Gameplay VS Graphics

Jun 9, 2020
25
10
35
Hello guys.
The title says it all, my question is, if there is a game that the graphics good but the gameplay not so much..
or opposite.
What do you prefer?
Fun discussion!
 
Jan 16, 2020
254
300
770
yeah same here, gameplay always trumps something that's pretty. Especially if its boring. A good example would be Tetris or asteroids, you don't need brilliant graphics to make something compelling, addictive or fun. if the mechanics and gameplay feel right, you don't need top notch graphics. We can see this in the indie scene with resurgence of 8bit/16 bit graphics partly for nostalgia purposes, partly because its easier and adequate to do so.
 
Jan 17, 2020
501
480
770
While gameplay is more important, bad graphics can definitely be a deal breaker.

For example, I don't think I would've been able to get into Dwarf Fortress if I had to play with the original Ascii graphics. However, even with a tile pack the game is still a good example of gameplay over graphics.
 

Zloth

Community Contributor
Jan 13, 2020
630
879
1,270
How are you supposed to even measure the two against each other? Is each eye full of eye candy is worth about 34.8 cubic gameplayics!? And what about story? What about the sound track? Is the game funny at all? Does artistic vision fit into "graphics" or is that just about how many GPU features you're using?

Sorry, but the whole question just seems ridiculous to me. Look at the WHOLE of the game then decide how good it is.

Good graphics but weak gameplay: Alice: Madness Returns, though I'm counting artistic vision as part of graphics.

Great gameplay, weak graphics: Nethack.

Great graphics but no gameplay at all: paintings.
Great gameplay, no graphics at all: Pen & Paper games.
No graphics, no gameplay, still very fun: books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pifanjr
Jun 9, 2020
25
10
35
How are you supposed to even measure the two against each other? Is each eye full of eye candy is worth about 34.8 cubic gameplayics!? And what about story? What about the sound track? Is the game funny at all? Does artistic vision fit into "graphics" or is that just about how many GPU features you're using?

Sorry, but the whole question just seems ridiculous to me. Look at the WHOLE of the game then decide how good it is.

Good graphics but weak gameplay: Alice: Madness Returns, though I'm counting artistic vision as part of graphics.

Great gameplay, weak graphics: Nethack.

Great graphics but no gameplay at all: paintings.
Great gameplay, no graphics at all: Pen & Paper games.
No graphics, no gameplay, still very fun: books.
Well. some kids in these days will never touch a game that is less 60 GB lol.
A classic example is assassins creed. So many gamers disappointed from the last games. only because the gameplay, while its favorite to other.
Of course, there is so many reasons to hate or love a game.
But what i'm trying to ask is what your BIG deal in games.
What matter MOST to you?
 

Zloth

Community Contributor
Jan 13, 2020
630
879
1,270
I don't think you're quite getting what I'm saying yet, @RevoluGame . A quick example:

Say there's a game that I almost like. A way to figure out if I like graphics or gameplay better would be to ask if adding just one more graphic thing or just one more gameplay thing would be more likely to put me over into liking the game. But what counts as a "thing"? If the choice was between adding a dozen better textures to the game vs. adding a whole new class of skills, I would take the gameplay. If the choice was between adding widespread tessellation vs. adding one more skill, I would take the graphics.

That's what I meant by throwing the crazy, made-up units in there. I don't know how to compare the two things - they are apples and oranges to me. Maybe if I knew how much each one would cost then I could say which I would rather pay for.

There's one number where you don't need to units: 0. If I liked a past time with no graphics but good gameplay but not the other way around then I could say I like gameplay over graphics. But no such luck.
 
Jun 9, 2020
25
10
35
I don't think you're quite getting what I'm saying yet, @RevoluGame . A quick example:

Say there's a game that I almost like. A way to figure out if I like graphics or gameplay better would be to ask if adding just one more graphic thing or just one more gameplay thing would be more likely to put me over into liking the game. But what counts as a "thing"? If the choice was between adding a dozen better textures to the game vs. adding a whole new class of skills, I would take the gameplay. If the choice was between adding widespread tessellation vs. adding one more skill, I would take the graphics.

That's what I meant by throwing the crazy, made-up units in there. I don't know how to compare the two things - they are apples and oranges to me. Maybe if I knew how much each one would cost then I could say which I would rather pay for.

