Support NeoGAF

[diffusionx]

This is basically the "Do you play Dwarf Fortress" thread IMO.

 

[Bathtub Fart]

Yes, although size isn't important. I'm tired of presentation and "story" being the main selling point for games nowadays. What happened to satisfying mechanics, innovative design and AI improvements? Sigh.

 

[Sosokrates]

Yes deeper games are what I want.
They don't have to be larger open worlds, just more detailed, complete npc daily routines, in GTA6 you can follow a random npc go to work at restaurant you can see them take orders and serve food at the restaurant, then you can see them get home, in there home u see them watch TV, prepare dinner etc.

The game would need to be the size of vice city with a population of about 10,000.

The ultimate would be Npc's that are not completely scripted where they can make different choices.

Basically a game with the sophistication of Westworld, or at least attempting somthing similar.

 

[lock2k]

Here's an example: Grand Theft Auto set in Liberty City, Vice City, Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas. That's five cities in one open world game. You can travel between three different states (Liberty, Florida, and San Andreas) and do all sorts of side activities, explore a decent amount of interiors, and even get a six-star wanted level to which the military will come after you like the good ol' days. You could even blow up a house with one of their tanks or maybe a UFO from Area 69 in this new game. I don't know about you but that sounds like it would be my new favorite entry in the series. I would pre-order this game in a heartbeat.

The catch? The graphics aren't photorealistic. And you can forget all about ray-tracing. This game clearly looks last-gen visually but to make up for it you can do so much more. The replayability would be endless, I think.

Of course

 

[Kamina]

In a heartbeat.
Content & World design > graphics

 

[vaibhavpisal]

I would let developers realize their vision. Whatever they want to make.

But must admit good writing, interesting premise, good pacing etc make me far more interested in a game than size or graphics.

 

[TUROK]

Absolutely. Hell, I want games to sacrifice graphical fidelity for image stability. Nothing takes me out of the moment like seeing harsh LoD transitions and pop-in.

I wish all games implemented that sort of dithered blending between LoDs that games like Halo 3 and Reach did. A smooth transition is less jarring to me than an instantaneous increase in polygonal or texture detail.

 

[GymWolf]

I will sacrifice some of the graphics for more physics, destruction, interaction and upgraded ia for enemies and npc yeah.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

I would sacrifice a lot of things to have a game that is actually interesting.

I took Gafs advice and tried playing Hellblade:Senua to me it was more like HellaBored. 30 mins of walking and my god that game fucking stank.

Give me good gameplay or give me death

 

[theclaw135]

I'm tired of games being too... danged... loooooong.
I'd like a smaller world that has better physics, better textures, better quest design. The works. Grinding and fetch quests have got to go.

 

[Psykodad]

If it means we'll get another GTA, I'd rather have photorealistic graphics.

 

[TheSHEEEP]

Games are about gameplay, not graphics.
Graphics have to be consistent, that is all.

Therefore, I don't care about photorealism, screw it.

 

[Brazen]

All things in moderation I say. I mean striking a balance in production seems most important when I judge something as a whole. Sacrificing gameplay by focusing on having the "bestest" graphics in a game is to me like seeing a big budget film having the best cgi sequences or camera work money can buy but the sum of it ruined by poor casting backed by cheap scripts/stories or inexperienced directors.

Likewise having terrible art direction, inefficient performance, lots of bugs, or muddy worlds can really turn me off from a game if I don't make it to the fun-deep mechanics you learn after spending dozens of hours with it.

 

[EDMIX]

More complex and interactive, sure.

Bigger? ...? Are open world games not already "big enough"? I think it could be argued some are a bit too big. Assassin's Creed Odyssey springs to mind.

No, give me a map like GTA V but that you can actually go inside all the buildings. I'd take that over a larger map any day.

This. Its why I'm fan of Fallout and Elder Scrolls series.

 

[Area61]

It depends on the game really. I don't really think games need Photorealistic graphics in RPG games specifically.

 

[kraspkibble]

as cool as it'd be to see a game that is photo realistic i would much prefer a game goes for a specific artstyle. games can look good without having to look realistic.

 

[V4skunk]

Here's an example: Grand Theft Auto set in Liberty City, Vice City, Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas. That's five cities in one open world game. You can travel between three different states (Liberty, Florida, and San Andreas) and do all sorts of side activities, explore a decent amount of interiors, and even get a six-star wanted level to which the military will come after you like the good ol' days. You could even blow up a house with one of their tanks or maybe a UFO from Area 69 in this new game. I don't know about you but that sounds like it would be my new favorite entry in the series. I would pre-order this game in a heartbeat.

