Is it just me of is gameplay underrated?

If seems to me that today all people want to see in a game is a great story and technically proficient graphics and wouldn't care if it had terrible gameplay or even gameplay at all. Metal Gear Solid 4 got 10/10s nearly everywhere, despite having barley any gameplay while a game like Saints Row 2 or Saints Row The Third that have loads of fun (but not realistic) gameplay but not so great graphics and story.

join the club bud

Yeah, it's really a shame... Especially when it's precisely gameplay that seperates video games from other media. Games like Uncharted and Mass Effect don't deserve the honors of game of the year awards for they do not exemplify the very thing that video games offer above other media pass times. There's nothing wrong with loving these kinds of games, I just think it's wrong to call them the best video games.

Yeah, it's really a shame... Especially when it's precisely gameplay that seperates video games from other media. Games like Uncharted and Mass Effect don't deserve the honors of game of the year awards for they do not exemplify the very thing that video games offer above other media pass times. There's nothing wrong with loving these kinds of games, I just think it's wrong to call them the best video games.

Pikminmaniac

Agreed 100% although I beleive Uncharted deserves it's praise, it's gameplay is fantastic, as for Mass Effect, it's gameplay is still good, it can feel repedative but still good.

Gameplay is the first thing that matter about games. That said, I can forgive a lot of gameplay flaws if the story can keep me enthralled, but no amount of graphical eye candy can save a game that has neither good gameplay or story. I'm looking at you, Killzone 2.

Too many people these days just want something pretty to look at. If a game isn't "the best looking game ever" then it's no good, no matter how good the gameplay is.

What I find funny is when some people talk about older games, even if it's about last gen games, and say they can't play them because they look bad. Even though a few years ago those same people would have said they love games from that gen. If a game is good, it will be good no matter how many years go by and wouldn't matter how better looking newer games are.

To me the most important thing is the gameplay, I play games to have fun and so if the gameplay is weak I wont have much fun. A good story can help out a game with mediocre gameplay to keep me interested, as long as the story doesn't take the spotlight too much (like the MGS series, too much story, not enough gameplay). But it does depend on the type of game too, take RPGs for example; to me an RPG needs a good story along with the gameplay. If the story is weak then most people wont want to play through a 40+ hour game. For action games the story isn't that important, it's a plus but it wont take much away from the game itself if there isn't much of one.

Now if a game has great gameplay, a good story and looks good at the same time then that would be a huge plus. However what most people forget when making a top end looking game is the gameplay. They put so much effort into making it look good that they forget the most important thing for a game, the gameplay. Either that or they know if they make a great looking game with poor gameplay it will sell more than if they make an OK looking game with great gameplay.

But what can we do? It has become the norm to put graphics ahead of game play and until people start thinking differently this trend will continue.

/rant

If seems to me that today all people want to see in a game is a great story and technically proficient graphics and wouldn't care if it had terrible gameplay or even gameplay at all. Metal Gear Solid 4 got 10/10s nearly everywhere, despite having barley any gameplay while a game like Saints Row 2 or Saints Row The Third that have loads of fun (but not realistic) gameplay but not so great graphics and story.

RageQuitter69

Yeah, it's really a shame... Especially when it's precisely gameplay that seperates video games from other media. Games like Uncharted and Mass Effect don't deserve the honors of game of the year awards for they do not exemplify the very thing that video games offer above other media pass times. There's nothing wrong with loving these kinds of games, I just think it's wrong to call them the best video games.

Pikminmaniac

Too many people these days just want something pretty to look at. If a game isn't "the best looking game ever" then it's no good, no matter how good the gameplay is.KnightSkull

I understand where you are coming from. Metal Gear Solid though, I disagree with personally ;). I do understand that it can have WAY too many cutscenes, but the series is in my top 5 video games of all time. The gameplay is also unique though if you look past the cutscenes. Splinter Cell is the closest thing, and even then that feels like a completely different game at times (but still a fantastic game).

Now if a game has great gameplay, a good story and looks good at the same time then that would be a huge plus.KnightSkull

The first thing that came in to my mind when reading this sentence was the Gears of War series! :). The gameplay is absolutely fantastic, the story drags you in, the graphics are just gorgeous (in a dirty, war-torn looking way) and the cutscenes are always perfect length for a game. Seriously, those games are just perfect. That's why, again, those games are in my top 5 of all time. They are just great :). Not only that, but the characters and voice acting is spot on.

Marcus Fenix - The tough one, has a really deep voice. He also doesn't care.
Dom - The most normal one, but we need those, right? can't all be over the top. But that's why some people love Dom. But Dom shows signs of aggression and emotion mostly.
Baird - The you-know-what of the group. At first you will be like "really? I have to be with this guy?", but he's actually one of my favourites.
Cole - The cool and crazy guy. He's just funny and the type of person you just can't dislike. He's a legend :P. The one and only, baby :lol:

That's just an example, by the way. So they do still exist out there. But you do get a lot more of the mainstream games that are very easy and don't leave too much of an impact these days, rather than 10 years ago.

The first thing that came in to my mind when reading this sentence was the Gears of War series! :). The gameplay is absolutely fantastic, the story drags you in, the graphics are just gorgeous (in a dirty, war-torn looking way) and the cutscenes are always perfect length for a game. Seriously, those games are just perfect. That's why, again, those games are in my top 5 of all time. They are just great :). Not only that, but the characters and voice acting is spot on.

Ashley_wwe

Gameplay is still the most important thing when it comes to rating video games. Especially on this website. Kevin V negated Ace Combat: Assault Horizon because he felt the game played itself. Asura's Wrath took heavy criticism for it's QTE specific style on here as well. Story and cinematics are plenty important, but look at Dark Souls: a game that has practically no story or cinematic cut scenes has a 9.5 here.

As for MGS4, the gameplay is great. Yes, there are an insane amount of cutscenes and the game is very story heavy. However, MGS remains one of the few story driven series that has excellent gameplay with lots of replayability. Play it through again, skip the cutscenes, just explore the levels. There are multiple paths and various secrets, and you have the option to go through it with a good variety of weaponry and equipment. It also has multiple difficulty levels that really bring out the challenge and expert design of the game.

Agreed 100%. Give me more Saint's Row, Just Cause 2, Modern Warfare campaigns, Super Meat Boy, Mario games, Rayman Origins, etc. These games are pure fun and have great gameplay. None have great stories, but that's not the point.

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

I actually think it's worse than that. We're at a point people actually think a cinematic game, which consistantly takes control from you in order to use cutscenes, is better than a game that's gameplay-only.

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

Ilovegames1992

No... there are several hundred games that have absolutely no storyline and are epic. Mario, Meat Boy, flOw, Pacman, Alien Invaders. A game with good gameplay gets you hooked because it makes you want to play the game. A game with a great story, but bad gameplay, just makes you want to see it to the end to find out what happens, not actually play the game.

I actually think it's worse than that. We're at a point people actually think a cinematic game, which consistantly takes control from you in order to use cutscenes, is better than a game that's gameplay-only.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

iHarlequin

No... there are several hundred games that have absolutely no storyline and are epic. Mario, Meat Boy, flOw, Pacman, Alien Invaders. A game with good gameplay gets you hooked because it makes you want to play the game. A game with a great story, but bad gameplay, just makes you want to see it to the end to find out what happens, not actually play the game.

I meant contemporary games. Yes 20 years ago when games did not have a story, fine. But it's not 20 years ago. We expect more from our games don't we? I do.

I actually think it's worse than that. We're at a point people actually think a cinematic game, which consistantly takes control from you in order to use cutscenes, is better than a game that's gameplay-only.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

iHarlequin

No... there are several hundred games that have absolutely no storyline and are epic. Mario, Meat Boy, flOw, Pacman, Alien Invaders. A game with good gameplay gets you hooked because it makes you want to play the game. A game with a great story, but bad gameplay, just makes you want to see it to the end to find out what happens, not actually play the game.

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

I actually think it's worse than that. We're at a point people actually think a cinematic game, which consistantly takes control from you in order to use cutscenes, is better than a game that's gameplay-only.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

Ilovegames1992

No... there are several hundred games that have absolutely no storyline and are epic. Mario, Meat Boy, flOw, Pacman, Alien Invaders. A game with good gameplay gets you hooked because it makes you want to play the game. A game with a great story, but bad gameplay, just makes you want to see it to the end to find out what happens, not actually play the game.

I meant contemporary games. Yes 20 years ago when games did not have a story, fine. But it's not 20 years ago. We expect more from our games don't we? I do.

I expect a game that I can play and enjoy. Can it have a story and still be a good game? Awesome. Is the story going to compromise the quality of the game? No thanks. Story is secondary in gaming: always was, always will be. It may have seen increased usage in the past few years, and I honestly don't mind its implementation -- but its overt use borders on something I particularly dislike, which is 'the game's good because of the story' mentality. I appreciate that games are being used as a medium for several other things, nowadays: art, storytelling, you name it, but what defines a game and its quality is its gameplay. The story is a crutch, the cutscenes are a crutch. I'd much rather see something like 'Heavy Rain' called an interactive story than a game.

The fact is, I don't need to prove myself when the industry does so: car racing simulators that consistantly score high (Forza), sport emulators, platformers, indie games, retail games (Super Mario Galaxy). We play games and enjoy them if they don't have a story. I dare you to find me ten games where we play an absolutely **** game because it has a great story.

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

I actually think it's worse than that. We're at a point people actually think a cinematic game, which consistantly takes control from you in order to use cutscenes, is better than a game that's gameplay-only.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

A game with good gameplay but a crap story is sh!t.

A game with a good/great story but crap gameplay is sh!t.

You need a mix of the two.

Ilovegames1992

No... there are several hundred games that have absolutely no storyline and are epic. Mario, Meat Boy, flOw, Pacman, Alien Invaders. A game with good gameplay gets you hooked because it makes you want to play the game. A game with a great story, but bad gameplay, just makes you want to see it to the end to find out what happens, not actually play the game.

I meant contemporary games. Yes 20 years ago when games did not have a story, fine. But it's not 20 years ago. We expect more from our games don't we? I do.

I don't... If the gameplay is excellent, I couldn't care less about the story... If the gameplay is terrible, but the story is excellent, I couldn't care less about the story. Pretty much all the best games I played this gen (Street Fighter, Rayman Origins, Punch-Out!!) had almost no story whatsoever. A good game that happens to have a good story is just a bonus (Wind Waker). The absolute worst thing is when a developer emphasises story over gameplay IMO. That very ideology completely destroyed Uncharted 2 for me. There are many times in that game where the focus on story yeilded whole chapters pointless and completely unfun by a gameplay point of view (Tenzen's ice cave). Metroid Prime is the ultimate example as to how a story should be told in a video game. It's up to ou, the player, to piece it together based on your environmental surroundings. The gameplay remains 98% uninterrupted.

I'm talking about games that have a story. Obviously driving games, platformers, beat em ups and sporting games don't matter as they don't have one. You can't use them as examples because all they are is just gameplay.

I have never played a game i loved that did not have a mix of everything in it. If its lacking in a department then i wouldn't be happy either way. Again, talking about games which should come under this category. Burnout obviously doesnt count etc

I'm talking about games that have a story. Obviously driving games, platformers, beat em ups and sporting games don't matter as they don't have one. You can't use them as examples because all they are is just gameplay.

I have never played a game i loved that did not have a mix of everything in it. If its lacking in a department then i wouldn't be happy either way. Again, talking about games which should come under this category. Burnout obviously doesnt count etc

Ilovegames1992

Above poster actually gave an example that perfectly suits this: Metroid Prime Trilogy. It has a decent story, which is told without being intrusive. Is it because of the story that we play the game? No. It's because of the gameplay and puzzle-solving. I understand that you enjoy a game with a good story, we all do. But a game can excel without a story, provided good gameplay. A game can't excel with bad gameplay, regardless of the great graphics and story.

The Saint's Row games are among the most vapid in the medium and are a primary example of all gloss, no substance. Even Saint's Row 3, which I enjoyed, is an ultimately shallow experience that does very little to progress the sandbox genre forward in any meaningful way. (Purple **** don't count)

So attacking MGS4 while venerating the gaming equivalent of junk food suggests your position is inherently weak, especially when you resort to using hyperbole instead of sticking to the facts.

MGS4 may have a messy, overbearing narrative but the game still possesses plenty of quality gameplay facilitated with some very tight mechanics. The first half of MGS4 actually contains some of the best gameplay I've experienced this generation even if the second half becomes bogged down in cut scenes and exposition. Regardless, to claim MGS4 "barely" contains gameplay is ludicrous and patently false.

Your love for the Saint's Row franchise is evident but that doesn't mean the rest of us subscribe to such a metric when deciding what to play and enjoy. Personally, I think SR2 was excrement and I can subsequently (and objectively) argue that the game is technically sloppy and fundamentally flawed.

I don't necessarily disagree with your central thesis as I too feel that the foisting of narrative onto gaming often weakens the medium more than it strengthens it but using something as shallow and derivative as the SR games doesn't do much for your position. As I've mentioned in other posts, Just Cause 2 is a far superior example of the type of design philosophies you are espousing and that game is not only filled to the brim with variety and content but is also a technical marvel.

Just Cause 2 is the game each and every SR wishes it could be.

You have an interesting point but you are using the wrong games to support it.

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

I'm talking about games that have a story. Obviously driving games, platformers, beat em ups and sporting games don't matter as they don't have one. You can't use them as examples because all they are is just gameplay.

I have never played a game i loved that did not have a mix of everything in it. If its lacking in a department then i wouldn't be happy either way. Again, talking about games which should come under this category. Burnout obviously doesnt count etc

iHarlequin

Above poster actually gave an example that perfectly suits this: Metroid Prime Trilogy. It has a decent story, which is told without being intrusive. Is it because of the story that we play the game? No. It's because of the gameplay and puzzle-solving. I understand that you enjoy a game with a good story, we all do. But a game can excel without a story, provided good gameplay. A game can't excel with bad gameplay, regardless of the great graphics and story.

I play a game for both though. I want excellent gameplay and a great story. That's the point of games for me. They are also a form of art. If anything, story is the underrated part of games.

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

I'm talking about games that have a story. Obviously driving games, platformers, beat em ups and sporting games don't matter as they don't have one. You can't use them as examples because all they are is just gameplay.

I have never played a game i loved that did not have a mix of everything in it. If its lacking in a department then i wouldn't be happy either way. Again, talking about games which should come under this category. Burnout obviously doesnt count etc

Ilovegames1992

Above poster actually gave an example that perfectly suits this: Metroid Prime Trilogy. It has a decent story, which is told without being intrusive. Is it because of the story that we play the game? No. It's because of the gameplay and puzzle-solving. I understand that you enjoy a game with a good story, we all do. But a game can excel without a story, provided good gameplay. A game can't excel with bad gameplay, regardless of the great graphics and story.

I play a game for both though. I want excellent gameplay and a great story. That's the point of games for me. They are also a form of art. If anything, story is the underrated part of games.

But it's extremely hard to find a game with a story that's even half decent. To be honest with you, I haven't played a game with a half decent story all gen, but I hear good things about Bioshock

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

Above poster actually gave an example that perfectly suits this: Metroid Prime Trilogy. It has a decent story, which is told without being intrusive. Is it because of the story that we play the game? No. It's because of the gameplay and puzzle-solving. I understand that you enjoy a game with a good story, we all do. But a game can excel without a story, provided good gameplay. A game can't excel with bad gameplay, regardless of the great graphics and story.

Pikminmaniac

I play a game for both though. I want excellent gameplay and a great story. That's the point of games for me. They are also a form of art. If anything, story is the underrated part of games.

But it's extremely hard to find a game with a story that's even half decent. To be honest with you, I haven't played a game with a half decent story all gen, but I hear good things about Bioshock

There are plenty of games out there that have excellent stories.

[QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

I play a game for both though. I want excellent gameplay and a great story. That's the point of games for me. They are also a form of art. If anything, story is the underrated part of games.

Ilovegames1992

But it's extremely hard to find a game with a story that's even half decent. To be honest with you, I haven't played a game with a half decent story all gen, but I hear good things about Bioshock

There are plenty of games out there that have excellent stories.

The last story that I experienced that was expertly crafted and actually meant something was Wind Waker's...

Yes it is, otherwise Skyrim would never be GOTY.

Most people don't how to rate gameplay is because they play (nearly) the same game over and over. At least thats what I feel about this gen.

Compare Undcharted 2 to Uncharted 3. U2 had amazing gameplay, dcent character development depsite the Hollywood cliche moments. U3 has amazing graohics, improved combat but a crappy story and is trash compared to U2. Devs like any other businesses tend to loose focus on what made their initial IP popular and worry too much about appealing to a wider audience.Games like the MGS franchise may have long cutscenes according to some, but Kojima always sticks to his formula staying loyal to what long time fans expect. Instead of trying to outdo or clone the next game, devs need to focus more on delivering stand out games while balancing consistency.

Really? I think the Gears gameplay is great, but the characters and story never did anything for me personally. The story may have gotten marginally better in 3, but the characters remained the same to me: one-dimensional blockheads that seemingly need to shout their lines all the time. I can't stand Marcus Fenix. Or any of the characters, really. We'd have to disagree there. But it's okay, I respect your opinion. The gameplay alone kept me interested there.gpuFX16

Yeah, I think Gears is great all around :). But of course, opinions are opinions :). We do both agree that the gameplay is fantastic though :D.Ashley_wwe

Gameplay and story compliment eachother, both are boring when one of those lacks. People want a reason to blast their way through the map, people want to beat awsome opponents, fight in awsome environments and defeat great bosss. All of which are both story and gameplay elements.

Note that a story in a game is much more then the text you read, everthing you see and do is related to the story. Wether you notice it or not, the story is a critical part of the gameplay and when they don't match, it turns out to be a horrid game.

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

4dr1el

MGS4 doesn't really.

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

4dr1el

[QUOTE="4dr1el"]

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

RageQuitter69

If I remember right, some years ago (I think it was after MGS2 came out) Hideo Kojima did say that he wanted to make interactive movies/games and the MGS games are what came of it.

I could be wrong but I'm sure I heard it somewhere.

[QUOTE="RageQuitter69"][QUOTE="4dr1el"]

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

KnightSkull

If I remember right, some years ago (I think it was after MGS2 came out) Hideo Kojima did say that he wanted to make interactive movies/games and the MGS games are what came of it.

I could be wrong but I'm sure I heard it somewhere.

[QUOTE="KnightSkull"]

[QUOTE="RageQuitter69"] Uncharted has fantastic gameplay, MGS4 barley has any and it is dominated by cutscenes, the creators of MGS should have made moviesRageQuitter69

If I remember right, some years ago (I think it was after MGS2 came out) Hideo Kojima did say that he wanted to make interactive movies/games and the MGS games are what came of it.

I could be wrong but I'm sure I heard it somewhere.

With the amout of time you just sit their watching cutscenes it's like a movie, then you get to interact with that movie by playing for about 10-20 minutes to get to the next part of the movie, which can last for half an hour at a time.

I've never played Heavy Rain so I can't really comment on it, but with what I have seen of it though you can call it an interactive movie as well as MGS can be called one too, they are just different types of interacive movies.

If you think about it almost any game can be classed as an interacitve movie, as long as it has some type of stroy the player is interacting with that story to get through the end.

