Gameplay or graphics??? Myself gameplay is everything but I do respect a formidable anti-aliased of pixelation. I think this may be why the Wii is selling so many units. Alot of people would say that there aren't too many good games for the Wii but I beg to differ! The only uncool thing is that NHL 08 won't be coming out for the Wii which swayed my purchase alone to the 360.
All I really require from graphics is that they don't hurt gameplay, and that works both ways, if the graphics are shit then it will obviously damage the game in some way, perhaps if you cannot easily follow what is going on. If too much time is spent on making the graphics nice instead of actually getting a good gameplay then it's bad too. So IMO developers should get gameplay handled before they start going over what cool graphic effects they might include.
You're right on the money! That's exactly how a game should be developed! What about sound? A game needs to sound good, I don't really care about music but any gunfire or explosions or even just the sound of someone walking has to be dead on!
Sound is what makes a masterpiece, however great your gameplay and graphics might be if you don't have sound to set the mental mood and attitude of a player then it doesn't matter. I can't remember which game it was, but I remember clearly that there had been a low ambient sound which had suddenly disappeared and just the fact that there was no ambient sound but only the occasional crow or whatever it was meant that I immediately went into a "something's going to happen here". For example, the Resident Evil games are particularly good at setting the mood. Relys: I don't like the idea that you have to balance between the two, that implies that you have a finite set of points to distribute between the various areas of a game. While it is sadly mostly true due to the various publishers forcing a deadline unto developers it has also been the downfall of many would-be great games. I don't like the idea of separating a game into specific areas such as graphics, gameplay or sound etc. either, it gives the impression that those are the areas that should be worked on and you can improve one of them and thus improve the overall game. Imagine an RPG game for instance, you have strength, agility and intelligence, being a mage you obviously only need intelligence and agility, this is the same mentally applied to game now a days, there is always an aspect given less weight than the others. The way I see it, however, is that all the areas bind together to form a feel of the game as a whole, and one bad area can seriously hurt the experience as a whole. If movement feels akward the gameplay idea might excellent, but it will still suck, if the ambient noise drives you insane then the graphics might excellent but it will still suck. For a master piece game, there is no "what's more important" because the only answer is that they're all equally important and should be judged on how they feel together in unity instead of holding them up as a separate entity, mess up one area and it all goes bonkers.
Maybe "even" was the wrong word of choice. Wii games can be super fun sometimes, but they make the graphics shit (Even thou they can do better), on the other hand, some 360 games or something can have the best graphics ever made, and still suck ass. I just don't want one side to be too "unbalanced". I prefer gameplay. Graphics doesn't make fun. It only makes your eyes orgasm.
i think that a game shop have A grade gameplay, at least B grade sound and B grade graphics so think of this: Kingdom Hearts 2 (PS2) : A grade gameplay; B+ grade Sound; B+ grade graphics............. ff7 on psx: A- grade gameplay; B- grade sound; B grade graphics (oh and just so u noe 4 ff7 the characters graphics were shit but the environment was AWESOME, thus giving graphics a b grade status) ... crap... i confused myself
Gameplay! Ever played a flash game you couldn't let go? I don't care if it's a simple textbased game, if the gameplay is good, I'll play it.
