View Full Version : Graphics In Game - Important?
Hey Everyone,
Im doing alittle information gathering and trying to get a census of the general thought amoungst the NC population and all the MMO'ers on this board.
Are graphics important to your game play? or would you mind having sub-super graphics for great system and story?
What I mean is, would you play an MMO if it didnt have the state-of-the-art graphics, but a really good story line and stat system?
The other question you need is, would you buy the game without knowing the story was really good and the system was great, based purely on the graphics and screen shots on the box?
If you answer yes or no, please explain why either way.
Garg [RogueNET]
20-05-04, 15:10
You dont buy a game only for good graph.
however.. good graph makes a better gameplay and more fun.
So a good game needs both not 1 and not the other.. imho
Good story and quests/overall gameplay are better than good graphics alone for sure. I do find though, when playing Morrowind (which I have been a great deal lately) - the realistic weather effects, sounds and overall graphics, get me a lot more immersed when I am not reading things in the game (the rain/lightning/dust storms etc).
I read a lot of the books I come across whenever I have the chance, because that immerses me a great deal in the world, knowing history etc.
You cant really beat a good story, FFVII graphics are not all that compared to modern games really - but that game for sure stands the test of time. There are plenty other examples in terms of RPGs you could use aswell.
For me story is more important than graphics, because my imagination is a bit better than my geforce4.
I would play a game if it *was* fun and didn't have the best gfx .. I mean, look at Neocron.
yah i will admit that graphics add to the mood and atomsphere of the game. and i think a game should have "reasonable" graphics.....but these games pushing the graphics envelope and then dishing out subpar game experience is gettting awful....so many games are all eyecandy or "feature creeps" that its not even funny. i like good graphics in a game. but i want the game to have the best possible game play...i dont care of the quality is quake 1 style...look at halflife its a perfect example of low tech level graphics engine AWESOME story
Are graphics important to your game play? or would you mind having sub-super graphics for great system and story?
YES. I want both. Developers that do not provide both are lazy. With todays technology there is no reason not to have both.
What I mean is, would you play an MMO if it didnt have the state-of-the-art graphics, but a really good story line and stat system?
NO. Because if this is the case then let's all go back to Zorg (version 1 - probably before most of you were born) or Rogue (again, before most of you were born). Or, we have games like KINGS QUEST (version 1).
To a degree, I think that yes, graphics are important to a game.
They help build immersion, suspense and can get you deeply involved with what's going on. I mean, how touching would Aerith's death NOT have been if it wasn't done using an FMV sequence?
Would you still feel as terrified of Hunters if the crystal-clear, stupidly well detailed graphics hadn't been present during that initial encounter?
Would you still feel the raw might of a Rafoie spell if it didn't make the room explode in an orgy of sparks and flame?
HOWEVER, graphics alone aren't enough to carry a good game. Unreal 2, for example, one of the most visually impressive, if not THE most impressive, game to grace our computers in recent times....but the gameplay, I mean....yikes! Apart from the odd set-piece, it was a bland, paint-by-numbers shooter.
Graphics snag people, but gameplay shackles them.
Peace.
-Moscow
YES. I want both. Developers that do not provide both are lazy. With todays technology there is no reason not to have both.
Lazy and Funded are kind of a two edge sword. Graphics should never superscede the story/content. But I appreciate the input. With todays technology graphics come at a high cost of money and machine speed. Once leaping over a certain hurdle, of whatever you set your target market to be, you loose the potential customers that can not run your game because of its requirements.
You dont buy a game only for good graph.
Someone hasn't paid attention to the game industry for the past few years...
I don't care about graphics (as long as its not the retarded text-based game and some EGA dos crap). If game doesn't have the best graphics up today's standards, but has great atmosphere and gameplay - then it's the best game ever. Look at the Fallout Tactics (fallout fanatics don't even start about how FoT is not original - stfu), the game's nothing but an overview of "3D" world where you control characters to do stuff... It doesn't have any fancy realtime shadows, any pixel shaders or whatever they have nowadays. It's just a presentable game with an immersing atmosphere and amazing storyline... Hell you could sit on one level whole night doing it either perfectly or doing it over and over accomplishing the goat different way each time. Graphics doesn't mean quality. Graphics is just sugar in your tea. It's up to you how much is it to your taste and what kind of tea do you prefer. Look at Deus Ex 2 for example, looking great - has all the DX9 stuff, yet it's missing the whole storyline immersion and the freedom of play that DX1 had. Then there's Far Cry, immersing atmosphere, and storyline with a punch. The tropical island graphics they just make that game want you to stay longer and explore it in depth!
imo cool graphics doesnt have anything to do with gameplay since these are two totally different factors.
I still play pacman and galaga every now and then :o Nice graphics? :lol: Gameplay? Excellent.
Tho you can't compare these games to NC and i do like nice graphics, at the end it all comes down to gameplay.
i really appreciate your input everyone. just been struggling with this lately, cuase i have heard a handful of admit ppl only want eye candy and the best storyline and say that "they should have both" it would be nice to be able to see your lead female characters nipples get hard when she walks into a cold room. but if its not important to gameplay or atomsphere why have a system that can do that. its good to see there are still realistic ppl in the gaming community
Yes. Definetly.
It is also important in regards to computer evolution, and computer evolution is important in regards to Medical Science.
i really appreciate your input everyone. just been struggling with this lately, cuase i have heard a handful of admit ppl only want eye candy and the best storyline and say that "they should have both" it would be nice to be able to see your lead female characters nipples get hard when she walks into a cold room. but if its not important to gameplay or atomsphere why have a system that can do that. its good to see there are still realistic ppl in the gaming communityEven though i dont like your reference i will answer your question.. People who dont like graphics and like gameplay are realistic? You arent right! Both people who want graphics or people who want gameplay are not realistic.. People who want both and game companies who try to give the best of both are *realistic* Graphics are the second most important thing in a game.. Because *it* is needed for a game to work unless you just want text.. ^^ Graphics *are* more important to people tahn they think and regardless of what they say.. Graphics are VERY important in an MMORPG.. Atleast to some people like me! I like to beable to *feel* myself in a game.. I *would* like to be able act as my character and my character be something in a *world*.. Bad graphics do not help with this at all.. Bad animations will not *help* with this.. and bad textures will *not* help with this.. I cant even enjoy neocron because of how bad graphics are in it.. Realistic emotes.. and *your* reference can be helpful in a game like an MMORPG if you want to *emerse* yourself into the game and feel like you in a *real world*. I *will* buy a game if it has good graphics.. That is onloy reason I will ever buy Racing games.. because they usually have the *best* graphics for consoles.. So whoever says *you wont buy a game just for graphics* is wrong.. ^^ Sounds and graphics are what *create* atmosphere.. Other players do not or atleast do not contribute to *atmosphere* as much as graphics and good ambient sounds.. Which unfortunately Neocron has nether of.. :(
I've been playing games since VIC 20 and Zinclair, those vintage boxes you know. Graphics back then was incredible good when the C64 arrived, it got many colors, even!
My first MMO was Anarchy Online. Graphics wise, it blew me away, and it still looks very good. I will never forget travelling through the desert with a friend, standing on a hilltop watching a sandstorm build. It was one of those magic moments. I have never seen that kind of weather effects in other MMO's after AO.
I played FF7 too and remember very well that death scene, was horrible. Without the FMV, it probably wouldn't have been that strong. Oh well I got to slay him later on :)
The story was not that big, and I hated the combat system.. sooo.
I was in the Asheron's Call 2 beta, and again it looked stunningly good, but story.. hm what story?
Neocron got a nice story, took me some time to read through it all. It got decent graphics, and I am of course hoping to see a "new" Neocron with the DX9 support when BDoY is out. New players are always looking at the graphics first, the first impression when you run out into the city is very, VERY important. We all know that.
To me, story and overall feeling is more important than the latest in graphics, but good graphics always is welcome, anyway.
Kasumi - I think maybe i need to clarify my statement a bit. When I talk about "unrealistic" graphics, im reffering to something along the lines of far cry, halflife 2, doom3, and so on.... these engines are way too much for most MMOs. It would be nice if we could have that graphics system in a game. But system requirements prevent us from doing so. To reach a TRUE MMO status you have to reach the "masses" and most of the masses dont have ATI x800s of Geforce 6s. I think a graphics engine shooting for a target market of the Gen 2 video cards would be more than enough to emmerse the player in the world of eyecandy. I also should say that with a system like that the quality of the textures really has nothing to do with what i am reffering to. Im not so much reffering to the content as i am the power of the engine. You could give someone the halflife 2 engine and if they content team sucks...the game is going to look awful. So I hope that eases your mind a bit as to the fact that Im not saying i dont want stuff to look good. but i also dont need 8 texture pipelines with pixel and vertex shaders. :)
I *will* buy a game if it has good graphics.. That is onloy reason I will ever buy Racing games.. because they usually have the *best* graphics for consoles.. So whoever says *you wont buy a game just for graphics* is wrong.. ^^
Oh god. I'm sorry, but I just can't take that statement seriously.
