What constitutes "good" graphics to you?

Question

What game has the minimum requirements for you to consider a game to have good graphics. The reason I ask this is because I have noticed that I have low standards for graphics apparently. I though Resident Evil 4: Wii edition had great graphics but when I saw a review they said the graphics where bad. Don't talk about stylized graphics because those are opinion. I mean realistic games.

Answer 1

It depends on your view on graphics. Some games are supposed to have ultra-realistic graphics, like RE5, but others, such as Animal Crossing, just have a style all their own. Gameplay should come first when determining what game you want to get. You are right in saying graphics are getting worse...but you have to realize they can only improve graphics so much. You will see less difference in graphics in the next generation of systems than you did between PS1 and PS2.



My reasoning behind gameplay: look at some of the RPGs for SNES, like Earthbound. This game had horrible graphics, but the story captured you immediately and it made it a cult hit. If you have not played it, find it a ROM of it online or petition NOA to port it to the DS, like they did with FF3, FF4, and Chrono Trigger...I have never played CT before, but for a 15 year old game, it is one of the best games I have ever played.

Answer 2

Graphics means a lot of things. It constitutes of animation, character designing, textures, atmosphere.... and many other things.

For me, a good looking game has to fulfill most of the criteria's well. The term 'great looking game' has been changing each generation. When the PS1 was in the market, people were wowed be FFVIII and said it was the best looking game ever. Same when PS2 was launched, GOW was termed as best looking game ever.... But, look at them now. They can't even compare to the worst looking next gen titles. Times change. Haze for example was bashed for not having great graphics, but if the same game would have been released 3-4 years back, it would have been termed as a master piece...



RE4 for Wii was termed to have bad graphics cause Wii was released with the PS3 and 360. So in comparison to them, the game had bad graphics. But, again, for Wii, it was the best looking game.



The best looking games of this generation are Crysis and Killzone 2. Some like the lush vegetation of the former whereas some like the barren planet of Helghan in KZ2... Personal preference.

The games are great looking cause you actually see detailing in every aspect.

For a game to be truly next gen, it must have HD graphics. The requirements would be for it to look realistic and not cartoony. The textures should have depth and not look plasticky. The character animations should also be good.



According to me, there is no bench mark for a game to qualify as good looking. For example, RE5 was just released a few days back and the game truly is next gen in terms of how it looks, but still no one gave it credit for it. The sole reason for this was the fact that Killzone 2 was released a few days back and the expectations from people were really high. Obviously KZ2 being a monster (20 GB of texture in KZ2.. insane!!!), looked far more better and so RE5 was over-shadowed. So, there is no limit after which a game becomes good looking.



Who knows? After 8-10 years, we will look back at KZ2 and Crysis and just laugh at how bad the games look the same way we are laughing at FF7 and GOW.

Answer 3

You are right, all the nimrods preaching about their graphical standards are blowing smoke out their rears.



RE5 does have great graphics, if a reviewer has "higher standards" than that, then they're trying to compare a game to a blu-ray movie.



As for realistic, most games are in 720p, few are any higher, and most good ones have framerates at a smooth 60fps. Considering blu-ray discs and just about all MPEG streams in general run at 24 fps, that is excellent graphics, better-than-a-movie graphics. Your eye can't tell the difference between 40fps and 60fps. Most ps3 games have good, well-detailed 3d models that are controlled by good physics. Not realistic physics, but that's not what the graphics is about. The models have well-detailed and lifelike animations. The environment is covered with cool textures that make things look real. I've seen especially impressive graphics in these games:



condemned 2: bloodshot: amazing glossy sheen, metal looks like metal, paint like paint

Pure: amazing detail

heavenly sword: real-looking people, beautiful girl

Wheelman: hey, that really is Vin Diesel! Looks like Mo-cap.

Alone in the Dark: things look real, dark things look like real things look in the dark.

Killzone2: nothing special about it, but it's good, so it makes the list.

Resident Evil 5: detailed people and gore. Nothing else really special, but good.



I think people who obsess about graphics are people who don't actually turn their attention to playing the game. If you're concentrating on playing the game, you won't notice little differences in the graphics so much. Not enough to be able to call a game like resident evil bad graphics. Especially since RE5 has such lousy controls. If they'd actually played the game, they'd be complaining about the controls, not the graphics.



Here are some games with crap graphics:

Full Auto Battlelines

Conan

Kane and Lynch: dead men



I can't think of any more right now. Why anyone would advocate caning and lynching dead men is beyond me. Why torture and hang someone who's already dead

Answer 4

1. Dynamically lighted world. Every texture must be dynamically lighted, not being pre painted to look bright or dark. This allow dynamic day night cycle with the same set of texture, you just change the lighting



2. Dynamic shadow. Again no pre painted shadows on the map textures. All shadow and dark shades must be dynamically rendered



3 Realistic shadow intensity. In the past, shadow are all dark black regardless of the surrounding lighting. Shadow intensity must correspond to the surrounding, shadow being rendered through pixel shading rather than just pasting a black texture there.



4. Parallax mapping. Bump mapping is so yesterday, we should use parallax mapping now



5. Post processing, blurring effect and realistic fog effect (instead of putting layers of semi-transparent textures)



6. Volumetric cloud.