Do graphics do it all?

[Artnez]

Title says it all.

[Beckwith]

huh?

[Artnez]

Yea, stupid vbulletin. It makes the post before I submit the poll.

[Beckwith]

for me its not a yes or no answer

they should be at least decent but the gameplay is more important

for example DC vs POE, at first with POE the gameplay wasnt great but the models and graphics were beautiful so i stuck with DC then by like .3 of POE the gameplay had come up to meet the graphics so i started getting more into POE

[Tacamo]

While gameplay will always mean more to me than graphics, I believe that a game shouldn't look half assed. Plus it should have graphics that are acceptable for the time they were released. Some games with third party support look better as the years go on. Look at OFP and BF42. Hopefully BF2 will be in that same group. Of course there's some games that have so much going on that graphics can not be focused on as games with less features.

[BrokenArrow]

my answer is about the same as fish's.

games need to put gameplay first, then graphics/sound. though graphics draw me to a game as well, they cant hold me.

[Alpha_Lima]

Yup it's like a beautiful woman, she'll attract you and grab your interest, but if there's nothing behind the good looks you move on before long...

I consider graphics & gameplay equally essential. A game that's missing either one loses my interest. I also agree sound can make a world of difference in the immersion factor, and is generally underestimated in its importance.

[Paladin-X]

I need very good gameplay and some good looks. Starcraft is old as hell with 2d graphics, but still very fun to play.

I probably would've gotten bored of BF2 by now, however, the gameplay changes so far and what's to come in PR I just can't resist. When I look at the different mods, all I hear about is what new model or skin is done, but I just wanna see what gameplay changing items are done. That's not to say they're not going to move away from the BF formula, but I... well I dunno... I guess I'm just one of the few that would rather here about what gameplay changing features are being done as opposed to what new is being added, unless it's a map.

[BrokenArrow]

well im sure you wouldnt lose interest in her THAT fast

[Eglaerinion]

Good graphics grab the attention of most people, good gameplay keeps people interested.

So a combination of those two things will be the best. But in the end gameplay is more important than graphics because good gameplay keeps people playing, good graphics will get old with the next new game.

[[TW]Fox]

needs to sound scary realistic and loud, but it isn't realism without realistic looking modells so thats quite important, but laggy textures would annoy me more than the slight look improvements they give, i think you should treat it like a BF2 mod, keep to the normal limits, but make the textures a bit different, should be more like low-medium, medium-high and real high,, low textures just look shit in BF2. high textures give 128mb graphic cards in a 1gb ram system stuttering, medium is ok but i know that that sort of system could handle an inbetween medium and high, whihc should be optimised but still keep realist properties more so than BF2 or other BF42/V mods

[DAWG]

I would have to say a little bit of both. A fabulous looking game that plays badly will loose interest very quickly, however even the best gameplay possible in a game will become ultimately un interesting if there isn't something to look at. I use a high end machine for BF2 running everything maxed out is no real problem in smaller games and dependant on other peoples connections, but I prefer to lose some amount of graphic quality for maximised killing efficiency.

[{GD}Ghost]

I always prefer game-play over visuals within reason.