Crassmaster: Aaaaah, graphics whores. I will never, ever understand them. I've stopped playing a game because of bad control issues, because of a horrific UI and because of camera/game glitches. I have never stopped playing a game because even though I was enjoying it, it just wasn't pretty enough.
frostcircus: See, now even this is exaggerating.
Nobody has suggested in any way that the graphics caused or will cause them to stop playing the game. They've just said the graphics aren't very good. And they're not. Why is this a forbidden opinion?
Well, for the sake of protest, the graphics are awful. They are, at best, 5 years out of date, and at worst, hilariously slapdash, inconsistent and animated like a surrealist claymation nightmare.
So? Doesn't mean I don't like the game. Doesn't mean I need every game to look like Crysis. Doesn't mean I'm a graphics whore. It means
I don't like the graphics in Mount & Blade, which is really not that radical a proclamation.
The game was released in 2008. A year in which indepedent studios also released King's Bounty: The Legend, World of Goo, and Braid. Three of the prettiest games ever made. It's true that being a tiny indepedent studio gives you a bit of leeway when it comes to production values, but it's not a free pass that leaves you completely immune from all comments about your games' graphics.
Also, Uplink is awesome
However, we all HAVE seen people just drop a game because "It isn't purty enough!"...those are the people I was referring to. If you didn't like that game, that's fine...you tried it, and it wasn't your cup of tea. Nothing wrong with that (and no criticism intended towards you personally). I just get annoyed with 15 year old graphics leeches who seem to care about nothing else...and game developers whose sole focus seems to be those idiots (eg Far Cry 2...could have been an incredible game if they'd spent as much time on the gameplay and populating the world as they spent on making it look amazing).
