-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"Gamers demand constantly improving graphics". I think that's a myth.
- Thread starter Sad Affleck
- Start date
MoogleMan
Member
It needs to be good on both fronts for me. I've been gaming too long for it to be acceptable for a game to play great but look like shit.
It can, but if it's only at 1080p and/or with a shoddy framerate then it dampens my experience.
For me, I want native output to my TV's (4K) resolution and a solid framerate. You can have the best art style, textures and graphical effects in the world, but as soon as I see pixels and framerate judders it completely ruins the immersion. So I only ask for those two things, and then do whatever it takes to get the game to fit those parameters.
But this only applies to 3D gameplay. For 2D games, only the framerate matters to me.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Why did "casuals" (god that term sucks) buy the Wii and Switch then?
Aurean_Mentat
Member
Publishers have been hoisted by their own petard. They were in graphics arms races with each other, and their marketing departments constantly trumpeted which games looked best. Because while fun is subjective (and hard to show in an ad), graphics are not (simply put two pictures next to each other. Which looks better?).
The only thing I've personally cared about as far as graphics is 'do these distract from the gameplay?'. For example, you could play Candyland the boardgame on a piece of paper, with just colored in squares, scraps of paper, and a few index cards you make various colors. But it wouldn't feel like Candyland, because you wouldn't have the all of the candy visuals that make it appealing to young kids.
If we look at the older games that are considered 'good' (KoToR, Jade Empire, and the like), the graphics are almost the only things that don't hold up. On the USgamer blog, they're doing a replay of FF IX, a game from the PS1 era. The gameplay, story, characters, and so much else hold up the game, but the graphics do not.
And yet, people still replay them, and we see LTTP threads for often older games on GAF all the time. To say that 'gamers' in general are demanding better graphics I don't think is accurate. Most people just want a good game.
LordRaptor
Member
The fact people in this very thread are saying PUBG has bad graphics or isn't exactly a looker is telling in and of itself.
Not true / no true scotsman
Not true / no true scotsman
Snoopycat
Banned
It most certainly isn't. You can go into almost any gameplay thread and the majority of the discussion will be centered around the graphics. There are people who genuinely believe Horizon Zero Dawn is a good game because of it's graphics.
AdmiralMikey
Member
I'm not immune to being wowed by realistic graphics, but I'd rather play something that's visually creative or interesting to look at rather than extremely detailed and realistic. For example, I think the stylized worlds of Mario Odyssey are far more interesting to look at than the realistic ones of Uncharted 4.
Dreams-Visions
Member
I wonder what their data says about Call of Duty, NBA 2K, FIFA, Madden, and others that look roughly the same year in and year out and sell millions year in and year out.
I wonder what their data concludes about games like Cuphead and PUBG which aren't attempting to look like something made by WETA studios, and yet are highly successful products.
I wonder how the data analyses the continued playerbase and popularity of games like League of Legends, Dota 2, Team Fortress 2, World of Warcraft, Diablo 3, Path of Exile, COGo and countless other games that are not on anyone's "genre-defining graphics" lists, but would most certainly be on their ROI lists.
Funny thing about data: it only tells part of a story and can be easily misunderstood if you don't really understand your target audience.
I think most games want their games to look clear on their screens (so something close to native resolution or with some meaningful anti-aliasing) and they need to have good gameplay and story if applicable. The popularity of relatively sub-par graphical experiences like PUBG should make it pretty clear that graphics are not the primary driver of game purchasing decisions. Whether the artstyle approaches realism or animation, the only part that matters is that it does it acceptable well relative to other offerings. Doesn't have to be the best; just needs to be acceptable.
I personally get the feeling that they're taking correlation as causation. Gamers aren't demanding anything beyond "good games" that appear to have been made with some love and free of malice towards gamers. Build around 1080p/60 and scale down your explosions n' shit so that you can hit those basic targets. Focus on gameplay, gunplay, presentation. Make your expansions and microtransactions fair and feel good like we see in Warframe, Path of Exile, and others. Tighten up your story-telling, as all too many games continue to fall short on the story aspect. Stop trying to make a new game engine for every fucking release.
