Posted Feb 03, 2007 at 12:35PM by Kristine C. Listed in: Interviews, Opinions & Analysis Tags: nVidia, Roy Taylor
Ó

Roy Taylor - Image 1Nvidia's VP of content Roy Taylor recently granted an interview with the folks from Next-Gen, and when asked about what he thought of the notion that "graphics don’t matter" in games, he replies that it's all "nonsense." (Hmm... we could have sworn that he was quoted for having said "bollocks" instead, but perhaps Next-Gen has toned it down?)

According to Taylor, it is "ridiculous to say that graphics don't matter," and that it may be the equivalent of somebody saying that "the quality of my TV screen doesn't matter." He went on to say that if graphics truly were unimportant, then you should "watch '24' in black-and-white on a seven-inch screen."

Of course, this doesn't mean that Taylor is a detractor of quality gameplay. He said that "sometimes graphics have been applied, not at the expense of gameplay, but without equal consideration to [gameplay]." Instead, what he tried to point out is that both are important.

He stressed that having quality graphics is the best way for a game to elicit emotions from the player. According to him, these emotions are the basis for emotional attachment towards a game, and these emotions can reach the player more effectively if you have detailed facial expressions and character animations.

Lastly, he expressed his sentiments regarding the necessary balance between graphics and gameplay. "I think we can do a lot better, but I think we'd like to see graphics encompassing the gameplay."


[Via Next-Gen] Permalink  |   Email this  |   Linking Blogs   |   Digg It!

Bookmark / Find this article on:


78 Comments


Sort by:
   by ahem (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Bollocks

He's just a knob anyway. I'll take great gameplay over awesome gfx anyday.


   Re: Annony - 2007-02-03
 » You earned a Gold Star

I agree 100% with the dude above. Pretty graphics are cool and all, but gameplay and replayability are what sells a game.

   Re: mohaas05 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » of course you would

go ahead and play your 8-bit NES and tell me the graphics dont matter. gameplay is important too but graphics are what bring the game to life

   Re: Drood (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Cretin

"He stressed that having quality graphics is the best way for a game to elicit emotions from the player."

Spoken like someone who has never played Cannon Fodder on the Amiga...

What a tool... Of course he's going to say this, he has to sucker folk into buying newer and fancier graphics cards doesn't he.

Mohaas: The fact that the Wii's virtual console is so popular kinda shows that people already are.

   Re: demondude777 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » To mohaas05

I do. Super Mario Bros kills Halo anyday! Graphics don't matter. What brings the games to life is the hook in the game that keeps you coming back. When the next Barbie game comes out for PS3 (because you have made it clear that you would choose that over the classics, just because it looks better) have fun with it. I'll stick to SMB.

   Re: Drood (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » HAH!

Nice:) Yeah, enjoy your Barbie or Disney licensed crap while we play Mario:)

I won't beat around the bush. Mohass is a retard. And probably a teenager.

   Re: seanarooni (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » i agree

at the point of half life 2, graphics in video games were good enoguh to fully display the emotion range of human beings. more than that is nice, but game play remains key.

   Re: 8-bit rocks (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Mohaas05 is Retarded

There's some 'old' games that still kick the crap out of the 'eye candy' games as far as being fun.

Hell, look at the Wii, you moron. Nintendo focused on Gameplay over GFX and the Wii's are flying off the shelf.

I like seeing GFX improvements, but a dud with photo-realism is still a dud. Seriously, does 'Africa' look fun to you?

   Re: Advertising -


   Re: ThrashWolf (Unregistered) - 2007-02-08
 » yep

I agree, hes just some retard anyway, just ignore him

   Re: Lymas (Unregistered) - 2007-02-08
 » 34324234

Old school games are still great. I like the graphics in the newest era of gaming but what matters to me is the gameplay. A game can have awesome graphics but with *****ty ass gameplay the game will suck major ass.

   Re: mohaas05 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-16
 » stfu

go wank off with all the nintendo-fanboys in the corner, gimme a break. the wiis virtual console is crap, who wants to pay money to play the same old ***** we played 15 years ago. id gladly play barbie if it was like barbies gone wild or something.
   by Korpiolut (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » LOL

Graphicks aren the key to good gameplay! Its all about that how good the game is. M*ther*****ing Nvidia! Doesn't know nothing about good gameplaying.

   by Logic (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » He is absolutely correct

I agree with him completely.


   by Red (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » :

What's this? The VP of a video card company saying graphics are the most important thing in a game? no wai!

Seriously tho, graphics don't mean *****. My favorite games are from generations long forgotten, like X-Com, Total Annihilation, and even NetHack. Maybe if all the pixel-pushing morons would quit worrying about how much jiggle boobs on their appeals-to-our-target-audience heroine I'd like some of the newer games, but all of the development time is sucked into the black hole of "OMAHGAWD WE NEED PHOTOREALISTIC (BUT STILL LOOKS LIKE ASS) GRAPHIXX!!1"


   Re: Drood (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Nethack

Nethack would probably make that nVidia guys head explode. "But... But... IT'S TEXT!!!" *BOOM*

My favourite games are all pre-2000. Myth 2, Total Annihilation etc... Hell, I still play Transport Tycoon... That was *shock horror* A DOS GAME!!!

The only current games I enjoy are Winning Eleven and Fire Pro R on the PS2... And the irony is Fire Pro... The graphics are 16-bit style!!! HAHA!

nVidia Man knows not of what he speaks. He's just using semantics to make it look like he's not saying "Please buy our cards, I need a Porsche!"

I mean he says "sometimes graphics have been applied, not at the expense of gameplay, but without equal consideration to [gameplay]"... He's saying the same thing twice, just wording it differently. If equal consideration is not given, that means gameplay was a secondary consideration... He's just trying to baffle the not so bright... So the exact market he's aiming at, the suckers who buy the latest pointless graphics card, and keep this guy in hookers and gin.

Makes me ashamed to be

   Re: Drood (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Cut me off...

I was saying it makes me ashamed to be an nVidia customer, when the company is run by such obvious hucksters.
   by Kutibh (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » yes

I do believe graphics are the key. Games for most people are a way to do things and enjoy things in life that you normally can't do in real life. It's an outlet for experimentation. It DOES make a difference if the game looks like real life. I don't want to 'pretend' that it's real by looking at polygon faced guys. i want to FEEL it being real...


   Re: Advertising -


   Re: demondude777 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » I couldn't agree more (insert sarcasm here)

You are right on the money. The next time I am killing a 40 foot mech robot with my Magic Gloves of Thunder Bashing, after being shot 30 times while running through the barren streets of devistated New York looking for the Key to Backwards World, it better look real or it just isn't going to feel like something I would do on a daily basis.

   Re: ThrashWolf (Unregistered) - 2007-02-08
 » to the guy above me

heh heh, yeah.
   by Kiel (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » LMFAOALMSDF

Of nVidia will say that... THEY MAKE THE PRODUCT. Anyways taht totally not true. I choose old rts over the new shiny ones anyday but some of those new fps look nice. The psp has nice graphics but lacks gameplay, the games are.... just plain annoying to play.

   by Wlah (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Limitation might be good...

As can be seen on the Wii with Miis: Limits in graphics leads to creativity.

I'll dare to assert that better graphics leads to less creativity.


   Re: Kenet (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » WRONG DUDE - sorry for bad english

Its not the limits in GFX... that tiger's creativity, its the control method... IF a WiiMote would be a PS3 or X360 controller YOU would see the same creativity, only with better GFX :D
   by comedy - 2007-02-03
 » guy above me...

i think you're right, but that's only a fault of developers, publishers and consumers - what would we rather have

a game with crummy gfx and good gameplay
or
a game with good gfx and good gameplay

i think the answer is a no-brainer. unfortunately games are simply trading on great gfx and not good enough gameplay right now... the wii is highlighting this issue by only offering chunder graphics and forcing the devs to make good gameplay.
so, for now it's one or the other, but let's not forget there are series out there which do both

my own list:
zelda, burnout, mgs, final fantasy (ff12 had good gameplay mechanic), god of war, half life 2, devil may cry 3 ... that's off the top of my head, there are others.

   by Just To Annoy People (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » However

If the Wii had hardware that was even weaker then the Gamecube, but still had the Wii-mote would you pay to play N64 graphics with the new innovative gameplay


   Re: MasamunesBlade (Unregistered) - 2007-02-14
 » hmm

yes
   by xjadow (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » hmm

i think graphics are important, but you need a good balance, no point having AMAZING graphics and crap gameplay and vice versa

   by Firestorm (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Nvida...

Wait, graphics card company saying graphics are important?! Oh my gosh they are truly unbiased!

I know that graphics are important almost as much as gameplay, but damn man. Let's get someone else to say it. Next we'll be hearing the head of Kellogs telling us to eat cereal everyday.

   by Advertising -
   by stapuft (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » gfx is ok

i say that if the game has awesome gfx but terrible gameplay then i wont play it but if it has bad gfx and awesome gameplay then i will
and i agree with him in that both are important

   by J (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » q

stupid nvidia, beacuse of things like this we are lack of really great games.

Final Fantasy VII - poor graphic but the only game that make me cry and I finished it 29 times.


   Re: comedy - 2007-02-03
 » ff7 poor graphics?!

dude at the time they kicked arse! don't you remember the fmv's? the backdrops were awesome, the summons were a whole order of magnitude more impressive than previous ff's... you can't say it looked crud back in the day.
also, you're referring to story mostly, not gameplay... that's another thing.

   Re: ma n stfu (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » u guys are noobs

just becuase there was only 1 game that was fun without GFX go and suk some diks go and get a life dam of course u might say oh gameplay is better than gfx welll its is to a limit ..... wii vs PS3

PS3+ great graphics and traditional use of controls that everyone is used t 2 + sixAxis

Wii+ subpar GFX (xbox last gen) , fun gimmik that only last a short amount of time....

ok u say u can lst with the wii graphics but if u havent noticed tech nolgy advanses see xbox and ps3 are barely usin up ther power and the wii is alredy beein used up

lets put it this way people say the wiimote is fun but look at it this way the reason GTA was so fun was becuase of its features and things u can do which is madeby processing and graphics ofcourse the wii may have k gafics now but thas only cuz people are used to the subpar grafix of PS2 GC and xbox of last gen and people dont mind that the grafics looks the same but PC and other thing get nbetter grafix and performance and then the wii will look like comperin PS2 grafix versus PS1 and N64

MGS video game i everplayed and the reason is becuase the grafix and gameplay and the gfx were so important it tottaly imerssed u into the carecters and made it beterr some may say oh wtf is rong with those eyes ?? but still it was one of the best things uve seen at the time am i right or not

   Re: Kenet (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Dr. Phill, Ophra, anybody....

wait... 29 times... i think its time for some therapy :P
You know FFVII its a great game and i love it... but damn.... 29 times... get your self a new GAME.. LOL!!!

   Re: q (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » q

yeah I passed it 29 times, and well, I'm waiting for it's remake :P

yeah I know about FMV's then but character were created rather bulky, noone truely disliked that much

anyway there's still much more great games not just that one.

Transport Tycoon Deluxe is one of the best games to ... playing in 256 colors
I know about 1 kid who like great graphics but when I showed him TTD he didn't want to play anything else ... power of gameplay man
   by stapuft (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » gfx is ok

i say that if the game has awesome gfx but terrible gameplay then i wont play it but if it has bad gfx and awesome gameplay then i will
and i agree with him in that both are important

   by band-aid (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Of course he likes graphics...

Guess what I just spent 3 hours playing. Starfox 64. If what he says is true, I couldn't possibly have enjoyed it. But guess what... it was fun... *gasp* I couldn't care less what the graphics look like. The N64 is still the greatest system ever created because the games were amazing. All game makers care about now is how realistic the game looks and its causing the gaming industry to go down the toilet imo.


   Re: somebody (Unregistered) - 2007-02-04
 » ok....

but you didnt keep playing the snes version did you? gameplay was the same, but gfx were better on the 64 version.
hes not trying to say gameplay is unimportant, but that "gfx" are going to make the gameplay in the near future. look at crysis. destructible everything, forests of trees, buildings, koreans, tanks. you could not do this game without good "gfx" but its about everything "gfx" makes up: physics gfx interactivity,not just more polygons.

photorealism is only as good as the physics and animations behind it, and thats what hes talking about, not just more polygons or better textures
   by coolguy5678 - 2007-02-03
 » Immersion

Graphics is a large part of immersion, which IMO is as important as gameplay.

   by db26 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Graphics.

VP of Graphics Card maker says Graphics are important?! No frickin' way. If he said the negation, I could see this being interesting, but as of now, it's just publicity.

   by db26 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Graphics.

VP of Graphics Card maker says Graphics are important?! No frickin' way. If he said the negation, I could see this being interesting, but as of now, it's just publicity.

   by trinal (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Graphics Vs Gameplay

I think gameplay is more important than graphics. For example, look at all the puzzle games we play. They get you addicted to them but dont have the best graphics in the world.

But good graphics are necesary in all games. You just can't say you loved Final Fantasy VII just because of the story. When it first came out the graphics were awesome and it attracted the attention of many people who weren't fans of the series beforehand. This rule applies to many games we consider the best of the best (like Zelda OoT). You can't make a game that everyone loves without some good graphics.

What I think nintendo did was make people think that gameplay far surpasses the graphics as an escuse to why the graphics in their games can't match that of the PS3 at launch. Talk about which was more important was never even discussed as much as it is now until Nintendo started making us thing gameplay is the only factor in games. If the Wii had the better graphics in this generation then people wouldn't even care about which is better.

I do think that gameplay is better (I own a Wii), but graphics is important.


   Re: demondude777 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » You can't make a game that everyone loves without some good graphics? I have 3 words for you:

Dance Dance Revolution.

It is just 4 arrows, and people still love playing that game.
   by Mudshark - 2007-02-03
 » Looks like everything's been said already

but yeah, gameplay should always come first, and graphics second. That's why Doom is still popular (Zdaemon, anybody?), cause the gameplay is solid. That and it can run on virtually anything, including my psp lol.

   by Naweed (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY!!

Graphics are important to an extent, yes no doubt about that.
You can not just rely on game play alone, example: zelda TP, was stunning and the game was very good. What nintendo offer is a bundle of game play and graphics. Graphics make you go "WOW!" Game Play makes you go addicted to saying "WOW!". Seeing superb stuff but repeating events over and over and over again gets boring and the "WOW!" turns in to "i've seen this already.........".

   by gattsuru (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Graphics equal to Gameplay?

I'm not sure I agree with this guy. I'd rather play, for example, Legend of Mana, Secret of Mana, or even Zelda 1 rather than the recent Superman Returns game or Eragon. I'll pick up Eternal Darkness with its barely-above-n64 raphics much faster than some of the PS2's Resident Evil games, and Guilty Gear XX#R over most of the 3D fighting games. It's not because of graphics or anything of that matter; it's simply because the games are a lot more fun to play.

That's not to say graphics are valueless: a game with an unacceptably low framerate, or graphics that don't clearly demonstrate what is what, can become unplayable. But there can be decent games built in two dimensions, or with simple graphics.

Today, though, graphics aren't the best way to apply emotion. Humans react well to other human faces, but we've reached the uncanny valley for human-like graphics and thus often produce creepy things that only put people off. Music, well applied, is *much* more significant.

   by sigh (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » graphics v gameplay??

dirge of cerberus looked nice, but the controls were crap, i didn't bother finishing that because of the controls

graphics are a nice bonus but not entirely necessary, just look at all the people playing cs.....

you think some guy from nvidia will say graphics aren't essential to games??? oh yeah aside from that buy our latest graphics card at 800 bucks, its worth it


   Re: nobody (Unregistered) - 2007-02-04
 » fool

look at all the people playing cs source. that was purely a "graphical" update (physics are more or less considered gfx nowadays in the computer world, or at least put in that category)

in any case, a good gfx card is less than a psp, and since the only thing most people lack for a gaming computer is a gfx card,thats less than most consoles. in fact, its less than a wii for ps3 graphics. not too bad is it.
   by Kichigai - 2007-02-03
 » Riiiiiight....

Graphics ARE important, but good gameplay can make up for bad graphics. If the game is FUN to play, you won't care about the graphics. That's why we'll still dust off our old NES's and hook it up to our 62" HDTVs and enjoy Super Mario Brothers in glorious 240x160 through 480i. Or those of us who emulate older game systems with the filtering turned OFF. Or how Katamari Damacy was using blocky, simplistic graphics, yet WE STILL ENJOYED IT. Or look at the success of Capcom and SNK's 2D fighters. They usually just run around 320x240, but they're still fun!


   Re: esay (Unregistered) - 2007-02-11
 » you have a good point

Gameplay over gfx but to a degree

Is great gfx and great gameplay better than
supreb gameplay and black and white gfx it cant happen gameplay and gfx depend on each other.