The catch? The graphics aren't photorealistic. And you can forget all about ray-tracing. This game clearly looks last-gen visually but to make up for it you can do so much more. The replayability would be endless, I think.

What you say reminds me of San Andreas vs GTAIV.
GTAIV was a huge step back from San Andreas in every thing except gfx.

 

[Grand Theft Scratchy]

What you say reminds me of San Andreas vs GTAIV.
GTAIV was a huge step back from San Andreas in every thing except gfx.

Euphoria physics were a great addition. Unfortunately not very fun in GTA V.

 

[phil_t98]

Here's an example: Grand Theft Auto set in Liberty City, Vice City, Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas. That's five cities in one open world game. You can travel between three different states (Liberty, Florida, and San Andreas) and do all sorts of side activities, explore a decent amount of interiors, and even get a six-star wanted level to which the military will come after you like the good ol' days. You could even blow up a house with one of their tanks or maybe a UFO from Area 69 in this new game. I don't know about you but that sounds like it would be my new favorite entry in the series. I would pre-order this game in a heartbeat.

The catch? The graphics aren't photorealistic. And you can forget all about ray-tracing. This game clearly looks last-gen visually but to make up for it you can do so much more. The replayability would be endless, I think.

The problem with bigger game worlds is they don’t put much to do in them. There is to much open space of nothing. I would prefer smaller open worlds with more to do in them. Usually the bigger the world is the more time is wasted just travelling from one place to the other.
Just my view

 

[#Phonepunk#]

one of my favorite worlds in all of gaming is Dark Souls, and that game is not afraid to look ugly, to look outdated even, if it means constructing a believable world. there is an internal logic to everything, from the geometry to the textures to the lighting, even if it is not using the latest engine. i will take that 100% of the time over something that looks pretty.

 

[hunthunt]

Just give me stylised semi open worlds like From Software or Guerrilla, I dont give 2 fucks about real worlds ala Rockstar Games.

 

[V2Tommy]

Didn't I already do this with Days Gone?

 

[Azelover]

Anybody that said all they want is a good framerate, I'm totally with you.

Steady 60 fps across all games please.

 

[fran.fernandez]

I will sacrifice 4K and 60 FPS for that

 

[spawn]

We're already doing that. Look at Fallout for example. Graphics are not visually impressive as other linear single-player games, but there are many things in the game you can do and explore

 

[Yesbox]

Tbh, I'd sacrifice it all just for more cartoony and imaginative artstyles.
I am really sick and tired of photorealistic games, it's boring to me.

 

[Myths]

I was thinking about this again, there’s clearly room for both. It’s only a matter of time before we’re at a steady 4K60 with this level of graphic fidelity (compounded by bigger worlds and more scripts added):



I could add Liberty City to it, a lot of add-on scripts to enhance optional and side content. So technically, we don’t need to sacrifice much of anything. Other than your wallet...

 

[Zekra Dezivad]

Nope, world are already too big. There's no need for bigger worlds, I would prefere a more meaningful, richer, interactive worlds over thousand of kilometers of useless maps.
I really hope this is the generation where interactivity will be a major design objective. Not in a playful, gamey, cartoony way, but in a more realistic way, with proper physics and destruction, accordingly with fluids, lights and different materials shape and quality.
I'm tired of beautiful looking static scenarios.

 

[GermanZepp]

Yes, all the way. Interactivity and " complex"sinulations inmersme more than graphics.

 

[G-Bus]

Yup.

Don't give two fucks about 4/8K, 120 fps, ray tracing etc. Be more than happy if image quality stayed the same next gen and we just got a huge boost to everything else.

Give me some real destructible environments. Like Red Faction on steroids.

 

[Kupfer]

Would you sacrifice photorealistic graphics for bigger, more complex game worlds?

Totally.
With Gta4 we were at the point, when I thought "that's the breakthrough". We had so many details, like people carrying cups, food, boxes and dropping these when you bump into them, then they are getting angry, maybe even start a fight or a mad lad pulls out a gun.
We had such a good damage system for vehicles. I remember spending hours crashing cars watching the real-time forming of dents.
We had the best animationssystem of the player and NPCs, loosing their balance, trying to hold on their car if you steal it, until forces become too strong and they just roll around and crash into stuff, stumbling around while being drunk and so on ...
I don't know what happened, but that was last gen and with gta5 they made the game more arcade again and in my eyes they made a huge step back. The world didn't feel as complex as Gta4, although it is "bigger and better".

All in all I felt like "this is the future" with Gta4 but was like "ok, no, I was wrong" with Gta5.
So I hope it gets more complex again and developers want to show off their skills with the new generation of games, not just graphically, but complexity-wise.