I think graphic presentation does matter a lot. Otherwise we wouldn't be such suckers for ads. Think of the normal distribution, the gauss curve. There will be few people interested only in the accuracy of the simulation and few people interested in graphics alone (since we're talking about a sim game and not an arcade game). Similarly there will be few people wanting to play as real as it gets and also few who'd prefer no challenge at all.
The majority lies in between. When it comes to choosing a product, only a few will look for the complete features and take them into consideration. Those interested in graphics would dismiss the game if it doesn't look good before getting to know how actually good the product is and how captivating it could get even without flashy eye-candy.
If the game looks good and is attractive then you can get caught in it and it lets you wanting to know more. I reckon that because I like SH I ended up joining this forum and got to learn a lot more about submarines.
I don't think graphics should be dismissed in a sim, as long as the eye candy does not adversely impact the simulation engine as we all know there's a limit of computations that can be done in 1/30 of a second.
The most complete sim I ever got my hands on was a training software for the Airbus A310. I had to persuade the father of one my childhood friends, a pilot flying the real thing, to copy it for me. It ran under DOS, had only a few mega and it simulated a great deal of stuff (I remember spending a lot of time trying to setup the on-board computer before take-off 'cause the thing wouldn't even start without those being set). It consisted only of the on-board instruments, all crammed in one screen. Although fun for a while you sure wanted to take a look outside from time to time instead of imagining how it would look like.
|