Graphics Of Video-Games.

[Eltu]

One of my huge pet peeves is when people say that a game has "bad graphics" because it does not look photorealistic. I say - THIS IS WRONG.

Why?

Graphics being good or bad has nothing to do with realism - it has to do with the feeling the game wants to create. Some games (for instance, Crysis) rely heavily on photorealism, and in THIS case, its photorealistic graphics are very good.

But it's different for different games. Graphics might be really good, but not at all realistic (World of Goo for instance). In World of Goo, the graphics fit perfectly for the game, and are in other words really good.

And it can of course be the other way around - graphics may look really realistic, but bad - uninspired, boring. In this case the graphics do not succeed in establishing the feeling that fits for the game, and are therefore bad.

Good or bad graphics depends on the ART DESIGN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL GAME. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH PHOTOREALISM.

If the graphics of a game succeeds in giving the game the feeling it is meant to have, the graphics are good - no matter if they are realistic or not. Photorealism is only ONE way of showing a message.

Thoughts on this?