gameplay vs. game graphics, opinions plz

[Vlad417]

How much does does gameplay and graphics effect your game experience? and how do either change your opinion about a game? which is more important to you when choosing a game? would you play a game with high graphics but low game play or a game with low graphics and high gameplay?

[ovidiucucu]

I prefer high gameplay to high graphics.
However, I don't mind if have both. ;)

[IllegalCharacter]

In general, gameplay is more important than graphics. For example: Tetris, Bejeweled, Minesweeper. None of these games have great graphics but a lot more people play these than say, Half-Life 2 or Oblivion. Even look at Starcraft, it's still insanely popular worldwide and the graphics suck by today's standards.

Look at it this way, if your graphics are amazing but your gameplay sucks, people are going to play your game for an hour or so before they get bored and toss it. On the other hand, if your gameplay is amazing but your graphics suck, the hardcore gamers might toss it right away but the average person will probably still enjoy it.

This doesn't mean ignore graphics altogether, but you should put more attention towards gameplay as this is what made the best games the best.

[ovidiucucu]

I have dared to add a poll to this thread and made it sticky for a while.

So... please feel free and vote!

[Krishnaa]

I like both, high graphics is useless if the game play is limited... A game ( such as a 3D first person shooter) must have both.

[S_M_A]

Well designed and balanced sounds are also an important factor that goes before graphics.

[bitshifter420]

I think that gameplay definitely comes first.

This keeps the user interested far longer than just good graphics or sound.

There are (were) a lot of good DOS games that proved this.

If your code is methodic and masterful you will have room for lots of texture and sound to be added later, but focus on game logic first.

This is why the game chess has survived for thousands of years, not because the game peices look cool, but because of the gameplay.

Happy Coding!

[ovidiucucu]

A little bit off-topic:
Does anybody remember this "low graphics" game?

[Vlad417]

im too young to remember that.

[Hnefi]

I remember that. Played on the Amstrad, I believe. Can't remember what it was called.

As for your question, I am of the opinion that both are necessary, to a degree. Graphics and gameplay serve different purposes.

Graphics are the main part of the initial impression you get of a game. As anyone who has studied rethorics knows, no impression is as important as the first one. It is what makes people interested in the game and consider whether it might be worth their time (and money).

Gameplay is content. It is what gives a game longevity, as well as reputation. While graphics will serve to increase sales initially, without gameplay the reputation of the game will plummet and with it, buyer interest and your revenue. You need gameplay to make people want to buy expansions, sequels and other products developed by you.

So in the end, both are equally important. The days of DOS and C64 are over. It is no longer realistic to expect to get away with either inferior graphics or inferior gameplay.

[Hobson]

All depends on a type of the game. My favoirute game type is RPG and in this category gameplay is the only what counts. My favorite RPGs are Exile and Avernum series (2D graphics with top-down view and great plot), IMO much much more better than Morrowind, Baldurs Gate, and whatnot.
Other kind of games I like is FPP shooters, and here graphics means to me more than gameplay. Generally.

Cheers