Ok....here is Graphics argument: Graphics make EVERYTHING look better. the hair, the food, the fur, and your guy/girl. And the grass. Why grass? why don' t those guys work on the storyline or the gameplay instead of ONE little blade of grass? I had a game that had the BEST visuals better... but it only took me half a day to beat it. And the controls?? LOL. Use L1 and R1 to take out your equipped weapon. X to shoot. I couldnt take ONE measly guy down. Then the story whcih didn' t make sense[:' (] IDK why but the guy was a girl at the end of the game. The gun was actually a sprit, and the Boss was yourself...He didn' t even look like the main dudette.


Storyline and Gameplay: They make what the game is. They make the game longer. They are the veins of the game. The gamecube might have some cheap graphics but the games try to keep it alive. Do you see mario sweat when he' s trying to take down bowser? No. Do you see lins' s earring fall when he fights Ganon? No. anyway if it did then it would make the game realistic. But do ALL games have to be about real life? No. if president Bush sneezes do they make a game that makes you wipe his nose? No. I mean.. the war games are fine cause they have action. but common.....do i reaaly need to see my guy' s hair move when im trying to lock on unto a guy? No.


If you agree, Write SOMETHING
If not: then kill me

GAMEPLAY, always!

I like Pong more than a lot of the crap I' ve played during the current generation and some of the next-generation stuff

next-gen doesn' t look nex-gen. looks like crap. dont start shelling out bucks for games that just LOOK good. wait for it! or ask a freind how it is

next-gen doesn' t look nex-gen. looks like crap. dont start shelling out bucks for games that just LOOK good. wait for it! or ask a freind how it is

ehhh`?

just wait until a GOOD review of the game comes out then you can start shelling out $$$

Gameplay always comes first.
I don' t know if you mean the over-all visuals or simply the technical progress when you say " graphics" .
Because I feel that the visual presentation is very important in order to creat the right atmosphere and immersion in games. Art direction is extremely important to me. Will Zelda Twilight Princess be the same without it' s graphics? Would Shenmue, Ocarina of Time or FFVII have been the same? Not really. So even though gameplay is the core of gaming, the visuals are very important, especially the art direction.

What the hell is gameplay? I' ve heard of it, but I don' t think it exists.

its how the game goes. ginjoiur u got a point but we dont need grachis for EVERY little thing in games do we?

Why do i care what i look like when i leave my flat?!

Why did i chose to date a pretty girl?!

Why do people buy new cars?!

I guess it depends on the genre but to make a truly memorable game you need to have both gameplay and story.

gameplay will be the most important if it´s a action game.

Both. If developers took time tightening up their games, most of the crappy ones that leave shelves in weeks, could be bestsellers. Granted they may not have the money for the most " advanced" visuals, but they can at least make a game look good. Think about it. Zelda Windwaker did' nt have that much going for it in terms of amazing textures, or realistic particle effects, but the graphics were visually pleasing because the developers took their time to make what they had look clean, and original.

If you look at most games with quality graphics, and poor gameplay, they have suffered an eternity in the bottom of the bargain bin. Some games with average to subpar graphics but great gameplay do really well for themselves. So from the consumers point of view, I think gameplay is more important. Me, i think both are equal, so I won' t settle untill I have amazing and innovative gameplay, and bleeding edge visuals all in one game. I' m just picky that way.

Pretty visuals are a nice bonus and do help make some games more fun, but like women I do like games with more to them than just simple beauty. I like the whole damn package, great errm...gameplay and gorgeous looks for both Women and games are the best!

I dont like to answere that :P

Ofc graphic means much,and ofc gameplay means much.

In tetris,or puzzle game who cares about the graphic?
But look at Gears of war,make that game with so-so graphic and i doubt it would get a lot of attention.

I think gameplay will always win with visuals as long as you compare two games of which one is great looking and terrible in gameplay (you can' t play this shit) and the other is crappy looking whle sporting amazingly fun gameplay.

In reality we don' t have situations that clear - I expect my games to be great in all areas - and don' t forget the sound.

The best example for gameplay over graphics is Mario Kart DS Vs Ridge Racers ( or even better wipeout for psp - since it' s got weapons too).

Anyway , downplaying the role visuals have is wrong too.Also viusals are not only textures and 3d models - the interaction on screen and so on - it all counts

Graphics mean nothing if the game isn' t very enjoyable. So I, unlike any and all chavs, muuuch prefer the gameplay of a game to how realistic the fur looks.

As the saying goes: " Don' t judge a book by it' s cover"

If it was between gameplay and music though...

Bullshit. What about Metal Gear Solid?!

The gameplay sucks mostly as the controls are messy and the camera gets dodgy (indoors). The FPS mechanic is retarded and you can' t move while shooting when in first person.

The reason the games are so successful is because of their look, style and to a lesser extent their story.

The original was genius but the gameplay formula hasn' t matured and it' s been improved upon and outdone by other games since it' s release on Playstation.

Actually gameplay is one of the strongest points of any MGS games and when I was playing it I had no camera problems.

The FPS mechanic is retarded and you can' t move while shooting when in first person.

maybe cause it' s not an FPS game?

FPP view serves it well if you ask me.

I consider MGS to be getting worse with each iteration , but they always are avery good games with great gameplay and outstanding presentation.

I hate this stupid debate.

graphics or gameplay, graphics or gameplay

You want my answer?

If a game fails on either front, it' s disappointing.

Looks like crap, plays great... that makes it AVERAGE when it should have been stellar.

Looks great, plays like crap...same difference. AVERAGE.

Great games have both, and there are very few games I consider great. If I have to sacrifice on either, the game isn' t AAA.

That said, both qualities are subjective anyway. What one person likes may be complete crap to another person.

For instance, I hate final Fantasy games. To me, playing a FF game is like sitting in a theater and watching a really pretty, really cheesy movie. Then, every once in a while some guy jumps up and challenges me to a " random battle" .
So, I don' t play them. Famitsu can kiss my ass.

ok heres an example of gameplay and some music.... man i 4got to add music to this category.... well don' t blame the words just look at the vid and listen to the song and TELL ME THOSE TWO DONT MATCH!!JUST TELL ME!!!! GO LOOK



Music' s rebuttal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THmyCWxM29E&NR

the last music isn´t actually matching the action but the game is amazing