Pure gaming enthusiasts will gladly argue to their grave that gameplay prevails over graphics. If a game has dazzling visuals and awesome eye-candy, but is befuddled by horrendous gameplay and problematic bugs, then that game will be heckled and dumped for a game that has engaging gameplay (hopefully).
So what better way to rally up the naysayers with some comments from Phil Wright, Head of Content Business Development for Nvidia. In an opinion piece titled "Better graphics mean better gameplay", Wright argues that… well, better visuals means better gameplay. Catchy, huh?
"…I’m not alone in arguing that DX10 is going to be as much about better gameplay as pretty pictures. In fact, the graphical effects that DX10 makes possible actually have the potential to enable new gameplay features and concepts. It’s inevitable there will be triumphs of style over substance in any creative industry."
The rest of the piece goes on describing several imagined game sequences that better visuals will enhance the gameplay, like being in a field and with the wind blowing through the grass, that opens up a seemingly "calm before the storm" tension, along with exposing sneaking enemies while the wind is blowing.
Lastly, the article touts the "success" of games like Crysis that’ll blend gameplay and mind-bending visuals into some higher form of gaming that no one has ever experienced, well, till we actually can play it.
What are your thoughts? Do better graphics mean better gameplay, or can games be just as fun 3 years from now even if they aren’t DX10?
