Stop using modifiers when explaining games.

" Okay, so whenever i'm talking about the graphical quality of a DS game, i'll say it sucks hard.  "

"

@Video_Game_King said:

"

@AgentJ said:

" Okay, so whenever i'm talking about the graphical quality of a DS game, i'll say it sucks hard.  "

No, you won't. If you do, I'll banish you from the kingdom...with a flaming fist to the face :P. "

Oh no, not the Falcon Punch! Oh wait, since Brawl's on the wii the Falcon Punch doesnt look that epic.  "

" I'm just saying that a game either looks good or it doesn't. A DS game should have decent 3D graphics or good 2D sprites, and not look like some broken ass quake 1 engine game. "

"

@insanejedi said:

" I'm just saying that a game either looks good or it doesn't. A DS game should have decent 3D graphics or good 2D sprites, and not look like some broken ass quake 1 engine game. "

A DS game is never ever going to look good compared to Crysis, so your logic is flawed.  "

It doesn't have to look like Crysis, It just doesn't have to look offensive to me. "

"

@insanejedi said:

It doesn't have to look like Crysis, It just doesn't have to look offensive to me. "

Name one mainstream (as in "I don't have to search all about for it") DS game that looks racist :P. "

Homie Rollers? Which applies to what I REALLY ment and what you mean. So win-win. "

"

@insanejedi said:

"

@AgentJ said:

"

@insanejedi said:

" I'm just saying that a game either looks good or it doesn't. A DS game should have decent 3D graphics or good 2D sprites, and not look like some broken ass quake 1 engine game. "

A DS game is never ever going to look good compared to Crysis, so your logic is flawed.  "

It doesn't have to look like Crysis, It just doesn't have to look offensive to me. "

Then aren't you saying that the game can have good graphics "for a DS game"? Or are you just saying that as long as you like it then it's okay? After all, if something on the DS looks okay to you, then there shouldn't be a Wii game that you have a problem with.  "

" I absolutely hate people using modifiers when  talking and evaluating games. What are modifiers? It's something at the end of an evaluatory sentence which helps create a more accurate meaning of what you are exactly saying.

Unmodified: That game looks graphically good
Modified: That game looks graphically good for a wii game.

I really wish people would stop using this because ANY kind of game or ANYTHING does not exist in a vacuum that only certain things or nothing can it be compared with.

A game should just look good, I don't care if it looks good on a particular platform, it has to look good. A crappy game on the Fairchild Channel F is still a crappy game. So please, if a game looks bad gameplay wise or graphically, just say it's bad. Don't try to justify it by excluding other games to make it look better. And in return, if a game looks good, just say it looks good. "

"

@insanejedi said:

"

@AgentJ said:

"

@insanejedi said:

"

@AgentJ said:

"

@insanejedi said:

" I'm just saying that a game either looks good or it doesn't. A DS game should have decent 3D graphics or good 2D sprites, and not look like some broken ass quake 1 engine game. "

A DS game is never ever going to look good compared to Crysis, so your logic is flawed.  "

It doesn't have to look like Crysis, It just doesn't have to look offensive to me. "

Then aren't you saying that the game can have good graphics "for a DS game"? Or are you just saying that as long as you like it then it's okay? After all, if something on the DS looks okay to you, then there shouldn't be a Wii game that you have a problem with.  "

No because the games that I like visually on the DS do not try to make themselves look like a broken ass IDTECH 1 game or early PS1 game. Generally they involve good looking and drawn sprites and not on technical prowess.  If the models look blocky, or the textures look really muddy, or the aliasing is so awful, then I think it looks graphically bad no matter what system that it is on. Which Is why I can never bring myself to play the old Tomb Raider games or Goldeneye. "

So then it's more of a personal opinion then anything else. You dont care if a game looks shitty as long as it adheres to your opinions of what make a game good looking. Personally i have a hard time playing the tomb raiders and goldeneyes myself, but I can't imagine what made you make this post when the PS1 and its style have been dead for over ten years now. Since you supplied a picture of the Conduit, i assume that's the game you are railing on, but since it looks better in every way then a DS game and doesnt have the problems of N64 and PS1 games i can't see how your arguement holds water. "

"

@insanejedi said:

"
The Conduit has texture filtering and aliasing issues which make it hard to look at. The only modifier that I'll accept and willfully use is the term "By today's standards" because were directly comparing all of today's games to other games. It's perfectly fine to say, "Prince of Persia Sands of Time still looks good by today's standards." because that's something we can actually gauge and is relevant. Saying "This game looked good for a game 6 years ago." means very little and is irrelevant for the time period. Yes, what I'm proposing is a bit flip floppy, but games that look bad today on any system, look bad regardless of the platform it is on. If a console is released with a 100 mghz processer and a 8mb video card, I'm not going to say "The game looks good for the "blank" it is on." I'm going to say "The games on this system look like shit by today's standards."What I'm generally saying is that games do not exist in a vaccum and we shouldent treat games like they are in some void where games of that timeline do not exist. I dunno, maybe I just snapped with people saying "It looks good for a wii game" ALL THE FRACKING TIME, that I want to abolish using words like that. "

If you think "the sands of time" looks good by todays standards you shouldn't have any problem with The Conduit. It sounds to me like its a value judgement, because it certainly looks pretty damn good in my eyes. Maybe that's because i don't know anything about game design, but should i have to? I'm a consumer, not an analyst. 

So what i'm hearing from you is "i dont like how the conduit looks" and "im trying to make it part of a larger arguement". I recommend you just leave it at "I dont like how the conduit looks". 

Maybe it doesn't bother me as much because i dont even notice when people say "for a wii game". 

"

" While this thread may be a bit lackluster when compared to most others floating about, it still remains good for an insanejedi topic.CWUTIDIDTHAR?! LOLOLO "

"

@insanejedi said:

"

@AgentJ said:

"

@insanejedi said:

"
The Conduit has texture filtering and aliasing issues which make it hard to look at. The only modifier that I'll accept and willfully use is the term "By today's standards" because were directly comparing all of today's games to other games. It's perfectly fine to say, "Prince of Persia Sands of Time still looks good by today's standards." because that's something we can actually gauge and is relevant. Saying "This game looked good for a game 6 years ago." means very little and is irrelevant for the time period. Yes, what I'm proposing is a bit flip floppy, but games that look bad today on any system, look bad regardless of the platform it is on. If a console is released with a 100 mghz processer and a 8mb video card, I'm not going to say "The game looks good for the "blank" it is on." I'm going to say "The games on this system look like shit by today's standards."What I'm generally saying is that games do not exist in a vaccum and we shouldent treat games like they are in some void where games of that timeline do not exist. I dunno, maybe I just snapped with people saying "It looks good for a wii game" ALL THE FRACKING TIME, that I want to abolish using words like that. "

If you think "the sands of time" looks good by todays standards you shouldn't have any problem with The Conduit. It sounds to me like its a value judgement, because it certainly looks pretty damn good in my eyes. Maybe that's because i don't know anything about game design, but should i have to? I'm a consumer, not an analyst. 

So what i'm hearing from you is "i dont like how the conduit looks" and "im trying to make it part of a larger arguement". I recommend you just leave it at "I dont like how the conduit looks". 

Maybe it doesn't bother me as much because i dont even notice when people say "for a wii game". 

"

No because there is something inconsistent about the graphics. There is a difference between a game that looked really good in 2000  and a recent shooter that is deemed very bad in the graphics department by today's standards. I.E Red Steel.  And if that is what you pulled out of the post then you completely missed the point. What I'm saying is that wii games, 360 games, and PC games should not be treated as if they exist without anything else around existing. The Conduit is a prime example of this because most people say "It looks good for a wii game." But in contrast to anything in today's standards of the tech, The Conduit is vastly inferior. It applies to every game. "

So then you'll take back what you said about the DS? Because the tech on those games could be PSP level and they aren't, so the graphics suck. Hell, even the PSP has been out for a while, so the DS should be able to do much better. "

"
What did I say about the DS that I have to take back? All I said was that DS games should look generally good and not Quake 1 running on everything low. It doesn't matter what tech it is on or what the specs of the console is, all that matters at that point in time is the question of "does it look good or not?". "

"

@insanejedi said:

"
What did I say about the DS that I have to take back? All I said was that DS games should look generally good and not Quake 1 running on everything low. It doesn't matter what tech it is on or what the specs of the console is, all that matters at that point in time is the question of "does it look good or not?". "

Well DS games look like shit compared to PC games so i dont know how you can say they look "generally good". "