Why do have to chose which is better developers should incorpate both into the games(and they do in some games)
Lets compare
(wii sports)wii 8/10 gameplay and 4/10 gfx
(halo2)xbox 9.5/10 gameplay 10/10 gfx
which is better
or
(zelda)wii great gameplay 9/10 good gfx 8/10
(ffX)ps2 9.6/10 gameplay 9.5/10 gfx
(ff12)ps2 gameplay 9/10 gfx 10/10

Now umm yes you got halo3!! and ff13 on the next gen consoles i think where gonna need a new metre maybe out of 20 for gfx its only going to get better.

To be fair i compared last gen games because that is what the wii is a gamecube with the best control ever.
theres so many good games(with outstanding gameplay and outstanding gfx on the xbox 360 and ps3 wii isn't a option anymore.
went off topic there but i think i got my not important point across.
   by Noin (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » zomfg

Really this dude is completely right, i mean comeon graphics are *****ing important these days, were all used to seeing those highly detailed terrains and all, and gameplay without the proper mood given by the graphics is worth *****....

Honestly stfu and just accept it, graphics are equal to gameplay today.

Play doom 3 in 2d and play it on its own awesome engine which has perfect shadow playing and high-res textures and all, now - which will give you the feeling of being surrounded by monsters and fear going down your ass, the 2d or 3d HQ graphics version... well yeah the 3d HQ graphics one...


   Re: xyz (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » you are

moron
   by Some Guy (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Pretty much what you might expect.

I think for him to argue otherwise would be career suicide. His very purpose in life is to sell expensive graphic hardware. I think it would only be news if he said otherwise.

A great game is a great game, graphics or no. This is why people to this day play Chrono Trigger. This is why I can play away the entire duration of my DS battery life on a lazy Saturday playing Age of Empires. A great game with great graphics is just icing on the cake.

In short, great gameplay can COMPLETELY make up for a lack of good graphics (how many thousands of people still MUD to this very day?). The best graphics on the planet on the other hand, can do nothing for a game that is complete ass.


   Re: finch (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » rubbish

warioware for wii has not got good graphics and the gameplay is gr8t so hes talking out his ass
   by lol (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » No *****

No ***** this guy's gonna say graphics matters, the *****ers from Nvidia. Buy the next-gen $800 graphics card so you can truly play how it's meant to be played!

   by gh (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Nobody should really pay attention to this

And definitely not get upset over it. This guy is from nVidia, obviously he's going to tell you graphics are the most important.

I agree with him to an extent (no matter how good a new game is, if it looks like an NES game I won't play it), but he's just speaking for the company because obviously he wants to sell units. Don't take too much out of this

   by Shatterdome - 2007-02-03
 » If you can't see his point....

Then you are fools....for games like mario and such, graphics aren't a big deal.....but moving towards more cinematic experiences, like GoW or MGS or the new RE....graphics will matter ALOT for drawing the player into the world and obscuring the fact they are playing a video game....


I wonder if Resident Evil would have been as effective at scaring people if it was filled with stick men and stick zombies.

Also, wtf is saying that you can only have one or the other ? Imagine a game with amazing graphics and amazing gameplay ??? Why does it have to be one or the other......I just know for games that are trying to convice the player they are participating in real events, then good graphics are HUGE....


   Re: xyz (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » another

moron

   Re: demondude777 (Unregistered) - 2007-02-03
 » Stick figure RE? Bad example!

Resident Evil isn't scary...it is tense. The game isn't meant to make you sleep with the lights on, but more to make you freak out over close quarters, quick thinking and reaction. It would work with stick men and zombies all the same as long as they use the same formula.

BTW...best Resident Evil is the first. It was also one of the worst looking.

   Re: esay (Unregistered) - 2007-02-11
 » what he said

100% agree with you it depends what type of game youre playing
   by Pyro - 2007-02-03
 » .

gameplay is more important then graphics, but the guy is right, graphics also set the mood and draw emotions, which is part of gameplay.


   Re: esay (Unregistered) - 2007-02-11
 » i agree with you

We need graphic in somes obviously not puzzle or mind games and anyway it depends it the spice of life we need great gfx good gameplay and vias versa some people would never go back to playing sega 2d games
example you can eith buy super mario or halo 3 which would you choose


Add QJ.NET
Add to My Yahoo!
Google Reader Subscribe with Bloglines
Add  to your Kinja digest Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader Add 'www.qj.net' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
Subscribe with SearchFox RSS del.icio.us www.qj.net
Add to Technorati Favorite! Add to My AOL
furl! it Stumble for Treehugger!

 Username: 
 Password:
Forgot password
New user registration



Categories
Emulators
Titles
Archives