Wassup?! Wassup?! Decided I’d throw another one with the similar theme cuz I got quite the feedback regarding my post about graphics being valued over actual gameplay.
A couple of people have reached out to me and pointed out how I was probably generalizing too much and how specific gaming platforms are clearly focusing gameplay first and everything else second. The platform they were referring to was PlayStation. Let’s get this out of the way right now:
I fuckin love PlayStation as a platform. I value their games above all the others and I absolutely think that they deliver best and the most original content thus keeping the industry fresh and diverse. I have played a ton of titles on this exceptional console and am known to spend a lot on PSN stuff. I “was” that is, until I found out about this PSN code generator.Since then I’m spending much less, yet, I’m able to play whatever I want.
But does PlayStation truly value gameplay over graphics? Well that’s up for debate. Well there is absolutely no doubt that were getting freshest and most innovative games over this platform I find this statement to be not entirely truthful. Throughout past console generations PlayStation titles were the one to (arguably) contribute most for the gaming audiences. While the games from this platform have indeed introduced us to many gaming standards considered mandatory nowadays, saying how they evaluate gameplay over graphics is a bit of an overstatement.
For example, many full 3D games on PSX were quite ahead of themselves. Cult classic Silent Hill is a good example of this. Unlike its rival, the Resident Evil series which used prerendered backgrounds images, Konami option for real-time rendering of 3-D models throughout the entire game. Suffice to say this was not even possible back in the day so divisibility had to be severely limited. This resulted in developer putting draw distance limiting fog and pitch black darkness that turned out extremely successful and became one of the trademarks of the series.
What about PlayStation 2? We all remember Shadow Of Colossus, right? This extremely popular videogame developed by Sony Computer Entertainment themselves was, and to this game is a game like no other. Not just in its name, this game was colossal in every possible aspect. From insanely spacious landscapes to frighteningly massive creatures that roam the land, this game was big. The only thing that was small in this game was its frame rate. Frequent FPS drops ruined what could have easily been the best experience on PlayStation’s second generation of consoles. And while the gameplay was very satisfying, sluggish gameplay made it much less enjoyable.
Or what about Dark Souls PlayStation 3? While not as notable as in previous games, this one is also a fine example of visual aspects being favored and pushed too far. Now, to say that a game like Dark Souls is lacking in gameplay is a heresy yet, we all remember those so-called “FPS dead zones”. Whether it was the overuse of depth of field or the fact of every single object was under heavy Havoc physics is still to be determined but one thing is for sure, DS wasn’t as optimized as it could’ve been.
As for the PS4, it’s still too early yet, exclusives like Bloodborne are known to drop as low as 24FPS in specific areas. And why else would Sony be building PS4 Pro unless they were unhappy with the performances or trying to squeeze more FPS and get better visuals?
Of course, not every game on PlayStation has optimization issues and runs unstably under 30FPS but then again, not every game is really worth your time, but those that happen to be turn out to be poorly optimized and favoring visuals over performance. Nobody really likes that (except for really small kids and girls who don’t even notice FPS drops (feminist shitstorm in 3…2…)) yet they keep doing it. Why? They must be thinking that visuals are more important than the gameplay itself…