Graphics are nice and everything, but to buy a game JUST BECAUSE of graphics is nothing short of plain idiocy. I really wouldn't mind if developers started making Xbox/GC/PS2 games with SNES-standard graphics. As long
Deus Ex is one of the greatest games of all time. It is around 5 years old, but I wouldn't have a second thought about paying full price for it if I had to.
Deus Ex 2 has amazing graphics, but gameplay-wise it is average at best. I wouldn't have paid full price for it on launch day, I wouldn't pay full price for it now, and I would never pay full-price for it.
I am really starting to lose all hope in the games industry.
Aziraphale
21-05-04, 16:08
I've just started replaying X-com and X-com: terror from the deep.
So no, graphics dont matter much :D
But for an MMORPG, I think they kinda do, let's face it, the gameplay for most of them really ISN'T good. It's just addictive. Spending 6+ hours a day squinting at pixels would destroy your eyes, having lovely graphics (EQ2 for example) just makes it a lot more pleasant.
I am really starting to lose all hope in the games industry.
This is my problem as well, I believe that the general public has brain most developers into believing that a state-of-the-art graphics engine and a mediocre story line will give you a best seller. Im of the opinion that a game should have all its focus on content and story. And the graphics engine only wrap itself around it, like wrapping around a great christmas present. You wouldnt buy your dauther a pony and then wrap it in in newspaper. Nor would you $hit in a box and wrap it with gold paper and a silk ribbon. Which sad to say most games coming out in the last year or two have just done that. Tried to make up for what they lacked in content and story with "THE BEST GRAPHICS I HAVE EVER SEEN IN THIS GENRE". I hate when I read a view and the first thing that comes out of the person mouth is "these graphics are amazing". I immediately stop reading. Its like reading a review on a video card and someone saying that the card can do 8xAA 16xAS 1600x1200 @ 120 FPS. I laugh at that every time cause really above 75FPS is a waste. Becuase most monitors dont refresh faster than 75Hz. But thats a whole other issue.
I just think that the engine suitable for the game. Not the game suited for the graphics engine.
The thing is, how do you define "good graphics"?
When Doom first came out it blew people away.
When the first pictures of Donkey Kong Country were released, no-one believed it was real.
Yet if either of those games were released now, the consumers and critics would deem it unacceptable. You really can't judge a game on its graphics because standards are always changing. Gameplay on the other hand will always mean the same thing. To me, Metroid Prime is just as good now as Super Mario World was when it was released.
And if you consider it lazy for a developer not to make the most of modern technology, then why don't you do better?
I have said it before and I will say it again as many times as I have to;
A good game with bad graphics is still a good game.
A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game.
edit: it should also be noted that I don't class FMVs and pre-rendered backgrounds/characters as graphics. FMVs have been possible on any CD-based format since the Mega CD.
I usually go after graphics as it gives more realism, more realism means more fun :P
Edit: I mean, who wouldnt think Deus Ex 1 would suck with the Doom engine? :)
Immersion is the key. You can immerse people with sub-par graphics by making up for it in other areas. You can also create a photo realistic scene and ruin it when the player clips through a wall and gets stuck on a Coke can.
Personally, I find NC doesn't have too bad an atmosphere. It's cool when it rains, and the adverts/announcements help too. That's not to say there isn't room for lots of improvement. Some different voices thrown in would help. The subway could be greatly improved to make train stations more like actual train stations.
The actual graphics themselves also aren't too bad. Third person weapon textures are a little lacking, along with some other world textures, but characters aren't actually too bad. They don't use a great deal of polys, but they still don't look very blocky. Only the textures let them down - remember the original UT? Characters in that looked great, but they actually didn't use any more polys than NC chars do now, just hi-res textures.
In my opinion, a general texture overhaul would be the key to improving visual quality, models don't really need anything at all.
A good game with bad graphics is still a good game.
A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game. This is an opinion! I can with a bad story but with Photrealistic graphics will be as good as a game with good story but bad graphics.. It depends on what people *want* to play and what there choice is.. Even though someone doesnt believe it *I* will play a game with good graphics but not very good story..
