In other words, I don't give a crap about how the game looks graphically most of the time. I focus on the story and gameplay way more then cartoony, lighthearted graphics of action rpgs. I don't consider the graphics to be VERY important to the game. I consider the story AND gameplay in a video game VERY important and I KNOW that not all video games have to have a story, I just simply prefer a game that has a deep story and gameplay over graphics/artstyle which I why I like Tales of Phantasia despite it having "bad graphics"

I could see where you are coming from. If a game has the greatest graphics that ever existed and there is no story or it's the worst story ever imagined, then the graphics have no purpose or value. Now you need graphics, but a good story has slightly more value. The graphics make it even better.

Well, it honestly depends. If it's a life simulator, like the Sims, I expect it to have good graphics to immerse me into the world, and to not ruin the experience for me(It doesn't do that well, by the by, but whatevs.). Or in something like Final Fantasy VII, while the pre-rendered backgrounds look nice, it makes it hard to see where you can or can't walk.

 

Though on the other end, it's not like Pokemon needs good graphics to be a good game. Same with Zelda. Or Mario.

 

Basically, graphics have the capabilities to make or break a game. But if your game can be good without good graphics, then you should focus on the graphics after you've refined the story and/or gameplay.

 

At least, that's how I see it.

noo i am with you... As a reader of books i focus more on the story aspects of the book/game so yea. (idk if that made sense but whatever)

Quite honestly I think it ALL comes together in the end. They may be aesthetic details but sometimes those are key to how a game holds up, much like in the in the same way music, cinematography, and lighting can affect how a movie is received. A good movie isn't just good writing and good acting, it depends on a lot of factors AND how well they are used. The same can apply to a good game. It's not just simply good story and good gameplay, EVERYTHING that goes into it is worth considering and holding up. Graphics/artstyle isn't something of lesser value unless it's apparent that they were trying to go for something but ended up falling short of the mark. It shouldn't matter how "realistic" or how "stylized" a game looks, so long as it captures the feeling it is going for, it's successful. People tend to go on and on about the story and humor of Undertale and talk little of the simple bit-based graphics, when in reality the simple look actually helps add to the charm that the game is going for. And in MGSV, the large realistic scale of the world is given so much detail that in a lot of ways the way that it works against Big Boss and how he interacts with it supplements the lack of dialogue, giving off the feeling of a tense, empty, and sometimes hostile world. The aesthetics of a game isn't something to be weighed against other factors as if it was less important or more important, it should be recognized for what it is, a piece of a much larger puzzle that is the game itself. A game is incomplete if one single piece is not factored into consideration. It all comes down to a decision, and then how well they follow up on that decision. So if you ask me, no, I don't think graphics and artstyle should be "ranked" lower than story and gameplay, because when you get down to it they're all equal, they're all necessary. What they are doesn't matter, how well they are done IS what matters.

Quite honestly I think it ALL comes together in the end. They may be aesthetic details but sometimes those are key to how a game holds up, much like in the in the same way music, cinematography, and lighting can affect how a movie is received. A good movie isn't just good writing and good acting, it depends on a lot of factors AND how well they are used. The same can apply to a good game. It's not just simply good story and good gameplay, EVERYTHING that goes into it is worth considering and holding up. Graphics/artstyle isn't something of lesser value unless it's apparent that they were trying to go for something but ended up falling short of the mark. It shouldn't matter how "realistic" or how "stylized" a game looks, so long as it captures the feeling it is going for, it's successful. People tend to go on and on about the story and humor of Undertale and talk little of the simple bit-based graphics, when in reality the simple look actually helps add to the charm that the game is going for. And in MGSV, the large realistic scale of the world is given so much detail that in a lot of ways the way that it works against Big Boss and how he interacts with it supplements the lack of dialogue, giving off the feeling of a tense, empty, and sometimes hostile world. The aesthetics of a game isn't something to be weighed against other factors as if it was less important or more important, it should be recognized for what it is, a piece of a much larger puzzle that is the game itself. A game is incomplete if one single piece is not factored into consideration. It all comes down to a decision, and then how well they follow up on that decision. So if you ask me, no, I don't think graphics and artstyle should be "ranked" lower than story and gameplay, because when you get down to it they're all equal, they're all necessary. What they are doesn't matter, how well they are done IS what matters.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with you. I think the graphics/artstyle IS important, but not as important as the story and gameplay, at least to me. 

It depends (a cop-out answer, but whatever). I'm not saying either are the be-all, end-all necessity for a game purchase, but there's also nothing wrong with saying "this story is so good it makes up for the crappy graphics" OR vice versa. Games have a lot of different facets, and sometimes, a game with terrible graphics is enough to break immersion regardless of the story.

 

This is why I always emphasize the difference between "art style" and "graphics". If it's an intentional choice, then yes, I can in fact say "yeah, I don't like this because it does not look like a game I want to play". You, the consumer, know what you like (hopefully).

 

There's also games being bound by technical limitations, such as those of the time period. If we were to put the original FFVII next to the remake (assuming the writing and plotting is more or less the same) and present it to someone who had never seen either, they would go for the remake. That doesn't make the original FFVII a bad game, but it's significance to the chronology of games is part of why it's so enduring.

In other words, I don't give a crap about how the game looks graphically most of the time. I focus on the story and gameplay way more then cartoony, lighthearted graphics of action rpgs. I don't consider the graphics to be VERY important to the game. I consider the story AND gameplay in a video game VERY important and I KNOW that not all video games have to have a story, I just simply prefer a game that has a deep story and gameplay over graphics/artstyle which I why I like Tales of Phantasia despite it having "bad graphics"

You're not alone. I'm not one of those "Ermahgersh this game isn't 1080p 60fps MY EYES ARE BLEEDING" kind of people. I can appreciate it when a game looks good but it also needs to be fun to play more than fun to watch.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with you. I think the graphics/artstyle IS important, but not as important as the story and gameplay, at least to me. 

Oh well. Can't win everybody over.

Not really.

 

My life with games began with the NES and the first Game Boy (Man that Game Boy was big ) and 8 bit graphics, then came the SNES, N64, Playstation, etc.

This is just me, but I think that because I was born when the games were in 8 bit, instead of HD graphics, I came to value the worth of a game based on story and gameplay instead of graphics, which I think it's mostly the norm nowadays for most gamers.

 

I recently got a decent PC to play games (Like Fallout 4, Tales of Zestiria, Lightning Returns, etc), I have a PS3, and a PS4 next year, Wii, GCN AND many of the old consoles are still in my room if I want to play them, because I enjoy playing the original The Legend of Zelda, Mario Bros. and other games.

 

What I mean to say is that I value the story and gameplay above pretty graphics. Sure, graphics are an essential part of games, but, and that's just for me, I do not need 1080p/60fps to enjoy a game.

Not when there are people out there who judge a good game just because it doesn't run 1080p 60fps.

no way man, you're not the only one. i also feel that graphics should be third priority under gameplay and story. you see lots of games released today with great graphics but poor stories and mediocre gameplay. Take a look at The Order: 1886. You could say that the developers spent too much time making a pretty game, only to provide players with a lacking story and methodical gameplay seen in every other third person shooter. 

Why do people ask this question as if it's an unpopular opinion?

Gameplay is honestly the most important thing.Great graphics is a plus and well story..game stories are usually not that good in general so i can't say i care to much either way.

 

Story is something that would never deter me from buying a game no matter how bad it is if the gameplay is fun.

Why do people ask this question as if it's an unpopular opinion?

it kinda is...

Gameplay in my opinion is honestly the most important thing.Great graphics is a plus and well story..game stories are usually not that good in general so i can't say i care to much either way.

 

Story is something that would never deter me from buying a game no matter how bad it is if the gameplay is fun.

 

that's YOUR opinion. there. fixed it for you. 

Edited December 25, 20159 yr by Luke Fon Fabre

Art direction is very important. Without it the game is ugly and it's harder to immerse yourself with the game.

Art direction is very important. Without it the game is ugly and it's harder to immerse yourself with the game.

I think art direction is important too, but not to the point where I can't play the game because of the art direction. 

Why else would Rob continue to play his games in 480p resolution? Graphics don't matter to him. Rob was using this tv(not this tv, but similar) up to last year:

 

Edited December 25, 20159 yr by Rob