they wouldn't touch any game that didn't have a certain "look" - he
didn't care about the gameplay, only the look of the game
I showed him "Bouncer" - a game with less than an hour of gameplay but
about 4 hours of FMV - he LOVED it...
I think too many people have become "visual bitches" and don't care
about the gameplay itself - you could give them some beautiful visuals
and all you have to do it hit a button once a minute and they'd lap it
up
For me, a game has to be really playable - it's looks are definitely
secondary - we played a ton of GBA games while we had guests and Advance
Wars 2 isn't the prettiest of games, but it has us rivited - the visuals
could have been done on a SNES 10 years ago!
Oh, and as for Tetris being graphically acceptable? It's sliding flat
blocks - there's nothing special about it - the original hand-held
version was on the black and white GameBoy!
> You know...on some level I agree with you, but realistically
> I don't think so in today's market.
>
> For me, personally, I tend to shy away from games that don't
> meet the basic visual standard that I've gotten used to over
> the past two years.
> And that's regardless of any gameplay enhancements they may
> have. This weekend though, I did pick up two older (1998,
> 2000) Flight sims, Total Air War and Typhoon. I remember when
> they were launched how exciting I was at the graphics, and
> how dated they look today. I was shocked actually, but I
> enjoyed getting up into the air with Typhoon.
>
> Would I enjoy playing JET from spectrum Holobyte with
> wireframe graphics today? I don't quite know.
>
> It's got to look acceptable.
>
> For what it was, Tetris was quite graphically acceptable actually.
>
> -Gel
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