And if you consider it lazy for a developer not to make the most of modern technology, then why don't you do better?Some developers are *lazy* and will not try to do better.. Some cannot do better because of limit of time or money.. Can I do better than what?? I have played games that are older than neocron or as old but look *alot* better.. Neocron is an MMORPG so You cant use lots of graphics but what Neocron has now is *unacceptable* with most people who want to play *modern* games..
The actual graphics themselves also aren't too bad. Third person weapon textures are a little lacking, along with some other world textures,
but characters aren't actually too bad. They don't use a great deal of polys, but they still don't look very blocky. Only the textures let them down - remember the original UT? Characters in that looked great, but they actually didn't use any more polys than NC chars do now, just hi-res textures. Textures *and* MOdels in third and first person in Neocron are very *bad*.. I think even old games like Half Life have higher polygon count in there weapons.. The plasma rifle looks like a toy gun without its *metter* moving.. it looks like a sticker(?).. ^^
I usually go after graphics as it gives more realism, more realism means more fun :P I dont know if you are being *serious* but this is why I play games with better graphics.. It is more FUN!
This is an opinion!
*sigh* No it isn't. Read it again.
A good game with bad graphics is still a good game.
A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game.
A good game with bad graphics cannot be a bad game because as it says first it is a good game, and a good game cannot be a bad game.......bah I'm confused :confused: :p
The last word in your post is fun. Indeed fun is the most important factor of a game, above immersion, realism, looks or anything else. Are you really trying to tell me that
Graphics = Fun?
Realism = Fun?
Immersion = Fun?
No.
Imagine for example that you are someone who really, REALLY hates football games. You despise the sport as a whole and everything to do with it, and the whole concept of the games just puts you off.
You see a football game that has amazing graphics, is incredibly realistic and immersive, so much so that you at times feel like a football player/coach.
If you really hate football, are you going to enjoy playing that game?
No.
*sigh* No it isn't. Read it again.
A good game with bad graphics is still a good game.
A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game.
A good game with bad graphics cannot be a bad game because as it says first it is a good game, and a good game cannot be a bad game.......bah I'm confused :confused: :p
The last word in your post is fun. Indeed fun is the most important factor of a game, above immersion, realism, looks or anything else. Are you really trying to tell me that
Graphics = Fun?
Realism = Fun?
Immersion = Fun?
No.
Imagine for example that you are someone who really, REALLY hates football games. You despise the sport as a whole and everything to do with it, and the whole concept of the games just puts you off.
You see a football game that has amazing graphics, is incredibly realistic and immersive, so much so that you at times feel like a football player/coach.
If you really hate football, are you going to enjoy playing that game?
No.
I dont like sports type games.. So of couse I wouldnt buy it regardless of graphics.. Lets say a *new* RPG is released it has the best graphics EVER.. Nothing is as great in graphics.. but it has a terrible story.. I would buy it..
A good game with bad graphics is still a good game.
A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game.
You confused me.. ^^
Would A bad game with good graphics is still a bad game.. An OPINION?? I am a confused..
Graphics = Fun?
Realism = Fun?
Immersion = Fun?
What gives you Immersion? Graphics and Ambient SOUNDS... Graphics being fun and not being fun is an opinion.. Realism *is* fun that is what most game developers try to want..
I think graphics is important when it manages to create the right atmosphere. That said it doesn`t always have to be "good" graphics to do that, charm goes along way to. Most of all I value the a game is rendered fast, no hang ups and high fps. I hate it when mouse cursors start to act up and go all jiddery because of low fps. I always try to balance fluidity with graphic level, but fluidity weigh heavier than good graphics. Its not just about giving me an edge in fps multiplayer games.
That is onloy reason I will ever buy Racing games.. because they usually have the *best* graphics for consoles..
I dont like sports type games.. So of couse I wouldnt buy it regardless of graphics..
You just contradicted yourself.
Look. Here's what I'm trying to say.
Graphics can make a game more fun.
However, graphics alone cannot make a game fun.
Graphics alone = Nothing
Gameplay alone = Fun
Graphics + Gameplay = More Fun
That is what I have been trying to say all along.
Bringing me back to the original point of the thread.
Yes, graphics can make a game more fun, but they are not at all necessary. Gameplay is all that is needed for a fun game. Anything else - Graphics, Sound, Storyline, Realism, Design - is just an added bonus.
You just contradicted yourself.
Look. Here's what I'm trying to say.
Graphics can make a game more fun.
However, graphics alone cannot make a game fun.
