Gameplay, gameplay and gameplay are the three most important things for a video game to have.
That’s the view of games industry legend and co-author of the Fighting Fantasy series Ian Livingstone OBE who was speaking to The Train2Game Blog at Develop Conference 2012.
20°
20°
20°
40°
Ad 
10°
Can always tell a MMA fan.
Nothing about Heavy Rain was emotionally engaging, it was nothing but plot holes and possibly the silliest motive I have ever witnessed in a game.
gameplay and graphics for me. screw the story let me shoot up a bunch of bad guys for what ever reason then crash and kill myself in a high speed chase for my enjoyment.
This man is my hero.
There's the problem. That's like saying, people will buy a rock concert ticket but the band won't be playing a single guitar. Graphics are just as important as gameplay; there doesn't have to be any compromises. I don't think 'The Last of Us' would be getting as much attention if it was a side scroller.
How many comments in Wii U threads even mention gameplay as opposed to graphics? 1 in 50 maybe. For the masses to suggest they agree gameplay > graphics is laughable, when their actions clearly show otherwise.
However that graphical or audio windowdressing is what elevates what you are doing above being a kind of sport in to being a kind of theatrical entertainment with explicit or implicit messages about the atmosphere / values of the environment that you are in and the nature of yourself and other characters.
If Mr Livingstone wants to make sports games then maybe gameplay, gameplay, gameplay is his 3 most important things. But for gamesmakers trying to attract young adults with their thirst for magical entertainment and education, gameplay is far from the full picture.
Some might say that technically the gameplay of Silent Hill 3 is pedestrian, having to try numerous locked doors and not that many horrifying monsters. But the character, choice of environments, visuals and sound elevate it to much more in your imagination than is actually in the game.
Seriously, the story was so good that went straight up to the top for me. All that mattered was I felt a genuine bond between myself and Serph, as well as the rest of the party. The gameplay was far more subtle and relied on the story heavily. If a character left the party for example, you truly felt it, even in the gameplay because everything they achieved on the shared mantra grid would be washed away.
It's stuff like that that immerses me into a game. Not a finely tuned FPS like Call of Duty or Halo. If I play a game with a shitty story, it's already lost a significant amount of respect as far as I'm concerned, it can still be good if the gameplay is amazing (it can make up for it and vice versa with story), but it can never be truly great unless it has at the very least a serviceable story or narrative.
I think my 3 reasons are why Call of Duty just keeps going. It hits those 3 nails on the head year after year. People may start hating the gameplay, but for any newcomer, as all of us once were, they could easily fall in love with it's fast and hectic gameplay if its new to them.
And gameplay mechanics are dull, by the way. You can give a game interactivity without building entire systems designed for a particular genre. Developers need to stop focusing on genres like FPS, TPS, Strategy, Racing, etc, and instead focus on how to blend these mechanics together seamlessly in a way that "gameplay mechanics" don't feel repetitive after you've killed the 12,113th terrorist.
There doesn't have to be any compromises.
gameplay is THE most important element for me, but sadly others like me are far and few. most just want a pretty game to look at with nothing to do in it.
how you find enjoyment in playing a game because it looks oh so good but plays like a turd is beyond me. how is that fun? swinging at air, horrible animations,but it looks great!
sadly it doesn't matter how powerful next gen is, most devs are going to use it for graphics ala skyrim and let the gameplay suffer.
2 great examples in dev choice: dragon's dogma and skyrim
skyrim's graphics are incredible but plays like shit. huge open world with NOTHING to do but explore. in a game that boasts over hundrends of hours of gameplay you'd think having good gameplay is important, but it's not to them and it's not to the people who praise it. they NEVER praise skyrim for it's gameplay or story, strictly graphics. yet the game wins awards.
on the other hand, take dragon's dogma, GREAT gameplay that drives you to play well after you've completed everything, good but not great graphics and a decent story to boot (once you've completed the game it makes sense) yet it is hated on.
next gen will be more of the same, more power going to the graphics with gameplay taking a backseat. sad