When did people start judging games on graphics?


#1

I’m one of these people who’s still stuck in the past, I still look at CvS2, all the mish mash sprites, Alpha sprites, 3rd Strike sprites, new sprites, Morrigans sprite, I look at that game and think “damn, this is one of the best fighting games Capcom have ever made.” Yet these days people say “graphics are shit, game’s shit, I’m not buying it.”

And I can understand from a financial point of view, you wouldn’t want to pay $60 for a half assed project, but even the tiniest of things are putting people off. And it’s not just new players, it’s old school players as well, even they have risen their standards and had enough.

The only thing I can pin point it to is SSF2HDR and the shitty job Udon did on the sprites for that game, that’s the only turning point I can think of where players started caring about graphics and stopped playing games. We’ve got people saying “MvCi graphics are shit, why would you want to play that?” Where as I’d be saying “why would anyone want to be playing USF2.”

Does anyone who’s old enough remember that point in their life when it clicked and you’d had enough of companies hacking games together?


#2

For me, it’s less about graphic quality and more about style and personality. It’s hard to like any character when they all have blank stares and stiff stances and sound like they are reading their lines instead of acting.


#3

Yeah, I think the coherence and liveliness of style counts more than sheer graphics quality (as in models, animations and shaders). There are many indie 3D games nowadays that aren’t anything spectacular in terms of technology but look great just because everything fits the style they’ve chosen.
Besides, 3D graphics get older much faster than 2D sprites because they tend to go for a more realistic approach. There’s no wonder that games like Jet Set Radio or Psychonauts look so great today despite being 10-15 years old: they deliberately chose a cartoonish approach that will never really look outdated. But can you look at Virtua Fighter or SFEX models and say “they look good”?


#4

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Like it or not presentation matters.
You could have the most greta gameplay, but if your presentation is terrible, not many people will be compelled to play it.

This is specially true when a game like mvci is percieved as a huge downgrade from its previous entry, umvc3.
The problem that people have with mvci is not only the graphics, is the whole unappealing presentation, the graphics are terrible, the 3d models are horrid, the animations are bad, the hud is not only ugly, but is also flat and unninspired.
Everything feels like a huge mess, like something made by amateurs who don’t know what they are doing.

And that story demo is already showing that one of their main selling points, the story mode, is hillariously bad.

Edit

At the end of the day is simply economics.
People are being expected to give money to get mvci.
Therefore they are free to judge it whatever they want, if they feel that the graphics alone make it not worthy of their money is their choice.


#5

How about you reuse the UMvC3 models then? Wouldn’t that be even cheaper?


#6

30-35 years ago, I think?


#7

The thing is, Capcom used to have great art direction and now we get these ugly looking turds. We expect better from them. Hell, MvC3 while far from a wonderfully looking game at least had a coherent art direction and cel-shading that made sense for something based on comic books.

That, and the games are bad, too. KOF XIV doesn’t have good graphics but is a really solid game, SFV looks bad and plays bad and that goes for MvCI too.


#8

Since the inception of videogames. Presentation matters, a whole fucking lot, it’s what gets people interested in the first place. The gameplay doesnt matter if you cant even make people interested to try it out, if gameplay is good then peple will stick around.

You can use sprites and still make it look well, graphics as in polycount and textures dont mean shit without having appealing design. Thats the issue MvCI has.
Part of the presentation is attention to detail, well thought out designs that are consistent.

When you see a game being released that has great artstyle, a game that is made with passion and love then itll show and people will appreciate that.

Having an unique identifiable artstyle is worth so much more than simply cranking up the polycount and such. Games like GGRev2 will age very well.


#9

It’s like @“DevilJin 01” mentioned in another thread. Back in the Dark Ages, we got used to playing games that were a generation behind, because they were ports of games a generation or two behind graphically. We were used to MvC2 and CvS2 looking bad with recycled sprites looking out of place on 3D backgrounds and we didn’t care because the gameplay was good. But now we got players who didn’t live through that phase and that’s resulting in a clash between them and the older guard who just want to talk about gameplay.


#10

Basically. I personally think Injustice looks nasty and the characters blend into the backgrounds, but if I actually liked the gameplay I would still play it.

We played some really low res ass games that were tough for us to look at sometimes even, but the gameplay was cool so kept playing.


#11

If you have good gameplay people still give it a shot; see KoFXIV even before they did the lighting overhaul. The problem with MvCI isn’t that the graphics are bad, it’s that it looks like there is absolutely zero effort put into them. That doesn’t bode well for the rest of the game.


