It's just the graphics, obviously.

 

Mostly gameplay. Games with good graphics get outdated. Games with good gameplay last generations.

Think about it, some day CGs in the movie "the Transformers" will be able to be rendered real-time in a console. Will you still look at Gran Turismo 5 and say "Wow that looks almost like a real car"? Highly doubtful.

Can fancy visuals make pong a better game?

That's called good games in the 90's.

I can't think of any game that has top notch graphics and offer shit gameplay, and game that has good gameplay and graphics that doesn't suit the game to the point it's unbearable.
(What I'm saying is, does World Series of Poker 2009 need modeling that rivals Too Human?)

I don't think you need to sacrifice one for the other. It's not like "Okay, so we manged to set up a kickass system in *insert game*, therefore we must make the characters stick-figures otherwise our gameplay suffers"

 

Crysis looked great, but it wasn't a good game


Lost Winds doesn't have the most polygons but it has a great art direction and amazing gameplay.

 

Voted for Gameplay If I would prefer Graphics, I would have never bought me a Wii... What is a game with perfect graphic, the best gameengines and a story that sucks? Nothing

If a game is really great, I would also play it if it's 256 colors only

 

Ill say both because:

1) Gameplay is good but if i cant stand the graphics, i probably wont play it alot
2) Graphics is good but if they work too much on that and not alot on gameplay then i wouldnt play it alot either.

 

Gameplay is vital & should be the thing that is worked on first. Sadly developers have to be able to show their work early on.

Of course Graphics can often add a lot to the gameplay but it is true that a lot of pretty games do get lost in the way many years after release & what's left is a date look and nothing more. Anyone who remembers Rise of the Robots will know what I'm talking about.

 

Well, if the game is fun I will play it. However if it a 3D pixelationmess then... proably not.

 

The graphics help enhance the gameplay... but gameplay is much more important, though gfx does matter. Yes, if pong had an awesome soundtrack, super futuristic 3d graphics, motion blur etc etc I would like it more than regular pong.

 

People "claim" game play, but we all know you sell out for graphics.

This is why we have a lot of shitty f**king games with f**king pretty graphics, and it takes so long for people to just admit, ok we bought the pretty game and got suckered yet again.

It's why we have a few great games, but because the game lacked great graphics, it was labeled "dull" or "boring" and they get passed over.

Any asshole can render graphics, but it takes genius to make a great game.
And the industry is rife with graphics artist assholes with dreams of making games, but they have no real talent for making a game actually any good.
Genius is rare.

 

I play N64 and PSX games on my high-end PC because I like the gameplay of many games. Also, art direction and 'graphics' are not neccessarily the same, as the latter typically refers to realism. Games like Aquaria have great art direction, and on the other end so does STALKER - it is not the best looking game compared to Crysis or CoD4, but it doesn't sacrifice the bleak and depressing atmosphere for the bright flashing lights prefered by graphics whores.