It is far more important that the game has a common sense , a logical actions and outcomes , a realism , a real challenge etc' , than how the trees look's like or how the building collapsed
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
It is far more important that the game has a common sense , a logical actions and outcomes , a realism , a real challenge etc' , than how the trees look's like or how the building collapsed
"The essence of philosophy is to ask the eternal question that has no answer" (Aristotel) . "Yes !!!" (me) .
"Its time we stop worrying, and get angry you know? But not angry and pick up a gun, but angry and open our minds." (Tupac Amaru Shakur)
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
Gameplay is what makes a game good. Graphics can only make a game better.
"Look I’ve got my old pledge card a bit battered and crumpled we said we’d provide more turches churches teachers and we have I can remember when people used to say the Japanese are better than us the Germans are better than us the French are better than us well it’s great to be able to say we’re better than them I think Mr Kennedy well we all congratulate on his baby and the Tories are you remembering what I’m remembering boom and bust negative equity remember Mr Howard I mean are you thinking what I’m thinking I’m remembering it’s all a bit wonky isn’t it?"
-Wise words from John Prescott
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
Gameplay all the way.
Operation Flashpoint's graphics are laughable, but you will not find any other FPS that so so engrossing, so realistic, or so fun. Battlefield 2? Pfft. Capture the flag with eyecandy. Hardly worth my time.
SMAC's graphics are mediocre, at best, but you dont play a Sim Meier game for the graphics. You play it because they are the best dang strategy simulations known to man. Master of Magic and MOO2 (both using the same engine) were hailed as some of the best strategy games of their time, but like most classics, their graphics were laughable.
Rarely a game can combine sweet graphics with alluring gameplay, but I'd rather have someone who's plain-looking who can keep me interested with personality and intelligence for years on end than a hot blue-eyed blonde who I'll get bored with after a few days.
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
I agree. RTS games (HEY! their ok MP games!) IMHO have actually gotten worse since AOK...they only thing that as changed is the graphics.
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
I still enjoy playing Empire Earth (though by the time I get Nuclear Bombers, the game is over because nothing can stand up against those).
I definately enjoy Total Annihilation: Kingdoms, because while it was a RTS, it had a great campaign story (told in the style of Ken Burn's Civil War), and a fresh new approach to making units and getting "resources"
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
EE was fun. What annoyed me was that it took so long to gather resources.Originally Posted by kekvitirae
That and the fact the turtling was so effective plus the bad AI. I imagine it would have been alot better if i had played with 5 human players, rather then 1-2 humans and 3-4 AI's...
Back on topic....
I wonder how many people are going to vote graphics...no one so far. Makes the 'poll' part of the thread kinda pointless.
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
If I remember, the Russians have Advanced Mining which gives you access to 7 people on a single resource, instead of 6. I still prefer AOK where as many as you could pile on would be what mines
Re: Graphics VS gameplay.
That game looks so awesome and so bad at the same time. Still one of the best looking games ever if you ask me, just don't hug any threes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks