Graphics vs Gameplay

Which is the most important part of a game? If graphics is so unimportant why is there so many graph cs comparison threads? and why games with good graphics never flops?

all those elements put together, but if I had to choose one single element, then gameplay would be it.

Which is the most important part of a game? If graphics is so unimportant why is there so many graph cs comparison threads? and why games with good graphics never flops?

Alienware_fan

Graphics. I prefer that my games play like crap... with style 8)

In all seriousness, you're comparing arguably the least important element of a video game with the most important.

All of those elements are important in a good gameIantheone

Graphics are pretty much every bit as important as gameplay is, depending on the game. Graphics have to fit what the game is going for. Say if Minecraft was hugely realistic, then the charm and what makes Minecraft Minecraft would be gone and that goes the same, if UC2 had poor graphics it wouldn't be a good game.

Gameplay. Anyone saying anything else is near as important is an idiot. A game can look perfect, but if the gameplay sucks, the game is worthless.

Games with bad graphics can still be fun if they have good gameplay.

All are very important (graphics are based on style. Photorealism is a style. Lack of decent graphic style can ruin a good game). Personally, the story is what drives me to play games. Gameplay is important, but it can easily be generic/boring in concept and I'd still love the game if the story is presented well (example: Heavy Rain)

all those elements put together, but if I had to choose one single element, then gameplay would be it.

Metroid_Other_M

This. I mean really why do we even have these discussions? Obviously its good if you have all of these things mastered, but of course gameplay is the most important. And depending on the game, maybe Story is key, or gameplay, or graphics. Mario doesnt need an amazing story, but MGS does.

Gameplay is a fundamental all games have to get right if they want to succeed.

Graphics are important, but only to the point where it stops you scratching your own eyes out. They help make the setting what it is (I suspect a dystopian world with the art style of Hello Kitty wouldn't work...although...) and turn a good game into a great one if done right.

Gamephics. Gameplay and Graphics. mrmusicman247

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]All of those elements are important in a good gamefusionhunter

the one that has the word "game" in it GAMEPLAY. Because that's the point :P no gameplay, fantastic story, great visuals = movie. Great gameplay, bad story, fantastic graphics = good game (ex: Killzone 3) fantastic story, graphics, AND gameplay = excellent game! (ex: Uncharted 2, LoZ:OOT for it's time). A combination is best and there are cases where lots of players excuse gameplay for a fantastic story and good graphics (Mass Effect 2) but I'd say gameplay is most important because...well..game play is what makes it a game. Do you think Demon's Souls would have scored as high and gotten Gamespot game of the year 2009 if it had bad gameplay? Demon's Souls has a bad story, and the visuals are ok (great artstyle though) but amazing, unique, and challenging gameplay. That's why it's praised.

as obvious as the answer is, alot of people tend to forget it

Of course gameplay will lead the poll by a large margin, as it should. The irony is that it does not reflect the reality of SW at all. I'd say 10% of the regular posters on this board actually value gameplay over graphics and that is being generous.

If we can only have one, Graphics. Why?

• Without graphics all you would be doing would be to stare at a black screen.
• A game can still be played and enjoyed with minimal gameplay if the story is nice.
• Otherwise a game could still be enjoyed just for the sake of exploration

However with that said I would rather play a ugly game that plays nice than a pretty game that plays bad. I am just saying that if we could only keep one element it would be graphics.

I would like to mention that graphical improvements has in a few situations improved gameplay, the colour dungeon in Links Awakening DX is an example of this where puzzles used colour.

If we can only have one, Graphics. Why?

• Without graphics all you would be doing would be to stare at a black screen.
• A game can still be played and enjoyed with minimal gameplay if the story is nice.
• Otherwise a game could still be enjoyed just for the sake of exploration

However with that said I would rather play a ugly game that plays nice than a pretty game that plays bad. I am just saying that if we could only keep one element it would be graphics.

I would like to mention that graphical improvements has in a few situations improved gameplay, the colour dungeon in Links Awakening DX is an example of this where puzzles used colour.

Maroxad

Ever heard of Zork?

If that were true then Zork would be a terrible game with no fans but that isn't true. A lot of people loved Zork because of it's gameplay and story (kind of). Pac man, the first Super Mario Bros, OOT, all loved mainly because of their gameplay. That's why people (including me) love Nintendo, they tell good stories, but all their games have fun and amazing gameplay. That's also why the Wii and DS are popular. Gameplay.

All of them. That's why I only play games that score above 9.5 on GameSpot.

gameplay as always, proof is that I play a lot of games with bad graphics and I don't play a lot of games with bad gameplay.

Neither, all I want is a game to be enjoyable. How that is accomplished is not important.

I'd rather play a good game with good graphics over a great game with crap graphics any day of the week. Why do guys compromise personality of girls in favor of looks? why does the majority of people want a nice looking car over a powerful machine? Why are lions and elephants popular zoo animals and not ostrichs'? Looks keep people intrested so naturally I want my games to look good.

Ever heard of Zork?

If that were true then Zork would be a terrible game with no fans but that isn't true. A lot of people loved Zork because of it's gameplay and story (kind of). Pac man, the first Super Mario Bros, OOT, all loved mainly because of their gameplay. That's why people (including me) love Nintendo, they tell good stories, but all their games have fun and amazing gameplay. That's also why the Wii and DS are popular. Gameplay.

XVision84

I know what Zork is :) But even the texts, I even consider the displaying of texts as some form of graphics. Basicly what I meant in my first part was that if I want to play a game one thing I do NOT want is a black screen, no text, no polygons, no sprites, no textures, just a black screen. Visual novels dont have much gameplay at all, yet they have their own niche and can be quite enjoyable simply because of story. All I am saying there were no graphics, gameplay and possibly story would take a huge hit. If we have the outmost basic of everything I would take gameplay>story>graphics.

I love the DS and Wii too. In fact the Wii is my favorite console this gen and the DS is my favorite portable. Even the games I am playing right now dont have graphics that are anything to write home about. Nethack (9.5 to me), Mount and Blade: Warband (9.0 to me). Further examples would be WoW vs EQ2 which released at similar dates, EQ2 looked a lot better than WoW but the gameplay wasnt that good at launch (it did catch up and surpass it later on however, only to fall flat on its face due to lackluster expansion packs).

Why not all of the above?

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

Ever heard of Zork?

If that were true then Zork would be a terrible game with no fans but that isn't true. A lot of people loved Zork because of it's gameplay and story (kind of). Pac man, the first Super Mario Bros, OOT, all loved mainly because of their gameplay. That's why people (including me) love Nintendo, they tell good stories, but all their games have fun and amazing gameplay. That's also why the Wii and DS are popular. Gameplay.

Maroxad

I know what Zork is :) But even the texts, I even consider the displaying of texts as some form of graphics. Basicly what I meant in my first part was that if I want to play a game one thing I do NOT want is a black screen, no text, no polygons, no sprites, no textures, just a black screen. Visual novels dont have much gameplay at all, yet they have their own niche and can be quite enjoyable simply because of story. All I am saying there were no graphics, gameplay and possibly story would take a huge hit. If we have the outmost basic of everything I would take gameplay>story>graphics.

I love the DS and Wii too. In fact the Wii is my favorite console this gen and the DS is my favorite portable. Even the games I am playing right now dont have graphics that are anything to write home about. Nethack (9.5 to me), Mount and Blade: Warband (9.0 to me). Further examples would be WoW vs EQ2 which released at similar dates, EQ2 looked a lot better than WoW but the gameplay wasnt that good at launch (it did catch up and surpass it later on however, only to fall flat on its face due to lackluster expansion packs).

Ah, well of course a game needs graphics. A game needs all of those elements (except a story, there have been great games with no story). It can also be said that a game with all graphics and no gameplay is pretty much a movie, not a game :)

Gameplay if a vague term that gets thrown around a lot. What all is included in gameplay? Controls? UI? Game mechanics? Level Design? Yet somehow graphics aren't a part of gameplay?

What this thread really means is would you rather play a game that is not fun but has near photorealistic graphics, or a game that is fun. Kind of a pointless question to ask.

gameplay because ya know it's what makes THE GAME

How about all three of those options.

Similar to how a movie should use special effects to tell a story, and not a story to tell special effects; a video game should use graphics to show gameplay and not gameplay to show graphics. When graphics become an aid to tell your story, characters, and positively affect the gameplay and make it better they are being used correctly, but when the reverse is true and you use gameplay, story, and characters to tell graphics, where the graphics are the only redeeming factor about a game they are being used incorrectly. Graphics are not so much about the visual fidelity but how they are implemented into a game to make it better.

As much as I love story, the gameplay has to be top notch first.

Similar to how a movie should use special effects to tell a story, and not a story to tell special effects; a video game should use graphics to show gameplay and not gameplay to show graphics. When graphics become an aid to tell your story, characters, and positively affect the gameplay and make it better they are being used correctly, but when the reverse is true and you use gameplay, story, and characters to tell graphics, where the graphics are the only redeeming factor about a game they are being used incorrectly. Graphics are not so much about the visual fidelity but how they are implemented into a game to make it better.

DarkGamer007

all those elements put together, but if I had to choose one single element, then gameplay would be it.

Metroid_Other_M

A good game should have all of those.

I hate graphics. Maybe that's why I prefer playing last gen (to this day) more than this gen games. Now too many games are about flashy presentation. All style, no substance.

For me, gameplay and story are about even with graphics way below those two.