@DeathBeforeDawn The way I worded it was meant to reflect the fact that I think PixelJunk's aesthetics are consistently excellent, while the actual gameplay is less consistently excellent. There was no implied judgement on my part regarding which aspect is most important.
I, like most people, play games that I think provide a fun overall experience. I do, however, strongly believe that a game's art and sound design are part of the package that makes up that overall experience.
I'll use the example of Rayman Origins. Part of the joy that came from playing Rayman Origins was looking forward to seeing the next clever enemy design or beautifully detailed levels, or to hearing more of the amazing soundtrack and sound design. All of those things contribute to the experience and make the game fun.
Are they the most important thing? They are part of the whole package, and defining the most important aspect of a specific game is going to differ from game to game. If you take out all the gameplay mechanics that make Rayman Origins what it is, no amount of beautiful images and music can save it.
Conversely, if they had designed the game so it looked and sounded like it belonged on an Atari 2600, the core experience of the game would have been changed. It would have lost its charm, subtle humor and overall style -- all things that are an integral part of the experience.
A game's visuals are generally not the most important thing to me. As I said earlier, I play games that provide me with a fun overall experience, and that "fun" can come from many different aspects of the game. Great aesthetics usually end up being the icing on the cake, not the other way around.
Your comment struck me as a bit of a reprimand -- you thought I might be enjoying games the "wrong" way. Your question, "shouldn't fun be more important then being visually impressive?," can only be answered by an individual, for that individual, often on a ase by case basis. I know there are plenty of people out there who do all their gaming on high-end PCs with maxed out specs because visuals are more important to them than other aspects of a game (I realize there are lots of other reasons people game on PCs, just using this as an example).
Everyone should be able to enjoy games however they want to enjoy them, for whatever reasons and in whatever context they see fit.
How cool. I continue to be happier than expected with my PS+ membership. I get more benefits from it than I ever have from XBL, which is becoming an increasingly worthless service to me.
Just the discounts on games alone have already paid the membership cost.
I'm so interested in learning more about this. PixelJunk's games are consistently some of the most visually and aurally impressive things around (and usually pretty fun, too).
@ShadowXIII I just finished Alpha Protocol a few minutes ago, and I would say it is well worth playing. It's not perfect, but far more enjoyable than I expected.
PlayStation Plus in March: Early Journey, free Sly Cooper, more
Mar 5th 2012 5:56PM (Joystiq)Ah, that's too bad.
PlayStation Plus in March: Early Journey, free Sly Cooper, more
Mar 5th 2012 5:06PM (Joystiq)Um Jammer Lammy is also going to be free.
PixelJunk 4am out this spring, spectator mode detailed
Mar 3rd 2012 9:15AM (Joystiq)I, like most people, play games that I think provide a fun overall experience. I do, however, strongly believe that a game's art and sound design are part of the package that makes up that overall experience.
I'll use the example of Rayman Origins. Part of the joy that came from playing Rayman Origins was looking forward to seeing the next clever enemy design or beautifully detailed levels, or to hearing more of the amazing soundtrack and sound design. All of those things contribute to the experience and make the game fun.
Are they the most important thing? They are part of the whole package, and defining the most important aspect of a specific game is going to differ from game to game. If you take out all the gameplay mechanics that make Rayman Origins what it is, no amount of beautiful images and music can save it.
Conversely, if they had designed the game so it looked and sounded like it belonged on an Atari 2600, the core experience of the game would have been changed. It would have lost its charm, subtle humor and overall style -- all things that are an integral part of the experience.
A game's visuals are generally not the most important thing to me. As I said earlier, I play games that provide me with a fun overall experience, and that "fun" can come from many different aspects of the game. Great aesthetics usually end up being the icing on the cake, not the other way around.
Your comment struck me as a bit of a reprimand -- you thought I might be enjoying games the "wrong" way. Your question, "shouldn't fun be more important then being visually impressive?," can only be answered by an individual, for that individual, often on a ase by case basis. I know there are plenty of people out there who do all their gaming on high-end PCs with maxed out specs because visuals are more important to them than other aspects of a game (I realize there are lots of other reasons people game on PCs, just using this as an example).
Everyone should be able to enjoy games however they want to enjoy them, for whatever reasons and in whatever context they see fit.
Journey travels to PS Plus members one week early
Mar 2nd 2012 8:36PM (Joystiq)Just the discounts on games alone have already paid the membership cost.
PixelJunk 4am out this spring, spectator mode detailed
Mar 2nd 2012 8:13PM (Joystiq)The Joystiq Show - 027: Journey to Amalur
Mar 2nd 2012 2:05PM (Joystiq)Little Deviants review: Little interest
Feb 13th 2012 7:44PM (Joystiq)Wii U launching worldwide in time for 'year-end season'
Jan 26th 2012 5:27PM (Joystiq)Rovio not planning public stock offering in 2012
Jan 20th 2012 7:44AM (Joystiq)WRUP: Coming to America
Jan 7th 2012 9:48AM (Joystiq)I just finished Alpha Protocol a few minutes ago, and I would say it is well worth playing. It's not perfect, but far more enjoyable than I expected.