I think a game should have both stellar graphics and gameplay. I expect nothing less in 2016. If a game does not have that balance maybe.....no...in my opinion there is no excuse, no one over the other. Go all the way or don't go at all I say. Yin and Yang my friends, Yin and Yang....
You can think whatever you want. Right now I think I should get paid 10 million dollars to accept a free Ferrari. Oh look, that doesn't really work. For all your pretense there is reality. The reality of limited developer resources.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
The game must have a balance mix of gameplay and graphics. If a game have an awesome gameplay but crap graphics, or vise versa, I'd be bored af playing it.
Graphics gets my attention. Gameplay keeps me playing. There's a third factor, though - Suspension of Disbelief. This is something that smart devs/publishers focus on pre-release because it weighs heavily in a lot of people's decision to follow/buy/play the game.
The "Deceived" Cinematic for SW:TOR is a great example of this. It was designed to get a wide range of SW fans and MMO players excited about the game by getting them to say the same exact phrase "THAT's what I want to do." The red-headed archer chick / bounty hunter, the evil overlord, the stalwart hero, the team players, the fans of sieges and epic battles... oh look, a robot "pet", too! The fans of the dark, the light, the various races of the SW IP.
It can be a greater deal breaker for some than any gameplay or graphics issue. Like the "coffee house" aspect of MMO games, this factor often seems overlooked by both devs and players alike.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Well, I'm not a huge graphics snob, but I do have a cutoff point with low graphics.
At the very least, I'd prefer a game look like it was made in this century. They don't need to have top-notch, life-like aesthetics, but they do need to look at least somewhat decent or stylish.
I like some off-the-wall stylized graphics that some of the lower budget games have. But, a game that looks like it was made before 3D existed, I lose all interest. On that note, I'm not a fan of 2D games, in general, in this generation. 2D just doesn't appeal to me. That said, some isometric type games are okay, if done well.
I know that graphics are the most work intensive, time-consuming part of development for most folks(especially indie devs), but if you can't even get basic models and such today, then you shouldn't even bother trying to publish something. These days you can buy graphics on asset stores and don't even have to make them or hire anyone if you are unable.
Gameplay... but only with the caveat that the graphics communicate the gameplay well.
If the game looks like a dogs breakfast (i.e. most modern 'pixel-art' games; somehow the older, true 16-bit, games look so much better), fails to play naturally (i.e. constantly fighting the controls / UI), or runs poorly, I don't care how good the gameplay is supposed to be, chances are I'll never get far enough into it.
... That said, I did persist with (and completed about 10 times) the original Deus Ex despite the (even then) terrible animations: Gameplay 10, Graphics 2 (it ran well and had good lighting effects for the time).
The fun factor matters. Sometimes it's fun to look at a visual marvel, sometimes a challenging gameplay, sometimes an easy comforting comedy. But for me that's just short-term. I can't play anything without the social part for a long time. And when that's in and is good, the game itself comes pretty secondary for me. I guess I can have fun in any game with the right people.
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Beauty is only skin deep. A game is after all supposed to be played not stared at. As long as it's passable visually, I always go for good gameplay. If it's not fun I'm gonna get a good look at the pretty graphics and move on.
IMO, the only people who care about graphics are video card manufacturers and retailers.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I can play a game with good gameplay and shit graphics. I cant play games with shit gameplay and good graphics.
So, gameplay is king for me.
That said, graphics are still important. I would never sacrifice gameplay for graphics but, lets be honest, very few games have truly great gameplay and there hasn't been much innovation in gameplay in any genre. So, other aspects of the game need to pick up the slack and graphics is one good way.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
I voted gameplay but, that said, I wouldn't play any of the god-awful "retro 8bit" games or 2D games. I have a PC capable of far, far better than that and I want to make use of it's capabilities.
Anyway, my point is, graphics is the first thing I notice about a game, and as much as we hate to say it, first impressions do matter. When I see a game with good graphics, chances are I will try it out. However when the game looks terrible, especially for a mmo, whose gameplay is kinda predictable, it'll be an instant turnoff. Not to mention the fact that most modern MMOs with decent graphics also tend to have decent gameplays, and those with half-assed graphics tend to have half-assed gameplays. Of course there are a few exceptions (Runescape comes to mind)
That being said, gameplay is what keeps me playing. Ultimately my decision to pay (micro transactions) is derived from my long term commitment to the game, which itself is based on the gameplay.Nonetheless, all this won't happen if the game looks crap in the first place.
Trailers mostly display graphical quality and they generally have very little gameplay. While majority say gameplay is more important than graphics most of the hype is caused by graphics and promises that aren't displayed on footage.
If you really believe gameplay is most important stop buying games based on what they look like.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
I use BOTH gameplay and graphics to determine if a game is overall fun for me. If I was forced to choose one over the other I would simply pass over the game. I will not play something that looks like ass nor will I play something that looks awesome but has poor gameplay. Luckily I don't have to choose over just one aspect. I can take both into consideration.
Yet another ill-formed poll. Where's the 'cash shop' option?
