Opinion: Are Graphics Too Important Nowadays?

Inevitably, one of the main advantages of this gen over last is the graphical potential of the respective consoles; with enhanced technology and more advanced tools, developers are now able to utilize stunning character models, environments and Hollywood-like special effects on both the Xbox 360 and PS3. While these graphical capabilities arguably help to immerse us gamers into the experience more than ever before, a certain question remains: are graphics too important in this generation of consoles? It could be argued that many games are criticised harshly by gamers because of their graphics, ignoring what is seemingly more important: the gameplay. I don't feel as though this is necessarily the case amongst professional critics, as it's essentially their job to judge games in all aspects; not just in the graphics department. But from my experiences on various gaming forums, there's reason to suggest that too great an emphasis may be placed on graphics.

Graphics can both enhance and undermine a game's reputation. In terms of the latter, I think that Halo 3: ODST serves as a recent - and prime - example of a game being criticised on the basis of its visuals. In many ways, I agree that these criticisms are warranted; people naturally expect a progression in all aspects, and although ODST is essentially an expansion - although the rumoured price would suggest otherwise - it could be argued that it looks too similar to Halo 3. On the other side of the pond, it looks to me as though the game plays pretty great. But is this really been pointed out by its critics? Not from what I can tell. It looks as though the main criticisms have stemmed from the game's visuals rather than its gameplay, but perhaps that's warranted in many ways. As for graphics enhancing a game's reputation, Killzone 2 instantly springs to mind. I'm in no way suggesting that Killzone 2's gameplay isn't up to scratch - it wouldn't be scoring a 91 on Metacritic if that was the case - but I think it's fair to say that an incredible amount of attention was paid to the game's stunning visuals, with its gameplay hardly in the spotlight. Fair enough I guess - when a game looks that good, it's hard to give much thought to anything else. But in the build-up to the game's release, I don't remember hearing too much about anything else besides the game's visuals. If you look at Metacritic and other review sites, the majority of the 'top' games - in terms of review scores, at least - boast great graphics. While there are exceptions on the list, it does seem as though graphics play quite a significant role in determining a game's quality. So, do graphics give too much of an edge to certain games? Are they used to separate the 'good' from the 'great' - and is that fair? Would Killzone 2 have been held in such high regard had its graphics been somewhat less spectacular? Sure, all purely hypothetical scenarios, but it's something worth considering.

But there's plenty to suggest that gameplay - quite rightly - still dictates quality. Coinciding with the previous argument about ODST, it would seem that Halo 3 has shown that graphics aren't the be all and end all in games this generation. Despite what, in my opinion, are far from outstanding visuals, Bungie's title remains the number one played game on Xbox Live, leaving the more graphically outstanding games such as Gears of War 2 lower down on the list. What's that down to? A fine online structure and fun, addictive gameplay. It's probably accurate to say that very few people have bought - and loved - Halo 3 for its visuals; instead, its gameplay and multiplayer have been responsible for the game's incredible success. Equally, Left 4 Dead - which remains one of my favourite games this generation - is hardly a graphical showcase; I think it's fair to say that the Source Engine is starting to shows its age a little bit. But that didn't stop the game earning a very respectable score of 89 on Metacritic. Once again, the graphics weren't really important; a fabulous co-op experience and fun gameplay were responsible for Left 4 Dead's success. So, two very successful games this generation - in terms of both sales and reviews - have shown that graphics are not always a determining factor of success.

I think that, looking at the evidence, arguing that graphics are too important is slightly wide of the mark. I still think gamers acknowledge that graphics are just one part of the jigsaw in solving the puzzle of making a great game; they don't make or break a game. I do, however, believe that graphics have become more of a key component in games when compared to last gen, with scrutiny from gamers now being shared almost equally between gameplay and graphics. I think it's a natural occurrence that has come as a result of advanced technology and, consequently, more possibilities. Tetris was never going to be criticised during its time for simple visuals; the N64, which provided enhanced graphics when compared to previous consoles such as the SNES, still placed a greater emphasis on fun gameplay; and the graphical capabilities of the PS2 and Xbox meant that gamers started paying a little more attention to the standard of a game's graphics. With increased opportunities comes increased expectations, which is something that I'm sure will once again be the case with the next generation of consoles. So overall, I don't think graphics can be considered too important an aspect, but it's become more increasingly important nonetheless. I mean, if your game looks anything like Killzone 2 or Gears of War 2, it can only help.

Do you think graphics are too important nowadays?