I don't think this is as cut and dry as people make it out to be. Of course I love gameplay, but I would be lying if I didn't say I wasn't swayed by graphics. In some cases, I want a game that has great, tight, entertaining gameplay, and other times I just want to sit back, veg out, and play something that looks awesome.
It's the same with movies. Sometimes you want a deep, engaging story, and other times you want Michael Bay to blow shit up. Gamers demand constantly improving graphics in the same way as movie goers expect the next big summer blockbuster extravaganza. It's totally a 'why not both' thing, and I think it's okay to really want (and pay for) an awesome looking game.
It's the same with movies. Sometimes you want a deep, engaging story, and other times you want Michael Bay to blow shit up. Gamers demand constantly improving graphics in the same way as movie goers expect the next big summer blockbuster extravaganza. It's totally a 'why not both' thing, and I think it's okay to really want (and pay for) an awesome looking game.
Birgitte2004
Member
I've never really understood people who say "Gameplay > Graphics" to begin with.
First off, Graphics are a part of gameplay. How many people are going to enjoy a racing game with severe judder, dips down to 12 fps, and constant screen tearing, regardless of anything else?
Secondly, there are so many games out there that most people would have little problem playing a game with a slightly worse gameplay if it had jaw dropping graphics.
The choice is not between best gameplay of all time with awful graphics and worst gameplay of all time with great graphics. There is a massive world of grey in between.
Neither graphics nor gameplay is the be-all end-all. There are some people who like the Order-1886, and there are some people who consider FFX-2 to have great gameplay but still don't like the game.
First off, Graphics are a part of gameplay. How many people are going to enjoy a racing game with severe judder, dips down to 12 fps, and constant screen tearing, regardless of anything else?
Secondly, there are so many games out there that most people would have little problem playing a game with a slightly worse gameplay if it had jaw dropping graphics.
The choice is not between best gameplay of all time with awful graphics and worst gameplay of all time with great graphics. There is a massive world of grey in between.
Neither graphics nor gameplay is the be-all end-all. There are some people who like the Order-1886, and there are some people who consider FFX-2 to have great gameplay but still don't like the game.
We're effectively talking about AAA games though:
The OP said:
If we want to disprove the AAA publisher strategy, we would need a fair range of examples of lesser graphics games outperforming (or at least getting close to) similar games with better graphics at the $60 AAA level, especially at a level where they make enough money to move the profit/revenue needle for a major publisher.
Audioboxer
Member
For some people that is true yes, but one-minute forum posters on GAF are telling us in consumer-based topics around DRM/loot boxes/MTs that the hardcore market is a minority and our voices don't really matter. Now, because we're talking about graphics it's all about what the hardcore market says and we're leading the way in persuading big devs/pubs.
The balance tends to not sit at the extreme of either end. We have plenty of examples of games that aren't a Guerilla technical masterpiece far outselling Horizon because they were caught up by the casual market/everyone's favourite streamer and have some sort of addictive gameplay.
When it comes down to the devs and pubs directly they need to create within their means. A closed studio is far worse than a studio who scaled back some of their graphical resources to ship a good game, with a stable framerate and a profit at the end of the day off their sales. Unless you're working directly under Sony or someone who has said this project is to be a spectacular graphical showcase, and breaking even is good enough to diversify the portfolio. If you're under instruction to make a profit, and maybe even a sizeable profit, probably not a great idea to spend outwith your means. Especially if a lot of that goes towards graphics.
I agree, but AAA games developers/publishers should be able to learn from the AA market, or even indie market, that graphics aren't always everything. A stable framerate, in fact, 1080/60 on console, will be appreciated as will a good story/experience, or in the case of MP, an addictive gameplay loop.
It's funny how everyone thinks their views are clearly the majority views. That's how the whole "moral majority" nonsense started.
As many people have pointed out already in this thread, there's plenty of evidence that purchasing trends show a clear advantage in having novel visual spectacle. That's hard, measurable fact. Why that is, exactly, is open to interpretation but there's almost certainly an aspect of being able to engage a potential audience with advertising that grabs attention quickly.
Have you ever seen an ad that tries to explain subtle gameplay mechanics and balance? I'm not sure it can be done. The trick is drawing an initial audience and giving them something to talk about so they spread positive word of mouth and that's where gameplay has a much bigger opportunity to play a role. Graphics are the hook, but to reel in more than the first week's sales you need something more.
Fluffernutter Pancake
Member
What we appreciate, if not demand, are:
Tight controls
Challenging, yet fair and rewarding gameplay (yes, Demons/Dark Souls/Bloodborne are a perfect example of this)
Intriguiging, engaging storyline ; subtlety is oftentimes appreciated over heavy-handedness ; optional lore exploration is verymuch appreciated (Deus Ex, Skyrim etc. do a great job at this with random books, audio logs, newpapers etc. to peruse)
Satisfying game progression --- make the player feel rewarded for the progress that it is put into the game. The best Metroidvanias do a great job with this.
Graphics that best portray the world around which your game is structured and also that meshes best with the gameplay style
Those first four above are what every game should strive for. Pleasing controls, rewarding & challenging gameplay, intriguing & engaging storyline & satisfying game progression
Tight controls
Challenging, yet fair and rewarding gameplay (yes, Demons/Dark Souls/Bloodborne are a perfect example of this)
Intriguiging, engaging storyline ; subtlety is oftentimes appreciated over heavy-handedness ; optional lore exploration is verymuch appreciated (Deus Ex, Skyrim etc. do a great job at this with random books, audio logs, newpapers etc. to peruse)
Satisfying game progression --- make the player feel rewarded for the progress that it is put into the game. The best Metroidvanias do a great job with this.
Graphics that best portray the world around which your game is structured and also that meshes best with the gameplay style
Those first four above are what every game should strive for. Pleasing controls, rewarding & challenging gameplay, intriguing & engaging storyline & satisfying game progression
Sword Of Doom
Member
consumers are not demanding it. Naturally if a game is real pretty then people will be drawn to it and publishers are competing with each other to wow consumers.
Let EA release FIFA at 30fps next year and see what happens. Im curious myself.
I dont think its as simple as youre making it out to be.
Let EA release FIFA at 30fps next year and see what happens. Im curious myself.
I dont think its as simple as youre making it out to be.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
None of those games would have switched to PBR if they looked the same year in and year out.
All my casual friends IRL who play nothing but Fifa, Madden and CoD care deeply about how true to life things look.
Sports games having higher visual fidelity, in particular, was the main reason most of them upgraded from 360/PS3 to XB1/PS4 within a year of release.
It's easy to say people don't care, but when two games in a similar genre release and one is better looking graphically than the other, that's a huge advantage in marketing for the better looking game. Horizon is a great example of a game that built hype almost purely based off how pretty it was. Then it came out and was pretty damn good, but the hype was clearly graphical, and Sony pushed it so hard in their shows because it showed so well on a big screen. It does matter.
This is my experience.
The order is a good example for graphics mattering. No one would have ever heard of that game had it been normal looking graphically. Almost every sale it got was based on the hype it generated for its visuals. Without those, it had nothing yet it sold over 1 and a half million copies, I believe.
Sports games having higher visual fidelity, in particular, was the main reason most of them upgraded from 360/PS3 to XB1/PS4 within a year of release.
It's easy to say people don't care, but when two games in a similar genre release and one is better looking graphically than the other, that's a huge advantage in marketing for the better looking game. Horizon is a great example of a game that built hype almost purely based off how pretty it was. Then it came out and was pretty damn good, but the hype was clearly graphical, and Sony pushed it so hard in their shows because it showed so well on a big screen. It does matter.
This is my experience.
The order is a good example for graphics mattering. No one would have ever heard of that game had it been normal looking graphically. Almost every sale it got was based on the hype it generated for its visuals. Without those, it had nothing yet it sold over 1 and a half million copies, I believe.
Graphics are only a portion of why costs have gotten so high. Look at Hellblade. One of the best looking games this gen made by a small team on a limited budget. Giant open world games with a lot of interconnected systems and gigantic maps, and service games with complex online networking structures and the cost of long term server support are also huge culprits. Those things require significant manpower and a ton of hours to create and manage. AAA marketing budgets are just as big if not bigger than devs costs in some cases.
I definitely wouldn't mind (and would probably prefer) if next gen devs decide to target 60 in order to prevent asset production time and costs from spiking, but it's not the sole factor. Really tired of people acting like those that care about visuals and technical quality are the ones damaging the industry. It's not like we don't care about gameplay, story, design, etc too. Gaming is a visual medium and the visual composition and quality is important to the experience.
I definitely wouldn't mind (and would probably prefer) if next gen devs decide to target 60 in order to prevent asset production time and costs from spiking, but it's not the sole factor. Really tired of people acting like those that care about visuals and technical quality are the ones damaging the industry. It's not like we don't care about gameplay, story, design, etc too. Gaming is a visual medium and the visual composition and quality is important to the experience.
I would argue that they offer something different enough from the competition.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
God it's almost like graphics don't matter that much compared to the overall experience of playing the game.
But they do.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Gaf don't care, well vocal members of gaf don't care. Others do.
GurgleBot20
Member
Those games also run better than most AAA games out there. It's part of why I'm always confused by the "casuals don't care about framerates" argument when it's possible they do, just at a subconscious level.
Classicblunder
Member
This. Zelda is a nice example of art style making a game interesting. Gamers want freshness, which isn't necessarily tied to graphics.
These companies do put out some games in this mold though. They're just cheaper products and separate from the flagship AAA lines where they feel graphics really matter.
EA has the EA Originals line with games like Unraveled and Fe. Activision Blizzard put out a Crash collection (and even Overwatch was sold for $40 on PC). Ubisoft makes games like Grow Home and Child of Light. Take-Two has noted they're getting back into this arena as well. Warner Bros has LEGO games. Basically all of them put out f2p mobile titles that don't have AAA console production values.
CraigerGamer
Member
I mean, what if a publisher stated up front, "Hey, our game could look better but we chose to put those resources into gameplay elements. We did this keep costs reasonable and still provide a great gaming experience."
Would anyone really be upset by this kind of transparency?
Would anyone really be upset by this kind of transparency?
Voidwolf
Member
Why is everyone acting like a game that has good visuals cannot have good gameplay? Why can't I want both things? I want my games to have great gameplay and have the best graphics. MGSV did it, Dark Souls 3 did it for the most part (may not be the best looking game but it looks great nonetheless), Horizon and BotW also did it. Who want's crappy textures and jaggies in their games? Developers can and should do both.
I don't believe it has anything to do with genres personally.Nirolak said:
Eg: PUBG crosses into largely similar type of games as service audiences as many competitive F2P shooters, and consequently expectations for it are centered elsewhere (not with hollywood production values).
Typical console mass-marketed releases on the other hand are squarely in the "blockbuster production values" expectation category, it doesn't matter if it's a party game or a shooter.
I do feel that "AAA" industry is rather self-indulgent/serving when it comes to said expectations, as opposed to being primarily consumer driven(to the point of what the OP touches on) - at least IMO looking at it from inside.
S
Steve.1981
Unconfirmed Member
In my humble opinion, this argument that gamers don't demand/never ask for better graphics was a nonsense when Jim Sterling said it last week and it's a nonsense now.
It's so obviously nonsense that I can't quite believe people are trying to claim it's true.
I almost feel brave enough to guarantee that right now, at this very moment, somewhere on this very forum, someone will be bitching about the graphics in a game. "PS2 era" is one of the favourite snide remarks, that I've seen repeated multiple times.
Demanding better graphics is one of the more obvious aspects of toxic online gaming culture.
It's so obviously nonsense that I can't quite believe people are trying to claim it's true.
I almost feel brave enough to guarantee that right now, at this very moment, somewhere on this very forum, someone will be bitching about the graphics in a game. "PS2 era" is one of the favourite snide remarks, that I've seen repeated multiple times.
Demanding better graphics is one of the more obvious aspects of toxic online gaming culture.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
I would expect a lot of "other studios are doing both, you have no excuse!"
