• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Graphics Vs Gameplay

Graphics or Gameplay

  • Graphics

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Gameplay

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Joined
May 14, 2012
Location
California
Graphics are definitely not everything! Ya they might be shiney and give the game a visually realistic look in some cases. Gameplay is really everything! Most of my favorite games are classics and I love them because of the stories that they tell and ya the graphics aren't even close to realistic but who cares! It's about how it makes you feel! I can't play a game that has no story and only looks good. It would get boring quick. Some of the best Zelda games are the classics! A link to the Past to this day remains in my top three Zelda games and it definitely doesn't compare to todays games graphic wise but has amazing gameplay! I couldn't just have a game that's visually nice. It makes me sad that some gamers can't get past graphics.
 

All Might

Honor before death
Forum Volunteer
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Location
Tsushima
The argument that all games can only be good if they are graphically amazing seems somewhat flawed to me. Graphics are an essential attribute to any game, but when a game's greatness is lacking in every other way then it tends to have a problem. I suppose the already aforementioned Call of Duty could have something to do with this, as its hailed for its realism, yet most everything else in it demands polishing. This includes gameplay.

If someone's looking only for realism in a video game, then I don't see why we should even bother calling it a game. It's more like a movie, with the exception of the player's ability to maneuver the character as he or she feels fit. I think people who are only playing for the cinematic aspect just want the realism. But there is nothing wrong it that. It's their personal preference, and even though they tend to clash with ours that doesn't mean they should be outright bashed; simple as that.

As for me, I seek out and pick a multitude of things when I start a new game. I'm pretty much able to tell if I won't like it right off since most games bring all the elements up early on. Graphics are the first thing to appear, then usually gameplay, and lastly story as events begin to unfold. These work out best to me when they're perfectly blended together and balanced out. Star Fox 64 instantly comes to mind as a pristine paragon in which its worlds are pleasingly displayed, its gameplay is smooth and exciting, and the story is well-told through each stage as the team moves in toward Andross. A classic title that will forever demonstrate the unique order of these treble essentials.

Now, to top off this topic, I have to agree that controls are ultimately better than visuals. My thoughts are best projected through the quote below.

LinkxZelda said:
I would rather have a game that is fun to play and looks good (Skyward Sword as an example) than one that looks good but is boring to play (Red Dead Redemption).
This has been something of an adage of mine on this issue, and I was pleased to see it. Very well stated.
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Gameplay over graphics for me as well. I still go back and play a lot of older games that look pretty awful by modern standards. Do the people who seem to care so much about graphics actually mean what they say though? Do they play a game that is boring/bad just because it looks nice? I personally doubt that.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Location
California
Gameplay is far more important than graphics, although graphics add a lot of depth and meaning to the game. But honestly, the gameplay is the most important aspect of a videogame ._.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Haha someone voted Graphics. Obviously gameplay is the most important part of a game. Hell look at Superbrothers: Sword and Scorcery. That game has really dated graphics but it still looks beautiful and plays great. Even The Secret Of Monkey Island. I prefer the original over the HD remake because it looks and feels better in the classic way.
 

Turo602

Vocare Ad Pugnam
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Location
Gotham City
None of the above. One is not more important than the other. They're both equally important. Sure, graphics aren't the first thing you should look for in a game, but it's what makes it appealing and helps define the video game as a work of art. You might look at some games of the past and say that it looks terrible today, but in its time, it was most likely a good looking game. The fact that the graphical quality of video games keep on improving through the generations, says how important it is. The only thing that can truly date a game is its gameplay. Take GoldenEye for example, once Halo: Combat Evolved hit, GoldenEye just didn't feel the same. It had nothing to do with it's graphics, but with its dated gameplay. Not to say all graphics stand the test of time, but they don't generally hurt the experience of a video game as much as gameplay would through the ages. I guess my point is, graphics don't make or break a game, but are just as important as anything else.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Location
CA
I didn't vote for either, because for me it's not that basic. A game can have the best graphics you've ever seen but if the game sucks then there is no way I will play it. And at the same time graphics are needed to a certain extent. When the gameplay is great but the graphics are horrible, it takes away from the game. Prime example is Skyward Sword. It's a lot of fun and you can even get used to the bad graphics after a while but after playing that then going back to a Xbox 360 game you realize the difference.
 
Joined
May 11, 2012
Location
Colorado Springs
Unlike most opinions it actually upsets me that the majority of gamers these days not only think graphics are a bigger deal than gameplay they pretty much think it's all that matters.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom