I don't know what kinds of games you're playing, but game art can look good without looking realistic. In fact, "realistic" game art is usually the first to stop looking good as technology progresses.

Автор сообщения: Sir Oinksalot

I value gameplay over graphics, but even then sometimes I find myself overanalyzing the minor defects in graphics on games. What do y'all do (if anything) to not overanalyze graphics?

Focus on the gameplay.

I don't analyze them to begin with. I either like them or don't. If a game isn't visually pleasing, I don't bother with it. It's why I generally dislike games with so-called "realistic" graphics and prefer stylized or pixel art. Expressive art styles are easier to enjoy.

Just playing for story or progression. Ye, graphics in some games aged poorly, but story is still cool.
Also, I switch between games with obsolete graphics & good ones, which makes me less tired of them.

Well here on PC, it's interesting as to what "graphics" mean. Which is to say, if you put a game at it's lowest settings for better performance, well, the whole map seemingly goes away lol.

Meaning say a forest and a plush landscape, literally becomes a desert at low settings.

That's not the case on consoles obviously.

I never knew M&B even had grass or trees, being on my old computer, i can never go beyond the lowest of settings.

On this computer, its now a whole different game.

And so graphics do matter, it's just a question of how much in good graphics people want.

I usually skip over a game if the art style is not something that I like. The cool thing about Bethesda games is that you can find mods to change them to look like almost anything you want. It's too bad that all their game worlds after Morrowind were so boringly realistic, though.

Автор сообщения: Sir Oinksalot

I value gameplay over graphics, but even then sometimes I find myself overanalyzing the minor defects in graphics on games. What do y'all do (if anything) to not overanalyze graphics?

That is very subjective. I strongly believe that graphics don't make a game. For me it is a tool in devs toolsets, one of many moving parts. Of which everything as a whole need to make sense and work correctly together or it won't "feel" right.

I've found over the years that all the games I consider to be the best and that I like the most in my whole list are under or around about a gig in size. Anything which is overblown and which only have 3D graphics to deliver to you usually end up being insipid and boring. The only factor which help go around this is when I am playing a game of a specific genre I'm already super into. Which is simply another way for me to say I manage to ignore it in favour of other way better sides offered in that particular game.

Why analyse them, OP? I just play the game.

Автор сообщения: Crazy Tiger

Why analyse them, OP? I just play the game.

I optimize the settings and that leads me to analyze the graphics more than necessary.

Yeah, I don't do that.