Scholar's Corner: Why graphics actually are important in a game.

There are many longstanding debates and issues which have divided the more fanatic video gamers such as myself, with the ones more likely to only buy the latest Nintendo releases on Wii, or in this particular case the latest and most popular titles. In this particular post, Scholar Gray discusses how eye candy is not the only reason why graphics are important and will continue to be important to many games.
 It used to be that I, Gray, thought that the fact that someone would prefer a game based on graphical quality meant that they were shallow, and didn't care about the actual game, like they should. However, while to a certain extent I stand by that, there's a huge reason why graphics are considered important which also factors into why certain genres in fiction are more popular than others among the ordinary person and other things that might interest you. To put it simply, graphics are important because they help with a suspension of disbelief.

For those unaware, some see suspension of disbelief as how well a person is able to relate to various forms of entertainment without questioning what is going on and ruining the overall quality of the experience. Or, to put it another way, it means that when you watch a TV show, read a book, see a movie or yes, play a video game, you are able to ignore things that might make you upset or irritated based on accuracy or plausibility. Things like 'Why do these vampires in Twilight have to all be pretty boys without brains?' or 'Why did Harry Potter and Ginny Weasley get together? They had nothing in common and barely talked to each other before they started dating!', or much more broadly 'No way would this guy be able to kill a dragon! He'd be toasted in seconds!'. Viewers, readers and players see things that makes them disbelieve, the illusion is broken and their enjoyment is squandered. These are often called 'plotholes', but they go by other names too. This is part of the reason why your resident scholar liked the Harry Potter series at first, but heavily disliked the last two books. That's not the subject of this blog though.

Amaterasu from Capcom's Ookami. The distinct visual look is taken from Umi-E paintings.

So back to graphics, and not only does this relate to video games, but also to movies. There are many games that while they might not be impressive graphically, they could be considered 'art' due to the creativity and expression employed in them. Games like Ookami, Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, MadWorld, and Little King's Story all have visual styles that are more artistic than realistic and all sold pretty poorly. This was not because they were bad games, as Scholar Gray can personally attest to. Marketing (or lack thereof) was definitely a factor, yet games that sold better usually incorporated one of two things. The first was a 'gritty' theme, and the second was realistic graphics. Games like Gears of War, Final Fantasy, Grand Theft Auto, Modern Warfare 1, the Uncharted series and the Madden series all incorporate increasingly realistic graphics and portrayals of human characters with increasingly realistic proportions which take place in warlike or contemporary settings. My personal opinions of these games are not completely favorable, but they do succeed at drawing the player in due to an easier identification with similar looking characters to themselves. Games are an interactive form of entertainment, so players are more able to easily relate to more 'realistic' characters. This is why Heavy Rain, a story based game that many including myself would sell very poorly, ended up selling at least a million units. This is why there was such a huge outcry when it was announced that the Zelda after Ocarina of Time would have a cartoony look. This is why animated films are so far behind normal films in any place except Japan.

What many THOUGHT we were getting after Ocarina of Time.

I could go on, but the point has been made. I admit that I'm still a fan of old eight and sixteen bit titles like Chrono Trigger, Super Metroid and the early Mario titles, but that has more to do with the fact that they're fun games than great interactive experiences. Those titles do succeed enormously to draw the player in, but that's because of their music, playability and other factors such as the current standards of technology... though, that's a subject for another day. Regardless, I'm of the camp that wants games that can be interactive art, but I'd also be up for something that was simply fun. It is likely though that the divide between the two will continue to widen as the years go by.

Hope you enjoyed! See you next continue!