There's one number where you don't need to units: 0. If I liked a past time with no graphics but good gameplay but not the other way around then I could say I like gameplay over graphics. But no such luck.
Well i get you, this is also a answer.
But for some people (or kids) its not individual.
I can get them the best gameplay (if because the story, skill or whatever) if there is none good graphics, they won't even touch.
But there can be gamers, as we saw in the comments, all they want its the gameplay itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pifanjr
May 21, 2020
28
2
35
IMHO I think really good graphics kills single player games. The company spends so much money on the graphics that the meat and potatoes tend to suffer for example Star Wars bf 2 the campaign was really short and meh focus was on graphics and multiplayer. Fallout 4 all the quests were pretty much the same go here shoot bring me x. Not that the graphics were good mind you but they crammed to much **** in the wasteland as opposed to 3 and new Vegas you actually had to take more than 5 steps to find something
 

Dan

Jan 15, 2020
127
153
270
As with all these things, there is not one thing that is better than the other. There are plenty of text adventures I have played with absolutely no graphics - but then there are games like Skyrim where I love to just endlessly walk around the forests, that wouldn't have the same effect with bad or zero graphics.
 
May 2, 2020
10
11
15
Video games are like food.

First priority is that it tastes good. However, your appetite will likely also be heavily influenced by how it looks.. ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pifanjr
May 21, 2020
28
2
35
As with all these things, there is not one thing that is better than the other. There are plenty of text adventures I have played with absolutely no graphics - but then there are games like Skyrim where I love to just endlessly walk around the forests, that wouldn't have the same effect with bad or zero graphics.
True but by today’s standards the original game without mods or the redux version the graphics are ok but by far the best. I think that today’s best graphics look amazing but it seems to me it is becoming the death of the single player game/ campaign. Look at fallout 76. To me fallout is supposed to be single player but Bethesda wanted to cash in on the online pay to win setup
 

Inspireless Llama

Community Contributor
Dec 20, 2019
471
472
770
I tend to go for looks before taste too. Something that doesn't look tasty I'd be far less willing to try.

In terms of games I think I do prefer graphics over story (I usually don't play 2D pixel games even if they're good) but I can't say I enjoy good looking games with a terrible story / gameplay.

Also, I did play some LISA and Stardew Valley which are pixel , while Ryse: Son of Rome was graphic decent but that game bored me to death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevoluGame
Jan 15, 2020
70
41
70
General rule of thumb is Gameplay over graphics but some games are just too gorgeous to not play even if the storyline sucks, i mean what is the storyline in simulators? Exactly, have that experience with amazing graphics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevoluGame
Jan 17, 2020
501
480
770
General rule of thumb is Gameplay over graphics but some games are just too gorgeous to not play even if the storyline sucks, i mean what is the storyline in simulators? Exactly, have that experience with amazing graphics.
Gameplay isn't the same as story. Simulators can be fun even if they look abysmal.
 

Frindis

Moderator
Jan 14, 2020
1,108
1,091
2,570
I can't really divide them too much as I believe they are both quite essential and intertwined for the players experience. Take ABZÛ as an example. The environment is so beautiful, but so is the character movements and they both melt together in an amazing spectacle.
 
May 5, 2020
43
27
70
I think the problem with the word "Graphics" is overly generic and means too many things.
For example, some people may not like a particular art style and says it has "Poor Graphics"

Take Torchlight 2 \ 3.
2 Has a Cohesive Pleasent Art Style
3 Looks like a Fancy Mobile Game.

So I feel as long as the art style fits and gameplay solid its good.
Because Anthem is a game that is stunning - but the gameplay is horrifically bad.
While Factorio is a game, in my opinion, it looks Bland, but the gameplay is great.
Project Zomboid is another game that looks pretty bland but reasonably good Gameplay ( not a fan of the UI )
 
Jan 14, 2020
33
16
35
For me It's always a mixture of the two.
Some older games like Company of Heroes have fantastic gameplay and reasonable graphics.
A newer game like Mafia 3 had good graphics but the gameplay was mediocre - still worth playing but it's not something that I would consider going back too.

Then we have remasters - the recent Call of Duty remasters have actually been pretty reasonable. A good single player campaign with pretty old graphics that have been brought up to date.
 
Jun 26, 2020
39
52
120
While Factorio is a game, in my opinion, it looks Bland, but the gameplay is great.
Factorio was the first game I thought of when I saw this discussion. It's such a fantastic game with a lot of great gameplay opportunities but it does look quite bland. When I first saw it I didn't think I'd be able to get into it, but the gameplay shines so hard it's difficult not to enjoy. I compare it to satisfactory, that uses more modern graphics and the first person perspective, but while it looks great it feels so much more shallow due to more limited gameplay mechanics.

Rimworld is another great example. Pretty basic in terms of graphics, but has so much depth and gameplay opportunities that it's so easy to overlook the basic graphics approach.

Of course it's great when a game can nail both. But time and time again I find myself so underwhelmed by the prettier games that end up lacking any real gameplay.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts