Sorry your browser is not supported!

I am asking now for the benefit of all DB writers-Please answer.

Do you like smooth gameplay(ie over 30 fps)?

Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?

How many, of you, buy new games and just wished they looked on a par with older games but in a different scenario (ie Battle feild 1942 on a par with Quake 3)? Wolfenstein has the most addictive multiplay I have been on. Why oh why is there no Wolfenstein Tournament?

How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?

How many just turn it off?

Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!

Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?

Do you really want to stand and look in a mirror so that it costs you 100 pounds buying a new card just to ensure the game still runs as smoothly?

Do you really care that the germans are showing suprise on ther faces when you just mowed them down with a machine gun?

Did you notice?(Actually I'm bitchin bout MOH and I love that game, and it plays fine on my PC but not best)

These are my questions to gimmicks which have no baring to gameplay after a few goes that I feel can be a waste of our time and effort!!!

If anybody feels that the gaming industry has other preconceptions that really do not matter after a couple of rounds, put em down. We need to know!!!!!!

Do you like smooth gameplay?
- hell yeah, 30fps on the dot or more will do

Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?
- if the games fps is less than 10 then screw you! <joking>

How many, of you, buy new games and just wished they looked on a par with older games but in a different scenario (ie Battle feild 1942 on a par with Quake 3)?
- hmm, i kinda go for originality!

Wolfenstein has the most addictive multiplay I have been on. Why oh why is there no Wolfenstein Tournament?
- wouldn't know, haven't tried it

How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?
- i love some in-game music, is still have the ending song for streets of rage 2!

How many just turn it off?
- nope, i always give them for taking out time to make such descent music.

Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!
- if you took the time out (days) from your busy life to make a video sequence,i don't see why i shouldnt take the time out (seconds) tow watch them!

Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?
- what's bumpmapping?

Do you really want to stand and look in a mirror so that it costs you 100 pounds buying a new card just to ensure the game still runs as smoothly?
- hmmm, nope.

Do you really care that the germans are showing suprise on ther faces when you just mowed them down with a machine gun?
-

Did you notice?(Actually I'm bitchin bout MOH and I love that game, and it plays fine on my PC but not best)
- hmm, haven't played that too (i really gotta start playing more instead of making more )

Originality is often a great factor, and all firsts have done well. However a variation of a good idea can also be crucial.

ie if a ww2 objective game had been written with the same level of graphix and playability of unreal tournament I would but it.

RTS gets on my tits but the few varients that actually involve a strategical and tacticle map really takes my fancy.

If you make games you really ought to play games!

Personally... my mindset is actually i prefer alot of the titles on the N64 to anything else.

The system carrys polycounts similar to the Playstation and is able to carry them beautifully with no slow downs unless it uses heavy fog, and even then its around 5-8 fps from standard 30 which is still playable and only for a few seconds

I mean have you ever play'd Paper Mario on it? it has some of the most effective graphics and is probably the least demanding there is - and thats the point in games really... which has been lost within the recent years with the Holy Grail of graphics cards and hyper processors, etc..

you don't have games being developed because they're trying to push the boundries and give you a damn fun game, no you have games which are being developed on premade genre's with no originailty, little gameplay and just relying on pixel perfect graphics which you can't actually get unless you do splash out for a hyper expensive upgrade!

Really where the hell is the challenge for development artists now? you're given 5,000 polygons to create characters and immersive worlds ... and yet what can be done by the few of us who've grown up utilising low polycount, can you imagine what we're capable of?
And old coders developing to squeeze every ouze of power out of a computer... what do you think they're capable of?

Doom3 and Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness - THAT is what the industry is capable of!
Have you all heard the reports tha Doom3's models are like massive high polygon models which blah blah ... BOLLOCKS
NON of the Doom3 models are over 8,000 polygons - which althought high but considering it is onscreen with the new quantum BSP format and those enemies are only there with 1 or 2 at a time, every model is Pixel, Texel and Vertex Shaded instead of standard textures which gives the illusion of THOUSANDS of polygons at very little processing power cost.

The same goes for TR - they are unbelieveable specs, as these titles were destined for the lower consoles ... just as the previous versions has to be cut down for the Playstation - so too did AoD for the Playstation2.
The PC version is just remarkable!

As for Doom3 and TR just being clones of thier latter games, you can also forget that ... because Doom3 is more being in the film Aliens - a marine sent to the Phobos Labs to retrieve some medical "samples", just to find out there is a very Resident Evil plot and true makes you think your way around the fully interactive lunar base.
And it was quite novel to give the entire Dev team Cameos

And TR you're doing what Lara has always done, but now you have deeper interaction - and more RPG elements with the ability to talk to people, get thier help, earn trust, and there is a FANTASTIC mission where you have to evade a swat team which closes in on you within the mansion ... plus you get to play and interact with a new character, return to old locations ... it is a true evolution which has been well worth the wait.

