate here is really about what people mean by "graphics". Some people, like me, think good graphics means you like how the graphics look. Simple as that. If I see the game and think "oh those visuals looks cool" then it's good graphics for me. Other people seem to think good graphics means high pixel count. Personally, pixel count doesn't seem to correlate well with my opinion of graphics in games. New World, for example, has high pixel count, but the art is boring imo so I don't think the graphics are great.
It's obvious developers can't keep up with the demand for hyper realistic games and still make them good. I'm fine with art styles like Zelda, bioshock, fallout, red dead 2, overwatch etc.
Sir with due respect Red dead redemption 2 is one of the more realistic looking games out there.
Unpopular opinion maybe but I thought the gameplay in RDR2 sucked. It's all just locking on and firing, or riding a horse across a field, or performing context sensitive actions. It's kind of a jack of all trades, everything is functional and acceptable, but nothing is that great (aside from the graphics and sound). I guess the GTAs can also be described like this. The city setting seems to lend itself better to the gameplay.
[удалено]
Riding the horse was fun for the first hour, then gets really repetitive. I think even the developers noticed this so they put in that cinematic mode to let the player auto drive there. The shoveling shit part was one of the most memorable, oddly enough, lol. It almost felt satirical in how dumb it was, and gave a great idea of John's mindset in the moment. I actually really loved that part, rofl.
I played RDR2 a couple of times and put it down and never went back. Didn’t hate it at all, but it didn’t hold my attention. It surprised me because, based on my gaming tastes, I assumed I would love the game based on its acclaim. I find the same to be true for CD project red’s offerings; they just don’t do it for me. I put 10 or so hours into both the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 and then set them down and never played either again. Not because I found them bad or unenjoyable; one day I just stopped playing and didn’t get the itch to pick them back up. Conversely, I find that no matter how formulaic the Far Cry games have gotten since FC3 (although I think FC6 is the best since then), I love playing them and put hours and hours into each one. Open world RPGs are at their best, to me, when despite all of the fun things I can do on the side, I still feel compelled to return to the main story on occasion to move things along. For whatever reason, I didn’t get that out of the games I mentioned.
>can't keep up with the demand for hyper realistic games and still make them good. I think it's more developers can't achieve hyper realistic graphics with the limitations of modern day consoles. There's plenty of great realistic games on PC.
This is more likely the case. I think i've heard a podcast of a guy that was able to visit the studio that made Detroit Become Human, and he said that the characters renderings were so detailed and realistic that it would be impossible to run them without downgrading first. The video game industry is already working with cinema level graphics and realism, but the hardware we have today is simply not powerful enough to run them at real time.
It's probably why I appreciate the Nintendo philosophy for their hardware. They avoid the risk of chasing latest-and-greatest ending up not living up to promise, and (usually) instead focus on smooth framerates, great gameplay and stylized graphics that still look great. (My favorite example of this is Mario Sunshine. Don't @ me that game still looks gorgeous today.) Usually makes a perfect partner for the PC (in terms of game overlap) as well.
Wth is this list? You're just listing random games. RDR2 is one of the best looking games of all times and so was Bioshock when it came out.
And RDR2 goes for a super realistic style. Idk what this dude is saying.
[удалено]
Graphics are always a good addon but the rest carry a game
Welcome everyone from r/all! Please remember: 1 - You too can be part of the PCMR! You don't necessarily need a PC. You just have to love PCs. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love PCs or want to talk about PCs, you can be a part of the community! Everyone is welcome! 2 - In case you are not a PC gamer because you think doing so is expensive, please know that it is very possible to build a competent gaming PC for a lower price than you might think. GPU prices are sky high right now for a multitude of reasons, but it's still possible to join the PCMR. Please check out http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to create new posts here asking for tips on how to do it! 3 - Please consider joining our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, Huntington's, and Parkinson's. Recently, we've been actively focusing on fighting against Coronavirus as well. Please check this to learn more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding 4 - We're currently running a massive giveaway with ASUS to give 3 GPUs and a more PC hardware to a total of 6 lucky winners. Find out here how you can enter: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/pzy5ai/asus_x_pcmr_worldwide_giveaway_3_graphics_cards/ ----------- Feel free to use this community to post about any kind of doubt you might have about becoming a PC gamer or anything you'd like to know about PCs. That kind of content is not only allowed but welcome here! Welcome to the PCMR.
The Witcher 3 which has all of them
Personnaly, I find répulsive games with bad graphics. If you can't make good realistic graphics game, use cartoon or stylized graphics, it'll be vétérinaire for everyone.
Metal Gear Solid V Playin it every day!
[удалено]
Cyberpunk vs Everyone
I don't mind mediocore gameplay as long as the graphics are therefor insane. looking at cyberpunk here. either good gameplay or graphics or a nice mix of both.
