this thread is about the significance of graphics vs. animation/physics in arcade games. actually make that visual presentation vs dynamics.
i know most of the readers of these boards are much after the visual aspect of games (some just like flashy graphics, others like good art or apt stylizations, etc) but maybe exactly because of that it may be interesting to discus that here. i myself am a graphician guy, and still i think visual presentation may come only secondary in the majority of game genres, and in paticular the arcades. why?
lately i've been playing games of yesteryears, mainly on my dc, but also on the gc and ps2. my all-times favourite genres are racing, fighting, gory platformers/survival horror and shooting scrollers - one could say that my tastes are rather arcady, but i do enjoy a good RPG now and then, and some other genres too. so while playing some oldies today i was thinking, 'what makes me come back to this game?' - nostalgia - hardly, i got into consoles at a fairly mature age (early 20s), nothing to cause happy recollections of childhood. presentation? -- if that was the case i'd be sitting in front of a new shiny 360 playing pgr3 now, instead i'm sitting here playing for hours le mans24 on my dc over vga, seeing each and every goddam aliased pixel of it, and not giving a damn about the point-sampled decals all over the screen or any other visual imperfection a trained eye picks within seconds. the presentation of the game is ok, though, i don't find it pacticulalry lacking. trying to compare that against the last time i played pgr3 over hdtv - although the latter had way less visual imperections, i realize the experience is hrm, virtually identical. why? - the dynamics, the motion in both games are very comparable - both have a particulalry arcady style of asphalt driving physics. yes, that's what keeps me playing that old game, while not giving me much incentive to move on to the visually latest and greatest.
case two: soul calibur. the original on my dc, again, over a VGA, compared to the latest of the series on my ps2, run over component on my 29" flat screen tv. for those who keep warm memories of the visual prowess of the original when played over vga - let me reassure you the latest version creams the floor with the orignal visually, regardless of any vis. definition advantages the latter may have over the better display output - just take the word of a graphics coder. and yet, it was the original that made me sit for hours like a child in front of one e3 booth in the distant y2k, while the 3rd installment, surely a fine fighter to its last bytes, is essentially 'more of the same' for me (although it was the reason that made me buy a pstwo). why? - possibly because the deteministic thing in this game for me is the dynamics in the form of mocap'ed armed combat. simply the best money can buy. the traditionally strong visuals of the series come just as the icing on the top of the cake. in this regard, as it seems my play time in the series will ultimately end up being (sorted in descending time): sc1, sc3, sc2. sc2 sits last due to a minor animation glitch in it that basically turned me off on it.
final case: gory platformers and survival horrors (allow me to put them together). playtime spent in the genre in descending order: metroid fusion, metroid zero mission, castlevania AOS, castlevania DS, resident evil4, metroid prime, god of war. notice anything special about the list? - yep, the leading 4 titles are totally 2d platformers. and let me tell you that of the listed titles the only two i have not re-played multiple times are MP and GOW. and no, i have not been constantly travelling during the last two years, if you get to say i spend too much time with handhelds (that i do, but i play exclusvely at home).
so, to conclude, no matter how fascinated i am of nice visuals, both as hobbist and professional, i think the single essential component that takes me back to gaming is game dynamics. i'd take a nice dynamics game with acceptable visuals any day of the week before a visually-stunning game with so-so dynamics.
how about you?
i know most of the readers of these boards are much after the visual aspect of games (some just like flashy graphics, others like good art or apt stylizations, etc) but maybe exactly because of that it may be interesting to discus that here. i myself am a graphician guy, and still i think visual presentation may come only secondary in the majority of game genres, and in paticular the arcades. why?
lately i've been playing games of yesteryears, mainly on my dc, but also on the gc and ps2. my all-times favourite genres are racing, fighting, gory platformers/survival horror and shooting scrollers - one could say that my tastes are rather arcady, but i do enjoy a good RPG now and then, and some other genres too. so while playing some oldies today i was thinking, 'what makes me come back to this game?' - nostalgia - hardly, i got into consoles at a fairly mature age (early 20s), nothing to cause happy recollections of childhood. presentation? -- if that was the case i'd be sitting in front of a new shiny 360 playing pgr3 now, instead i'm sitting here playing for hours le mans24 on my dc over vga, seeing each and every goddam aliased pixel of it, and not giving a damn about the point-sampled decals all over the screen or any other visual imperfection a trained eye picks within seconds. the presentation of the game is ok, though, i don't find it pacticulalry lacking. trying to compare that against the last time i played pgr3 over hdtv - although the latter had way less visual imperections, i realize the experience is hrm, virtually identical. why? - the dynamics, the motion in both games are very comparable - both have a particulalry arcady style of asphalt driving physics. yes, that's what keeps me playing that old game, while not giving me much incentive to move on to the visually latest and greatest.
case two: soul calibur. the original on my dc, again, over a VGA, compared to the latest of the series on my ps2, run over component on my 29" flat screen tv. for those who keep warm memories of the visual prowess of the original when played over vga - let me reassure you the latest version creams the floor with the orignal visually, regardless of any vis. definition advantages the latter may have over the better display output - just take the word of a graphics coder. and yet, it was the original that made me sit for hours like a child in front of one e3 booth in the distant y2k, while the 3rd installment, surely a fine fighter to its last bytes, is essentially 'more of the same' for me (although it was the reason that made me buy a pstwo). why? - possibly because the deteministic thing in this game for me is the dynamics in the form of mocap'ed armed combat. simply the best money can buy. the traditionally strong visuals of the series come just as the icing on the top of the cake. in this regard, as it seems my play time in the series will ultimately end up being (sorted in descending time): sc1, sc3, sc2. sc2 sits last due to a minor animation glitch in it that basically turned me off on it.
final case: gory platformers and survival horrors (allow me to put them together). playtime spent in the genre in descending order: metroid fusion, metroid zero mission, castlevania AOS, castlevania DS, resident evil4, metroid prime, god of war. notice anything special about the list? - yep, the leading 4 titles are totally 2d platformers. and let me tell you that of the listed titles the only two i have not re-played multiple times are MP and GOW. and no, i have not been constantly travelling during the last two years, if you get to say i spend too much time with handhelds (that i do, but i play exclusvely at home).
so, to conclude, no matter how fascinated i am of nice visuals, both as hobbist and professional, i think the single essential component that takes me back to gaming is game dynamics. i'd take a nice dynamics game with acceptable visuals any day of the week before a visually-stunning game with so-so dynamics.
how about you?
