Since when did GTA fans

[AuSsIeThUnDeR36]

Well for me I'm 38 and I grew up with C64 that had game graphics made of blocky pixels. But the thing was they were the best games ever. I think I speak for all the other 30+ age group here that have seen graphics evolve over time. Yes, the graphics that are created by today's standards are outstanding. But it's ALWAYS been about the gameplay. If the game doesn't play how it should operate, then it's crap and isn't worth bothering with. There were some games on the old C64 I remember that had good graphics but were utter crap to play. Then others had not as great graphics but would keep you fascinated for hours. There has to be a balance. Make a great game with good graphics and awesome gameplay and you're on a winner.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Graphics are just a bonus to me. People say GTA IV was all about graphics, but then again compared to some games at that time (MGSIV for example) its graphics were above average.

 

In saying that I don't still play it for that reason. I genuinely like its gameplay.

 

Sure GTA V's graphics aren't Crysis quality, but they're still pretty damn good for such a large open world game. It astounds me when people complain about them.

[wwinterj]

I've been gaming 20+ years and still to this day play retro games(Sonic, Mario and so on). Can't say I care about graphics at all. Gameplay is the most important thing.

Edited July 20, 2013 by wwinterj

[high247]

If you're a OG gamer you know Gameplay > Graphics all day.

 

[pariah87]

I'm an OG gamer and I care about graphics.

[DonkeyEatingCheese]

Story> Gameplay> Graphics

 

 

I will play a game if it has a good story even if the gameplay sucks. If the gameplay is good but the story isn't then I'll still play it, but it needs to be really good. I don't give a crap about the graphics. If I wanted good graphics I would have built a gaming PC and played Crysis.

 

 

[redx165]

 

Story> Gameplay> Graphics 

 

 

I will play a game if it has a good story even if the gameplay sucks. If the gameplay is good but the story isn't then I'll still play it, but it needs to be really good. I don't give a crap about the graphics. If I wanted good graphics I would have built a gaming PC and played Crysis.

Story > Gameplay ( That make sense in a linear type game but a open world game has to be the opposite Gameplay > Story )

Edited July 20, 2013 by redx165

[Honest Bill]

graphics whores have existed for as long as computer games have.

[Skeloton]

 

How about both of you stop being fangirls and labeling each other as "PC gamers" and "console gamers". Consider yourselves "gamers".

Why the f*ck aren't there more people like you.

[Rick88]

I would say to an extent that we all care about graphics, nobody wants to play a game with really awful graphics. However, I don't think graphics should ever be put above gameplay.

[Capricornus]

When random non-gta fans started playing GTAIV and never enjoyed the III era.

I swear this is the truth. The people "who's first GTA was GTA IV" are the main ones that cry over the graphics. Had they started with the III era or even the Top Down era, the graphics would not be that much of an issue. In the same respect, I do love to look a excellent graphics, for beauty in motion is awesome.

 

Overall, some of the greatest games in history haven't really had graphics like MGS 4, Uncharted 3, Watch Dogs, LA Noire and what not. You look at games like Super Mario 64, LoZ: Orcarina of Time ect, the graphics for their times were good but Super Mario 64 doesn't look nearly as nice as Super Mario Galaxy. I want a smooth running game, but you are fooling yourself by thinking that a lot of developers have the mindset that "graphics aren't that important." If that was the case, Uncharted 3 would look like Superman 64.

[CryptReaperDorian]

Having good graphics can be great, but you have to remember that having good graphics doesn't mean the same thing as the game having a "good atmosphere" or a "great detail". Games like GTA SA and Half-Life 2 look pretty crappy at this point in time, but both of them have highly detailed worlds.

 

Actually, thinking about it again, games that tend to go for a more "realistic" look rather than a "cartoonish" look tend to age worse. GoldenEye 007 looks like sh*t compared to Super Mario 64 in 2013, and take a guess which one went for the more "realistic" look.

Edited July 20, 2013 by CryptReaperDorian

[Mr. Sleepy]

 

graphics whores have existed for as long as computer games have.

Pathetic.

This is the kind of sh*t that pisses me off, people like him.

 

I will explain it further in depth so some of you understand.

 

I will ALWAYS prefer gameplay over graphics, but that doesn't mean that I will accept a game with graphics like IV and below. And I know for a fact a lot of you won't but you're trying to fit in with the 'cool' crowd.

 

And most of us are pissed off at the fact that Rockstar is releasing game screenshots that will end up not looking at least 50% like them.

Yes, we do care about trees, why? Because I expected to get lost in them, trees add immersion to a game even if you might consider it pathetic, for some it is quite a big deal so get over with it and accept that others have different tastes.

 

And for the love of Talos console fangirls, shut the f*ck up and learn to respect /PCs/ (not PC elitists), because without PCs there would be no gaming at all.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Sleepy187.

[redx165]

 

graphics whores have existed for as long as computer games have.

Pathetic.

This is the kind of sh*t that pisses me off, people like him.

 

I will explain it further in depth so some of you understand.

 

I will ALWAYS prefer gameplay over graphics, but that doesn't mean that I will accept a game with graphics like IV and below. And I know for a fact a lot of you won't but you're trying to fit in with the 'cool' crowd.

 

And most of us are pissed off at the fact that Rockstar is releasing game screenshots that will end up not looking at least 50% like them.

Yes, we do care about trees, why? Because I expected to get lost in them, trees add immersion to a game even if you might consider it pathetic, for some it is quite a big deal so get over with it and accept that others have different tastes.

 

And for the love of Talos console fangirls, shut the f*ck up and learn to respect /PCs/ (not PC elitists), because without PCs there would be no gaming at all.

Lets cry cause they took away trees for purchasable property, Customization, tattoos, and etc...

 

So you're saying you rather have more trees than features? You don't care about the gameplay then.

 

Learn to respect consoles before you demand people to respect PCs.

[Audiophile]

graphics whores have existed for as long as computer games have.

Pathetic.

This is the kind of sh*t that pisses me off, people like him.

 

I will explain it further in depth so some of you understand.

 

I will ALWAYS prefer gameplay over graphics, but that doesn't mean that I will accept a game with graphics like IV and below. And I know for a fact a lot of you won't but you're trying to fit in with the 'cool' crowd.

 

And most of us are pissed off at the fact that Rockstar is releasing game screenshots that will end up not looking at least 50% like them.

Yes, we do care about trees, why? Because I expected to get lost in them, trees add immersion to a game even if you might consider it pathetic, for some it is quite a big deal so get over with it and accept that others have different tastes.

 

And for the love of Talos console fangirls, shut the f*ck up and learn to respect /PCs/ (not PC elitists), because without PCs there would be no gaming at all.

Lets cry cause they took away trees for purchasable property, Customization, tattoos, and etc...

 

So you're saying you rather have more trees than features? You don't care about the gameplay then.

 

Learn to respect consoles before you demand people to respect PCs.

And what makes console players more superior that PC players HAVE to respect console gamers first.

 

Your fanboyism is so obvious it's not even funny anymore. Respect everyone, you don't respect his opinion why the hell should he respect yours?

[redx165]

graphics whores have existed for as long as computer games have.

Pathetic.

This is the kind of sh*t that pisses me off, people like him.

 

I will explain it further in depth so some of you understand.

 

I will ALWAYS prefer gameplay over graphics, but that doesn't mean that I will accept a game with graphics like IV and below. And I know for a fact a lot of you won't but you're trying to fit in with the 'cool' crowd.

 

And most of us are pissed off at the fact that Rockstar is releasing game screenshots that will end up not looking at least 50% like them.

Yes, we do care about trees, why? Because I expected to get lost in them, trees add immersion to a game even if you might consider it pathetic, for some it is quite a big deal so get over with it and accept that others have different tastes.

 

And for the love of Talos console fangirls, shut the f*ck up and learn to respect /PCs/ (not PC elitists), because without PCs there would be no gaming at all.

Lets cry cause they took away trees for purchasable property, Customization, tattoos, and etc...

 

So you're saying you rather have more trees than features? You don't care about the gameplay then.

 

Learn to respect consoles before you demand people to respect PCs.

And what makes console players more superior that PC players HAVE to respect console gamers first.

 

Your fanboyism is so obvious it's not even funny anymore. Respect everyone, you don't respect his opinion why the hell should he respect yours?

Do you read?? Cause I'm guessing you use your own blind fanboyism and not paying attention to what I really said. It's alright we're human and we make mistakes.

 

He keeps feeling he's above PC gaming and expects everyone to love PC gaming. Yet he can't even accept that he has to respect console gaming. Without console gaming GTA wouldn't of got this big and good.

 

Once again you come up with your own stuff. I never said I don't respect his opinion I'm telling him he needs to respect consoles more.

[Mr. Sleepy]

lol.

