After reading some of the comments on
this post, I began thinking about next-gen graphics. To me, if a game runs well, without slowdown, jaggies, or other little technical glitches, I consider it to have "good" graphics. I don't care about normal mapping, bloom lighting, or anything along those lines, unless it directly affects the gameplay. Really, I'd rather play a game that has style over technical horsepower. For example, I'd rather play Paper Mario than Gears of War. But then, that's only if I'm playing games for something to LOOK AT, as opposed to something I can interact with. I can understand why someone would see a crappy movie simply for the special effects, surround sound, and so on, but would you play a crappy game just because it has good graphics? Really, if graphics are so important, then why isn't Lair selling like crazy? My point with this is to ask, are graphics really THAT important in the long run?
Ack. This is a rambling, incoherent post. But I'm writing after working the night shift, so I have an excuse.
It's a hard thing to balance gameplay, storyline and graphics perfectly and there are very few developers who can do this. Sierra, 2k, Valve and id are the best examples I can think of in the FPS genre.
To Cheeburga: See, I just didn't think it was all that special or revolutionary. I mean, it was fun, but it wasn't mind-blowing or really all that unique, IMO.