Graphics alone = Nothing
Graphics + Gameplay = Fun
That is what I have been trying to say all along.
racing games are an exception.. ;) Of course graphics canno just make a game.. I know ther eare other things that are needed but graphics are *second* most important thing in my opinion.. ^^ Gameplay is the last thing I look at for a game.. :)
You cant use lots of graphics but what Neocron has now is *unacceptable* with most people who want to play *modern* games..Textures *and* MOdels in third and first person in Neocron are very *bad*.. I think even old games like Half Life have higher polygon count in there weapons.. The plasma rifle looks like a toy gun without its *metter* moving.. it looks like a sticker(?).. ^^
How does the lack of a scripted texture show that the models are bad? The plasma rifle is actually one of the decent quality textures. Just because the meter isn't animated doesn't show anything apart from it could do with being animated like the holographic signs are. Half-Life models look to be about the same poly count as NC weapons to me, but with higher quality textures. However HL is also guilty of some low-res textures dotted about.
As I showed, if you play Unreal Tournament, you'll notice the player characters are very high quality. When you then look very closely, you see that they have approximately the same poly count as NC characters, but they have excellent textures. That's all NC needs - increased poly count on top of that woul result in little more visual quality at a significant cost in performance. Hi-res textures would be worth the performance hit, especially if the updated engine can handle it. Increased poly counts would not.
Gameplay is the last thing I look at for a game.. :)
Urgh.......here we go again...........
Remember, you are playing a game, so gameplay must surely be the most important thing?
Perhaps our definitions of gameplay are very different. Either way, I give up. I am not going to even attempt to understand what is going through your mind O_o
All I can say is, if gameplay doesn't matter to you, why not just watch a film?
i really like lethys' logic. makes alot of sense. ppl so enthralled with graphics should just be allowed to watch the cinematics of the game and then go to the next. why do anyhting in between :p
How does the lack of a scripted texture show that the models are bad? The plasma rifle is actually one of the decent quality textures. Just because the meter isn't animated doesn't show anything apart from it could do with being animated like the holographic signs are. Half-Life models look to be about the same poly count as NC weapons to me, but with higher quality textures. However HL is also guilty of some low-res textures dotted about.
As I showed, if you play Unreal Tournament, you'll notice the player characters are very high quality. When you then look very closely, you see that they have approximately the same poly count as NC characters, but they have excellent textures. That's all NC needs - increased poly count on top of that woul result in little more visual quality at a significant cost in performance. Hi-res textures would be worth the performance hit, especially if the updated engine can handle it. Increased poly counts would not.I know.. I have never played *Unreal Tournament* so I dont know.. but I dont know I would have to look at them to know..^^ Lineage II uses high polygon count models.. but low resolution Textures.. atleast for something.. I fyou look close at the models the texture is *blurred* lost.
ow does the lack of a scripted texture show that the models are bad? The plasma rifle is actually one of the decent quality textures. In my opinion this is *being* lazy.. I was refering to the textures not the models for the meter if I said model I am sorry.. ^^ The smallest graphic problems in games bother me more than the bigger graphic problems.. ^^ And the meter on any of the plasma weapons not moving is very *bothersome*
Urgh.......here we go again...........
Remember, you are playing a game, so gameplay must surely be the most important thing?
Perhaps our definitions of gameplay are very different. Either way, I give up. I am not going to even attempt to understand what is going through your mind o_O
All I can say is, if gameplay doesn't matter to you, why not just watch a film?
I confuse myself sometimes.. poor english! Ok *gameplay* isnt that most important thing to me.. But games like Final Fantasy X-2 I liked looking at the graphics and following story as much.. But thisisnt the samehting for all games.. But games like Gran Turismo.. I will just play it to see the next *pretty* vehicle.. or to see the different types of things the games does.. the gameplay (the raceing part I do not care much about).. ^^ I hope that helps explain.. If not sorry.> ^^
yah try not to confuse her. english isnt her native language! lol this is a good debate.
.. But games like Gran Turismo.. I will just play it to see the next *pretty* vehicle.. or to see the different types of things the games does.. the gameplay (the raceing part I do not care much about)
Buying and selling cars in Gran Turismo is actually part of the gameplay. If you enjoy that particular part of the game then it does have good gameplay.
As I said before, your definition of gameplay is different from mine.
I know.. I have never played *Unreal Tournament* so I dont know.. but I dont know I would have to look at them to know..^^ Lineage II uses high polygon count models.. but low resolution Textures.. atleast for something.. I fyou look close at the models the texture is *blurred* lost.