And it is a pitty more development houses stop looking for the quick fixxes and get on with developing evolutions of thier own titles which will grab the public and make them love games for the pure thrill of playing rather than getting the most outstanding graphics on a weak-ass plot!

Challenge - is the key to a good game. Not just eye candy.
Playability is also a key factor - lousy control makes a lousy game.

Okay Raven u've lost me. Ru saying these games look very impressive and run at low speed, are you being sarcastic?

Personally why is there a Doom 3? I liked Unreal Tournament but I wont buy the new one. When I got MOH(I do Like) I was dissapointed to find it was a lot of single player missions mainly, that you allies walked into bullets and there was no interaction of any kind.

I played a game called IWO JIMA. It looks like a throw back to 1998 yet everyone who played it, even now, think it is a very, playable game.

I think looking at PS1 and N64 games are a good place to start. At most, we should aim for Dreamcast level graphics. Raven brings up a good point, texture the model right and it can hide the lower poly count. Inovation, like pearl among the sea, if you find it, hold it for it is truely rare. The last game I saw that's showed real inovation was ICO. It's tough to think of something truely new.

Do you like smooth gameplay(ie over 30 fps)?
- Yep ny less than 30 in 3d and I start complaining

Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?
- No way. Smoothness helps you to feel more in control of the action. If a game jerks it brings u back down 2 earth with a bump

How many, of you, buy new games and just wished they looked on a par with older games but in a different scenario (ie Battle feild 1942 on a par with Quake 3)? Wolfenstein has the most addictive multiplay I have been on. Why oh why is there no Wolfenstein Tournament?
- um well if u r asking do I hanler for older games? Yeah sometimes. To me, no 3d platformer has beaten Mario64, no FPS has beaten Doom, no shooter has beaten R-Type, No racer has beaten Daytona OR Outrun, and no 3d beatemup is a patch on many 2d offereings from Capcom / SNK . NOTHING is a patch on Nights. No new FF has topped VII. However I love many new games released, but playability, smoothnes, believability and atmosphere is more important to me than any specific graphical effect.

How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?
- Depends what it is - sometimes yes. But personally I think all PC games should have the facility to intergrate your own MP3s if you want

Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!
- NEVER. umm unless its an adventure or RPG and I might miss something I need. I hate FMV, its usually a lazy way to gloss up games - the resolution change and loading times are annoying, and a good game should really tell the story through the game.

Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?
Do you really want to stand and look in a mirror so that it costs you 100 pounds buying a new card just to ensure the game still runs as smoothly?
- lmao NO not for an FPS. However more believable graphics can improve the atmosphere of some games. For example, I always found Resident Evil 1-3 on PSX kinda overambitious and not really involving. THEN I played Code Veronica on Dreamcast. It was so much more believable - and therefore scary, which was the point of the game in the first place!

Do you really care that the germans are showing suprise on ther faces when you just mowed them down with a machine gun?
- Not exactly, however expression in adventures, RPGs etc are VERY important.

As for the comment about us aiming at Dreamcast level graphics - Um yep I'd agree with that. However, I've seen graphics on DC that are IMHO more impressive than any recent console games - Its not in the special effects, the high res, smooth, solid, bright, well lit, 60hz graphics are absolutely stunning on occassion. If I ever reach that level by myself, I'll feel truly proud

Game Play all the way. Games should be fun to play. Whats the point in having good graphics if the gameplay is shit. Take Zelda for the SNES. Graphically average but gameplay out of this world. (Well I thought it was anyway - See my Zelda Clone Project message).

Jim

The Architect:

"Do you like smooth gameplay(ie over 30 fps)?"
If it´s a FPS game, yes. For everything else i think 15 is enought for me.

"Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?"
No, i don´t want to leave a certain area whit a FPS of +30 and suddently see it fall below 10 FPS and still try to play the game just becuse the graphics looks soo great.

"How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?"
Music for games is as important as it is for a movie i think soo if the music is great and really adds atmosphere to the game i would never turn it off.

"How many just turn it off?"
Not me unless it sounds boring and doesn´t fit into the game. (I play Quake 3 whit no music becuse if that.)

"Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!"
I always watch them.

"Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?"
If it is activated by default i wouldn´t notice it.

"Do you really want to stand and look in a mirror so that it costs you 100 pounds buying a new card just to ensure the game still runs as smoothly?"
For most of the time i ignore mirrors and other graphic effects.

"Do you really care that the germans are showing suprise on ther faces when you just mowed them down with a machine gun?"
No.

"Did you notice?"
Yes i noticed that.

- Tywald

The reason I asked these questions is because I think they are worth knowing. A lot of time and effort is put into various little effects to enhance a game. I was just wondering if any one truly thinks the programmers or cpu workload is always worthit.
I think it is a ball ache to find new games jerk and suffer on a machine that is above recommended specs and with the textures on low the terrain looks like its been painted with an oily rag.

Necrym: "Playability is also a key factor - lousy control makes a lousy game."

I agree.
It's important to make the control simple - I wouldn't want to have to pause the game and sift through several menus just to perform a simple task.

In the end gameplay will always win. If you have to choose between an extra level or eye candy, you're not thinking. The extra level is a no brainer. I'm with Jim, I think that was the best one ever, I even got ultament bragging rights on it. I beat it and got a zero, no saving, no dieing, took 5 hours.

Do you like smooth gameplay(ie over 30 fps)?

As long as the jumps arn't annoying I don't care.

Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?

No.

How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?

I turn it off, often before I even listen to it, in game music is mostly a complete waste of time as I can have winamp and the game playing and hear music I like.

Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!

No they take up too much time often when a few lines of text would have done.

Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?

I might but wouldn't be bothered if it wasn't used.

you know the point of cutscenes kinda piss's me off...
i mean there are a few games which rely on them too heavily, but then again some games where to break from a simple - shoot this, kill him type of mission it gives you basic workings of the missions.

take Zelda for example, would you skip any of the cut-scenes in that? no because they advance the story... oh but wait that is wrong isn't it using a cutscene to advance the story... NO because you can't really interact when someone has to tell you something. Or there is a large amount of information to be taken in at once.

So many people skip cutscenes and then sit there wondering "where the hell do i go now?" ... and certain events can only be caputured with a cutscene, suchas waking up a monster on the other side of the level.

if you want the game to be realistic you'd let it jump out and forget the cutscene, but people would complain because they never saw it comming and it makes it too hard, or the rating would go up because its too scary.
And believe me they push the rating up for the most STUPID things you could ever believe!

remember when Carmageddon was first released, red blood, and the prat-o-cam ... later versions had to be zombies and rather than shouting "OOOOOHHHHHH SHITTT!" when you went 200mph into a wall, it was changed to "OOOOHHHH NOOOO!" i mean how stupid!!

I am asking now for the benefit of all DB writers-Please answer.

Do you like smooth gameplay(ie over 30 fps)?

I read somewhere that the human eye can only process about 30 fps. Events are processed in the brain that is total human reaction time at like 10 times a second. TV video is at 24 frames per second. I can't much tell the difference after like 20 so I don't care. I think the whole fps thing is kind of a marketing buzz-word in video games.

Do you sacrifice smooth gameplay for better graphics?

Yes. To a point. That point is when it seems too choppy or slow.

How many, of you, buy new games and just wished they looked on a par with older games but in a different scenario (ie Battle feild 1942 on a par with Quake 3)? Wolfenstein has the most addictive multiplay I have been on. Why oh why is there no Wolfenstein Tournament?

Huh? I like Wolfenstein multiplay, but sometimes I'm in the mood for less realistic shootem up action eg Q3 or Elite Force.

How many, leave the in-game music on after about 5-6 playing times?

I do.

How many just turn it off?

I like the in game music for 1-player games. Q1 is the best example I can think of. Wolfenstien is great too. It helps with the immersion if it's done well. Remember SNES music. It really gets in your head and makes you want to play more.

Who actually watches the sequence videos? Everyone I know is devided on it!

I don't like games that rely on it too much. I wanna play, not watch a movie. They're cool if kept short.. or if they're part of the game itself ie Wing Commander.

Who actually notices bumpmapping in a game EXCEPT when u have just been killed and your face is up against it?

see below

Do you really want to stand and look in a mirror so that it costs you 100 pounds buying a new card just to ensure the game still runs as smoothly?

see below

Do you really care that the germans are showing suprise on ther faces when you just mowed them down with a machine gun?

see below

Did you notice?(Actually I'm bitchin bout MOH and I love that game, and it plays fine on my PC but not best)

OK you got like 4 questions that are basically the same question. How much detail do you need? The answer is as much as you can get. When you can't tell it's a game is when it's perfect. I notice the steam coming out of the soldiers' mouth when he breathes in RTCW snow levels.
More detail = better.
You might not consciously notice it all, but you will notice that it looks better and your suspension of disbelief and immersion in the game will improve with improved graphics & sound and attention to detail.

These are my questions to gimmicks which have no baring to gameplay after a few goes that I feel can be a waste of our time and effort!!!

If anybody feels that the gaming industry has other preconceptions that really do not matter after a couple of rounds, put em down. We need to know!!!!!!