So you tell me, that 10-20 trees will remove property customizations and such? Then Rockstar should've made the map 5% smaller, I rather have tiny stuff like trees and ponds and whatnot instead of a hugeass map with nothing in it.

 

And why should I respect consoles or console fangirls? PCs created consoles not vice-versa.

Wait... I am guessing that statement irks your fanboyism a bit. Isn't it?

 

P.S. I got nothing personally against you.

[Audiophile]

I can read and your post here is just a continuation of posts you have made over months showing your own fanboyism and every thread you are in that discusses any platform other than PS3 descends into a flame war. Just as this thread is well on its way to.

 

How am I a fanboy if every single post I have made here is to urge you and everyone else to view each other as gamers instead of "console gamers" and "PC gamers". I'm sorry I forgot that you view everyone that doesn't agree with your viewpoint as inferior or a fanboy.

 

I should know better at this point than to respond to you. PM me if you want to continue this instead of adding more spam to the thread.

 

By the way, I didn't agree with the guy you replied to. He's just as bad as you.

 

Redx and what exactly are you? By that logic you are what, a console "elitist"?

[redx165]

 

lol.

So you tell me, that 10-20 trees will remove property customizations and such? Then Rockstar should've made the map 5% smaller, I rather have tiny stuff like trees and ponds and whatnot instead of a hugeass map with nothing in it.

 

And why should I respect consoles or console fangirls? PCs created consoles not vice-versa.

Yet consoles is what keeps gaming alive. Console is where the money is at and that's where game companies can use that money to improve on their game. Rockstar would never be able to improve their game like they did without consoles. It's trees on a mountain who really gives a sh*t about that.

 

You are a PC elitist if you can't even respect console. I can understand your lack of respect to the fanboys.

Audiophile I already proved you wrong with the Xbox One. That was before they even changed the DRM sh*t. You acted like a sheep and accepted it. It's ok I see your bias opinion and you can't accept that console gaming is more important than PC gaming. Console gaming gives money to developers to improve their game. Go ahead and not respond. It isn't going to make you look cooler if you don't.

 

I'm someone who played on PS3/360/PC and enjoyed them all and not complain about anything. I will continue to enjoy the PS4 and PC.

Edited July 20, 2013 by redx165

[Mr. Sleepy]

Fine, consider me a PC elitist, =], I could careless really, I, for one, know that I am a gamer.

Enjoy your V on consoles, I will wait for the PC version patiently. There are other awesome games, who may be better than V in some aspects on the way which I will enjoy as much as I'd enjoy V or even more.

[redx165]

Fine, consider me a PC elitist, =], I could careless really, I, for one, know that I am a gamer.

Enjoy your V on consoles, I will wait for the PC version patiently. There are other awesome games, who may be better than V in some aspects on the way which I will enjoy as much as I'd enjoy V or even more.

Well then enjoy yourself.

[Hvitdverg]

Graphics have always mattered, I'm not saying you need realistic graphics.

 

You need appealing graphics for a game to be "fun".

 

Gameplay is the most important factor, but artstyle/colors is what matters!

 

 

GTA V looks amazing, graphically and gameplay wise imo

[Guest]

I like V's graphics. I like IV's graphics. The only thing I didn't like about IV was how orange it was at certain times of day, the street lights glared too much. Aside from that, they were nice. Especially at midnight in the rain.

 

Hell, I even like Saints Row 1's graphics. They weren't realistic at all but they were colourful and had some character to them.

I liked SR1 graphics over SR2's and SR3's, actually.

 

I'm certainly no graphics whore but I do have standards. JC1's PS2 port had terrible graphics it actually makes the game quite depressing and actually makes it harder to see. But now we're in 2013, no games have JC1 graphics anymore so I'm fine with that. The only thing I want V to have graphics-wise is some effects while driving. You know, light trails when speeding past a cop car, or some sparks when you hit something. It's not that realistic but it looks nice. It also fits the Hollywood style of the game.

 

But really, sound is equally important as graphics and that's what needs to be improved. Better engine sounds and all that good stuff.

[ZZCOOL]

 

When random non-gta fans started playing GTAIV and never enjoyed the III era.

i played vice city and in my personal opinion it is one of the best looking games available to date graphically due to the colors it looks ALOT better than san andreas does

 

and i care about graphics and i want the graphics of v to be as good as possible sadly consoles will hold that back which dosn't give v the chance to show it's true potential

 

don't get me wrong console games still look good been playing red dead redemption on ps3 and it looks great too me but it could look better

 

besides i enjoy the graphics the rage engine has created it looks alot better too me than for example crysis as i enjoy that tone of graphics

 

only thing thats being held back is resolution anti aliasing and content shown on screen but thats it in my personal opinion the engine is the best engine i have ever seen red dead looks beautiful it's choppy and pixelated at times but it still looks beautiful absolutely beautiful

Edited July 20, 2013 by zzcool

[Death2Drugs]

I've seen this has unfortunately turned into yet another Console vs PC war. You can't seem to discuss graphics without some PC fanboy saying "console graphics suck, derp, my mega-awesome NASA computer will totally kill it". Many PC gamers seemingly don't understand that's their PC. An average or low-end PC wouldn't be able to run such graphics, perhaps worse than consoles.

 

On topic, GTA V's graphics really aren't that bad. I don't know why people complain that the graphics are too much like IV, when really the expectations should have been low. Plus, it looks more cleaner and nicer than IV anyway. I'm not complaining. GTA V could have SA graphics, and I'd still buy it (though preferably with Euphoria physics).

 

EDIT: It should also be noted that the XBOX version of GTA III and VC were much better looking than the stock PC and PS2 versions. SA on Xbox only had a slight edge though.

[Dornon2]

I always wondered this. The III area was always behind in graphics because it was a big open world with tons of content.

[ZZCOOL]

I've seen this has unfortunately turned into yet another Console vs PC war. You can't seem to discuss graphics without some PC fanboy saying "console graphics suck, derp, my mega-awesome NASA computer will totally kill it". Many PC gamers seemingly don't understand that's their PC. An average or low-end PC wouldn't be able to run such graphics, perhaps worse than consoles.

 

On topic, GTA V's graphics really aren't that bad. I don't know why people complain that the graphics are too much like IV, when really the expectations should have been low. Plus, it looks more cleaner and nicer than IV anyway. I'm not complaining. GTA V could have SA graphics, and I'd still buy it (though preferably with Euphoria physics).

 

EDIT: It should also be noted that the XBOX version of GTA III and VC were much better looking than the stock PC and PS2 versions. SA on Xbox only had a slight edge though.

from what i can see it is mostly console players talking down on pc players not the other way around

 

console players in this section of the forum are like angry wolves as soon as someone says pc they attack with all their power

[Twiggy123]

Gameplay>Story>Graphics

 

I'm a multi-platform gamer myself so I've come to respect the core aspects of what makes games great, not the bullsh*t graphics=bestestevurrrrr mindset. True to some degree graphics do matter, but only a miniscule amount. Unfortunately, more than a few of my PC bretheren think they are superior for really no substantial reason at all and use better quality graphics as a point of argument, which in turn makes the rest of us look like assholes. Of course, consoles are plagued with the same type of assholes which also makes the rest of us console owners look like dicks. There shouldn't even be an argument about which is best at all because everyone who owns one platform only has just as much fun as the person who owns the opposite platform. You can't tell somebody they are playing on an inferior console or that they are a PC snob if both parties have had any fun at all on their respective platform.

 

So please, act like the adult we know you are and respect others in their choice of medium of entertainment. It only makes you look like an upset child who is desperate to justify his purchase in gaming platform by belittling the choices of others.

[GTAaLEX117]

I honestly could not care less about graphics, and this is coming from somebody who has a very good gaming rig.

I believe that if the gameplay sucks, the graphics can't do anything to help, but if the gameplay is good, the graphics are just a bonus. Either way, I still have more fun with CS and various other Source mods than with most graphically-intense games that have come out in recent years.

[Audiophile]

Gameplay>Story>Graphics

 

I'm a multi-platform gamer myself so I've come to respect the core aspects of what makes games great, not the bullsh*t graphics=bestestevurrrrr mindset. True to some degree graphics do matter, but only a miniscule amount. Unfortunately, more than a few of my PC bretheren think they are superior for really no substantial reason at all and use better quality graphics as a point of argument, which in turn makes the rest of us look like assholes. Of course, consoles are plagued with the same type of assholes which also makes the rest of us console owners look like dicks. There shouldn't even be an argument about which is best at all because everyone who owns one platform only has just as much fun as the person who owns the opposite platform. You can't tell somebody they are playing on an inferior console or that they are a PC snob if both parties have had any fun at all on their respective platform.

 

So please, act like the adult we know you are and respect others in their choice of medium of entertainment. It only makes you look like an upset child who is desperate to justify his purchase in gaming platform by belittling the choices of others.

Thank you so much. This, just this post.