Trine - Demo Impressions

I think it's fair to say that downloadable games have grown increasingly popular recently. Personally, ever since a little beauty known as Braid was released last year, I've been paying more and more attention to the release of such titles. So, just imagine my delight when Trine was announced for release on PSN and PC later this year (although the recent news is that an XBL version is also in the works). The first trailer had me intrigued - 'LittleBigPlanet meets Lost Vikings' is what many initially said, which can only be a good thing surely? Trine went under the shadow slightly for quite a while but, during E3, Frozenbyte announced that a demo would be released in due course. Well, on 25th June, the Trine demo became available for download via Steam and various other sites. Being the curious lil' chap that I am, I decided to c-c-c-check it out.

The demo wastes no time at all, launching you straight into the story. One of the first things to admire is how well executed the cutscenes are; an artistic set of images is combined with charming narration to move the story along rather nicely, although it's clear that the story itself isn't the main focus here. The vibe from the cutscenes and story is very much something many would associate with your typical light-hearted, childhood tales. Of course, it'd be innaccurate to suggest that the story is going to sway gamers either way - it's more of an afterthought, really - but it's a nice touch that adds to the overall experience. I don't want to spoil the story for those who care about it, but let's just say that the three main characters - a thief, warrior and wizard - find themselves... stuck... in a bit of a tricky situation. That certain situation comes in handy for us gamers, as we're able to switch between each character on the fly.

Each character has his/her own tutorial at the start, so you can get to grips with their basic abilities. The first character you get to try out is the thief, whose basic abilities are a bow & arrow and a grappling hook. The thief is incredibly accessible in terms of controls, with the WASD keys used for movement and the mouse used for her abilities (left-click fires an arrow, while the right-click is used for the grappling hook). While each tutorial is unsurprisingly simple, it serves its purpose, while also offering an insight into the types of puzzles you'll be encountering later on. The wizard was next, and his abilities were rather intriguing; not only can he move certain objects (namely crates), but he is also able to draw boxes to help solve the puzzles in each level. In fact, the wizard essentially acts as a cheerleader for the game's physics-based gameplay, with his magical abilities paving way for some truly creative situations. These two abilities are controlled by the mouse, which comes in very handy. Indeed, it's hard to imagine whether the wizard's abilities will be as easily controlled through a controller - that's something we'll have to find out if and when a PSN/XBL demo is released (or we could just wait for the full game). Last up was the warrior, with his tour-de-force approach proving useful for... well, smashing things. His abilities were admittedly the least interesting out of the three but, like the other two characters, he was very easy to control, with a left-click of the mouse swinging his sword and a right-click raising his shield.

So, with the three tutorials out the way, I then had the chance to try an actual level out. One striking aspect of Trine is the flexibility in completing the various puzzles set out before you in each level. Whether you use the wizard's spells to conjure up crates, grapple onto ceilings with the thief or, you know, smash things with the warrior, each puzzle can be completed in a large number of ways. This alone ensures some replay value, as you keep coming back to levels to solve each puzzle in a different way - I even played the demo several times over, just to try out different methods of solving certain puzzles. The physics-based nature of the gameplay - the game's main attraction in many ways - also adds another dimension to the gameplay, with there being a sense of unpredictability when facing up to enemies or trying to reach the other side of a bottomless pit.

Within each level there are a large number of green bottles to collect - 50, to be exact. These bottles are 'experience'; collect enough of them, and you can level up each character and add to their abilities. The demo is very limited in this regard, but you get given a glimpse of the kind of upgrades you can implement in the full game, such as multiple arrows for the thief or the ability to conjure up more than one crate with the wizard. The upgrade system itself - from what I could tell - does seem to have a lot of depth to it, which should ensure that the gameplay mechanics still feel fresh as you progress through the game.

Overall, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't impressed with what Trine has to offer. A charming narrative, combined with simple controls and versatile gameplay mechanics, means that Trine looks set to be quite the downloadable gem. I haven't even mentioned the graphics yet, but they don't need much of a mention - to put it simply: Trine is an absolutely gorgeous game. I initially played it on the higher settings before switching to a lower setting (due to framerate issues), but it was certainly enough to conclude that this game classifies as one of the most beautiful looking platformer games ever to exist.

The revealed price of $29.99 (via Steam) has raised a few eyebrows, and rightly so - it's certainly pricey for a downloadable game, although rumour has it that the singleplayer campaign will last 7-8 hours (not to mention the co-op mode). It's hard to know at this point whether Trine will be worth the purchase; while it's an undoubtedly charming game, whether there will be enough twists and turns to warrant its price tag is questionable. But, for now, Trine has a lot of potential. Let's hope this is an exception to the rule that 'three's a crowd'...


Trine is due to be released on PC and PSN on 3rd July 2009, and is scheduled to be released later this year on XBL.