[QUOTE="4dr1el"]

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

RageQuitter69

Again, you are wrong. Perhaps having such uninformed opinions and being a vessel of misinformation has dulled you to the pains of being utterly incorrect but regardless, the erroneous nature of your comments is apparent to anyone who has actually played the game.

There is plenty of gameplay in MGS4 and as a point of fact the first half of the game contains some very open-ended combat scenarios. The second half most definitely becomes bogged down with exposition but to make the comment that MGS4 "barely" contains any gameplay is exaggerated nonsense and is factually incorrect.

Subjectively, I would argue that MGS4 offers an overall more cohesive and better gaming experience than any of the SR games, all of which are entrenched in adolescent power-fantasies and juvenile humor. Like I've stated previously I enjoyed SR3 but as a whole the franchise is incredibly shallow and mostly derivative of better games.

Gameplay is important, a certain amount of storytelling is ok but devs go waaaay over the top with hours of cutscenes, NPC's endless blabbing, etc.

I actually think at this point having a cutscene should take points OFF.

The story should be interwoven with the GAMEPLAY, not seperate from it.

Look at Half-Life, did you see any cutscenes? No, the story was woven into the game, you didn't have to stop and read in-game books to get the plot, the storytelling was the progression.

Look at Fallout 3. They actually made the plot into RADIO STATIONS.

As you're walking around, exploring, etc, you have President Eden and 3Dog etc relating the story in between songs, and the plot related to you by key characters and triggered events.

THAT'S the right way.

Saints Row 2 was crap. The driving wasn't fun. The shooting wasn't fun. No part of the game was actually fun, and the cutscenes kind of carried it.

Gears 3 did alot of things right, but I guess I just hate third-person shooters because I couldn't get into the gameplay.

[QUOTE="4dr1el"]

*facepalm at the idiots saying MGS4 and Uncharted games dont have good gameplay*

Ilovegames1992

MGS4 doesn't really.

I've only played Uncharted 2 and it really didn't have very good gameplay either. The "platforming" was made useless because it was so linear, it might as well have been on rails. Then the developers decided to make EVERYTHING break under Drake's weight to prolong this slow, tedious, and pointless gameplay mechanic. Then the gun fights are alright to begin with then when the game goes in to shoot out after shoot out, you realize that there aren't any interesting weapons and only about 3 variations in enemies and that they take way too many bullets so that these "action" portions become incredibly boring and slow paced. Don't even get me started on the Tenzen "levels"... They were useless, contained no good gameplay, and were only there because the story asked for it.

No argument there. The controls are responsive, weapons are great, etc. Fun to play.gpuFX16

I don't know if you agree with this one or not (not everybody does), but I think the graphics are awesome as well. Some people say the graphics are pretty boring. I can see where they're coming from though, but I still love them. When they say boring, they mean dull, as in comparison to the colours of, such as, Uncharted. As for the MGS games, they usually take hours to complete and have a ton of extras. Even if you skip all of the cutscenes, they still have a lot of playtime, especially on the harder difficulties. On every MGS game, the gameplay just got more and more advanced. It was a step up each and every single time :).Ashley_wwe

What I find funny is when some people talk about older games, even if it's about last gen games, and say they can't play them because they look bad. Even though a few years ago those same people would have said they love games from that gen. If a game is good, it will be good no matter how many years go by and wouldn't matter how better looking newer games are.

KnightSkull

100% true, someone said to me that GTA IV was a disaster but they can't go back to San Andreas because of the graphics, as for me, I still play San Andreas regularly.

The most important element of any game is the gameplay. If a game isn't fun, then it isn't worth playing on even if the story and graphics are great. Next, I look for an engaging story. If you have both solid gameplay and narrative then you've got a winner. I can look past graphics as long as they are technically good. Stuttering framerates and poor texture loading are often too distracting to be ignored.

A quick question for everyone:

Grand Theft Auto San Andreas doesn't technically proficient graphics, strong competeive multiplayer or a touching emotional story so why is it the best in the series?