Graphics fucking bore me these days. We've reached a point of saturation for graphics that it doesn't show much difference in the 'wow factor' these days. I say its akin to seeing 4K or higher on screens, you're not going to have a very big noticeable difference because your eyes can't perceive even higher resolutions.

Sure there is ray tracing today but does it make such a big factor? I say no, I much rather have good gameplay than shiny graphics.

I think its one reason why games are so damn boring today because the graphics don't really move me, and the gameplay are just really meh.

The last time I had a holyshit those graphics moment was GTA 5, Crysis and Battlefield 3.
agree
31
friendly
1
informative
1

No matter how amazing new realistic graphics are, i will forget about them 10 minutes into the game.
Same thing goes for mediocre or bad graphics, give it a while and you'll ignore it in favor of gameplay.
agree
51
disagree
1

[quote mentionsUser="5075" postId="664247" threadPage="1" threadId="19901" username="Ignhelper"]I much rather have good gameplay than shiny graphics.[/quote]
See this is where this kind of opinion shits the bed for me, it's like there's an implication that if we have good graphics, the gameplay will be meh or vice versa, so you have to pick one or the other, an example of one game that has both that came out recently would be DOOM Eternal.

I'd rather have both good graphics and gameplay, I don't think compromises should be made in this day and age for either one, even as an indie dev there isn't really an excuse for it given the amount of options available, you don't need to be stacking 8K textures and photogrammetry into your game, just have a good and consistent art style and you're good to go on the graphics front.
agree
38
dumb
2
kawaii
1

We have demonstrably reached a ceiling where graphics and detail are concerned. Not in terms of realism, but in terms of effort/reward. Graphics and detail have become too straining for development on a human level and contribute to the prevalence of crunch in the industry. This is also why AAA games have factually become generally worse (and more buggy) in the last 10 years than in the 10 years before that. In 2000, a NPC was an animated skeleton and nothing more. In a 2020 game, all NPC's are expected to have a realistic ragdoll system, motion-captured inter-locking animations, automatically-generated facial expressions and mouth movements, cloth physics, and a ton of shader processing for every texture. When you consider this, it becomes completely understandable that any modern NPC can be the source of countless bugs, and therefore a lot of strain on the development side.

On a level design perspective, open worlds have the same problem. Linear games put a lot less stress on the devs, but open-worlds can be a development nightmare.

If AAA games keep pushing graphics and detail even further, expect games to have even more soul-crushing crunch and to become even more buggy as it becomes literally humanly impossible to achieve games that are at the same time: 1° highly detailed/realistic, 2° polished/with few bugs, 3° huge/ambitious. Right now the only company that seems to still be able to pull it off is Rockstar Games, who have thousands of crunching workers and hire subcontractors around the globe to work on games that cost [i][u]hundreds of millions of dollars[/u][/i] and take [i][u]nearly 10 years[/u][/i] in development.

This is utterly unsustainable.
agree
45
friendly
1
winner
1

Skyrim is a boring game.

Three attempts over several years and I've never managed to finish it. I think the furthest I got was the mission where you infiltrated the embassy. I have no clue how close to the end that is. I just get bored. I think the worst bit is level scaling. I spend all this time getting strong, except every enemy is now scaled to my level so I've actually achieved nothing. I want to be able to go back to enemies I struggled with near the start of the game and fuck them up, but instead they're as strong as ever. I makes me feel like I've not advanced in any way. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
agree
45
friendly
2
sad
1

The Open World gimmick needs to stop.
I don't mean "stop making games with open world maps", rather, not every game needs to be open world.
I have completly given up on open world games because they all seem to revolve around the same core of, go to place, find quest and 2 or 3 side quests, all the quests seem to be fetch quests or "go to talk to NPC X" and before I know it I've turned my brain off and I'm just chasing map markers for reasons unkown to me.
Once you've exhausted the quests for region X the NPC become just cardboard cutouts of people, they don't really act like humans when you try and interact with them it's like you don't exist to them, Rockstar is probably the only studio who puts effort into making a robust sandbox with beleivable NPCs.

I'm very much in favor of "Make your own fun" sandboxes, where you're given a robust sandbox some randomization to keep it interesting and a vague goal.
I can safely say I'm having more fun with Europa Universallis IV than I've had with Fallout 3 or 4 because I'mm not chasing map markers for some quest I dont care about, rather I'm making my own stories and my decisions matter.
agree
42
friendly
1
winner
1

Stories in MMO games feel disjointed because you're just doing the same things as everyone else before and after you.
[i]Oh wow, you killed that guy about to destroy the world! Please, take this sword from his possession 30% of the people around you are already carrying with them.
Thank you for going into that cave to slay the dragon, you've saved the village! Please don't mind there's people constantly piling into the cave to load their own instance of the same exact fight.[/i]
agree
37
disagree
2

Subnautica fails to utilise its open-world as much as it can. It's like it couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a linear story game or an open-world game, and tries to do both without being particularly great at either.
disagree
20
agree
5
kawaii
2

Rogue Legacy was one of the worst notable Roguelites.