Yes, and that's much more noticable than the 'blocky' effect of a low quality model. Hence the textures should be looked at first rather than the models. The main reason for it is that you can apply shading to the texture itself, and still have it darken/lighten in dark/bright areas, while still actually applying it to a low detail model, and it can look very realistic and three dimensional. The only real reason for going much higher poly count is to have moving light sources and cast shadows perfectly. Rendering this much detail on the fly is very intensive though, and doesn't provide enough of a visual improvement to justify it. In an FPS game with a very effective engine and limited actual player numbers, or most single player games like FF series, it's fine, but for a MMORPG, it is not, thus the low(ish) poly models and higher detail textures provides a better tradeoff between performance and quality.
In my opinion this is *being* lazy.. I was refering to the textures not the models for the meter if I said model I am sorry.. ^^ The smallest graphic problems in games bother me more than the bigger graphic problems.. ^^ And the meter on any of the plasma weapons not moving is very *bothersome*
It's not necessarily a case of being lazy, it may not even be supported by the engine. I don't think you can call someone lazy on the grounds that they didn't write the code to support one small feature which is present in a small part of the game. Especially considering more time taken to write that code is less time fixing the bugs. I'd say crashing is just a tad more irritating than having a static meter on my plasma cannon.
Yes, and that's much more noticable than the 'blocky' effect of a low quality model. Hence the textures should be looked at first rather than the models. The main reason for it is that you can apply shading to the texture itself, and still have it darken/lighten in dark/bright areas, while still actually applying it to a low detail model, and it can look very realistic and three dimensional. The only real reason for going much higher poly count is to have moving light sources and cast shadows perfectly. Rendering this much detail on the fly is very intensive though, and doesn't provide enough of a visual improvement to justify it. In an FPS game with a very effective engine and limited actual player numbers, or most single player games like FF series, it's fine, but for a MMORPG, it is not, thus the low(ish) poly models and higher detail textures provides a better tradeoff between performance and quality.
I am a graphics artist.. as well as 3D designer.. :P You didnt have to *explain* this to me.. I already knew.. ^^
It's not necessarily a case of being lazy, it may not even be supported by the engine. I don't think you can call someone lazy on the grounds that they didn't write the code to support one small feature which is present in a small part of the game. Especially considering more time taken to write that code is less time fixing the bugs. I'd say crashing is just a tad more irritating than having a static meter on my plasma cannon.Yep! I guess I shouldnt of said that.. ^_^ But like i say small things like that bother me more than big things that get fixed fast.. ^^
@Scikar if I sound rude sorry! I dont mean to.. :)
*Realises why Kasumi preferes the PSP to the DS*
At the end of the day, Mario > Farcry.
FF7 > FF8.
Monkey Island 1 > Monkey Island 4
*Realises why Kasumi preferes the PSP to the DS*
At the end of the day, Mario > Farcry.
FF7 > FF8.
Monkey Island 1 > Monkey Island 4
At least someone around here has a brain :lol:
*Realises why Kasumi preferes the PSP to the DS*
At the end of the day, Mario > Farcry.
FF7 > FF8.
Monkey Island 1 > Monkey Island 4
PSP and DS have nothing to do with thread.. I also *dont* prefer one over other.. I just know one is better than other..
At least someone around here has a brain :lol:
Lethys, the *dumbasses* who crave graphics are dramaticly helping to boost Medical Technology.
In the past 5 years, medical tech has increased dramatically due to the increased power of computers. This increase in computer technology is due to the Profits on the Computer Game Market overtaking Holywood.
Lethys, the *dumbasses* who crave graphics are dramaticly helping to boost Medical Technology.
In the past 5 years, medical tech has increased dramatically due to the increased power of computers. This increase in computer technology is due to the Profits on the Computer Game Market overtaking Holywood.
I'd imagine the profits on games alone have nothing to do with it. Graphics hardware perhaps, more likely however is profits from selling hardware in large amounts to companies. Intel and AMD get money from having their CPUs in the thousand strong orders made by corporations, not just from gamers. Profits on games themselves are actually related to consoles more than PCs. And consoles do fairly little for increasing the technology level of PCs, they instead inherit from advances made in PCs.
Also Lethys' point was not that graphics are a bad thing to want, just that someone who plays a game only for the graphics is eseentially watching a more exepensive film that they have to do extra work to watch.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.