#12

This, is like some folks like op can’t (or simply don’t want to) understand that the 1st impression matters.
This is true in everything.
In the case of games, if what people see doesn’t appeal to them is very unlikely that they will give a try after that.

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that those games had great presentation and that while the sprites were low res, those games still had a lot of work put into details that made them charming and appealing. (Low res =/= look bad btw.)
I can still look to the Alpha games and see quality work in there, the same to sf3 and mvc1.


#13

Sure that’s what you can see. Yet, when I was playing 3rd Strike casuals the Smashers would just be like “what is that game like 15 years old?”


#14

So you take what a retard says seriously? :rofl:


#15

No, but that is objectively a problem for gamers back then. They wouldn’t care to play 3rd Strike because it was pixely and not polygon and higher res like their game. Plus no pokemon or whatever else they like.


#16

Appearance, much like in life and on people, counts. Whether or not you’re good looking, doesn’t mean someone can’t still look at you and get that you’re putting effort in to be presentable. If you don’t look presentable, it equates to laziness, lack of passion and other things. All qualities you don’t really want on your person, and not a quality you want on your games.

Now I absolutely advocate gameplay first, graphics second, but if the graphics can’t properly represent the gameplay, then there is a problem. MvCI looks really bad in all visual aspects, something quickly thrown together so it could be showcased, much like someone quickly throwing on clothes to go out without giving a shit. I’m sure there’s a lot of scruffy lookin’ mother fuckers out there who have got a drive like no other, but if you were to ask me to locate on appearance who I thought had their shit together, it probably wouldn’t be the guy with two different colored socks with sandals on. Riding that metaphor, baby.

As everyone has said, it’s not about graphical fidelity, it’s about having a style which matches the gameplay you are creating. I mean, it goes back to the whole Dragonball/XRD thing again, doesn’t it? Some people hate the anime style, but any intelligent person will understand that the style is done correctly, whether you like the style or not. People have a hard time looking at things objectively, which is why most people make TERRIBLE game critics. Overall though, appearance has and always did matter in games. The evolution of graphics in video games used to mean more because it coincided with increased possibilities within the game engines, like the jump to 3D for instance. Now adays, if you make a game that just looks like generic CG models, with styleless shaders, it’s like a game with no clear vision behind it, nor passion from the devs.

Sprites are timeless, they as a whole age better than 3D graphics, because they inherently come with a very distinct style choice. Imagine if Tekken 7 had a versus game and they ported older gen 3D models into the game and just upscaled them? It would look HORRID. With sprites, it’s a lot less noticeable, but even back then, it still wasn’t the best, just porting sprites from games with distinct style differences. Capcom was always riding that budget train when it came to their fighting games. So, it’s true, they got by because the gameplay was solid. Then they made SF3 New Gen and it bombed because it’s gameplay sucked and it’s graphics were amazing but using a dated style, even if it’s sprite work was and still is some of the best ever done. They improved the gameplay, boom, a classic for the entirety of the FGC. You have to have both in some regard. The best fighting game ever made can’t be a bunch of stick figures battling it out.


#17

Dude, MvC2 had ass backgrounds that made no sense (especially compared to MvC1’s) and lackluster music that only became loved after it became memetic. There’s a reason most hacked DC MvC2 discs, the ones people like Toodles made for running tournaments without having to unlock shit usually came with customized soundtracks.

And trying to play Morrigan or Sagat in CvS2 could make your eyes bleed. Sagat’s cr.hp was the only reason I tolerated that.


#18

Back when MVC2 was relevant at tournaments, I know the Smash kids just wouldn’t think this shit was looking hot. Even if we know the shit had some technicality and artistry to it, if the other community/public doesn’t see it that way then it only goes so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKIAn3hwGko

The game already pixels really bad because of the contrasting resolutions and sprites over polygons thing. Plus they’re using their own edited colors which are generally shit they just crafted without a ton of real work. On top of that MVC2 cut/skip a lot of frames for the CPS2 characters so Xmen/MSH characters especially don’t animate anywhere near as well as they do in their original games. Shuma’s idle post is real messy compared to his MSH one. The frame cuts are probably worse than the PSX/Saturn games even.


#19

It’s understandable he wouldn’t know, since he just joined SRK yesterday lol.


#20

Honestly, I think 2D sprites on 3D backgrounds only really started to look real good during the end of the last decade, with games like BlazBlue having higher resolution sprites, on top of doing amazing things with animated textures.