Opinion: If You Value Graphics Over Gameplay – You’re An Idiot
Earlier this week, my faith in humanity was weakened a little when I stumbled upon some rather ignorant forum comments about acclaimed indie title Lone Survivor.
Masterminded by the ingenious Jasper Byrne and presented in old-school, side-scrolling 2D, the game is a shining example of substance over style; a wonderful exercise in genuinely imaginative narrative and gameplay that puts both the ‘survival’ and ‘horror’ firmly back into the neglected field of survival-horror.
Still, that hasn’t stopped some expressing indignance or even outright hostility at its rather basic graphics. I’ve read comments dismissing it altogether on the basis of its appearance, proving to me beyond doubt that some gamers – spoiled by modern-day advances in textures, rendering and technical capabilities – are now so shallow in the way they judge any new title, that graphics matter to them more than anything else. In my opinion, however, the misguided remarks of those knocking Lone Survivor for its visuals are far uglier than the game’s retro pixels could ever prove to be.
Substance Over Style: Acclaimed indie title Lone Survivor
It all comes down to one crucial, indisputable truth: a game may boast visuals so mind-blowing that they make God himself weep at their creative beauty, but if the title’s controls, mechanics and general playing experience are frustrating and joyless, then the whole thing is nothing more than a shiny pile of dressed-up, gleaming turd.
Remember Final Fantasy XIII? My God it looked incredible. Beautiful scenery. Astonishing detail. And yet somehow all of that seemed rather like sticking lipstick on a pig when you consider that the game consisted of one, long trek down an extended set of corridors, pausing now and again so that you could enjoy the gripping experience of pressing ‘A’ over and over again until something died (together with your love for the series, funnily enough).
But still, that didn’t really matter to a lot of critics and consumers. Because hey – look how stunning those corridors were!
There’s a reason why Final Fantasy fans so-often hark back to the glory days of installments VI and VII, even though those titles now look like blurry, pixelated vomit compared to the glossy splendour of their more fresh-faced brethren. It’s because the overall playing experience of the older games typically had so much more soul: brimming with gripping encounters, intricate battle and character-development systems, and sublime sub-games among the compelling narratives.
Looking good. But a great leap forward? Or an awkward step back?
Likewise, Resident Evil enthusiasts will tell you that the more polished graphics of episode five hardly make up for the awkward co-op, unimaginative mechanics and lack of real horror throughout. Playing the re-released Resident Evil: Code Veronica X recently, I was struck by just how much more thrilling it was than the last main series release – despite looking so genuinely appalling that my eyes took at least an hour to adjust to its rough-and-ready exterior.
Part of the reason I feel so strongly about this issue is that I spent my formative years playing platformers, puzzlers and adventure games on the humble ZX Spectrum. It was an era when the graphics for these titles were noticeably atrocious even for the time, so it was always crucial to a game’s success that it drew you in, held you in thrall and captivated your imagination simply by the way it played.
Even the 16-bit systems plied their trade with cartoonish, stylized graphics that had little sense of realism or wow-factor, and it was only really when the PlayStation rolled around in the second-half of the 90s that I genuinely found myself blown away by some of the visuals on offer.
Deep Impact: The wonderful, rubbish-looking X-Com
Even then, I rapidly realized I’d much rather spend my time playing a shoddy-looking strategy gem like X-Com: Terror From The Deep (and we’re talking months of dedication there), than a stunning but superficial blockbuster. Truly great games have depth that extends far beyond skin-deep polish, no matter how impressive their exterior may be.
In gaming, perhaps more than any other artform, there is a tendency to value new, groundbreaking technology above all else, to the extent that polished graphics often become seen as an essential attribute rather than a welcome bonus. Of course, we’ve advanced far enough in recent years for big-budget companies to receive rightful criticism when the visuals in their game seem outdated and ugly, and in an ideal world we’d consistently get experiences that offer both top graphics and great gameplay.