A Link Between Worlds' non-linearity added nothing to the game.
agree
9

i don't like pixel art.

i wish i can smooth all the pixel art so it's become not boxy again. my cylinder eyes tiring when looking at rough boxy graphics.
funny
25
agree
10
friendly
3
disagree
2
artistic
2
winner
1
glasses
1

Games tagged as "visually gorgeous but gets boring fast" needs memorable characters.

I always was in a weird spot with opinions on this.
In one hard, the more random visual information is given to the player, the less imagination the player needs to use to build the world and that ruins part of the immersion. And imagination is something we inherently lose as we grow up because our head now has different priorities.
But also I like detail on everything and see how far a game can go in telling me how the world behind the events is made of, like leaving background info in form of text or images scattered everywhere, high texture detail, accurate body language and behaviour, lights and shadows well placed.
I find horror and dark fantasy games to have the perfect mix between the gritty textures on environment I like to see and text carefully given to the player in small chunks.

I'm also in the bag to say that high quality games today could trade image quality for a better story. And definitely create more memorable characters.
agree
5

[quote mentionsUser="1040" postId="664299" threadPage="1" threadId="19901" username="Tinbe"]Stories in MMO games feel disjointed because you're just doing the same things as everyone else before and after you.
[i]Oh wow, you killed that guy about to destroy the world! Please, take this sword from his possession 30% of the people around you are already carrying with them.
Thank you for going into that cave to slay the dragon, you've saved the village! Please don't mind there's people constantly piling into the cave to load their own instance of the same exact fight.[/i][/quote]
This completely, I can't get into most MMOs because of it, the only time I did was The Old Republic and it was because the story and my choices as a Sith actually felt like they had some impact, but then I had to do side shit and eventually it got to me and I gave up.

Roguelikes are a copout for not having a good story/engaging enough gameplay. It needlessly punishes the player while trivially hiding progression in order to artificially inflate how much replay potential there is.
disagree
49
agree
10
funny
1
friendly
1
dumb
1

The more ambitious visuals-related take I'd give is that I often prefer bad graphics over good graphics. Especially in something like a shooter, something like a Team Fortress 2 has so much more visual clarity than many more modern shooters with much more detail and fidelity. I want my video games to distinctly look like video games.
agree
17

Despite its many flaws, Friday the 13th for the NES is actually a neat game and deserves a spot in the hall of Survival Horror precursor games.
agree
2

[quote mentionsUser="1507" postId="664310" threadPage="1" threadId="19901" username="pramadito"]i don't like pixel art.

i wish i can smooth all the pixel art so it's become not boxy again. my cylinder eyes tiring when looking at rough boxy graphics.[/quote]

There was a period of time when I felt like some indie people pursued pixel artstyle to excuse not being able to do anything else, and then I had worst bias that if artstyle had no care then neither the gameplay.
agree
8

1) I didn't like The Witcher 3. I found it dull and wasn't really attached to any of the characters, except maybe Roach because animal.

2) Games being 'too linear' is considered criticism but I don't really agree. There's nothing wrong with games that want to tell a story and want you to play that story a certain way. Limbo was a succinct story game, just pretentious enough to give it an air of mystery, but if you released it nowadays, you'd probably have gaming journalists calling it 'too linear' because it didn't have a crafting system rammed in or a shallow Telltale-esque "choose your own story!!!".

3) The value of an open world is diminished greatly if your "open world" is just the same grass texture copied and pasted for ten miles with a few hills thrown in for good measure.
agree
16
disagree
2
funny
1
sad
1

More games need well crafted, challenging levels using the tools you are given rather than being metroidvanias.
agree
3

I'm not a fan of the ''free pass'' you get with high speech skill in Fallout New Vegas and the dialog system is not as great as people make it out to be.

In the end the choices you make that matter boil down to:

[1:] Appease faction A but piss off faction B
[2:] Appease faction B but piss off faction A
[3:] Piss off both factions A, B and maybe even C
[4:][speech 60] Appease both factions A and B, get rewards, good karma, and a blowjob from both faction leaders.

I'm not saying that a speech only build should not be viable in RPG games, but it shouldn't be as easy as it is in NV, where you can just dump all your skill points into it and get a free win dialog button. Conversations in RPGs are way more interesting if they not only rewarded the players for investing into speech skills, but also when played out like a ''dialog dungeon'' rewarding the player for paying attention to character they are speaking to. Pathologic is a great example of the latter and its not even an RPG game.
agree
14
disagree
5

i hate hype culture but especially in gaming
"new pokemon shitfarteus released" "you can choose between two dick options in this game" "some minecraft youtuber showed his neck" "heres this award show where half of the games are the vidya equivalent of boomerlennial shit like harry potter and game of thrones but everyone is still watching it and taking it seriously because theyre just used to it" shut up and let me grill and play weird indie shit
agree
40
winner
3