Fare thee well
Neophyte
I think we can all agree that if you have shit graphics AND shit gameplay, the only hope for revisiting a past game is AVGN and Jontron 
Jug wine doesn't get finer with age.
Jug wine doesn't get finer with age.
NeoIkaruGAF
Gold Member
Not really, but a lot of games with amazing graphics aren't exactly good games, that much is true.
Keihart
Member
You are tripping, all these games were lookers when they launched.
All these games, allowed their gameplay to do the talking.
Too much graphics takes the fun of the gameplay.
Sea of theives doesn't have great graphics. Instead it relies on artistic beauty, and the gameplay, to give you a good journey.
CapnAmaricrunch
Banned
when i first saw oot screenshots I thought they were photorealistic, dude...
JordoftheDead
Member
They are just old games, they looked great at release. Also Sea of Thieves as an example of good gameplay and poor graphics is a total opposite world comment. This entire thread premise is confusing as hell.
MikeM
Member
This. These games were awesome when they released.
ResurrectedContrarian
Suffers with mild autism
Not so sure about that pirate game, but I've never played it
Anyhow, there are too many things entangled confusingly here:
- those games had excellent graphics for their time;
- nonetheless, it is true that they hold up remarkably well today, whereas plenty of other games with far more sophisticated graphics don't manage to hold up even five years later;
- so there isn't a problem with using cutting-edge graphics, but there is a problem with so many games using their graphical "wow" as their sole selling point, which will tend to fade away and leave nothing behind;
- therefore, we can say: shiny graphics are the hook to get the player interested sometimes, but have very little to do with the game's longevity and ultimate value;
- so I partly agree, but it isn't that these games are ugly -- it's that their gameplay held up until they became relatively ugly compared to today's tech, which is a testament to their remarkable staying power, due to their gameplay
Anyhow, there are too many things entangled confusingly here:
- those games had excellent graphics for their time;
- nonetheless, it is true that they hold up remarkably well today, whereas plenty of other games with far more sophisticated graphics don't manage to hold up even five years later;
- so there isn't a problem with using cutting-edge graphics, but there is a problem with so many games using their graphical "wow" as their sole selling point, which will tend to fade away and leave nothing behind;
- therefore, we can say: shiny graphics are the hook to get the player interested sometimes, but have very little to do with the game's longevity and ultimate value;
- so I partly agree, but it isn't that these games are ugly -- it's that their gameplay held up until they became relatively ugly compared to today's tech, which is a testament to their remarkable staying power, due to their gameplay
Fare thee well
Neophyte
Thread can end now. ResurrectedContrarian nailed it.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
lol I'm saying! Its legit the stupidest myth in gaming and simply doesn't make sense.
It basically tries to make it sound like one person is making the game and they just don't have enough time to work on good gameplay stuff because they're spending all their time on graphics in completely disregards and entire team of people makes a video game each with separate task.
So I always find it funny when you kind of get that one gamer that's under this weird impression that one person's making the game so you always have to wait until the inevitable "instead of" myth lol
And here we go lol
I legitimately believe people like you might want to actually fucking watch how games are made before posting this weirdness. My god where on earth did you get this "instead of" ? The artists selected to work on those games only job is to do art their job is not to expand any gameplay complex or create anything in regards to programming for the gameplay or any ideas like that even remotely...
So I don't see any evidence that the gameplay of Assassin's Creed has anything to do with how great the games actually look because those are two completely separate jobs, Jesus Christ did you think that one person was making those games and they just didn't have enough time to do both or something weird like that? Lol.
Even in defense of cyberpunk 2077 as anybody on here knows I'm not a fan of really anything that went on with that project but I'm also not gonna sit here and attack the artist as to why that game was in the shape that it was in because if anything the artist did their jobs it is everybody else that was part of the programming that was unable to complete those tasks because what the actual publisher was demanding was massively unrealistic, as in artistically it is possible to design a city like this, however the gameplay elements they're trying to implement cannot be done with the team of 500 in such a short time frame trying to be rushed out to meet a bunch of overzealous demands...
This has to be a troll as I'm amazed that in this day an age gamers still believe this weird thing.
I know right lol It destroys this whole fucking narrative that they need shit graphics to be good. Why throw i shit from 20 years ago and pretend 20 years ago that was um "shit" for its time just to force this fake ass narrative? smh
Agreed.
Topher
Identifies as young
