Where the hell do you get off. This is a board about graphics not money you arrogant **bleep**. I am 30's something and have a job jerk off. But I also not an idiot like yourselve who is obviously blind. I have high def and I still don't see anything that impressive coming from the systems. Sure it's pretty and all. Big deal. But to pay thousands of dollars for a complete system like you describe just to play video games is asinine.
Some games out there that have fairly decent visuals along with good gameplay usually show the hard work and dedication to the game.
However you do get some games which look wonderful and play kinda cruddy....X-blades is sort of that. To me that game didn't capture my lifelong longing for it.
Valkyria Chronicles is a great looking game however once you beat it onces....over and over again and on the other modes it just fizzles.
Fallout 3 is one game with medium high but not so HD graphics but it knows how to make you feel tiny real fast and shows how huge some things can be even with decent graphics.
Either way if the game looks and plays great I like it. But if it's too graphical and gameplay is not challenging...someone spent too much time in the art museum.
No, the graphics don't have to be mind-blowing, but it better not be blatantly obvious that the developer was trying to save a buck or two on development costs. If graphics are that bad, the game has no business being a PS3 game, and should be a PSP game instead.
It boils down to this, if the developer isn't willing to put the effort to make a good presentation, then why should I fork over $59.99 when there are better presentations for the same price?
Baldur's Gate 2 still has the best graphics out of all RPGs ever made in my factual opinion. Not because of realism but because of feel, it evokes more emotion than say the graphics of Oblivion. Like with a painting, graphics can be horrible or photo-realistic, in the end it's the feel that matters because that is how graphics contribute to gameplay: the feel they add to the experience.
The thing is most gamers still holds the idea of 'graphics is the king'. We all know that nice graphics catches people's attention without fail but nice/unique gameplay has to be experienced/looked into to be picked up by people. It's a hard decision for game studios when they need to secure the break-even sales at least. A considerable amount of sales comes from impulse buyers and guess what they are based on - graphics!
I personally value the experience that games will bring me. So gameplay is the most important for me followed by story then graphics. The Disgaea series is the best example here. Its graphics is downright last gen to bits but the gameplay along makes up for everything. And on top of that, each game has a funny(though not very original) story.
Shrug. There is a reason why RPG's are only really made for portable systems now. They are so much cheaper to make. RPGer's are willing to play them on portables, so they buy them.
It's the only they have left to survive really. Despite the big titles that get made for years, and have been put on DELAY for longer than most games even cost to make, if you want to play a good rpg, it has to be done on a portable.
Accept it. Or don't.