What is the secret to a good game? To many people the heart of the game lies in the functionality of how it plays, commonly known as gameplay. In contrast there are many people who prefer games that push their visuals to the limit to fully express the world they want to convey.
220°
80°
180°
40°
Ad 
120°
20°
40°
30°
20°
30°
Graphics in games is just like the cover of a story book, without the words it is useless.
Gameplay is same across all platforms.
Its just PC provides the bonus with better graphics across the board and this just isnt high end PCs. Since console tech is so old, Even low to mid range PCs of today provide that bonus.
It needs visual appearance, audio fidelity, and fun interactiveness to be successful.
Best games are those which nailed each of those aspects, so I'd say it's pretty obvious we need all of them.
Both visuals and gameplay can become boring or stale when not enough attention is put into it.
Like in life, you need a good balance of those aspects. You need to look respective for your position, and perform adequately to your role.
You might slack off a bit, or not care about how you look, but that's a personal preference of favuoring one over the other.
But there are standards dictated by the environment to be met. Or surpass if ambitious enough.
All of us would prefer both, but if I had to choose, I'd sacrifice graphics. I had most enjoyable time with less fidelity, but richer worlds or gameplay mechanics. I can imagine pretty vistas. It's hard to imagine fun gameplay when it isn't.
both the same!
There is and must be the best middle golden way for every game, depending on wanted result is it a simulation or story based game etc... graphics and gameplay must have great balance...
gameplay matters but if graphics lacks "the looks" then even my imagination cant help!
That makes no sense. You just said gameplay was most important.
"Gameplay is same across all platforms."
Exclusives say no.
Gameplay has always been and will always be more important than graphics.
No one older than 5...NO ONE...would play a 100% broken, unfinished, beautiful game that only allows to you walk 2 feet before crashing, over an ugly game that plays well.
I dont even play games I just skip to the cut scenes
Bottom line you need both more today than 8bit days because we've past the line where anything is possible.
Players always wanting more looking for more, when we buy a new console what's the first thing you notice when new game comes out aka killzone 4 ? Gameplay. BS visuals graphics the wow factor.
But when you see or have hands on a game that has gameplay and graphics then it's a perfect match.
But both of them can let down a game if the game not done right.
I totally didn't rip off your word there XD... I didn't notice it until I read your post over again after I wrote mine.
BTW the answer is subjective. Why not ask what genre is best? Evryone has an opinion.
killzone
halo 4
forza
gt
rdr
uncharted
gears 3
to name just a few. both have good graphics and good gameplay.
Graphics might tip the scale on two games that are similar in feel and game play but I really dont think they matter as much ultimately as many would think they do.
gameplay all the way. graphics is just the eye candy.
some ugly girls have the best woosay. while the some pretty chics rely on their beauty to make you think its good lol
ijs
Indie games have great gameplay' but graphically and engine wise feel shallow and lack of AAA feel; they feel shallow in 2d levels.
3D and a great 3d looking game sucks you into the experience by tricking the human mind. Great gameplay and great graphics should be balanced with one another. Release a 2013 game with 2006 graphics and its going to get ripped. Unless you have a strong following with the franchise, graphics will draw in new customers 9/10 times IMO.
BALANCE is key.
Look at Crysis 3 vs Dark Souls.
Some great games couldn't exist without sufficient graphical power, and some games wouldn't be as immersive without the graphics they have.
Imagine playing what I consider one of the best games this gen, Red Dead Redemption on PS1 or even PS2 for that matter. Those wild west vistas and euphoria engine reactions to getting shot pulled me into the world in a way that less power would never do.
The only problem is when devs rely on flashy graphics over solid gameplay....so I guess gameplay, but that's like saying your heart is more important than your lungs, you could live without one but the quality would suffer tremendously compared to two.
It always happens at the cusp of a new generation (or when a certain console's games have better graphics and thus, damage control articles are written) when people are "wowed" by improved visuals in games - that is normal, and expected. But can you not have both? The answer is yes. Many developers pull off the right balance, and the new generation will see improvements in both as far as AI and world complexity, draw distance, frames per second, and FOV is concerned.
Then you have the fidelity and realism helping to shape storytelling and allowing for emotions to be much more easily shaped. Graphics are not just about making things LOOK prettier, like many seem to think.
For excample...
An exploding building rigged with physics blowing rocks up across the map can look stunning, yet turns into gameplay when these rocks can actualy hit and damage you.
Looking down seeing your own body in a fps, can be considered awesome gfx, but turns into gameplay when a rock hits your knee, and you'll be able to put some bandaid on it after noticing it.
Most developers are stupid, thats why you have this GFX versus Gameplay discussion.
Sad.
That what graphical finesse brings for me anyways. It makes a great experience even greater.
My conclusion is, both are equally important.
Graphics are what forms a first impression and as psychology has proven in a vast majority of cases, First impressions actually have a stronger influence on your opinion than Actual long term experience. (Its true, your brain works by creating topics or memories, then manipulating them little by little, it takes a lot to overide a first impression)
BTW in case anyone is wondering about this I like the PlayStation because of the controller, technology and Sony exclusives.
Motorola RAZR i
I guess you didn't notice that no one wants to experimant anymore.
As long as CoD sells in tens of millions.
A game needs to be balanced and not mathematically balanced but plot, context, believable, interactivity etc etc etc.
But man the graphics were horrible lol. Eventually I got tired of the bad graphics and the animations that were getting cheesey. And the reverted back to cod or bad company 2 at the time.
Counter strike on the other hand I can give a shit about graphics. I tone down all my settings and config the hell out of it for the best fps and maximum performances in time I need it. Thats what every good player does anyway. You gotta be outta your mind to think the best players play at high settings. I play counter strike global off at 640 x400 resolution.