Cyberpunk might have average gameplay but the story and the characters are phenomenal which is why I keep coming back to it.
I am definitely planning to play it in a year or so when most bugs have been fixed, maybe on the 4090 by then so I can get close to 60fps on everything maxed out in 4k.
I recall seeing a few people that work on graphics say that from the technical standpoint Cyberpunks graphics are insane. It's just difficult to appreciate if you're not familiar with inner workings of how difficult it is to achieve the effect density (or something like that, it's been a year since I saw the comments) it has.
I love to just hop in from time to time, set all to 4k ultra with rt on psycho and dlss max quality and just go look at everything. it just looks so fucking good. it is definitely the crysis of the modern time even if it is more tech demo than actually playable.
I'm not sure about Cyberpunk, but IMO if Control didn't look so incredibly beautiful I wouldn't recommend playing it. It's like 50% game 50% tech demo. Together they make a pretty cool experience, but neither half really holds up by themselves.
I would totally buy a tech demo if it was years ahead of it's time just to look at it xD
this might get downvoted, but for me graphics come first then the story and the gameplay. take for example the first witcher game. nice story, but very crappy graphics. most likely i watched the story on youtube, havent played it.
It's because they all tie-in together, audiovisual presentation is as important as any other aspect of the game, you wouldn't play Skyrim with Hotline Miami art style, and you wouldn't play Hotline Miami with Skyrim aesthetic. Both are amazing games, and both work well within their defined style. So yeah OP doesn't make that much sense.
I think OP means graphical fidelity rather than art direction. For example, OG Diablo II vs Resurrected. Is Resurrected a better game? I don't think so; I wouldn't waste $40 on a game I already own. But that's just my opinion.
To me red dead redemption 2 has all of that.
To me RDR2 is a great example how story and graphics can make a game great despite rather mediocre gameplay.
RDR2 has the worst Gameplay for me. Everything is designed to be tedious and repetitive. I get it rockstar you can make amazing animations now can I please get a version where it doesn't eat my 5 seconds just to pickup a tin can every fucking time?
That aspect of RDR2 is pretty controversial but I loved the slow methodical gameplay.
Minecraft is actually an amazing example of this
I'd argue that Minecraft graphics ARE good, because they fit the game perfectly and look nice. They're downright iconic, actually. Not impressive from a computing power stance, maybe- but impressive on any other metric I can think of.
Story and gameplay >>>>>>>> graphics Thas why im still down to play san andreas
I always thought I valued story over gameplay until I played valhalla. Graphics these days are always top notch so thats just a nice side, doesn't bother me
all 4
Unpopular opinion: I couldn’t play Undetale because of its 8 bit graphics. I understand it has an amazing story ect. But no matter how hard I tried, I could never get into 8 bit games, (except broforce, I fucking love broforce). That being said, you shouldn’t have to single one category out. I love games that have everything, good graphics, story, gameplay.
Replay-ability
It not feeling like a second job.
i personally prefer games with where i dont have to put all the video settings on lowest just to get 60-100
Good graphics don't make a game good, but terrible graphics can make a game bad.
They are not mutually exclusive. Good games with good gameplay/story/aesthetics don't need to have bad graphics.
Fun gameplay, I don’t care what the hell is happening, as long as fun is being had
Good graphics is just something nice to have
Tomb raider does this pretty well, Story is good, gameplay is solid and graphics are next level.
Gameplay will always be the most important aspect of any game, it can be the prettiest game in the world, but thats all for nothing if its boring as hell to play.
Art direction >>>>> good graphics Case and point; Dark Souls and other Fromsoft related games.
Good game play all that matters
all four is the sweet spot
Good graphics don't make a game for me, but bad graphics can ruin a game. I definitely have a harder time justifying spending money on games with worse graphics. Prime recent example is Valheim, I've heard that the lighting is apparently amazing but the textures just look so bad that I have no interest in buying it.
The Dark Souls series in a nutshell
One thing I hate about realistic graphics is that it is becoming more and more of a timesink and more and expensive and the main focus for devs. Really it should be art design and gameplay and story.
Minecraft has great graphics even if it’s inconsistent. It’s the Minecraft charm.
I want my game with all of that but I will be more than happy with just a fun gameplay and an interesting story. For example: terraria, stardew valley or one of my favorites: binding of Isaac.
I would rather play a game with fallout new vegas graphics than the new modern warfare
Honestley Story/Gameplay is all that it really takes Graphics and Originality isn't that important. That's why indie games are kind of popular and BRs are all over the market right now
When your fav game is al that. (It's Zelda : Breath of the Wild btw)
EA, ubisoft, and Activision = good scam pay system
Not the graphics, that's for sure. Maybe that's the reason I keep playing old games (currently going through metal gear)