...but I didnt offer any advice? I pointed at known facts. Costs are going up. They are constantly seeking new revenue paths. Despite that, they still shut down studios or view multi million sellers as failures. Is there any other industry on earth with such fragile fans? I never said I know what they should do to make money.
Audioboxer
Member
I'd argue some of them are trying to squeeze such games into AAA games though. That's not healthy because not everything can be AAA. There are certain genres of games, or types (SP generally, for one) that it doesn't matter how much money you throw at them, they might not recoup it/make a profit. It's like reaching a ceiling cap for projections but deciding if I just spend more I can drag that cap up. Not always. Rarely, in fact.
Games that go viral and sell 80m copies, or a Rockstar game, are few and far between. As I highlighted above, not every game can be made under Sony where they explicitly state they can be happy to make loss/break even on some experiences.
Maybe it's not fair Guerilla get to blow big budgets on insane engines that Sony are happy to bankroll, or another game goes viral instead of yours. That's life in development though. Not everything can be COD, and not everything can be under a publisher who'll take some losses for portfolio diversity.
Some devs and pubs simply have to work within their means, with reasonable expectations, and not obsess over whatever some others can do in the industry. Otherwise, you may well risk closure/bankruptcy, and what good does that do anyone?
CloudyTuba
Member
I dont think it's a myth but I think it's less true now than it was a few years ago. Graphics do continue to get better but they have diminishing returns. When we were hopping from SNES to N64 to Gamecube, graphics were changing so wildly each gen that it became expectation. Those kinds of jumps just arent going to happen anymore.
It's a whole lot easier to sell new consoles when you can see the jump, though. That's plenty of incentive for companies to keep pushing them.
It's a whole lot easier to sell new consoles when you can see the jump, though. That's plenty of incentive for companies to keep pushing them.
bemusedchunk
Banned
This is kinda a chicken or the egg thing.
Because if hardware wasn't released every 5 years (quicker now) then publishers wouldn't focus so much on graphics (maybe).
Even if you take consoles out of the equation, phones are released every year with new, increasingly better hardware. And mobile developers/publishers want to take advantage of that.
Because if hardware wasn't released every 5 years (quicker now) then publishers wouldn't focus so much on graphics (maybe).
Even if you take consoles out of the equation, phones are released every year with new, increasingly better hardware. And mobile developers/publishers want to take advantage of that.
VichoCardenas
Banned
Most underrated post of this thread. What a burn.
Seeing how y'all go fucking nuts every time a Digital Foundry thread opens or specs of future hardware leaks out or a game ends up being downgraded for several reasons or a new trailer with nothing but good visuals drops, I'd say I firmly disagree with the notion that this is a myth
The resolution is not up to snuff? Pre-order cancelled
That tree shadow in that one screenshot looks kinda bad? Pre-order cancelled
That aliasing looks like it could cut flesh? Pre-order cancelled
The presentation of a game is everything to a lot of players
The resolution is not up to snuff? Pre-order cancelled
That tree shadow in that one screenshot looks kinda bad? Pre-order cancelled
That aliasing looks like it could cut flesh? Pre-order cancelled
The presentation of a game is everything to a lot of players
bemusedchunk
Banned
you forgot to bring up 60 vs. 30 fps and locked vs variable.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
There's been such a massive leap in visual fidelity this gen that I don't believe this statement is true. And there's still massive ways in which games can increase graphical fidelity as more horsepower becomes available.
Niceguydan8
Member
I would guess that this is part of the disconnect with the casual and the enthusiast.
VichoCardenas
Banned
Let's not forget the insane ammount of "downgraded graphics!!11!" videos you can find on YouTube.
Patrick Klepek
furiously molesting tim burton
I, uh.
Hmm.
Are you...?
OK.
Hmm.
Are you...?
OK.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
Lol games are experiences and graphics are the primary draw of videogames. Anybody with a little insight on game design will confirm this. By graphics, I mean visuals. Graphics, sound, mechanics and sometimes story all come together create the "experience" and neither of them should be treated "less" than another. Everything should work together in tandem to create an experience.