Graphics or gameplay?

[lindbergh]

If you had to choose between a game that has gorgeous graphics but weak gameplay and a game with excellent gameplay but has crappy graphics, which game would you choose? I would personally prefer a game with great gameplay. I don't care much about graphics because IMO, graphics are only secondary when it comes to totally enjoying a game.

 

[Montgomery]

I agree with you lindbergh, it doesn't matter if a game looks great if it has lame game play. Ideally a game would look and play wonderfully but I would rather it played great if i had to choose one or the other.

 

[crossunitedfate]

I go for game play on this one. You can't "play" or have fun with pretty graphics. Sure, it's a nice addition. But if a game has all graphics and weak gameplay, it's the same as the old saying of "all flash and no substance".

 

[Anju]

Gameplay. If I had a cheap xbox/computer that couldn't run any good graphics then why would I bother? Plus. graphics =/= gameplay in terms of the amount of time you play. Of course, it may affect the time a bit but that's only if you truly hate/like the graphics on the game.

 

[Xboxfan]

Gameplay all the way! Hey, that even rhymes.
I agree with Anju, what if the xbox is a bit "slow"? I'd rather play the games as it is rather than buy a new Xbox.

 

[BigBigFan]

Gameplay! Some of the best games I've ever played have crappy graphics. I LOVE Ultima Online but by today's standards that's an ugly game, and so were old time MUD games... but fun.

I still play some old games that look like they cost 50 dollars to produce, like excitebike, so it's all gameplay for me. I don't care how pretty a game is if it's not fun to play.

 

[crossunitedfate]

Wait, the old NES game Excitebike only cost Nintendo a grand total of $50 to create? My god.....how did game development go from a humble $50 to an enormous multi million to develop?

 

[soulglazed]

Gameplay is the obvious winner because if a game has stunning graphics and terrible gameplay, it's still gonna be unplayable and the graphics will make no difference. Games from 15ish years ago are blown away in every possible way by the graphics today but people play games of every console era heavily no matter how much time goes by.

 

[Gift3d]

do you have any examples? like would you consider halo CE one with bad graphics and good gameplay if thats the case I would agree, I found lots of games have bad gameplay, worse than what I am used to anyways like Bioshock, I never liked that game. Maybe just the controls and how I was not used to it but that did have great graphics

 

[BigBigFan]

The ugliest game I ever played was Q-Bert I think but I loved that game. It was a challenge to jump on tiles in the right order. I can't imagine wanting to ever play it again with what we have now though so really looks don't matter, keeping up with the latest challenges is.

 

[Jatelo2]

Gameplay, though I would want a combination of both in one game. Unfortunately, most of the game developers only invest in one aspect either gameplay or graphics.

 

[Craig]

It's hard to say, can't we have both? It's almost 2013, we should be able to have great games with a combination of great gameplay and great graphics. I would say I prefer gameplay but then again, a game without graphics looks awful.

 

[bionichead]

I'm for Gameplay too. I don't really care too much about the graphics. I loved the game Doom and it looks very low tech compared to what is available today. For me, Gears of War 3 has the best game play in the shooters class. I compare the gameplay of every shooter game that I buy to the gameplay of Gears of War. For example, when I got Left 4 Dead 2 and played it for the first time, I kept thinking about how much fun it would be to fight these fast moving zombies with a character from Gears of War. Where's the mulcher and the frags when you need them?

 

[crossunitedfate]

The problem is the people that care about gameplay are FAR outnumbered by the ones that care about graphics. How can you tell? Just look at things like E3 and the VGAs. Look at how many people quick to call "game of the year" just because they saw a 5 second trailer with good graphics.

 

[lindbergh]

This sadly is true. People tend to judge something by the way it looks. This is why most developers sometimes focus more on graphics that they forget about the gameplay of the game. Of course I also want great graphics but not to the extent that gameplay is sacrificed.

 

[benj0145]

Personally I think gameplay is most important yes, but graphics play a big part in immersion. If they are god awful then you don't get that same experience. So I would say ideally its a good combo.

If I had to choose tho I would go gameplay for sure. I agree with others, that good graphics, terrible gameplay translates into a terrible play experience. This being something no amount of amazing visuals can fix.

 

[crossunitedfate]

Great graphics are sweet, don't get me wrong. There is a standard that should be upheld as time advances after all. But the problem is these developers forget they are actually making a game and seem like they're more hell bent on just making pretty CG graphics. Which is when the game play suffers heavily.

 

[ROBOCOP]

Gameplay is my first choice. If the graphics are good/great then that's an added plus!

 

[save27]

I definitely play gameplay over graphics. If the game just looks good but the gameplay is awful, then there is no fun at all in playing it and it can get boring pretty quickly.

 

[humbleoctopus221]

I would in my opinion prefer a game with good gameplay. I don't care much about graphics because in my opinion graphics aren't the decision maker when it comes to totally enjoying a game.