What has happened to the gaming community...

[Tom Bombadildo]

So I've been strolling around a few gaming boards yesterday, checking out reviews for Rage and checking out peoples opinions and such. I saw more bad then good about the game and the ONLY thing people were crying and whining about and giving bad reviews was because of the apparent poor textures the game has. So I decided what the hell, why don't I give this game a try and see what all the fuss is about. I installed it, played it for about 4-5 hours, and...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH EVERYBODY???? My god! The game looks amazing! I have NO problems with the graphics whatsoever! Holy christ! What the hell happened??? When did everybody turn into graphics whores? I just...I can't...I don't even! Since when did graphics even mean so much that it basically defines how entertaining the game is? I mean sure, not everybody is like this but if a majority of the bad proclaimed by people is because of the graphics (WHICH LOOK GREAT) then there is a problem here. If this is the way the gaming industry is going to be from now on I...I just don't wanna live on this planet anymore!


Post your thoughts, do graphics really define how great a game will play/sell?

 

[haflore]

Rage got serious hype for its supposedly godlike graphics, so I guess some people just had unrealistic expectations.

In my opinion, graphics don't mean much. It's nice to have a pretty game, but the gameplay, plot and other elements are far more important to making a game good or bad.

 

[Slyakin]

People care about several things when it comes to a game: graphics, audio, gameplay, and other things.

Graphics has gone up on the list of important things a game should have.

Not to mention that RAGE really DOES have bad textures.

[yt]0FefSRFQj5o[/yt]

 

[Lube_Skyballer]

Crappy textures or not, the game imho is just fun. I don't understand the people complaining about those issues the WHOLE time. ffs just enjoy the game.
Every game from varying from the Atari 2600 to the PS3 don't need graphics to be a good game, a game needs to be FUN.
The gaming community is losing their focus....

And it's in people's nature to complain. People are just never satisfied...

(Althought Rage technical issues (severe texture pop-in) were annoying. But they can be fixed so stop complaining)

 

[HaniKazmi]

The problem with rage was that it was split over three DVDs simply because it was said to have amazing graphics: it's nothing special otherwise. When thoes graphics turned out to be good, but not amazing, people felt disappointed.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

People care about several things when it comes to a game: graphics, audio, gameplay, and other things.

Graphics has gone up on the list of important things a game should have.

Not to mention that RAGE really DOES have bad textures.

[yt]0FefSRFQj5o[/yt]

Sure there have been graphics problems for certain cards, and really sometimes you can't help that, but if you're basing your entire opinion on the graphics on this one video (or even the many videos out there like this) then there is a problem (Not sure if you are or not, just assuming) I have a lot less power than the PC described in the video (I3 dual core 3.1ghz, NVIDIA Geforce 440 512mb gddr5, 1tb hd, 4gb ram) and I have absolutely none of those problems, and my game doesn't look at all like that. Mine looks good.

 

[jamesaa]

The only problem i've read regarding the textures in rage were they are "popping in" so if you turned around quickly you got really shoddy textures until the higher quality ones loaded - i'm no graphics whore but something like that would bug the hell out of me.

Haven't played it myself though so how bad that really is i have no idea.

Graphics are not high on my list of features a game needs, give me two identical games one with great graphics and one with outdated graphics then of course i would go for the one with better graphics, but if a game with poorer graphics but great gameplay is available then i'd get that.

 

[Burton]

In this case is the people's expectations. If a game is known for having "x" factor then people expect too see the "x" factor at it's best. I think RAGE expectations were to have high graphics and that's why gamers are whining. Sometimes people whine because they like to criticize something (weather the critics are with a logical base or not) and when the opportunity comes they just strike.

 

[machomuu]

It's for this reason that I go on a gaming forum rather than going to gaming sites like IGN or Gamespot to talk about games.

 

[prowler]

Graphics effect gameplay. If a game has poor textures that take a noticeable time to load, the experience of that game as a whole isn't going to be too good.

 

[s4mid4re]

I don't think it's ALL because of expectations. According to wikipedia, it's a graphics card compatibility problem:

Many Windows version users have criticized the lack of any advanced graphics options within the game, as well as the console-focused game engine.[52] Several reports of the game not running properly have lowered the Metacritic's user score well below the journalist's scores. Both console[citation needed] and PC gamers,[52] have been critical of the large amount texture pop-in which can occur, even on high-end graphics cards.[52] AMD[52] and Nvidia[citation needed] have both announced drivers that will attempt to fix the issues with Rage.

So basically, you were on the lucky end while the others weren't; you can't blame them for having an incompatibility issue.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Graphics effect gameplay. If a game has poor textures that take a noticeable time to load, the experience of that game as a whole isn't going to be too good.

