Fuck the graphics, go for the gameplay in my opinion, with or without gore.
For me it's simply that graphics itself is a subset of gameplay, as is everything else for the game.
Because if the game looks awesome you enjoy the game more, hence the game 'plays' better - but ultimately it's about how fun the game is to play (at least for me) - I play a game to play it not to look at it. The rest is just bonus to make the game look more fun, seem more fun and play better.
It's like when Gamespot does reviews of games and it like has Graphics, Sound, Difficulty, etc, etc as sections to rate.
And then it has a section called gameplay! I find this quite a amusing TBH although I understand it's simply how games are rated.
ONE section within a review about how good a game is called GAMEPLAY. Isn't it all about how well the game plays? How much you enjoy it?
Cos for me the 'Gameplay' section and score of THAT simply means: Everything fucking else! I mean the graphics and the sound and the difficulty all add to how well the game plays and how enjoyable it is. So gameplay simply means every other fucking factor that adds to the game! Lol.
If a game has excellent gameplay but shit graphics and audio....then it doesn't play as well as if it has awesome sound quality and looks awesome, it's not as fun to play, the gameplay is less good. Because part of the gameplay of a game is the awesome graphics and sound adding to the fun, adding to how the game 'plays' for you; adding to the gameplay. So it's all a subset of gameplay IMO...
Now, if the graphics look good but slow the game down then for me at least that decreases the game play. Because if a game runs more smoothly with perhaps still nice looking and very easy to navigate graphics but rather than completely overpowering graphics, plenty or gore and fog and smoke or whatever that slows the game down or makes it harder to play - I think the game plays better with simply smooth graphics rather than suped-up graphics...what looks good is not the same as what is overpowering and realistic regardless of it it actually makes the game better to play or not.
On the other hand...some people might want to sacrifice some 'playability' for better graphics. If they think the game plays better that way in the sense it's more fun...then IMO from THEIR point of view THAT'S the better Gameplay even if the game runs less smooth cos the better graphics add to the game, hence add to the fun, hence add to the gameplay, etc.
So it's all about the gameplay for me. And I PERSONALLY don't give a shit about gore cos I just like my game to run smoothly and be fun.
Although a bit of gore can look fucking sweet - ultimately to me it's about WHATEVER makes the game play better, more fun - WHATEVER makes the game have better gameplay overall, what makes it better game - that matters. It's the same as my attitude to music - 'so long as it sounds good I don't give a fuck what genre or band it is...although I might on average sway to one particular band or genre more than others simply because that's what I personally LIKE - ultimately it's what sounds good to me'.
Replace ' so as long as it sounds good' with 'so long as it PLAYS well' and replace 'band/genre' with 'game/gamedeveloper' and that's my attitude on games too.
It's nice to have nice looking graphics, but also - nice looking doesn't always mean more technical and/or realistic.
And I think if graphics look awesome but get in your way then that doesn't necessarily look good because despite the fact they technically look good it might be fucking irritating having to see the 'awesome graphics' fuck up the game all the time LOL -so it doesn't 'look good' in that sense because looking at it is fucking annoying cos it's hard to play the game with how the graphics look! They 'get in your way' or are awkward to navigate/play with/on or whatever.
And if the graphics aren't exactly the most realistic graphics ever but they're very easy to navigate and they DON'T get in your way - then that's pretty cool graphics I think - being easy to navigate and not getting in the way of the game I mean. There's graphics that LOOK good but not necessarily BETTER because better looking might not necessarily be for the look itself but be because you don't have to keep looking at it getting in the way of your fucking game and they're not so damn difficult to play with! Lol.
Of course if you have pretty damn good gameplay but the graphics are shit...that's not good because the game would very probably be more fun to play - and hence; have better gameplay - if the graphics looked less shit or even good! (providing they were easy to play with...graphics that look realistic but fuck up the game isn't exactly the best graphics that can be...graphics that look 'ok.' but are really easy to play with and the game itself is awesome; those kind of graphics can be fucking sweet.
Lol.
/end gaming rant.
EvF
For me it's simply that graphics itself is a subset of gameplay, as is everything else for the game.
Because if the game looks awesome you enjoy the game more, hence the game 'plays' better - but ultimately it's about how fun the game is to play (at least for me) - I play a game to play it not to look at it. The rest is just bonus to make the game look more fun, seem more fun and play better.
It's like when Gamespot does reviews of games and it like has Graphics, Sound, Difficulty, etc, etc as sections to rate.
And then it has a section called gameplay! I find this quite a amusing TBH although I understand it's simply how games are rated.
ONE section within a review about how good a game is called GAMEPLAY. Isn't it all about how well the game plays? How much you enjoy it?
Cos for me the 'Gameplay' section and score of THAT simply means: Everything fucking else! I mean the graphics and the sound and the difficulty all add to how well the game plays and how enjoyable it is. So gameplay simply means every other fucking factor that adds to the game! Lol.
If a game has excellent gameplay but shit graphics and audio....then it doesn't play as well as if it has awesome sound quality and looks awesome, it's not as fun to play, the gameplay is less good. Because part of the gameplay of a game is the awesome graphics and sound adding to the fun, adding to how the game 'plays' for you; adding to the gameplay. So it's all a subset of gameplay IMO...
Now, if the graphics look good but slow the game down then for me at least that decreases the game play. Because if a game runs more smoothly with perhaps still nice looking and very easy to navigate graphics but rather than completely overpowering graphics, plenty or gore and fog and smoke or whatever that slows the game down or makes it harder to play - I think the game plays better with simply smooth graphics rather than suped-up graphics...what looks good is not the same as what is overpowering and realistic regardless of it it actually makes the game better to play or not.
On the other hand...some people might want to sacrifice some 'playability' for better graphics. If they think the game plays better that way in the sense it's more fun...then IMO from THEIR point of view THAT'S the better Gameplay even if the game runs less smooth cos the better graphics add to the game, hence add to the fun, hence add to the gameplay, etc.
So it's all about the gameplay for me. And I PERSONALLY don't give a shit about gore cos I just like my game to run smoothly and be fun.
Although a bit of gore can look fucking sweet - ultimately to me it's about WHATEVER makes the game play better, more fun - WHATEVER makes the game have better gameplay overall, what makes it better game - that matters. It's the same as my attitude to music - 'so long as it sounds good I don't give a fuck what genre or band it is...although I might on average sway to one particular band or genre more than others simply because that's what I personally LIKE - ultimately it's what sounds good to me'.
Replace ' so as long as it sounds good' with 'so long as it PLAYS well' and replace 'band/genre' with 'game/gamedeveloper' and that's my attitude on games too.
It's nice to have nice looking graphics, but also - nice looking doesn't always mean more technical and/or realistic.
And I think if graphics look awesome but get in your way then that doesn't necessarily look good because despite the fact they technically look good it might be fucking irritating having to see the 'awesome graphics' fuck up the game all the time LOL -so it doesn't 'look good' in that sense because looking at it is fucking annoying cos it's hard to play the game with how the graphics look! They 'get in your way' or are awkward to navigate/play with/on or whatever.
And if the graphics aren't exactly the most realistic graphics ever but they're very easy to navigate and they DON'T get in your way - then that's pretty cool graphics I think - being easy to navigate and not getting in the way of the game I mean. There's graphics that LOOK good but not necessarily BETTER because better looking might not necessarily be for the look itself but be because you don't have to keep looking at it getting in the way of your fucking game and they're not so damn difficult to play with! Lol.
Of course if you have pretty damn good gameplay but the graphics are shit...that's not good because the game would very probably be more fun to play - and hence; have better gameplay - if the graphics looked less shit or even good! (providing they were easy to play with...graphics that look realistic but fuck up the game isn't exactly the best graphics that can be...graphics that look 'ok.' but are really easy to play with and the game itself is awesome; those kind of graphics can be fucking sweet.
Lol.
/end gaming rant.
EvF