I'm probably 50-50 on the importance of game play and graphics. If I wanted a game with great play and 1980s graphics, I'll simply drag the old Apple II+ out of storage and see if I can get it to boot.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Anyway, my point is, graphics is the first thing I notice about a game, and as much as we hate to say it, first impressions do matter. When I see a game with good graphics, chances are I will try it out. However when the game looks terrible, especially for a mmo, whose gameplay is kinda predictable, it'll be an instant turnoff. Not to mention the fact that most modern MMOs with decent graphics also tend to have decent gameplays, and those with half-assed graphics tend to have half-assed gameplays. Of course there are a few exceptions (Runescape comes to mind)
That being said, gameplay is what keeps me playing. Ultimately my decision to pay (micro transactions) is derived from my long term commitment to the game, which itself is based on the gameplay.Nonetheless, all this won't happen if the game looks crap in the first place.
Let me turn you over to the gameplay side:
Are you positively certain that you what you are talking about is Graphics and not Art style? Did the lack of AA or SSAO really turn you away from a game? Or bad textures...why does this really matter?
Yes, but art style is another thing that has the same effects, so both.
Bad graphics, textures especially, since people hardly ever notice things like AA anyway, are pretty much a no go for me. I'm gonna be staring at the game for hours, might as well look at something good. Also like I said, the graphics of a game are usually correlated with the overall quality of the game (in the MMO context at least), so when I see a new game that looks 20 years old, I can quite safely say the devs didn't put much efforts into making the game.
Comments
You can think whatever you want. Right now I think I should get paid 10 million dollars to accept a free Ferrari. Oh look, that doesn't really work. For all your pretense there is reality. The reality of limited developer resources.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I may or may not agree with the rankings on that list, but aside from that.
Notice how many have top-notch graphics... a good number of them.
But there are a handful on there that (I think) have horrible graphics. But are still great games.
Graphics will move boxes, but it won't sustain players.
Why is the topic being hijacked to what is selling rather than what we want?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
The "Deceived" Cinematic for SW:TOR is a great example of this. It was designed to get a wide range of SW fans and MMO players excited about the game by getting them to say the same exact phrase "THAT's what I want to do." The red-headed archer chick / bounty hunter, the evil overlord, the stalwart hero, the team players, the fans of sieges and epic battles... oh look, a robot "pet", too! The fans of the dark, the light, the various races of the SW IP.
It can be a greater deal breaker for some than any gameplay or graphics issue. Like the "coffee house" aspect of MMO games, this factor often seems overlooked by both devs and players alike.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
At the very least, I'd prefer a game look like it was made in this century. They don't need to have top-notch, life-like aesthetics, but they do need to look at least somewhat decent or stylish.
I like some off-the-wall stylized graphics that some of the lower budget games have. But, a game that looks like it was made before 3D existed, I lose all interest. On that note, I'm not a fan of 2D games, in general, in this generation. 2D just doesn't appeal to me. That said, some isometric type games are okay, if done well.
I know that graphics are the most work intensive, time-consuming part of development for most folks(especially indie devs), but if you can't even get basic models and such today, then you shouldn't even bother trying to publish something. These days you can buy graphics on asset stores and don't even have to make them or hire anyone if you are unable.
If the game looks like a dogs breakfast (i.e. most modern 'pixel-art' games; somehow the older, true 16-bit, games look so much better), fails to play naturally (i.e. constantly fighting the controls / UI), or runs poorly, I don't care how good the gameplay is supposed to be, chances are I'll never get far enough into it.
... That said, I did persist with (and completed about 10 times) the original Deus Ex despite the (even then) terrible animations: Gameplay 10, Graphics 2 (it ran well and had good lighting effects for the time).
But for me that's just short-term. I can't play anything without the social part for a long time. And when that's in and is good, the game itself comes pretty secondary for me.
I guess I can have fun in any game with the right people.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I cant play games with shit gameplay and good graphics.
So, gameplay is king for me.
That said, graphics are still important. I would never sacrifice gameplay for graphics but, lets be honest, very few games have truly great gameplay and there hasn't been much innovation in gameplay in any genre. So, other aspects of the game need to pick up the slack and graphics is one good way.
Anyway, my point is, graphics is the first thing I notice about a game, and as much as we hate to say it, first impressions do matter. When I see a game with good graphics, chances are I will try it out. However when the game looks terrible, especially for a mmo, whose gameplay is kinda predictable, it'll be an instant turnoff. Not to mention the fact that most modern MMOs with decent graphics also tend to have decent gameplays, and those with half-assed graphics tend to have half-assed gameplays. Of course there are a few exceptions (Runescape comes to mind)
That being said, gameplay is what keeps me playing. Ultimately my decision to pay (micro transactions) is derived from my long term commitment to the game, which itself is based on the gameplay.Nonetheless, all this won't happen if the game looks crap in the first place.
If you really believe gameplay is most important stop buying games based on what they look like.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
I'm probably 50-50 on the importance of game play and graphics. If I wanted a game with great play and 1980s graphics, I'll simply drag the old Apple II+ out of storage and see if I can get it to boot.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You could add a third option for both....i can not say one is more important to me then the other cause I do not play games that do not have both.
If the gameplay is bad I walk away, if the graphics are bad, I walk away.
You could also add animation to the list. Also very important to me, if the game feels clucky and not smooth, I will also not go near it.
This is now the second 1/2 of 2016 and there is no reason at all to me for any new game released not to have the above.
Bad graphics, textures especially, since people hardly ever notice things like AA anyway, are pretty much a no go for me. I'm gonna be staring at the game for hours, might as well look at something good. Also like I said, the graphics of a game are usually correlated with the overall quality of the game (in the MMO context at least), so when I see a new game that looks 20 years old, I can quite safely say the devs didn't put much efforts into making the game.