Do real gamers care about graphics?

[Blockoman]

"OH forget, HE'S GOT AN OPINION! HURRY, FLAME HIM stuffLESS!"

But I just explained exactly why he's wrong and he continues to spew forth stupidity.
He could say "Well I dislike the pixel look" or something that doesn't contradict the post he just quoted.

[Ad Bot]

[WOLFPACK2]

All i can say is graphics don't make a game...

[Teneksi]

Graphics make a game prettier and a little more fun if they're nice to look at our play around with, but gameplay is still much more important. (or I would have lost interest in Blockland a long time ago)

[Jake White]

Graphics are unnecessary, it's gameplay that counts.

This has been said a stuff ton of times.


But really, if you took minecraft-- And gave it GOOD GRAPHICS?

It would not be minecraft anymore.

[Daedalus]

Anyone is plays COD isn't a gamer, they're a COD friend. A gamer is someone who plays variety of games not just 1 stupid loving game, e.g. World of Warcraft/CoD.

Definition of gamer:
# A person who plays games, particularly video games; Comparative form of game: more game
If they play games, they're considered a gamer. Doesn't matter what your opinion on their game choice is - they're still a gamer. "Stupid" is a complete matter of opinion. That's like saying "your opinion is wrong."

[Saber15]

Graphics are unnecessary, it's gameplay that counts.

This has been said a stuff ton of times.


But really, if you took minecraft-- And gave it GOOD GRAPHICS?

It would not be minecraft anymore.

no, it'd be something better because more things could be accomplished
for example, if it wasn't all huge cubes of dirt, stone, etc, (let's say a block is divided into 8 equal parts) you could put much more detail into buildings, and worlds would look much more organic. take it up to eleven and give it smooth terrain and dynamic terrain deformation like red faction 1 and celestial impact, and you could have very realistic looking worlds

[ase]

no, it'd be something better because more things could be accomplished
for example, if it wasn't all huge cubes of dirt, stone, etc, (let's say a block is divided into 8 equal parts) you could put much more detail into buildings, and worlds would look much more organic. take it up to eleven and give it smooth terrain and dynamic terrain deformation like red faction 1 and celestial impact, and you could have very realistic looking worlds

but then its not minecraft anymore, its a ripoff clone of the game Fracture, only without the advance weapons

[Jubel]

256x texture pack.
NOW WHO HAS BAD GRAPHICS MR CALL OF richardY?

Also, people judge me because I still play Driv3r.

[qevil]

I could care less about graphics, so long as it is fun.

[Megamax2001]

I don't mind the "8-bit" or "gaming Expirence" graphics. I just care that my PC can run it. Sure nice graphics are uhh.... nice, but I really don't care.

Those guys don't know what they're talking about when they say it sucked because of graphics, because I needed one of those Gaming Graphics card to get even past 30 frames a second.

I kind of consider myself a gamer.... over 14 games on my Computer, 8 games for the Wii, and nearly 40 for the PS2.

[JAW959]

I can appreciate a game with awesome graphics and pretty visuals but at the same time gameplay is more important, for example crysis 2 (judging by the demo) while being fairly pretty (especially considering it's basically a sloppy 360 port) plays so much like COD it just gets boring.

[Kingdaro]

I'd take 16-bit 2D graphics over 64-bit 3D any day. I'm a fan of cubes over polygons.

[SkullCandy]

I don't care. Quake 3's graphics are stuff now, but the game is still better than black ops :D

[Megamax2001]

Besides-
Some games hurt my Eyes to make out some images, and most are High Quality graphics.

[Marcem]

I don't care. Quake 3's graphics are stuff now, but the game is still better than black ops :D

You can't exactly compare the two.