I value how smooth the gameplay runs and how fun it is over the graphics. When I dump games to play them on an emulator, I'll happily compromise on resolution/graphics mods if it means that the game runs smoother.
Do you believe graphics determine the console you want to buy?
436 Views | 42 Replies
New Topic
Respond to this Topic
At 11/9/24 10:24 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/8/24 11:37 AM, Edwin01 wrote:Especially as the PS5 Pro just released yesterday with a 700 price tag.
To me, it is exclusively the titles. It's why I laugh at the Xbox side of things, and most of the PS5's lifespan. Also the PS5 is too expensive, PS+ Is just insanely expensive. As someone who has a switch, psvita, new3DS, and Steam Deck. I have those systems due to the games. The PSVita offered me JRPG games, region-free, and good indie titles. The 3DS has games that I wanted and to experience. The Switch... Splatoon 2 and 3, mario bros wonder, and more. Also it being the cheapest system with pretty good games under its belt if do cough up 20 dollars for the year for Nintendo Switch online. Doesn't mean Switch Online is good.
From someone who has a PC and those systems. No? The PS4 I joked about during 2015 for being underpowered as. Basic PC games at the time. If you want good graphics or cheap games. A PC Can do it, offer me can my PC can't do or play... Legally. To me the PS5 is an interactive movie player outside of Astro Bot. Where's my Jak and Daxter, Where's my less Marvel and more Ratchet? I am not talking about PS3 and PS4 era Ratchet, but something that is based upon the PS2 SERIES in tone and feel. Where's the sly series?
Personally, I am not interested in graphics as a system/platform is made or broken by its games. If Triple A games must take 3 ~ 5 years, a modern double A game is closer to a Triple A on PS2 or PS3, even Indie Titles can hit closer. A smaller game is to me, something I prefer. As what does $50+ dollars of content mean when you game is unfinishable?
I just want more stylized games, as I miss the voxel look of FPS games that did attempt it in the early to mid 2010's. Graphics have plateau'd. What is left now is just development time. I had a ps2 and ps3 when growing up. I was late life PS2 primarily. I didn't even the ps2's graphics were obsolete in 2010.
Now that's what a true gamer is.
At 11/9/24 10:35 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/8/24 04:29 PM, Edwin01 wrote:At 11/8/24 03:26 PM, Chdonga wrote:Fuck no. Library and processing power is the sole factor. Nice graphics don't mean shit if the games all have pop-in, 30 second loading screens everywhere, and framedips. Even less so if there's only a baker's dozen exclusives.
Like with Concord vs Astrobot
Let's point and laugh at Concord. What a failure. Also Astrobot's graphics I would say looked nicer, more colorful, and just expressive. While Concord was lifeless and soulless.
Soulless to the point of getting the studio shutdown
At 11/9/24 10:37 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/9/24 12:41 AM, ErasmusMagnus wrote:Well, here's a collection of my most recently played games:
So, no. I don't think my buying habits are driving the industry. The most I've ever spent on a game in my entire life is $22. You know what I do when I want to see realistic graphics? I go outside. Or watch a movie.
TF2's graphics I would say are... That's how you make a game age like fine wine. If your game is talked about over 10 years, and more ( not for positive reasons ) yet the visual design is clear and great. Then you done a great job making a pretty game then and now.
TF2's visuals are perfect as. If ever want to make a shooter, use its visual design to be easy and clear. Looking at every Overwatch Clone here.
Just like Marvel Rivals
Yes, although I prefer sprites and if it's models, then I prefer Wii styled graphics. Controller design matters a bit to me, but not the most important thing. It's actually the library of good games that goes for me, and I prefer Nintendo consoles since I grew up with them, and I love all the characters, and it has a decent amount of JRPGs.
At 11/8/24 11:37 AM, Edwin01 wrote:Especially as the PS5 Pro just released yesterday with a 700 price tag.
So wut
I'd rather it have the ability to play games I would like and also my favorites
At 11/9/24 11:19 PM, Edwin01 wrote:At 11/9/24 10:35 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/8/24 04:29 PM, Edwin01 wrote:At 11/8/24 03:26 PM, Chdonga wrote:Fuck no. Library and processing power is the sole factor. Nice graphics don't mean shit if the games all have pop-in, 30 second loading screens everywhere, and framedips. Even less so if there's only a baker's dozen exclusives.
