How important is graphics to Sup Forums?
How important is graphics to Sup Forums?
very important, its a key feature that can set products apart from each other
That has nothing to do with grafix and everything to do with Square's miserable art design that resulted from them bleeding out artistic, and otherwise, talent in the last decade.
Not particularly important to me personally, but Sup Forums is full of different people with different tastes.
>Game has been re-released twice now
>Still doesn't let us skip cutscenes
Just fuck my remaster up
framerate is king
i like me some aa tho
don't care about the rest
Wow ps2 looks great. I might need to play X again, I never finished it.
Also, have there been other examples with the original versions of games looking better than a remaster/remake/port/etc.?
art style is important, graphics quality not so much.
This is why the original version of FFX is largely superior and the HD remaster is a farce.
Most original versions look better than their """"""""""""""""""""remaster"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
gameplay>plot=graphics
Do they make the characters seem not-dead?
I think something went wrong because the left(original) yuna looks the best.
God i don't think there's one final fantasy girl that i don't want to fuck.
i want to fuck them all.
Gameplay > Aesthetics/Style = Soundtrack > Story > Graphics
I would be happy if we stop at bf4/witcher 3/the division level of graphics.
I was one of the people who didn't like the new models, specially Tidus.
Then a few minutes after playing I got used to them, so I'd say they are important but not a top priority.
Keep in mind that the original FFX had separate models for gameplay and cutscenes. But yeah, how they managed to make the remaster look worse than that is a mystery to me.
It's vital for immersion, that doesnt mean a particular artstyle cant be immersive.
Now post the Tidus remaster.
I can play 2D games with sprites but low poly 3D models trigger me.
60FPS is #1 for me but I'd rather be at 60 maxed out than 120 at medium
That's not true at all, most "remasters" are just the original assets at a higher resolution. How well that works depends on the quality of the original assets.
Good asthetic design is important for atmosphere, graphics I don't care about as long as they're not hampering gameplay
>Gameplay>Music>Story>Grafix
Didn't mean to meme arrow.
Wow, that first one looks good, is that the remaster? The other two look like shit.
Slightly important. If you haven't played text games then you're a fucking casual. The graphics are to represent the actions and behaviors of the world, therefore any graphics that can accurately depict what's happening is sufficient. Anything better than that is just a cherry on top.
low poly can look fine, it's just most early 3D games nobody knew what the fuck they were doing
The models in Oxenfree have that low poly aesthetic to them but I think they look quite good
Despite what they say, graphics are the most important thing to most people here. Otherwise we wouldn't have millions of "downgrade" threads for literally every game.
The remaster wasn't done by Square, it was handled by some chink studio.
You are either 40+ or are a super nerd. Sorry your dick doesn't work, grandpa.
>Keep in mind that the original FFX had separate models for gameplay and cutscenes.
The remaster does too.
This.
Some interesting artstyle is more important to me than good graphics. Katamari Damacy is probably still the best looking game on PS2.
Not important, just not ASCII graphic pls
>Keep in mind that the original FFX had separate models for gameplay and cutscenes.
Literally every Square game within the last 16 years has been like this.
>putting plot before graphics
Someone was born after 98.
93
>never played planescape
Why does the PS2 version look best?
>goes from looking like a japanese girl (as she should) to a white person
For what purpose?
but they didn't changed the graphics, they changed aesthetics, and to the worse imho.
thereĀ“s really little difference between PS3 and PS4 so i might as well just get a Wii U next
Good graphics are really nice if they don't cause the game to suffer. If the models look fucking great but the game can't run above 20fps then I would rather they get toned down a bit. It also depends upon what type of game it is. Gameplay is always the most important part. I've been playing games since the '80s and have quite a diverse set of games under my belt. If a game is out there and looks fun then I am GOING to play it.
I do believe that Sup Forums in general has issues with worrying about how many fps a game runs. I'm fine with a game like Uncharted 4 locking at 30fps to get more out of the graphics since that series was pretty much invented for it. Just as I'm happy with Guilty Gear running at 60fps. Hell most Nintendo classics have framerate drops so bad that enemies will go invisible and that didn't stop me from playing games. Plenty of people on this board can get quite pedantic over graphics, as for myself? I just want to play games. One day I will play Geometry Wars all day and then the next I'll play something like The Last of Us.
Why not just wait for the NX, that everyone is saying is going to be amazing. I mean the new zelda looks like the ps2 in ops picture.
No very important really, if they don`t look as a shit, i can be happy.
they subcontracted it to a third party that wasn't very good.
Graphics? Not so much
Art direction goes a long way though, few games impress me like the Metroid Prime series does
>How important is graphics to Sup Forums?
Graphics are the most important part of the medium that is vidya which sets it apart from books, movies, board games, etc.
Anyone who doesn't prioritize it up top is just being a faggot.
I will prefer smooth/solid framerate to be honest.
Even 6th generation 3d still hold up with some cleaned up textures.
Gameplay matters most as usual, of course.
I have pleb eyes when it comes to graphic and tend to not notice until people on Sup Forums point out what went really wrong with the graphic. So yeah, it don't really care about it.
That said, that remaster made Yuna goes from top 3 most beautiful FF girl to shit tier. Fuck the remaster.
>PS2 version
>better
Are you guys blind? The PS3/4 version in OP's pic looks a lot better.
I agree, but in JRPGs framerate doesn't really matter.
>Graphics are the most important part of the medium that is vidya which sets it apart from books, movies, board games, etc.
>implying movies don't use C G I
Left is PS2. Right is PS2.
>Literally fifteen years since the game came out
>Only now notice that she has heterochromia
As if she wasn't bad enough.
So that's where all the inspiration for heterochromia OCs came from.
It was done by a horrible Chinese studio who also has done the HORRIBLE HD-"remaster" of Arkham Asylum/City.
Absolute bullshit.
>heterochromia
Hearing loss/deafness, prematurely graying hair, abnormal hairline.
HOT!
Boy did FFXII dodge a bullet there
The 2nd and 3rd don't even look like Yuna anymore. Changed her lips and eyebrows too much.
depends on the game's art style.
JUST
FUCK
MY
HAHAHA
UP
Perfect.
Lulu is best girl tho
FF games should be focusing more on their janky animations rather than making things look HD greatest pixels. That goes for a lot of games these days actually.
Graphics not so much but art design is pretty important.
It's a face, you fucking idiot. The pre-rendered backgrounds were redone from scratch, and the world has been completely retextured and the terrain has been given more polygons. You should literally kill yourself if you think the PS2 version looks better than the remaster, you fickle little shit.
What you don't understand is that they remade the fucking models and strayed from the original artstyle so much that it looks like shit now.