PDA

View Full Version : Whats more important to you, Graphics + Gameplay mechanics or Story?



pacmanate
05-08-2013, 10:30 PM
Just a poll for my own selfish needs... Will be interesting.

ArabianFrost
05-08-2013, 10:43 PM
I hate narrow options. Instead of voting I'll tell you my opinion. A good story with sub-par gameplay undermines from the game's narrative and deters the total experience, throwing the great plot ti waste as an overwhelming sense of frustration an regret sets in, sort of like AC3. Enjoyable gameplay mechanics, but a mediocre story to accompany the game give me no reason to progress through the story. Both are dependant, but if I had too choose one, I'd choose gameplay because they are video games, which first and foremost are meant to challenge via gameplay. An enticing story may be a selling point for a game, but entertaining game mechanics are why I'd replay it. There are always books or movies if you want a good story told to you.

silvermercy
05-08-2013, 10:46 PM
All??? :D

Examples:
I couldn't play the original Deus Ex games, after playing Deus EX:HR, despite their awesome story.
I couldn't play Crysis 2 despite the super awesome, super realistic graphics since I wasn't immediately absorbed into the game story.

Shahkulu101
05-08-2013, 11:20 PM
The walking dead was an amazing experience with very limited gameplay but the story was so good you kept on playing. However no-one is going to play a game with a very good story if the game is full of game breaking glitches and what not. There is no single answer, you have narrowed it down far too much.

Rugterwyper32
05-08-2013, 11:22 PM
Gameplay always comes first for me. After all, with no fun gameplay, what's the point of it being a videogame?
Then comes storyline combined with soundtrack. If the game is fun and it has a fitting soundtrack, it can have a simplistic storyline and I'll still find it worth playing, but a good storyline gives it a big boost. Note, there's a difference between a simplistic storyline like in many of the old classic platformers which don't really need a storyline, and a stupid storyline that's absolutely not needed (see: Sonic 06, Metroid Other M)
Then come graphics. Stellar graphics give a game a good boost, but I don't find it necessary. So long as the artstyle works for the game and it doesn't look like it was made with minimal effort, I can appreciate it. I like it when my games don't look boring and drab. Not a big fan of many modern FPS games because of that (though no modern FPS can touch the magic of classic Doom, admittedly).

But yeah, a game that I consider absolutely amazing combines all elements into something great.

ACfan443
05-08-2013, 11:25 PM
I'm finding it difficult to vote because they're both equally important in my eyes.

EDIT: just gonna go for story

SixKeys
05-08-2013, 11:26 PM
Graphics and gameplay mechanics shouldn't be lumped together, they're two completely different things. Gameplay mechanics are closer to story than graphics.

IceHot100
05-08-2013, 11:30 PM
Well the way they are handling the story right now...I would certainly go for story

Shahkulu101
05-08-2013, 11:30 PM
In my experience I found ACB the best AC purely because of gameplay and was not that bothered at the lackluster story elements like the cartoonish villains. But the story wasn't mind-numbingly boring either so that kept me playing. All in all I'd say a game needs a decent, solid story that doesn't have to be spectacular if it's backed up by very good gameplay mechanics.

AssassinHMS
05-08-2013, 11:33 PM
Gameplay always comes first for me. After all, with no fun gameplay, what's the point of it being a videogame?

Exactly! Games aren't movies, if a game has a good story but poor gameplay I may play it once or twice (for a few hours) but that's it, just like I did with Uncharted. On the other hand Assassin's Creed is so much more than a good tale. Story is only 20% of the Assassin's Creed experience and that's why I still play these games (except for AC3).

montagemik
05-08-2013, 11:38 PM
Gameplay mechanics & Story should be the primary focus ............Graphics should be a secondary Bonus & not a substitute for the former.


So i couldn't select either voting option .

Megas_Doux
05-09-2013, 12:47 AM
1 Story
2 Gameplay mechanics
3 Graphics.

Sushiglutton
05-09-2013, 12:50 AM
Given the current state of the franchise I think gameplay is the area that needs the most work.

oblivionalt
05-09-2013, 01:34 AM
I'm sorry, but there is only one honest answer I can give to your question.

No.

Graphics AND gameplay are not more important than story. And story is not more important than graphics AND gameplay.
Gameplay and story are more important than graphics. And gameplay is more important than either graphics OR story.

Gameplay is the primary concern. Framerate and animation quality come next. Story follows those. Graphics are the least important aspect, which is why the original Assassin's Creed is still at least as good as Brotherhood and better than any other release so far.

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 01:36 AM
None are of the highest priority, they all need to be there to make a great game. It needs to look good (or at least not ugly), it needs to play well, and it needs to have a good story. All three are needed to create a great game IMO.

Megas_Doux
05-09-2013, 02:26 AM
which is why the original Assassin's Creed is still at least as good as Brotherhood and better than any other release so far.

Utter blasphemy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spider_Sith9
05-09-2013, 02:39 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen: Gamers! They complain about gameplay yet can't play a game without a story or will not allow it to be GOTY material for that very reason.

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 02:52 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen: Gamers! They complain about gameplay yet can't play a game without a story or will not allow it to be GOTY material for that very reason.
What's wrong with games having great stories? It enhances the experience and gives you an emotional reason to cut through the inevitable army of enemies.

Assassin_M
05-09-2013, 03:08 AM
The most important things about Games are the Interactivity and Gameplay, what matters more for anyone is irrelevant. A game is a game, because it`s interactive and fun. Stories do not make games. Stories are an important part of course, but there are entire genres of video games that survive without ANY story...what anyone prefers is just opinion. from story to gameplay, but what makes a game between the 2 is DEFINITELY gameplay

That said, I believe this poll is hollow. on what base did you tie gameplay and graphics together ?? I wont vote...

1- Gameplay
2- Story
3- my pinky
4- Graphics

SixKeys
05-09-2013, 03:10 AM
What's wrong with games having great stories? It enhances the experience and gives you an emotional reason to cut through the inevitable army of enemies.

Minecraft doesn't have a story. Does that make it a terrible game?

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 03:11 AM
The most important things about Games are the Interactivity and Gameplay, what matters more for anyone is irrelevant. A game is a game, because it`s interactive and fun. Stories do not make games. Stories are an important part of course, but there are entire genres of video games that survive without ANY story...what anyone prefers is just opinion. from story to gameplay, but what makes a game between the 2 is DEFINITELY gameplay

How about Heavy Rain? Or The Walking Dead?

I agree that Gaming = Interactivity. However, that doesn't necessarily mean interactivity in the gameplay, it could mean interactivity in the story. Fact is; it's getting harder and harder to nail down what exactly makes a game.

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 03:13 AM
Minecraft doesn't have a story. Does that make it a terrible game?
No, it certainly doesn't. I've spent plenty of time on Minecraft (I honestly would be scared to count the hours - considering I've played both the PC and 360 versions extensively).

I'm just saying that asking for a great story doesn't make you a non-gamer.

EDIT: My apologies for the double post.

Assassin_M
05-09-2013, 03:19 AM
How about Heavy Rain? Or The Walking Dead?

I agree that Gaming = Interactivity. However, that doesn't necessarily mean interactivity in the gameplay, it could mean interactivity in the story. Fact is; it's getting harder and harder to nail down what exactly makes a game.
All great games, though should not be given "GAME OF THE YEAR" over a game like Red Dead Redemption or even Call of duty. Standards for games are changing and evolving, but the basics remain the same. the industry is moving more and more to the mainstream of cinematics and movies, BUT, gameplay and interactivity are ALWAYS top...

it`s not hard to nail down what makes a game, people just like to think that what they prefer is the most important, but fact...over interactivity, gameplay and story, interactivity and gameplay come first

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 03:23 AM
All great games, though should not be given "GAME OF THE YEAR" over a game like Red Dead Redemption or even Call of duty. Standards for games are changing and evolving, but the basics remain the same. the industry is moving more and more to the mainstream of cinematics and movies, BUT, gameplay and interactivity are ALWAYS top...

it`s not hard to nail down what makes a game, people just like to think that what they prefer is the most important, but fact...over interactivity, gameplay and story, interactivity and gameplay come first
Ignoring Game of the Year, which I don't believe can really even be stated (some genres just can't be compared - how can you compare Gran Turismo to Assassin's Creed?), I'm not sure it's so simple.

Let me say I consider myself fairly unbiased, I enjoy pretty much all genres of games, some with fantastic stories, others with none at all.

Lemme' hit you with this game: Dear Esther. There was a fairly big discussion upon it's release whether it's actually a game, as it pretty much contains no gameplay whatsoever. Regardless, Metacritic and Wikipedia both consider it to be a video game. What do you think Assassin_M?

Spider_Sith9
05-09-2013, 03:33 AM
What's wrong with games having great stories? It enhances the experience and gives you an emotional reason to cut through the inevitable army of enemies.
Because it overthrows gameplay. Now people say they need as a driving point or it's meaningless to play it. It also kills chances for GOTY on games. I wanted Bayonetta to get a GOTY!

Assassin_M
05-09-2013, 03:34 AM
Ignoring Game of the Year, which I don't believe can really even be stated (some genres just can't be compared - how can you compare Gran Turismo to Assassin's Creed?), I'm not sure it's so simple.

Let me say I consider myself fairly unbiased, I enjoy pretty much all genres of games, some with fantastic stories, others with none at all.

Lemme' hit you with this game: Dear Esther. There was a fairly big discussion upon it's release whether it's actually a game, as it pretty much contains no gameplay whatsoever. Regardless, Metacritic and Wikipedia both consider it to be a video game. What do you think Assassin_M?
My friend, i`m not saying Heavy rain, walking dead, dear Esther..etc aren't games, who ever says that is ignoring the evolution and elasticity of the game industry and is quite frankly stupid. did i not mention interactivity ?? I`ll say it again, Interactivity and gameplay are the most important things in a game. lets talk over what makes a game.

a game world, EVERY game has that no matter how small...even tetris has a game world, consequently to this, there is interaction with this universe through Physical elements mostly...every one of the above games has an interactive universe, thus....video games

I wont go into much detail, what i`m saying is the most basic form of a video game is interactivity, it`s most treasured element is gameplay. Stories are important, but like I said, gameplay and interactivity MAKE a game, game....Stories are letters on papers or the screen. What anyone prefers is fine and no one is allowed to label anyone a non-gamer simply because he/she prefers the story, but in the industry and the word GAME, interactivity and gameplay ALWAYS come first...

catkiller97
05-09-2013, 03:35 AM
Gameplay mechanics & Story should be the primary focus ............Graphics should be a secondary Bonus & not a substitute for the former.


So i couldn't select either voting option .

Same, but i voted Gameplay Mechanics option..

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 03:39 AM
I wont go into much detail, what i`m saying is the most basic form of a video game is interactivity, it`s most treasured element is gameplay. Stories are important, but like I said, gameplay and interactivity MAKE a game, game....Stories are letters on papers or the screen. What anyone prefers is fine and no one is allowed to label anyone a non-gamer simply because he/she prefers the story, but in the industry and the word GAME, interactivity and gameplay ALWAYS come first...
Okay, got you sir. Just interested in your view, was all.

I mostly agree with you, except I just consider the interactivity part to make a game. Dear Esther, for instance, is only interactive in that you move forwards and the story is told to you. Therefore, I do not consider it a video game, but rather a visual novel.


Because it overthrows gameplay. Now people say they need as a driving point or it's meaningless to play it. It also kills chances for GOTY on games. I wanted Bayonetta to get a GOTY!
I love most games, but don't hate on those that love the stories. I wouldn't play an AC game without a great story. Other games like Terraria don't need them.

Oh, and yeah, Bayonetta was awesome! A shame Bayonetta 2 is Wii U exclusive, as I don't see myself owning that console any time soon.

BATISTABUS
05-09-2013, 04:16 AM
I don't think it's fair to link graphics and gameplay. They are two completely different things. If I had to rank those, i'd be

1. Gameplay
2. Story
3. Graphics

oblivionalt
05-09-2013, 05:08 AM
Utter blasphemy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only thing any game in the series has added that improved the combat in any meaningful way was Brotherhood with chain kills.

And that came with AC2's destruction of the need to time anything, and swapped AC2's lack of a guard-break attack for an insanely overpowered guard-break that had no counter. ACR decided that instead of fixing and properly balancing the broken mechanic, they'd add a new type of enemy who's immune to it.

Also, the first game still has the smoothest transitions from one animation to the next and the least framerate drops. Go ahead, play them all again, you'll see I'm right. First game is the only one using the pre-AC3 combat mechanics which has any real balance to the combat mechanics, and it was held back by the stupidest AI in the series.

Assassin_M
05-09-2013, 05:11 AM
The only thing any game in the series has added that improved the combat in any meaningful way was Brotherhood with chain kills.

And that came with AC2's destruction of the need to time anything, and swapped AC2's lack of a guard-break attack for an insanely overpowered guard-break that had no counter. ACR decided that instead of fixing and properly balancing the broken mechanic, they'd add a new type of enemy who's immune to it.

Also, the first game still has the smoothest transitions from one animation to the next and the least framerate drops. Go ahead, play them all again, you'll see I'm right. First game is the only one using the pre-AC3 combat mechanics which has any real balance to the combat mechanics, and it was held back by the stupidest AI in the series.
I don't know about him, but for me, the blasphemous act is saying AC I is as good ACB... :|

AC I as good as ?? as good as ?? and what ?? ACB ??

BLASPHEMY

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 05:24 AM
I don't know about him, but for me, the blasphemous act is saying AC I is as good ACB... :|

AC I as good as ?? as good as ?? and what ?? ACB ??

BLASPHEMY
While I wouldn't say it's blasphemous, AC1 is the only game in the series that bores me in places. Every time I replay an AC game, I 100% it, except for AC1. Ignoring the flags, saving 160 civilians (well, 3 civilians over and over again) and then doing the same 6 side quests 9 times over just kills me.

The assassination missions are fantastic, however, as well as the atmosphere. I'm also one of those people who hates Altair having an American accent, though I liked his story.

ACB would be my favourite as I just LOVE Rome. The best city in the series for me.

oblivionalt
05-09-2013, 05:39 AM
Original game had side missions which felt more monotonous than in ACB.

It also had:

-better combat mechanics
-better development of side characters
-tighter core story progression
-more responsive controls
-a sense of weight behind the character
-smoother animations
-more consistent framerate
-less - and less ridiculous - glitches
-no sense that "Altair didn't kill people, he just robbed them, beat them into unconsciousness then dropped them down a well. Because if they didn't CHOOSE to wake up, they drowned themselves"
-a requirement to actually have something resembling a sense of timing if you want to get the cool kill animations
-no enemies who cheat by having a better sprint speed than your super-highly-trained Assassin even though they're wearing what looks like heavier armour than you.

On a purely technical level, the original game works better, but it's more simplistic. There are repetitive tasks, but they're part of the way the story is told and they're in the game to make the world feel more complete, It would have been good to have a greater variety and less of the same task repeated over and over again, but there were some great ideas in there which it was stupid to throw away completely.

Brotherhood doesn't feel like the new things it does are enough to make up for the fact that it was the third entry in the series. It's not bad, it's just fallen well short of how good it should have been with two previous games to build from. Better than AC2, not better than the original.

jamgamerforever
05-09-2013, 06:02 AM
oblivionalt said...

Original game had side missions which felt more monotonous than in ACB.

It also had:

-better combat mechanics
Disagree. In AC1, you can just stand still and counter pretty much everybody around you. Play the Battle of Arsuf, and you hardly take damage. In ACB, you can mix up offense and defence easily, use poison or a crossbow or gun. There's just a lot more to use, and thus the combat doesn't become dull.

-better development of side characters
Again, disagree. Malik and Al Mualim were done well. Other than that, who? In ACB, you have La Volpe, Mario, Claudia, Machiavelli, Caterina etc.

-tighter core story progression
Give this to the original, if only because I skip it's side quests, making the game only main story progression.

-more responsive controls
No.

-a sense of weight behind the character
Altair and ACB Ezio both carry weight IMO. Ezio in ACB is fairly badass, as he calls the shots and hurtles towards his objectives, unlike in AC2 when he was finding his way a bit more.

-smoother animations
Animations are a little subjective here, I think. ACB had much more stylised moves than the first two. In terms of quality, I'd say they were equal.

-more consistent framerate
Not on PS3, which was inferior to the 360 version in quite a significant manner. The other games were at least consistent through platforms.

-less - and less ridiculous - glitches
I have only ever experienced one glitch in the AC series, and that was in AC2 - hundreds of guards continually spawned on a rooftop in Venice and they kept pushing each other off into the water. Hilarious.

-no sense that "Altair didn't kill people, he just robbed them, beat them into unconsciousness then dropped them down a well. Because if they didn't CHOOSE to wake up, they drowned themselves"
-a requirement to actually have something resembling a sense of timing if you want to get the cool kill animations
AC1's timing was easy, then again the entire series is.

-no enemies who cheat by having a better sprint speed than your super-highly-trained Assassin even though they're wearing what looks like heavier armour than you.
I can let this go in story terms for some nice enemy variety. Sometimes fun has to trump accuracy.

On a purely technical level, the original game works better, but it's more simplistic. There are repetitive tasks, but they're part of the way the story is told and they're in the game to make the world feel more complete, It would have been good to have a greater variety and less of the same task repeated over and over again, but there were some great ideas in there which it was stupid to throw away completely.
The lack of variety is a BAD thing. Pacing is super important to video games. In terms of great ideas, the assassination missions were great, and the more open-ended nature of them would make a return. Other than that, there is nothing I want from AC1 to return.

Brotherhood doesn't feel like the new things it does are enough to make up for the fact that it was the third entry in the series. It's not bad, it's just fallen well short of how good it should have been with two previous games to build from. Better than AC2, not better than the original.
Semi-agreed. Brotherhood is AC2 Part 2. It is basically the second part of the story of Ezio. Should it have been an expansion pack? Maybe. It's the same length as AC2, however. It's not the jump AC1 - AC2 was, it just refined AC2 a little bit.

Legendz54
05-09-2013, 06:07 AM
The answer is story

Please fix it AC4!

BATISTABUS
05-09-2013, 07:29 AM
The story in AC3 was fantastic...the problem was the way missions were structured.

HisSpiritLives
05-09-2013, 08:05 AM
Well.. you need both for making great game,that is why AC is my fav franchise ,cuz it combines those two ,but if i had to chose i would prefer story more,because thats why AC is so special and unique...:)

UrDeviant1
05-09-2013, 10:32 AM
AC's story is a lost cause. 6 years accumulated into the crap we saw in AC3. They have a rich lore that they never tap in to. I'm more interested to see how they better the gameplay mechanics. I have more faith they'll get that right as opposed to that convoluted ****storm they call a story.

HisSpiritLives
05-09-2013, 11:18 AM
AC's story is a lost cause. 6 years accumulated into the crap we saw in AC3. They have a rich lore that they never tap in to. I'm more interested to see how they better the gameplay mechanics. I have more faith they'll get that right as opposed to that convoluted ****storm they call a story.

I liked story in AC3 ,it wasn't as good as AC triology but it has its own charms....

Lignjoslav
05-09-2013, 11:34 AM
Hmm, if I were making a poll like this, I wouldn't lump graphics and mechanics into a single item. As it is, the poll pretty much translates to: "Does a good story trump everything else in a game?", and the answer is "maybe, sometimes, but not always".

In a game, I need to enjoy at least two out of those three (graphics, gameplay and story). Story without graphics and mechanics is a novel and not a game, just like graphics without a story and gameplay is a tech demo (and mechanics without graphics and story is Tetris :D).

misterB2001
05-09-2013, 11:55 AM
Ultimately game play and story are the most important for me. AC3's story was beautiful, but the gameplay really dragged it down. I loved AC2's story and gameplay which is why I rate it as my favourite.

Spider_Sith9
05-09-2013, 01:08 PM
Okay, got you sir. Just interested in your view, was all.

I mostly agree with you, except I just consider the interactivity part to make a game. Dear Esther, for instance, is only interactive in that you move forwards and the story is told to you. Therefore, I do not consider it a video game, but rather a visual novel.


I love most games, but don't hate on those that love the stories. I wouldn't play an AC game without a great story. Other games like Terraria don't need them.

Oh, and yeah, Bayonetta was awesome! A shame Bayonetta 2 is Wii U exclusive, as I don't see myself owning that console any time soon.

I get what you and Hayth_M are saying. I do think Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead deserves it. I have no problem with stories. My issue is how much it's taken over the minds of gamers. And yes, Bayonetta was awesome. However, it's story was convoluted so it was rarely seen as GOTY material that year. Adventure Games are just as much as Games as anyone else. It's just the remaining drip of gameplay emphasis left in the minds of gamers calling it "Interactive Movies" which, back then, wouldn't be called that. Hell I already have an issue with how gamers behave these days with "Rip-offs".

If you play a game with some sort of violence or non-menial task. They'll want a story or they'll get bored with it. Almost all gamers are like this.

P.S I wanna play a Slice of Life video game. A more realistic one. Not like Harvest Moon. Deadly Premonition came close to doing it well.

ProletariatPleb
05-09-2013, 01:11 PM
Uhm..it's a GAME, so GAMEPLAY.

But personally I want balanced gameplay and story, let the lore do the work of adding depth.

lothario-da-be
05-09-2013, 01:20 PM
For ac story and gameplay should actualy be excellent and graphics descent. But sadly enough gameplay is only descent in ac.

pacmanate
05-09-2013, 01:46 PM
Very Interesting discussion. Okay lets pretend graphics isn't an option and its Gameplay Mechanics Vs Story. I see people saying that they want both, sure, everyone does, however the poll is supposed to be hard and its making you choose. Personally I prefer a good story over amazing gameplay mechanics.

lothario-da-be
05-09-2013, 02:00 PM
Very Interesting discussion. Okay lets pretend graphics isn't an option and its Gameplay Mechanics Vs Story. I see people saying that they want both, sure, everyone does, however the poll is supposed to be hard and its making you choose. Personally I prefer a good story over amazing gameplay mechanics.
Well aren't movies for good stories? Sure i want good stories in my games, but its still a game. So i want to have fun while playing.

ProletariatPleb
05-09-2013, 02:00 PM
Very Interesting discussion. Okay lets pretend graphics isn't an option and its Gameplay Mechanics Vs Story. I see people saying that they want both, sure, everyone does, however the poll is supposed to be hard and its making you choose. Personally I prefer a good story over amazing gameplay mechanics.
That's why we have videos and movies and documentaries, this is exactly why I am gradually losing interest in cutscene creed.

lothario-da-be
05-09-2013, 02:02 PM
That's why we have videos and movies and documentaries, this is exactly why I am gradually losing interest in cutscene creed.
I prefer to call it warrior's cutscene.

pacmanate
05-09-2013, 02:18 PM
Well aren't movies for good stories? Sure i want good stories in my games, but its still a game. So i want to have fun while playing.

But if the story in a game sucks, what would make you want to keep playing it?

Spider_Sith9
05-09-2013, 03:09 PM
But if the story in a game sucks, what would make you want to keep playing it?

Good gameplay/content?

ProletariatPleb
05-09-2013, 03:12 PM
But if the story in a game sucks, what would make you want to keep playing it?
Who said it needs to have bad story? A decent story with great gameplay is fine. The point was they shouldn't just focus on story(AC - good story, mediocre 'gameplay.' if you can even call it that)

Rugterwyper32
05-09-2013, 03:18 PM
That's why we have videos and movies and documentaries, this is exactly why I am gradually losing interest in cutscene creed.

Gotta admit one thing, though, at least it hasn't gone MGS4 on us yet. It's getting there, but I hope that they see it and backpedal to avoid that.

pacmanate
05-09-2013, 03:30 PM
Gotta admit one thing, though, at least it hasn't gone MGS4 on us yet. It's getting there, but I hope that they see it and backpedal to avoid that.

Yeah but MGS suits those cutscenes, I love them because the story needs them and they look fantastic. AC cutscene animations are so mediocre and involved hardly any movement compared to MGS cutscenes.

AherasSTRG
05-09-2013, 04:11 PM
If I prefered the story over the graphics and the gameplay, I would go read a book and let my imagination do the rest. Nope, Gameplay mechanics far more important than story for me.