Like with Concord vs Astrobot
Let's point and laugh at Concord. What a failure. Also Astrobot's graphics I would say looked nicer, more colorful, and just expressive. While Concord was lifeless and soulless.
Soulless to the point of getting the studio shutdown
I would say it committed the " 3 monkies ". They saw nothing, heard nothing, and spoke nothing. Therefore, it doesn't exist. I am willing to kick a game when it is down as. People forewarned the studio "Hey your game isn't relevant, yet didn't listen.
Join The Rat Cult and grasp firmly.
At 11/10/24 02:36 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/9/24 11:19 PM, Edwin01 wrote:At 11/9/24 10:35 PM, DevilRat wrote:At 11/8/24 04:29 PM, Edwin01 wrote:At 11/8/24 03:26 PM, Chdonga wrote:Fuck no. Library and processing power is the sole factor. Nice graphics don't mean shit if the games all have pop-in, 30 second loading screens everywhere, and framedips. Even less so if there's only a baker's dozen exclusives.
Like with Concord vs Astrobot
Let's point and laugh at Concord. What a failure. Also Astrobot's graphics I would say looked nicer, more colorful, and just expressive. While Concord was lifeless and soulless.
Soulless to the point of getting the studio shutdown
I would say it committed the " 3 monkies ". They saw nothing, heard nothing, and spoke nothing. Therefore, it doesn't exist. I am willing to kick a game when it is down as. People forewarned the studio "Hey your game isn't relevant, yet didn't listen.
And yet they didn't listen enough that they have an episode based around them in Amazon Prime's Secret Level that will be awkward in hindsight now that have been cancelled and delisted
This is the first I'm hearing of a new PlayStation, but I would absolutely not buy it for that price hahaha. I appreciate the artistry that goes into making characters and scenery look hyper-realistic, but it's definitely not a factor in what games I want to play. I'm probably more likely to buy games that don't look like real life, because I feel like there's only so much you can do with super-realistic characters before they start to look unnerving. Honestly, I don't think everything needs to have the greatest graphics of all time to be realistic either. Maybe I just have low standards, but games like Half-Life 2 are over 20 years old and still manage to look pretty convincingly real without crazy textures or insane lighting.
Admittedly I don't buy nearly as many new games as I used to. I still love playing but I'm not the biggest fan of the direction games have been going in for the last few years (like the games themselves costing $80, non-cosmetic DLC in games I already paid for being $30+, getting home from GameStop and realizing I have to get online and download half the game before I can play it, etc.). These days I mostly either play free games online, buy indie games on Steam, or get older ones at local stores. A PlayStation 2 + controller + memory card only costs about $50-$70, and while the graphics aren't going to be the best, I can still buy about 30 games (along with the console) for the price of the new PS5 alone and probably have a better time haha. I'm sure there are a lot of great new games, but my other gripes always kind of sour the experience, especially if I manage to hit a dud lol.
Response to Do you believe graphics determine the console you want to buy? 2024-11-11 07:14:32 (edited 2024-11-11 07:18:30)
as someone who plays games that look like THIS....
no not really.
selling a console as "oh you can see every micro detail bro in complete realism" is dumb tbh.. like yeah impressive tech and all but unless you got fun good games to play on what is the point?
also 700$? they are still going with that?????
At 11/11/24 07:14 AM, youtherthyf wrote:as someone who plays games that look like THIS....
no not really.
selling a console as "oh you can see every micro detail bro in complete realism" is dumb tbh.. like yeah impressive tech and all but unless you got fun good games to play on what is the point?
also 700$? they are still going with that?????
Tbf it's a repeat of the Ps3 price reveal
There was a time it did. It was use to categorize games in the past by their visual limitations like 8 bit. It was used to identify a system such as Nintendo 64.
Currently the high visuals are unable to keep up with game play which result them making switch to which want to prioritize show or play. Still marvel for to seeing the sweat of the character, but now it can hinder the purpose you bought the system which is to play unless you are advertising it. There are other problems that cannot be overlook especially like in game purchasing.
