In my last article, I discussed how I thought that sometime in the future (whether it is near or far) games could become so realistic that they become too realistic for their own good. In response, one of my frequent readers (A Voice) had this to say about my approach to the topic:
You need to make the distinction between graphic fidelity and gameplay, then explore the issue from those two points because one neither necessarily includes or excludes the other. This post is problematic because you seem to be conflating the issues at some points and talking about one or the other at other points, something that utterly confuses the entire discussion. I hope you can see how this lack of clarity presents problems for the thesis sentence in the middle of the first paragraph, viz. are video games reaching a point where they will become too realistic to be enjoyed?
The first thing I would like to say is, “thank you.” I enjoy seeing what you have to say about what I write. I see why you say that the two aspects of graphics and gameplay are distinct, yet at the same time, dependent. I have two reasons why I stuck the two issues together, but talked about one or the other at some points. First, I didn’t quite realize it was necessary to distinguish the two, because (reason 2) I feel they way they depend on each other is more important in this situation than how they’re apart.
What do I mean? Well, at this point, will you be enveloped in a game that has a good mechanics and good mechanics, but PS2-level graphics? If you’re used to playing games with current-gen standards, it’ll be a bit disconcerting to play a modern game that looks old. On the flipside, if you play a beautifully rendered game, but the mechanics are absolutely broken, will you find yourself engulfed in the virtual world? Probably not.
It’s the combination of visual beauty and seamless gameplay that will allow a gamer to become so enveloped in the game that he or she regards it with more awe than reality. Of course, the two separate aspects (graphics and gameplay) are each important in their own right, they are much more important when glued together, in my opinion. When they come together perfectly, you get the game that defines a genre or even a generation.
Which of the two is the more important aspect? Personally, I feel that the mechanics and features of a game are more important. Pulling from things I state earlier, you could make a highly enveloping game by including voice recognition and comprehension. Another aspect is having a slicker UI, and having better controls is also important.
With that being said, you have to have at least decent graphics to make the mechanics of a game pop; they don’t have to be great, but at the very least, decent. When the graphics and physics of a game rival the superiority of the mechanics, an even greater game will be created.
So, in the end, I hope you can understand why I tended to clump the two together. Subconsciously, my mind realized just how important the two aspects were when intertwined, and although it may have come off as a bit confusing, I guess I can’t help that much.
I’m not a perfect writer; I’ll grow and learn how to more clearly state what I believe, but for now, I’m just sticking my opinions out there to the best of my abilities. Comments like this, which prod me to do better, are helping me grow as a writer, and will hopefully help my as I graduate high school and head off to college; I appreciate the input and feedback greatly.
Please consider leaving a like or a follow, and maybe check out the LP channels in the “Links” Tab.