I don't care about graphics and gimmicks. I'm a real gamer.
'm interested as well. It seems that Nintendo fans like to think that any game with good graphics can't have a good gameplay.
people still respond to buretsu??
HE DOSEN'T OWN A WII U
i72600k @4.6 // ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution // 8gb ram // 3x MSI GTX 680 sli // 1tb HD//W8pro//NNID shaunme1//PSN poselecta//XBL CursiveA//STEAM shaunmelwell//
If you were a real gamer why are you playing on a console who's main gimmick is a boring tablet controller which has been done to death since the ds was released, and which has largely boring casual party games like Nintendo Land? Where are Nintendo's great games? A real gamer needs to play a lot of great games, and can only play this on the ps3 or xbox 360 and upcoming consoles the wii and wii u do not offer the depth of gameplay, challenging gameplay and genre variety of these hd consoles, they are simply minigame casual consoles, I don't think a real gamer would like that type of console. WHich is why you're not a real gamer
How do you define a "real" gamer?
It's a useless term that has no meaning used by people who like to brag about sitting on their ass staring at a screen and pressing buttons for hours on end...
The person above suffers from IAD.</post>
ORANGE666 posted...Buretsu posted...
That person's question was actually answered in the very post he quoted.
Tomb Raider had great graphics and Tresseme Hair, and gameplay is... well... subjective, but it was solid enough to play. The game sold at least 3.4 million copies...
And it was deemed a failure by Square Enix. Now it wasn't as advertised as your average Call of Duty, so how much did they spend on everything to make so many sales a financial failure?
The problem is companies these days have no concept of budget limitations. They have 5 people doing the work of 1 and they make and remake parts over and over again. Look how much Bioshock Infinite changed in development. How much would that have cost?
Are graphics important? They can be when done right, but I'm shocked no one's mentioned the truly important part of graphics: Art style. Look at Okami. It's touted as one of the most visually stunning games of our time, and it came out on the PS2. It wasn't anti-aliasing and 1080p that did this, it was a well implimented art style.
Compare again Yoshi's Island to the announced 3DS one. The original stands the test of time before of its vibrant a colourful visuals, the 3D one looks washed out in comparison, the graphical upgrade has done it no good because they've botched the artstyle.
tl:dr, game budgets are overinflated and Art style trumps graphics.
These two things are killing the industry.
Its called progress. When the first mouse came out was it a gimmick? The first rumble pad? Only people lacking intellegence want the same system with the same features and the same options year after year. A REAL gamer wants to have new experiences not the same game with a new name each year.