Random Image Thread

[Rem-13]

I dropped a bomb of photos on the thread, next thing you know you are going to bitch me out for posting a two by four and it having nothing to do with 'planking'.

[Rem-13]

NEW PAGE PICSPLOSION

[Kole T. Merr]

There's nothing from that presentation that suggests it's going to be better than any of the current consoles on the market on any field - if this is the case, why should we buy it?

So we can play Mario in HD. DUH.

[Kaden]

I should have stopped when Teemer posted the hater walk.

No point.

[Kazuya]

none of those are photobombs

Your face is a photobomb. OOOOOOO


jkjk <3

[Nori]

And look how one guy made a little game with super low end graphics called Minecraft and sold 2.5 million copies. Or how the best selling MMO is World of Warcraft, and the graphics in WoW were pretty much never all that "realistic".

Aesthetics and style > realism.

I'm in agreement with Psy. How much better would those games be if the graphics were better? I never said realistic, I said graphics matter. Look at Borderlands. It's a visually striking and beautiful game, and it sets it apart from many modern shooters.

In fact, reviewers of expansions of wow have even said they are surprised how the aging game engine of wow still surprises them because of the visual style the game possesses.

It's true that a good game > bad game with good graphics. However it is also true that graphics matter. The first time I played Metal Gear Solid 4 my jaw dropped because of how goddamn beautiful the game was, and I realized we are in a completely different generation. The cartoon-esque games of the wii can suit games, this is true, and further enhance the feel of the game. But not all games should be limited to this approach. On pc, xbox, or ps3, you could make the cartoon game or make a game with striking realism, is HAS that choice. The wii does not. It seems the new wii does not.

I'm with people on how the new console looks retarded. I liked the wii as a party system, I won't be picking up the next generation unless it unveils something spectacular. If I want motion gaming that bad I'll pick up a ps3 again, because it's better at motion gaming. Also, Nintendo needs to stop breaking third party game creators ballz. Also, this thread needs more skyrim.

[Milk Bubble]

In fact, reviewers of expansions of wow have even said they are surprised how the aging game engine of wow still surprises them because of the visual style the game possesses.

And that's pretty much exactly what I said.

Overall visual style lasts way longer over photo realism. Graphic quality ages, and if that is all the game focuses on, you're not going to remember it for very long. If you instead remember that when you played the game it had a certain style and feel to it, it's going to make a lot more of an impression on you.

That's how video games should be, they should focus on the look and feel of the game, and not just try to be as realistic as possible. Video games are supposed to make you feel immersed in a world and give you an impression of a certain style about it. That's what makes great video games.

[Nori]

I didn't mean photo realism. It doesn't matter if it's cartoony or real, it a gaming system can't handle the pixels that would be portrayed on the screen.

I understand that good games = good games. But I fail to see how your argument ties into the wii not being able to give producers tools to make games with a visual quality they desire. For example, once again, Borderlands. It's a cartoonish game. Unable to be played on the wii due to limitations imposed on the system.

But, I guess that just begins a "this game is good so stfu" discussion in the sake of the wii.

Also, more Elder Scrolls

[Milk Bubble]

I didn't mean photo realism. It doesn't matter if it's cartoony or real, it a gaming system can't handle the pixels that would be portrayed on the screen.

I understand that good games = good games. But I fail to see how your argument ties into the wii not being able to give producers tools to make games with a visual quality they desire. For example, once again, Borderlands. It's a cartoonish game. Unable to be played on the wii due to limitations imposed on the system.

But, I guess that just begins a "this game is good so stfu" discussion in the sake of the wii.

You can still make a great game with limited technology graphic wise, and still give it a certain great look and feel to it.

People in this thread have given countless examples of such.

[Tyr]

Related: DLC for armored horses hinted at it in interview about Skyrim, though I hope it was a joke. D:

[Nori]

I dunno man. The horse armor was reaaaaal nice.

Edit: I've also said, as have others, that a game with a good concept would be better as a game with a good concept and superb pixels. Take minecraft. Good game. Now if it had this gen graphics as well, it'd be that much better.

[Jarka]

I dunno man. The horse armor was reaaaaal nice.

Edit: I've also said, as have others, that a game with a good concept would be better as a game with a good concept and superb pixels. Take minecraft. Good game. Now if it had this gen graphics as well, it'd be that much better.

I have to disagree with you there. There are some games in which less than superb graphics actually are what make the game so special. From what I've seen of Minecraft, part of the appeal is the fact that it is such an open ended game and contains such a rough look. It actually feels like a DIY project, like something you'd do in a garage on a rainy afternoon. If it was made with the shininess of, say, Little Big Planet, I doubt as many people would enjoy it.

I'm not saying I don't appreciate high-end graphics, but they are not always the best choice for every game.

[Nori]

Your the first person who I've ever heard who has said that the roughness of minecraft is what helps it appeal to you. I've always forgiven it because it's a one man project, and because it's better for the time to be sunk in other things. Such as gameplay.

Open ended, sure. That's what makes it a good game.

[Belle Hibiki]

Minecraft would lose a lot of its charm if it was hyper-realistic.

There would also be a lot of computers that just couldn't run it, drastically decreasing the size of the community ... And the community is what makes Minecraft Minecraft.

Let's look at Phoenix Wright and its sequel, Apollo Justice.

The original PW trilogy was made for the Gameboy Advance, and when it came over to the DS, the graphics were definitely showing their age. However, despite the fact that its graphics were over half a decade behind, the PW trilogy was a smash hit - it became one of the reasons to own a DS, even if the DS' only contribution was using the touch screen for a menu to avoid cluttering the top one.

Now, let's look at Apollo Justice. Same type of game, different gimmicks, but the art had much better resolution, and the game made use of the 3D capabilities of the touch screen. Writing wasn't quite as on-the-spot as previous games, but was entertaining. And yet, the game was roundly criticized. On average, it scored less than PW, despite having MUCH better graphics. Biggest complaint? The story.

Graphics are there to stylize games and movies. Do you think Bambi would be a better movie if they went back and redrew everything to be photorealistic? Or that Super Mario World would be a better game if they made it 3D?

Oh wait, they did something like that. And I enjoyed it just the same as Super Mario World.

"Better" graphics do not automatically make a game better. What matters is the GAME - everything else is just window dressing.

[Jarka]

Your the first person who I've ever heard who has said that the roughness of minecraft is what helps it appeal to you. I've always forgiven it because it's a one man project, and because it's better for the time to be sunk in other things. Such as gameplay.

Open ended, sure. That's what makes it a good game.

I look at it this way.

Film technology is phenomenal now, right? We've got omega-high definition, 3D, superb special effects, yaddayadda.

Look at a movie like, say, Psycho. Black and white film, but still regarded as one of the better movies of all time. Would Psycho be better if it was filmed in color (or recolored)? I dare say it would probably degrade the quality of the movie.

As another example, the hippest way to make a shiny film now is to make it in 3D. Movies like Avatar, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'hoole, and Up used the 3D imaging to improve the quality of the viewing experience, using depth changes to enhance emotional quality and world immersion.

However, should all films be in 3D? No. The Hangover: 3D would be a pretty pointless waste of the technology.

Do some films that use 3D rely on it as a clutch or a gimmick? Absolutely. A mediocre film can get increased revenue by being shiny and jumping off the screen (I'm looking at you, Clash of the Titans remake).

Look at the Grindhouse films. Tarantino and Rodriguez used damaged film reels to capture the feel of a real 70s exploitation double feature for their homage to the genre. They had access to digital recording and post processing, but they chose to use antiqued film. Would Grindhouse be better had it been filmed digitally? No. The quality of the film (or lack thereof) is part of what makes Grindhouse what it is.

Same goes for video games. Shiny isn't always an improvement.

[Nori]

Once again, I'd like to emphasize that I've said, and meant, about pixels represented on a screen. I didn't say a game should have top of the line photo realism graphics, but that a entertainment system should give tools to the designers; even if it's cartoonish, such as borderlands. The wii doesn't give the same tools as other systems. It's inferior, and the entire system is sold on gimmicks and ancient franchises.

For me, graphics are a integral part of a game. It helps you suspend disbelief. We can go back and forth about how graphics don't matter, but to me, and a lot of other people, they do. They are not the defining aspect of a game, however they do play into it. It's why on reviewing system there is a graphics score.

[John Doe]

We're just talking about aesthetics again. gtfo with that.

[Josh]

Nori isn't talking about making games Photorealisitic, he's talking about just overall better aesthetic, technology, graphics, HD.

Technology, it makes things better.

Street Fighter 2


Street Fighter 2 HD Remix


Also, Minecraft is popular because it's essentially an ultimate free roam game. It's not because of it's rough aesthetic. If it where, they wouldn't have numerous different HD reskin's that lots of people use, like VonDoomCraft, Meine Kraft, Doku RPG, and Steamcraft.

[Milk Bubble]

Technology doesn't always make things better. It helps, but like I said before, you can still make a good game that doesn't have the greatest looking graphics (technology wise if you are limited by the console), but the overall style and look of the game is superb, and the game play is fantastic. It can happen on the Wii.

[Kami]

#irrelevant