Perhaps this may be a bit obvious, but Minecraft. I say that as I've played on a PC which took about 30 seconds to load most of the world as I turn or move. I loved and still love the shit out of it, despite the crappy/laggy load times for the textures. And again the load time isn't even as bad as everyone makes it out to be

 

[prowler]

Perhaps this may be a bit obvious, but Minecraft. I say that as I've played on a PC which took about 30 seconds to load most of the world as I turn or move. I loved and still love the shit out of it, despite the crappy/laggy load times for the textures. And again the load time isn't even as bad as everyone makes it out to be

Minecraft is Minecraft though, you can't really compare it to RAGE and other titles.

 

[machomuu]

Graphics effect gameplay. If a game has poor textures that take a noticeable time to load, the experience of that game as a whole isn't going to be too good.

Well then it'd be more accurate to say graphics affect the experience, not the gameplay; the two are separate entities.

 

[Slyakin]

Graphics effect gameplay. If a game has poor textures that take a noticeable time to load, the experience of that game as a whole isn't going to be too good.

Well then it'd be more accurate to say graphics affect the experience, not the gameplay; the two are separate entities.

Not when the graphics literally affect gameplay. How will you shoot an enemy if it doesn't even load into the image until it's 5 feet away from you? (Maybe not RAGE, but other games do have problems like this)

 

[machomuu]

Graphics effect gameplay. If a game has poor textures that take a noticeable time to load, the experience of that game as a whole isn't going to be too good.

Well then it'd be more accurate to say graphics affect the experience, not the gameplay; the two are separate entities.

Not when the graphics literally affect gameplay. How will you shoot an enemy if it doesn't even load into the image until it's 5 feet away from you? (Maybe not RAGE, but other games do have problems like this)

That's true, I won't deny that graphics can affect the gameplay. I was strictly referring to the quoted post rather than anything regarding the subject, though.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Perhaps this may be a bit obvious, but Minecraft. I say that as I've played on a PC which took about 30 seconds to load most of the world as I turn or move. I loved and still love the shit out of it, despite the crappy/laggy load times for the textures. And again the load time isn't even as bad as everyone makes it out to be

Minecraft is Minecraft though, you can't really compare it to RAGE and other titles.

Well I suppose you're right there...but I stand by my statement that everyone is over exaggerating and it really isn't all that bad. Sometimes it does pop the textures in but it doesn't effect the gameplay whatsoever. It's just...well the textures popping in. So boohoo, the graphics look bad for literally half a second while it loads the texture! THIS GAME HAS THE WORST GRAPHICS EVER!

 

[haflore]

Perhaps this may be a bit obvious, but Minecraft. I say that as I've played on a PC which took about 30 seconds to load most of the world as I turn or move. I loved and still love the shit out of it, despite the crappy/laggy load times for the textures. And again the load time isn't even as bad as everyone makes it out to be

Minecraft is Minecraft though, you can't really compare it to RAGE and other titles.

Well I suppose you're right there...but I stand by my statement that everyone is over exaggerating and it really isn't all that bad. Sometimes it does pop the textures in but it doesn't effect the gameplay whatsoever. It's just...well the textures popping in. So boohoo, the graphics look bad for literally half a second while it loads the texture! THIS GAME HAS THE WORST GRAPHICS EVER!

Worse than Grand Theft Auto, with its notorious texture pop-in!?

 

[prowler]

Well then it'd be more accurate to say graphics affect the experience, not the gameplay; the two are separate entities.

No, it can mean both and I meant both.

 

[machomuu]

Perhaps this may be a bit obvious, but Minecraft. I say that as I've played on a PC which took about 30 seconds to load most of the world as I turn or move. I loved and still love the shit out of it, despite the crappy/laggy load times for the textures. And again the load time isn't even as bad as everyone makes it out to be

Minecraft is Minecraft though, you can't really compare it to RAGE and other titles.

Well I suppose you're right there...but I stand by my statement that everyone is over exaggerating and it really isn't all that bad. Sometimes it does pop the textures in but it doesn't effect the gameplay whatsoever. It's just...well the textures popping in. So boohoo, the graphics look bad for literally half a second while it loads the texture! THIS GAME HAS THE WORST GRAPHICS EVER!

Well if people look for graphics in a game who's to argue with them? For instance, I love great music in a game and it's something I look for. If a game has bad music but amazing gameplay I'm less likely to play it than I am if it's a good game with good music.

Well, probably, but you get my point, it's the same scenario.

Well then it'd be more accurate to say graphics affect the experience, not the gameplay; the two are separate entities.

No, it can mean both and I meant both.

Okay, I never said you didn't mean both.