However, the salient point to bear in mind is that one of these attributes is so much more important than the other. And when titles with incredible graphics and mediocre gameplay continue to be accepted and praised, while those showcasing the opposite are increasingly ignored or side-lined, it makes you question just where the medium as a whole is heading – and where the priorities of gamers truly lie.
you need both and ff 13 was amazing
Final Fantasy 13? More like Final Hallway 13! AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA!!!
FF13 amazing? Watch out guys we’re dealing with a troll over here!
First of all agree that gameplay > graphics no brain, but for me personally for some genres I want the game to be TOP in both else I wont even bother, for example MMORPG or ARPG must have TOP graphics/gameplay in order to even test them for a few minutes, but for JRPG I can play a game with sprites w/o prob I wont pass a JRPG just because it have bad/sprite-like graphics I love those games
Gameplay is the only thing that developers need to/should worry about.
Blizzard is a prime example, all their games are amazing and people play them for decades, and their graphics are “crap” and “old” when compared to new games.
Thank you! No matter how shiny and clean a car is, if the transmission and steering is crap, the car is crap. Same with a game. No matter how polished a game looks, if the game play is miserable and the story is nowhere to be found, players are going to have a hard time having any fun with it.
In a perfect game, game play, graphics, and a compelling hook (storyline, multi-player, gimmick, ect) would all work in harmony. This is reality, so that seldom ever happens. I do believe two out of the three is always necessary in a good game and I will take better game play over better graphics any day.
Basically you guys date ugly ass girls with great personalities. Oh how I envy you so…
Can’t tell if trolling, or just dumb as fuck to think this is anywhere near a valid argument.
No, Puni$her, we date women based on their bedroom performance without regard to their looks. Who wants Heidi Klum if all she does is lay there like a dead fish?
I’ll take the dead fish heidi over a porn star skilled gabourey sibidey any day of the week bud.
I gotta admit – I love good graphics and there are a (very) few games I don’t play because of it. That said Lone Survivor isn’t one of them. For me graphics are “good” if they go hand in hand with story and gameplay. For example VVVVVV is graphically very simple but together with its soundtrack and simple but effective gameplay mechanics it is the perfect mix. Disregard the fact that it’s partly a homage to C64 games and imagine this with high end pixel shaded graphics – it would destract more from the gameplay than it would enhance it. On the other hand – imagine Skyrim in a 2D Super Nintendo look – sure it would propably work somehow but the graphics in this case actually enhance the immergion you feel when you discover the world.
I completely agree, though, that developers and publishers put too much effort into graphics and leave story and gameplay on the side. In terms of Big budget titles Dragon Age is propably one of the most complex RPG experiences whe have at the time but it’s still a joke compared to titles like Baldurs Gate II, Fallout 2 or, even earlier, the the realms of arcania series and of course the ultima series.
I agree very very much that gameplay is far more important than graphics. However, I think you’re selling some of those low-resolution titles a little short. The number of pixels has little bearing on the actual quality of the graphics–that is up to the skill and imagination of the artists. I felt that Final Fantasy XIII, for example, had graphics that were far inferior to X-Com: Terror from the Deep. Where FFXIII has gaudy, overdone details and mismatched colors in the background that draw your attention away from the subject, TFTD has an excellent and vibrant color scheme that makes it easy to differentiate each piece of the picture. Where FFXIII has so much happening at once that you aren’t sure what you’re supposed to be looking at, TFTD has distinct subjects that stand out from the backdrop. In TFTD there are stunning and dramatic poses, haunting ambience, creepy and fascinating alien life forms, and superhero-esque armor suits. In FFXIII there are just lots of little meaningless details that got some artist a paycheck while upping their medical insurance rates, but they don’t contribute anything to the imagery except to draw your attention away from the important aspects. Yeah, I actually find it difficult to look at FFXIII’s graphics. And it’s better than most of that stuff you see these days being touted as “best graphics of any title yet”.
That’s a fascinating perspective. Thanks.