One thing you should know about me by now is that I collect retro video games. It’s in literally every bio I have as it’s something that’s fundamental to who I am. Stay with me here; a lot of people mostly play the modern games if they game at all, and going back to play older games isn’t super common from what I see, so it’s easier to say “I collect games,” rather than say “there’s an entire backlog of video games I missed out on and it’s my sworn duty in life to catch up.”
All of this is to say: I truly don’t give a f!ck what the graphics of my games look like.
There are way too many think pieces on this topic alone to do a mini-essay on it. Frankly, I’m kinda sick of hearing about what graphics look good, and what graphics look like PS2/GameCube graphics (i.e. ass), and isn’t the hyper-realistic graphics getting boring, and aren’t we tired of 16-bit graphics in the modern era, and on and on and on. Whatever! Who cares! Is the game good though? Does it function? That’s all that matters to me.
It’s like the infamous Zelda debate during the GameCube era, where Nintendo showcased a high-quality tech demo reel with Link and Ganon fighting to showcase the GameCube’s power, which everyone ranted and raved for.
But, when Nintendo released their next Zelda game, they released Wind Waker (a cartoon-looking game) instead. People took the piss out of Wind Waker at the time until Nintendo released Twilight Princess, which looked closer to the GameCube demo reel, but it took so long to release that it ended up being a Wii launch title as well as a GameCube game. Now, there isn’t the same amount of support and hype for Twilight Princess comparatively, and it’s Wind Waker that gets the accolades for standing the test of time.
The fact of the matter is that realistic graphics will forever not look great with time. Sure, we’re at a point now where graphics in gaming look so clean, it looks like you’re watching a movie instead of playing a game, but is that really what we want? Wouldn’t you rather have a good experience playing the game over how pretty the graphics look?
And sure, graphics are a part of the creative artistic vision of the developers. But you can’t seriously think AAA devs are too concerned about the artistic vision. Like, look at Pokémon Scarlet/Violet! Dogshit graphics, truly looks abysmal and plays abysmally. But, shockingly, it sold well, so regardless of complaints, the Pokémon Company isn’t going to change how they make their games. They’re going to keep giving devs a lower and lower budget, with higher and more immoral time constraints, and as long as you can vaguely play the game, then that’s all that matters! Give the game a day one update to fix bugs that make the game unplayable, who gives a shit! People will still buy it because it’s Pokémon.
Regardless of who you are and what you’re experience is with gaming, there are certain expectations placed on AAA companies to produce a certain look to their games. What works and sells well then gets replicated tenfold until we’re (the consumers) are sick of it, and then some. The graphical quality of modern games ultimately doesn’t matter for AAA companies because what matters is what will sell, especially with brand recognition.
So, what does it matter? Why do we keep debating day in and day out about the same dumbass discourse about games? Why does discourse regress constantly to the same talking point?
The only suggestion I have for this is maybe to not buy the latest and greatest games as soon as they release, or at least don’t pre-order them. I still haven’t bought Scarlet or Violet because I don’t think that game is worth $60 new, let alone $20. Do I want to play it? Yes, but I have so many other games I can play instead.
And that’s ultimately the thing, right? Like, god, there are so many games that release all the time, and there’s hundreds of games that have been out for 5+ years that are still fantastic games to play, and yet, there’s like a common cultural zeitgeist to only play the most recent games. Even among people who are younger, there just isn’t an urge to play things older than 5 years old, other than maybe a handful of games. It’s like if a game hits 5+ years old, no one seems to want to play it anymore, and I don’t get why.
I get not everyone wants to be a game collector, and I get not wanting to catch up with the entire 50 year-long backlog of gaming (that’s not even a task I want to do; respectfully, I refuse to spend money on Atari games), but I wish more people gave older games a chance before subjectively deciding that all older games aren’t worth their time, especially based on how shitty those games look to the modern player. Outside of the popular games from the late 90s to early 00s—games that continue to be mythologized to this day as the best games ever made—there are so many other great games from older generations that went under the radar, and continue to be forgotten gems to this day.
And I think ultimately, the problem with why people aren’t playing these older games that went under the radar is because their publisher, the company that releases the game to the public, refuse to make their older games accessible to a modern audience. Some companies are better than others (squints in Nintendo), but even then, it’s only ever the games that sold incredibly well or had a huge cult following. Rarely do you see the weird in-between games get remade or remastered or just playable in some modern quantity (like Ghost Trick, my beloved).
Maybe it’s not even the graphics—maybe it’s just that buying a GameCube, and a controller, and a memory card, and a game, and maybe even a CRT to get the full experience, is just too much money for most people (especially in this economy). I don’t know! I’m spitballing here!
God. I’ve gone a bit off topic, but nonetheless, the games industry continues to piss me off. And rightfully so! Let’s get back on track:
Not all games that have shitty graphics are bad. A lot of the time, the judgement is just wrong, not even subjectively but objectively. Complaining (unless justified in Pokemon’s case) won’t get you anywhere. And a lot of y’all have forgotten what PS2 games actually look like.
It’s not always about graphics. Good graphics often doesn’t even equate to a good game, like sometimes there are games that are really good looking, but are bland stories with uninspiring gameplay. So, give games with shitty graphics a chance. Play an old game no one talks about. Laugh at how horrific it looks, and share it around. Or enjoy how pretty it can be in the right lighting. You just might end up finding a new favorite.
And that’s it! Like I said, this was mostly a rant because I’m tired of seeing the same counterproductive arguments all the time, and frankly, trying to add something new to that conversation is just fanning the flame sometimes.
Lemme know what you think about graphics in gaming, modern or otherwise! Or share some of your favorite games from previous generations, because I know there’s a lot of hidden gems even I don’t know about.
I’ve recently opened up memberships to my blog via Ko-fi! If you like what you’re reading and want to support me, consider checking it out below!
Next week, I’m posting my Ace Attorney fandom rundown, detailing what makes the fandom unique (which will be posted on the 24th, as to be expected iykyk), so stay tuned for that! I’m super proud of that post, and have been waiting a full month for it’s upload.
Also! I’ve started a mini-review series called “Sunday Mini Stackin’”! You can find those posts under the tab entitled the same on this Substack’s home page. Next Sunday (12/28), my second SMS post goes live, writing about the wonderful game Metroid Fusion. Stay tuned!
And as always, see you next week!
No comments:
Post a Comment