- Joined
- Jul 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,047
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 33
- Location
- Oregon
- Website
- www.facebook.com
- XP
- 226
- Country
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 330
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 29
- Location
- The other side of the internet
- Website
- Visit site
- XP
- 88
- Country
I would say both. Both very important. If Bioshock didn't look the way it did, with eerie underwater worlds and great effects, I dont think I would like it.
Sorry to tell you this, but you are on a Video Game Forum.Orc said:
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 38
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 32
- Location
- Sofia, Bulgaria
- Website
- Visit site
- XP
- 99
- Country
I like games. A game is something that you play. If I want a good graphics I can watch a movie, they are all photo realistic.
I prefer both but my favorite is proberly gameplay because the game is what you are playing not watching the picture quality
Gameplay, as I'd rather buy a game that isn't good graphically that has lots of replay value as opposed to one that I only play through once but has awesome graphics. I'd rather have WarioWare: Twisted (which I still haven't beat) as opposed to- wait, I don't even think I have games that have good graphics. After all, I got a Wii (not trying to troll) and I don't use my PC to game. It's nice to have a balance of both though.
Graphics aren't everything. The Touhou series has great music and has a lot of replay value (then again, it is an arcade style game...) so I might actually import one of the games.
Graphics aren't everything. The Touhou series has great music and has a lot of replay value (then again, it is an arcade style game...) so I might actually import one of the games.
generally gameplay in the first place, photorealic amazing graphics are no use if the gameplay sucks and doesn't make fun:. it's a waste of ressources and costs if thats the matter. but i think the graphics should at least be on an adequate level to give the game an optical note which fits' to the theme, style and story and give the player even a little bit of optical comfort:.
but once a gameseries becomes famous it's somehow obligatory that gameplay and also the graphical level are on a satisfying, means not automatic towering, level:. example: fans would be disappointed for sure if the next zelda game would come along with gamecube graphics', but if the gameplay is convincing it won't be that big disaster, though nintendo won't let it be released like this, because since it is one of the most renowned gamesseries they want to implicate high quality in both, gameplay and graphics'
but once a gameseries becomes famous it's somehow obligatory that gameplay and also the graphical level are on a satisfying, means not automatic towering, level:. example: fans would be disappointed for sure if the next zelda game would come along with gamecube graphics', but if the gameplay is convincing it won't be that big disaster, though nintendo won't let it be released like this, because since it is one of the most renowned gamesseries they want to implicate high quality in both, gameplay and graphics'
I'd vote for "Both", but really, it's simply wrong to generalize video games like this.
There are games that live from their gameplay, and there are games that live from their graphics (of which however none may so far exist on the Wii).
And then there's still other games that live from their soundtrack, sound effects, storytelling, or really anything, and any possible combination of those aspects. It's like asking whether explosive action or pretty actors are more important for a good movie.
There are games that live from their gameplay, and there are games that live from their graphics (of which however none may so far exist on the Wii).
And then there's still other games that live from their soundtrack, sound effects, storytelling, or really anything, and any possible combination of those aspects. It's like asking whether explosive action or pretty actors are more important for a good movie.
GameWinner said:
Depends, if there was a game where you looked at a very high quality animation of a dancing kitten over and over again then I'd be hooked for weeks. Thats just me though, I'm impressed easily
While I feel that good graphics make the experience a lot better, if the game play is top-notch, then I could care less about how the game looks. Half Minute Hero and the original Super Mario Bros. are two examples of what I mean.
So uh yeah, to me, gameplay is more important.
So uh yeah, to me, gameplay is more important.
well i definitely enjoy gameplay more than graphics, people that only like graphics are kids "omg its not 3D its crap", "omg its a running across the screen game it sucks" i like to have a game with good graphics and good gameplay, my favourite Crisis Core is a good example
Graphics are more important..I mean a game may have awesome gameplay but the graphics suck. Then it will be ABSOLUTELY lame...
what about a game with awesome graphics but gameplay sucks that would make the game ABSOLUTELY lame...devesh_zelda said:
IMO I can enjoy any game even with 8bit graphics as long as it has gameplay
Similar threads
-
- Poll
-
-
-
-
@
RedColoredStars:
I dont like cream cheese. Thats why. Haha. The breakfast noodle cup sounds fantastic though. -
-
@
sp3off:
@ZeroT21 tons of ingredients contains lactose more or less sadly. Makes them tummy aches and farts-o-lantern rocket launches+1 -
-
@
RedColoredStars:
"Start your day with Cup Noodles Breakfast! This limited time flavor blends ramen with your favorite breakfast flavors, including pancakes, maple syrup, sausage, and eggs."
-
-
-
-
@
RedColoredStars:
Grilled peanut butter sandwiches with banana, bacon, and marshmallow cream. YUM!!!!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
RedColoredStars:
i only buy new ones when theres a new standard and I have gear that uses it. Otherwise my cables seem to last forever.
-
-
