The most important element of gaming

[OmniCloud]

Was good fellas...for those who've read a couple of my earlier topics it's probably clear that I like to rant instead of speculate on updates and bits of "new" information. (don't get me wrong that's not a bad thing! Keep the UPDATES coming guys!) Anyway, while playing Devil May Cry 3 the other day, I felt the need to express this issue about storylines in games. Now when I first played DMC, I finished in like 2 weeks, not because of time, but because of difficulty. It was a fresh new gameplay that challenged your coordination and reaction skills. While playing DMC 3 however, I found myself longing for something more. So I popped in GoW even though I knew everything that was going to happen from beginning to end. Immediately I felt more satisfied with GoW! Not to discredit DMC3, it improved on the original in almost everyway, but the story, while semi-interesting is not told as well or polished as other games in the same genre. I even found myself going back to old classics like FF7 and Chrono Cross and playing untill the wee hours of the night all over again! So what is the most important factor to games. Gameplay? Story? Sound? Graphics? Or a combination of all of the above? Can one game really be exceptional in every category. There are a few who has risen to the challenge and claimed the throne, (Zelda any1?) but far too many games are becoming generic and boring only after a few hours into them. For example, Genji is a good game, but I'll probably never play it over again because there's nothing that was so cool that I want to see twice. I don't think developers realize just how important a story is. Tell me, what's the main reason MGS is better than Splinter Cell? STORY!!! Sam uses more gadgets, actually relies on stealth espionage and has all sorts of lighting and soft touches in the games like curtains and drapes. Yet, I still play the original MGS to this day! And many people who played and beat MGS3 bought it again just because it had online play and a new camera angle. Story people. No matter what you're doing, or how it looks, it's all a waste if it's not for a good reason. Bashing demons and ripping heads off feels so much better when you know Kratos is tormented by his own past and is serving the Gods for his personal reasons instead of just being a mindless killing machine. FFVll was just an average RPG gameplay wise, but it's story is remembered almost 10 years later and Cloud and Sephiroth are forever etched in videogame history. If more developers could focus on this part, and worry about how the gameplay and graphics should be incorporated into a particular story, I think we'd have a much better selection of games. There's no reason that till this day, there' isn't a quality FPS out there with an amazing story besides Half-Life.(which is a PC game really) It's one of the main reasons I don't by FPS's. Instead, I wait patiently for the next great RPG to come out or action game that focuses on story. All types of gameplay can be introduced if a developer just thinks of a good reason a player should do it. So, you've all heard what's most important to me for games, what's most important to you?

[The_One]

Duh, the "obvious" answer is to try to incorporate all the elements. However, a HUGE one in my books is story. No story = I don't wanna play that piece of junk.

One reason why SotC was a disappointment in my eyes :(.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Well you must need my glasses. :P

It's all about gameplay. Once the razzle dazzle of graphics wears off it's all about whether or not the game is fun and responsive. Power is nothing without control.

Story...eh. Stories aren't even typically good. If you think about it, most games don't really have an amazing story, the ones that do, while there, are just the smaller portion of the pie. Most games have a weak story, or enough to get you through it, and say, now go win. Story can or can't be there (imo), doesn't determine if the game is fun or not. It can be motivation, but if the game is fun to play, that should be motivation enough. A game that's fun is a successful game.

I didn't see the 'trying to incorporate all these elements' before I reflexively voted 'gameplay'. Of course that's the best option. However, a lot like conceptual art, it can look good on paper but if your execution is off, then it doesn't make a difference. Games are a very honest form of entertainment. It's either a good or bad game, there's no cheating or deception. So in light of that, I stick with the 'gameplay' vote, because trying to make a good game doesn't fly. They have to just do it.

addendum: for instance, in devil may cry 3, not special edition, the first one that came out, it was pretty tough. I went through past levels just to get the power ups and build up my dexterity and skill enough to beat certain bosses. The story is okay, it's interesting and better told than the first, but that doesn't get me through leveling up a character because the boss is pretty tough. But thank goodness the game is actually fun to just play the levels, even repeatedly. It's so fun to play that I don't mind the task of 'getting stronger'. God of war has everything going for it. But to hell with kratos' burning hatred for ares and lust for revenge if the controls and gameplay and levels weren't at least decent.

[DofD]

I'll have to agree that gameplay is most important. A game could have a great story, awesome graphics and sound, but if it's game play is hard/confusing/steep learning curve/bad then the overall game just sucks. Some of my favourite games are still on my Amiga, and Apple ][+, just because they have great game play and thus are fun to play.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Example: puzzle games.
tetris- and to be more current, lumines- don't have stories. You just start playing and OMGZORS I can't put it down it's so fun!
Fun is the key word. Your game's first priority is to make fun. And then, if you can manage it, let it make sense. I believe this is the fundamental idea of any game.

[OmniCloud]

Duh, the "obvious" answer is to try to incorporate all the elements. However, a HUGE one in my books is story. No story = I don't wanna play that piece of junk.

Yeah, but when u do that, which element actually stands out?

I agree with u on one thing LaLiLuLeLo2003, a game is either good or bad, no in the middle...lol But with our advanced technology today, don't you think that fun should be defined through more sophisticated games? Back in the 80's Pac-man was the greatest game ever created! There was no need for a story or for the gameplay to even make sense. Today, with more and more adults and mature individuals playing games, I think fun should be expressed accordingly.

[frosty]

I like games with an involving story as well though, like the first time I played RE I couldn't stop because I wanted to find out what happened next, kind of like reading a good book. Although, it would be nice to see some more effort put into them. I'd like to see stories on calibur with the greatest film classics.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Don't get me wrong, I love stories too. My favorite game is freakin' metal gear solid series. But if the game wasn't fun, it wouldn't be up there at all.

[jaxmkii]

You forgot the most critical part...

Physics.

[OmniCloud]

Don't get me wrong, I love stories too. My favorite game is freakin' metal gear solid series. But if the game wasn't fun, it wouldn't be up there at all.

So which approach is better? Making a game fun, and then seeing if you can somehow make sense of it and make it look appealing. Or coming up with a story and mapping the gameplay and graphics around the original concepts of the story?

[The_One]

It's all about gameplay. Once the razzle dazzle of graphics wears off it's all about whether or not the game is fun and responsive. Power is nothing without control. Couldn't disagree more. *SPOILER ALERT* Pwning and Owning more than a dozen larger-than-life monsters to find that you turned into them, without any explanation, is quite retarded, no matter how good the gameplay--of course, I'm refering to SotC in this case. *END OF SPOILERS*

Also, I consider very highly music, not sound per se, but the background music. It can really make or break the atmosphere of the game, and that's extremely important too; the atmosphere. That simple, yet grand, reverence you have of a vast and gorgeous terrain in SotC, the adrenaline and thrill of a boss battle in MGS3, and the horror of seeing a monstrous being that can chomp your head in half in RE4. That, my friends, are examples of good atmosphere in games.

[OmniCloud]

Couldn't disagree more. Pwning and Owning more than a dozen larger-than-life monsters to find that you turned into them, without any explanation, is quite retarded, no matter how good the gameplay--of course, I'm refering to SotC in this case.I think you don't like the way SotC story is told rather than the lack of story...He turned into the monster because...well, u just have to figure that one out, but the story is there, you just have to read between the lines to find it.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Well, because of the nature of the gaming market, it's expected of the developers to make mind blowingly amazing looking games if the technology is there, otherwise you're looked down on. If you're able to make great graphics, then you have to make great graphics. It's human nature, the first threshold of judgement is our eyes. The way most games now work is, you have to build all these things up simultaneously, if you didn't, games would take forever to come out.

To answer your question better I'd have to go with the latter. Because even personally speaking I know I design characters and then worlds around those characters first for myself. I just initially know that, this is gonna be a story about this character doing x, y and z. The ideas start on paper. Everything starts in drawing and writing stages before it gets to the computer and the game design itself, ya know? However if it's not fun, all that goes to waste. The fun factor is the foundation of it. Like a house, every part is necessary but without that solid ground it just falls apart. Trite but true.

Uh, jaxmkii, I have no idea what you mean. Games have been around, and been fun, long before 'physics applications' became a critical factor'. Games have to move in that direction of realistic physics now because of uncanney valley. And really, that kind of thing falls under the graphics category, as it deals with the natural motion and animation of objects.

Nah, the one, you're missing the point entirely. The power of SoTC's story (and there is one) isn't nonexistant, it gives you a premise, and let's you fill in blanks with your...wait for it...your imaginaaation0_0, and deductive reasoning, zomg, which is a more powerful story telling device than just giving everything away for the sake of idiot-proofing it. It's nice for a game to actually put faith in the gamer that he's above at least a high school reading level. There's the setup, a hint that something is wrong in the middle, and the ending was pretty good imo. Sad but good. Not calling you an idiot by the way. At least not in this virtual space.

But how did it feel to scale those monsters, slay them, almost get stomped on, and in some cases, do get stomped on, and take them down with nothing but your wits, a sword and arrows? How did it feel while playing the game? what was the experience of playing the game like? You sort of trivialize that part of the game, which is actually the entire focus of the game. You're told why he's slaying them, to save his dead girlfriend (I think that's a bit much, I'd just find a new girl, I mean how good was she?) I won't give away anymore cuz you've played the game, and I'm sure some people haven't (the very thought of which haunts me everynight, mind you).
I played the game from start to finish, and over and over a few times, because it is fun. I was compelled to see how the next monster could possibly top the previous one. The *experience* is the key element there. That game also happened to have great graphics and sound/music.

edit again!

Shigeru Miyamoto, aka God of Nintendo said it best, "I don't think of making games, I think of making a box, and inside that box are tools for the player to entertain themselves."

[jaxmkii]

^^^ Since the first megaman when he steped off of stone and onto ice, and a change in friction coefficants where noted there have been physics in games.

[LiquidEagle]

The_One!!! GUYS! CAN I GET A SPOILER ALERT & TAG UP IN HERE!?!?

I think I may very well have had SotC's story ruined if things are what I think they are :(

[OmniCloud]

But how did it feel to scale those monsters, slay them, almost get stomped on, and in some cases, do get stomped on, and take them down with nothing but your wits, a sword and arrows? How did it feel while playing the game? what was the experience of playing the game like? You sort of trivialize that part of the game, which is actually the entire focus of the game.
I played the game from start to finish, and over and over, because it is fun. I was compelled to see how the next monster could possibly top the previous one. The *experience* is the key element there.ahhh yes...u bring back fine memories my friend, I think I'm gonna play it tonite on hard mode...

[venomv]

I put all of them, but if I had to pick just one it would be story, possably music. Graphics wear off fast, but they are important in the sale of games, gameplay is defently important, but I like my games long, and the thing about long games is eventually the gameplay become repetitive and boring, and that is why I think story is the most important because a good story will keep you wanting more and never gets boring, and music I think is an intrigual part in astmisphere, which is very important for stories.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Ah yes, but a game that has a fun factor that can stand the test of time is truly great.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

The_One!!! GUYS! CAN I GET A SPOILER ALERT & TAG UP IN HERE!?!?

I think I may very well have had SotC's story ruined if things are what I think they are :(

You should go buy, steal, rent, find a copy of that game, and beat it start to finish. The fact that you haven't makes me twitchy.

Yes jaxmkii, but it wasn't the deciding factor on whether or not it was a good game. The fact that they're on like, megaman x Nth power now and everyone's tired of it, is proof of that. And I'm sure it wasn't because they scaled back the variable friction in the floors, thus killing the overall immersiveness of the megaman experience :-/

Physics in games, you know, to whatever degree they've been there, aren't the key element of a game...it's getting there as games start to look more like real things, and less like symbols of things (i.e. a sprite of Ryu is a symbol of a person, and a polygon model of a solid snake in mgs4 is more like a real person), the more realistically they have to react to their environment. Physics are all relative to the game you're talking about. now, I assumed you were just saying 'real life physics', so there was a misunderstanding there. Cuz if fighting games had realistic physics, well, say goodbye to floaters, and, well, fun fighting games. But I still believe that goes under 'graphics' (collision detection, destructability, speed, inertia, ad nauseum, all relate to how the game looks in motion, no?

[venomv]

Ah yes, but a game that has a fun factor that can stand the test of time is truly great.

But a game of decent size that has that simply in gameplay does not exsist.

[LiquidEagle]

I bought it back in December, I just haven't finished it! I lost a memory card in January, one that I thought had my SotC data on it so I got real sad since I had already beaten the first 10, and I didn't want to start over again. I'll come back to it real soon, but I can't beat that snake that slithers through the sand -- can somebody give me some tips?

The game is beautiful but I have severe issues with finishing games that aren't MGS or ZoE :-p

[OmniCloud]

Zelda, MGS, FFVll, GoldenEYE, Chrono Cross...I think they stand up pretty well...

[Infernal]

I think it depends on the genre of the game.
For instance a racing or a sports game doesn't need a story at all, all they need is good gameplay and some shiny looking and sounding effects. While an RPG is all about the storyline. Shooters can swing both ways, but the best shooters tend to involve a good storyline, such as Halo and RE. The most important aspect in my opinion is "replayability". A game like Madden is worthless after a year for instance while FFVII ive played through dozens of times and still find it an incredible game. If a game cant last more than one go around, its not worth 50 dollars IMO.

[SuperLuigiBros]

Gameplay is the most important. I would even say that " Trying to incorparate all of these elements?" isn't important, its just a nice bonus if done correctly. The best example would be Resident Evil 4. It excels in everything, but above all, its fun. I would say the story is more important in games like RE1 or something where its very tension-based and wanting to know what happens next is why its fun.

My (and many other's) favorite game of all time is Super Smash Bros. Melee. I think the first one had a bit of a story (in the intro, the hand took the toys (characters) out of the toy box. Maybe that was the story. But in the second one, they didn't even bother and yet its even better than the first.

Gameplay, in my view, is the only important thing whereas the other serve as something that can potentially highten the experience. (I would say that after gameplay, a good story is more important than good graphics.)

[venomv]

Zelda, MGS, FFVll, GoldenEYE, Chrono Cross...I think they stand up pretty well...

All the games mentioned are great because of story, with the possable exception of Goldeneye, which I thought was completely horrid.

And Ill give you guys that certain genres are good with no story, but racing, sports, and fighting games only last a while, at least for me, with their multyplayer, which is I would consider a differnt catigory then gameplay, because it depends on who you play with along with having to be set up well.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

But a game of decent size that has that simply in gameplay does not exsist.
I've enjoyed the fighting in final fantasies from start to finish, and then some.:shrug: But I don't judge a game on how long it is. Games are getting shorter, that's just the truth. Do you judge a meal on how long it takes you to eat it?

Venom, those games are good games, with a good story. It is a game, that you play, so it should be fun.. Game. Play. Fun. That's what's most important. All those games are fun games, and the fact that golden eye's storytelling is so bad but the game is so legendary is proof of that.:pepper:

[OmniCloud]

I'll come back to it real soon, but I can't beat that snake that slithers through the sand -- can somebody give me some tips?That would just be cheating now wouldn't it?...

I agree with both Infernal and theCube-128, Gameplay is vital, I just think that story should come up first and then gameplay should revolve around that story-sort of like what LaLiLuLeLo2003 was saying about everything starting on paper. I just think that the story gets lost in a lot of games that probably had good ones from the beginning. And like it was stated earlier, no one goes back and plays madden 97, but a lot of people still go back and play FFVll over and over again...

[LiquidEagle]

It definitely comes in a mix of them all IMO. All of the greats like MGS and Zelda or Final Fantasy are known for being on the cutting-edge of everything. Final Fantasy's soundtrack is as big of a deal as the amazing graphics that accompany each new entry, and likewise people are dying to know the story and play through it with an exciting new gameplay addition & minigame. MGS has always been a poster-boy for the power of a console's hardware, plus the sound is something they pride themselves on with great voice actors and music composed by big-man Harry Gregson-Williams. The gameplay is a given to be awesome since it's practically what Kojima lives for, and the story excites players because it's guaranteed to be fresh and intriguing.

Obviously there's no set formula to making a classic game, so great graphics aren't exactly a prerequisite to a great game. Rez has little to no story but it goes down in my book as one of the most amazing games ever made. You could therefore argue that different genres have different requirements for a great game -- puzzle games obviously require no story and nobody's expecting one.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Suikoden 3 had a great story. I never beat it though, because the fighting system is pretty uh...garbage. :( I just turned it off one day near the end of the game, and its been sitting in my closet since.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Well then it needs to be broken down. The question is, what's the most important element of just....gaming.

[LiquidEagle]

Well when pressed when a choice, I still gotta say it's a tie between story & gameplay. One can very much carry the other if one is slacking. I'm willing to wade through a pretty boring story if it's fun as hell to play, and likewise I can manage through some unexciting gameplay if I really like the story. Good graphics & sound are nice bonuses but not a requirement since I've played some real fun games with terrible voice acting and pretty bland graphics (Way of the Samurai 2 comes to mind), but I loved the story and the gameplay was fun so it's all good. Future Tactics, a budget game for PS2, has merely okay graphics (actually really liked the land deformations in it) and some funky voice acting, plus the story's kinda "meh," but the game is really fun to play IMO so I have no regrets about buying it and I feel I got a great value for my money. Same with Seek & Destroy, another budget PS2 title.

[Homeru]

lol, i thought everyone would know that its gameplay that is most important, thats what games are, entertainment. If the game plays like crap then no one will care if it has great graphics, story, physics, and so on.

[LiquidEagle]

Aside from its fun puzzles and tense gameplay scenarios, Silent Hill isn't exactly what I'd call fun to play. My friends & I love it for the story and scary jacked up stuff you see in the game, and the atmosphere. Games aren't just entertainment, just like movies aren't just moving pictures. When I look back fondly on Ocarina of Time I remember the feeling and vibe of the game every bit as much as the entertainment value of beating a boss.

[venomv]

lol, i thought everyone would know that its gameplay that is most important, thats what games are, entertainment. If the game plays like crap then no one will care if it has great graphics, story, physics, and so on.

I have played plenty of games that had crappy game play that I loved because of the story.



Venom, those games are good games, with a good story. It is a game, that you play, so it should be fun.. Game. Play. Fun. That's what's most important. All those games are fun games, and the fact that golden eye's storytelling is so bad but the game is so legendary is proof of that.

Well like I said I thought golden eye was crap, but it is legendary because of multiplayer, something I mentioned earlier. And I hate most games with good gameplay but a crap story, but like some games with crap gameplay and a good story, so obviously that doesn't work for everyone.

Not to mention with the exception of Goldeneye no one has mentioned a game in a positive light in this thread that doesn't have a good story, just becuase you may not realize it doesn't mean it isn't true. Would you like MGS if the characters acted like teletubbies, I doubt it, cause it would suck and not make sense.

[senas8]

If games become movie like.... and we hear this....You need all elements...in my personal view. As for a racing game...I would rather have a story mode...Some info about the racer ..something on the side that tells us what motivates the racer. I would like that to be incorporated.

[Lekko]

SotC had an awesome story, ad for those of you that loved it, play Ico and you will know more of the whole story. Those two are my favorites of this current generation for adventure/puzzlers. PLAY ICO

The way I see things: Graphics are the flashy hook to get you to pick the game up and play it, NOT the reason you sit at it for hours. Gameplay makes it fun and intriguing to keep going, and so you aren't frustrated while playing. The story is your motivation to finish the game.

Not all games need all those elements though. Any one in spades can carry a title, but only great games weave all aspects together. Those great games are the ones that you remember...

[LiquidEagle]

Well I don't think Goldeneye had a bad story :-p. The movie's plot was actually pretty good, and I think it translated really well to the game's single player personally. I know I had plenty of fun in it, at least.

Anyways, I see what you're saying venom -- I'm trying real hard to think of a game that was uber-fun to play but lacking in the story department and it still came out a winner... Halo 2 is probably the best I can think of off the top of my head, since the shootouts were kind of fun (definitely not as good as the first!), but the story was complete and utter crap. I don't regard Halo 2 as a classic though so that might not be a good example. Other than that, uh... that's all I got. I might come back if I think of something else :-p

I'll certainly never be one to downplay the importance of a good story though ;)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Me neither. My only point is without good gameplay the rest falls apart.
Story, Graphics, Sound are the pieces. Gameplay is the Glue.

[Lucent Beam]

A game can have awful sound, but it can still be good because it's fun; awful graphics but still be good if it's fun; awful story but still be good if it's fun.. but if it has awful gameplay, no amount of awesome graphics, story, or sound can make up for it.
Gameplay is definitely the glue.

[LiquidEagle]

I think you repeated the sound part, Lucent -- I'm a little confused by that first sentence :-p

I think that's a pretty good analogy though, LaLiLuLeLo -- gameplay being the glue. I guess I can accept that, but I still have a hard time placing it at the very top of the ingredients for a good game. I still personally hold story too dear to give it the position of second fiddle in my eyes.

Anyways, a good example of what you guys are talking about is The Bouncer. Amazing graphics, pretty good story (that's debatable obviously, but I definitely was intrigued), and Square-quality sound (that's a good thing), but the gameplay fell short because it was repetitive, very short, and environment interaction was taken out for one reason or another. No glue to keep the experience together ;)

[sudzy]

The One, Thank you for ruining SOTC for me. I really appreciate that. I just bought it yesterday.
That reeeeaaallly ticks me off.

[VG Aficionado]

Gameplay is the most important. I would even say that " Trying to incorparate all of these elements?" isn't important, its just a nice bonus if done correctly. The best example would be Resident Evil 4. It excels in everything, but above all, its fun. I would say the story is more important in games like RE1 or something where its very tension-based and wanting to know what happens next is why its fun.How can "all elements" be an extra? A game that achieves that is The Ideal Game. I could agree that Gameboy Tetris gameplay is fun, but have you ever played it without the catchy music? It's not that fun.

I don't know what's your concept of overall excellence and most specifically a good storyline, but RE4's is incredibly substandard. Having played previous RE games, I have to say it's the worst, most plagued of plot holes, ludicrous storyline in a canonical RE game ever, with no room for suspension of disbelief. Not to mention that the "neutral" Spanish killed the excellence. Gameplay was good though, but not too original anyway.

While I'd agree gameplay is the most important part of videogaming, I am unable to feel totally satisfied if everything else doesn't live up to it. A game that excels at gameplay but fails at everything else would just get a 5 out of 10 from me.


The_One, one thing is spoiling a storyline in a dedicated thread and a different thing is spoiling something out of the blue. You've got to take other members gaming experience into consideration.

[kaphwan]

I think that the fact that we need to be weary of "spoiling" the ending of a game speaks volumes of how important the storyline of a game is.

And that's been around since the dawn of gaming (as far back as I can remember anyway). Sure, it is fun to flog the shit out of whoever Ryu or Kim have a bone to pick with but the ending cutscenes make it all so much better.

Edit Having Seen Poll: For Sony fans we sure aren't caring that much about Graphics, eh?

PlayStation2 was about looking realistic... but PlayStation3 will be about behaving realistically.

Edit2: I just remembered how awesome Nobuo Uematsu is. I would want to change my vote, but Music isn't in there. And in most games the music is rubbish anyway.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Edit Having Seen Poll: For Sony fans we sure aren't caring that much about Graphics, eh?

PlayStation2 was about looking realistic... but PlayStation3 will be about behaving realistically.



Like I said earlier, we're visual beings (even though no one wants to be labeled a graphics whore). The first threshold of judgement is what we see. a game can be like a love interest. You see 'em, and they're looking all hot and attractive on the surface. Then you get closer to them and really experience what they're like, and it's a big ol' mess (I know a LOT of girls like this). Or you can meet someone who's like, a 6 or 7 in terms of looks but is the best thing ever as a person, thus, making them beautiful. If you can get the total package, then awesome! But the graphics of a game can mean a lot in terms of putting you in that world. The problem is all this stuff can be important when done well. So we could debate this until kingdom come.

[Hrama]

Hmmm. Story is certainly important, music is without a doubt my favorite. I will play shitty games just for the music. But ultimately, gameplay is the most important thing. Now obviously it all depends on how complex/simple a game is and what genre it is in. Let me tell you this, I have some pretty great games in their own right on my PS2 (Kingdome Hearts 2, GoW, Dragon Quest VIII. Looking forward to FF12). Now of course most of these games are RPG's and are heavy on the story, but still... I have picked every one of them up probably for about five hours and then threw it on the shelf to play it another time. On the other hand, I play relatively simple (In comparison to the games above) constantly. I am a real lover of retro gaming and honestly... how many of the games on the NES, SNES, Genesis, Atari, or any of those other old systems (Besides RPG's) had a story, or at least one worth mentioning? Hardly any. Yes, they may have a basic hook... rescue the princess from a big turtle thingy (Mario) beat up a guy that is turning animals into robots and taking over the world (Sonic) Beat up everyone else for your own reasons, (Street Fighter II) And basically every Shmup out there, blow the fuck out of everything that is not you. And yet, there are many many great games in all of these genres. But we have to remember, these were relatively simple games that relied purely on skill, trial and error and other such mechanics. Now, as games become more realistic and chock full of realistic characters, story has become more important in every genre. Gameplay has become complex and people need to know what the hell they are doing and why. As gameplay becomes more complex, and characters become more believable, story has to be introduced. Now, having said all of that, I am not terribly big on story. Like all of the games I mentioned above on the PS2.... great games and yet I find myself sitting on my computer with an emulator and playing the original SSB for hours almost every day. Does it need a story? Hell no and as far as fighters go (For the time) the gameplay and characters are not complex at all, but I find myself playing it constantly (Only because I do not have a gamecube and thus no Melee) I play shitty old Shmups on my computer, puzzle games and basically anything that will keep my interest. Hardly any of these games have story... but the gameplay is what really shines through. Story isn't needed for something fun and simple. Nobody would play tetris, if they had to sit through cutscenes, intense dialogue between the... blocks(?) or if they had to remember to speak to every person in a town. Its all about the gameplay... pick it up and play. It doesn't need an explanation at all... its just fun. Now granted it probably won't hold your interest for as long as most games nowadays, but I bet it has greater replay value as well. Just some thoughts to think about...

[LiquidEagle]

Like I said, I think there's different requirements for each genre, and nobody expected a story back then so it flew. Game expectations are changing and I think they have to have a good backing story to keep the whole game afloat. Katamari Damacy wouldn't be half the game it is, if it didn't have characters like The King and a hilarious, original story like it does.

Need more proof that story's becoming important?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2003/20030124h.jpg

Okay, maybe that doesn't prove anything, I've just always loved that strip :laugh:

[LaLiLuLeLo]

hahaha...I'm thinking, "...what...does that have to do with anything?"

[Raitei]

im not gonna vote on this merely because different games need to incorporate diferent aspects. A sport game doesn't need a story, nor does it need graphics (though we like them) or decent sound (currently playing WE10 with japanese comentary) but good gameplay is needed.
RPG's need a story to really drive the game forward
Fighting games, graphcis can sell these more than with other games, but it has to incorporate a certain type of gameplay

I think gameplay is really important, but not to the extent that other aspects aren't

[OmniCloud]

@HramaGameplay might be the glue...But story definitely has to be the foundation for it to be a classic. And those old Snes classics are just what they sound like Hrama, OLD CLASSICS. They were great back then but more complex games are the norm now and more complex ways of entertaining are needed. GoW, KH2, and otheres that you've mentioned are games that recieved good scores and reviews because they incorporate good story with gameplay...

[LiquidEagle]

Exactly, I like you guys' points Safer & Raitei.

I think gameplay is really important, but not to the extent that other aspects aren't

I like that :)

Old classics were fine back then, just like silent movies were fine "back then" and the story wasn't expected to be monumental with epic scores like we need from a film like Lord of the Rings nowadays. I'm not saying every new movie has to be like LotR, I'm just saying expectations have changed along with capabilities.

[VideoGame mania]

1-gameplay
2-story
3-graphics and sound

Thats how I would rate them all,but better when a game has all of these qualities

[Z]

Which element is most important?
those required to deliver the experiences intended by the creators.

[The_One]

The One, Thank you for ruining SOTC for me. I really appreciate that. I just bought it yesterday.
That reeeeaaallly ticks me off.
Sorry about that guys :(.

I should have thought about you guys a bit more before posting XD.

Other than that... Story still reigns king!!!:rockon:

[Hrama]

Hmm I will keep it relatively short.
Story is absolutely important for it to become a great game Nowadays, even in genres where it was not even considered a factor back then. But we must remember this is taking into account the different gaming mentalities of then and now and in all of the respective genre. There are just as many games that are great fun with hardly any story at all. That's all I am saying. One can stand without the other, hardly the other way around and that one is gameplay. Great gameplay has to exist cross-genre while story... well... not so much. I can't think of any great games that did not have great gameplay... hell, I can't think of any decent games that did not have workable gameplay at least. Story... its important to some games and genres, not to others.

SaferSephiroth:But story definitely has to be the foundation for it to be a classic.
Ok, just go ahead and look at IGN's top 100 games of all time list, or any top 100 games of all time list (And I use IGN's just because it is easiest, not for their "great" reputation in gaming).
http://top100.ign.com/2005/index.html
Super Mario Bros?(#1) Tetris? (#3) Street Fighter II? (#8) Mario Kart? (#15) MS. Pac Man? (#20) Tecmo Super Bowl? (#24) Burnout 3: Takedown? (#27) And how many of these have a great story as its foundation, or hell, even a real story at all worth mentioning?

That is a relatively objective look at it, my favorite is still music :smoke:

[Phoenix]

Whoever voted on graphics as #1 is either a shallow idiot who doesn't deserve to play games. Or joking. :)

[mark297]

Theres no arguement on this one. Its all about the gameplay. Video games were made for another way to have a good time. Graphics doesnt give you a good time. Story doesnt give you a good time. Sound doest give you a good time. Gameplay does. You can have all those elements without gameplay, and you'll have nothing. Sure graphics, sound and story are all well and great but when you come down to it, its all about the gameplay.

[Viper]

Thsi is an absolute no brainer.

Gameplay.

It's the only factor that can truly make up for bad everything else.

Say you have great graphics but bad gameplay = bad game.
Good story but bad gameplay = possibly decent game.
Good gameplay and bad everything else = most of the classic games ever made.

If I wanted nothing but great graphics, I'd go to an art museum or hell look outside.
If I wanted nothing but a great story, I'll pick up a book.

[goku2057]

I don't know, Jimmy. The more I think about it, the more I disagree.

I don't think one area is better than any other. If one is shit, and the other is good, it can ruin a game.

[D3adcell]

Thsi is an absolute no brainer.

Gameplay.

It's the only factor that can truly make up for bad everything else.

Say you have great graphics but bad gameplay = bad game.
Good story but bad gameplay = possibly decent game.
Good gameplay and bad everything else = most of the classic games ever made.

If I wanted nothing but great graphics, I'd go to an art museum or hell look outside.
If I wanted nothing but a great story, I'll pick up a book.

Good gameplay is the most essential thing in games. But a game can not exceed with gameplay alone. Not by todays standards that is.

Today gamers seek more from games then just fun. Most gamers seek an experience that they can not find in movies or books. A story that they can craft themselves. Nobody wants to create a story with shitty visuals, most peoples minds have very vivid detailed imaginations when they think of stories etc. Gaming is in a sense a way to bring those imaginations to life. Atleast the imagination of the project leads and the developers.

All of which requires gameplay, story, graphics, sound, proper setting, and proper execution.

Without either of those things you have simply a game. But not so much an experience that you will remember. Or that pushes your own imagination and thought process further.

Games of old are fun to play but thats becuase we grew up with them and at the time they had the best of everything. Ask most kids which have grown up on ps2 or ps1 to play those games, they don't get the same experience that we got from those games when we were younger.

[Viper]

So by todays standards all DS games....well for that matter now GC, PS2 and Xbox games have horrid graphics. Limitations of the technology displaying the game do not warrant exclusions to that principle so therefore graphics do not need to be of any priority to make a game good.

It is merely our own pre-conceived notions that a game on said platform must have a specific visual level or else it is bad even if graphics on a far lesser powered console (say DS vs X360) would be considered good.

Bad graphics are nothing more than our own jaded image based on previous iterations of pixels on the screen.

Gameplay wins out over all. AC on Gamecube looked like crap by the standards of the remaining library for GC yet never once did the graphics have a detrimental effect on the game.

Good graphics can immerse you further into the game but gameplay is the foundation that must be layed out first or the graphical experience is a waste on frustration and lack of personal enjoyment.

[D3adcell]

So by todays standards all DS games....well for that matter now GC, PS2 and Xbox games have horrid graphics. Limitations of the technology displaying the game do not warrant exclusions to that principle so therefore graphics do not need to be of any priority to make a game good.

It is merely our own pre-conceived notions that a game on said platform must have a specific visual level or else it is bad even if graphics on a far lesser powered console (say DS vs X360) would be considered good.

Bad graphics are nothing more than our own jaded image based on previous iterations of pixels on the screen.

Gameplay wins out over all. AC on Gamecube looked like crap by the standards of the remaining library for GC yet never once did the graphics have a detrimental effect on the game.

Good graphics can immerse you further into the game but gameplay is the foundation that must be layed out first or the graphical experience is a waste on frustration and lack of personal enjoyment.

But you can't exactly express the emotion and feel of a game like MGS with atari graphics.

Gameplay is the most important thing, that I wont argue. But a game needs more then just gameplay to be something EVERYONE can enjoy.

[Viper]

But good graphics and bad gameplay is something almost no one can enjoy.

Graphics need gameplay far more than gameplay needs graphics.

[D3adcell]

But good graphics and bad gameplay is something almost no one can enjoy.

Graphics need gameplay far more than gameplay needs graphics.

True on that. But graphics do not need to be downplayed either. Every element needs to be done well to have an EXCELENT game.

[Viper]

I don't think they should be 'downplayed' either but defintely a backseat to gameplay. This is where the media alsways misinterprets Nintendo's philosphy. Big N never says graphics aren't important just that they aren't AS important as gameplay.

The question asked was which is most important. It was gameplay that saved video games from the crash of 1983. I think that answers the question right there.

[IEatFriedPikmin]

the focus of movies/books should be the story. The focus of music should be sound. the focus of art should be... graphics i guess. the focus of games should be gameplay.

[Z]

Whoever voted on graphics as #1 is either a shallow idiot who doesn't deserve to play games. Or joking. :)
to each his own. what one considers a 'hardcore gamer' another calls him a 'geek with no life'.

don't offend others for not agreeing with you ;)

[OmniCloud]

I'm stll sticking w/story first-and gameplay thought up around the original story, I'm tired of games that don't make sense or that you can tell the story was an afterthought...

[Zer0-Sum]

All of the above in an even balance of grace, elegance and fun.

[dncardman]

Gameplay fo sho.

[Phoenix]

to each his own.But my opinion is fact... :(

[Pro A.]

You want to try and incorporate all of the elements, certainly, because the more you have, the better off you'll be in creating an immersive experience, but the bedrock of gaming is gameplay. If the game doesn't play well, then what the hell do you have? A game that looks nice or might have a nice narrative. Game design runs second. That's the structure of the game. If the game can work on multiple levels and has lots of twists and turns in the basic architecture and design, then you have something special (see the Metroid series).

[Zodiacboyscorp]

I'm an RPG man so story all the way and good battle system next.

[Helios]

I voted graphics just to spite you Phoenix. :)

But more seriously I think its what you can accomplish is what makes the game great. Not purely gameplay but the experience you get overall. Gameplay is fine but its more powerful with great sound and graphics, the same aplies to storyline line -even more so actually. I have over 100 books and plenty of movies, i'll go pick up one of those rather than play through a "great story" with shitty gameplay or graphics.

For example Halo 1&2 are rather bad in the story department but a few friends comin over and playing muliplayer is fuckin great. Just as well FF VII may have had a great story but the graphics werent great and in my opinion was not much better than any other RPG(I have a thing against RPG's but still) - consequently I loved FFX, didnt have such an RPG feel to it and the graphics were great.


Point being there is no single important element in gaming. Unless you're one of those people that completely disregard certain aspects of a game.

[Phoenix]

100% gameplay and 0% graphics vs. 100% graphics and 0% gameplay...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0e/Super_Mario_Bros_box.jpg/200px-Super_Mario_Bros_box.jpg

vs.

http://media.gamestats.com/gg/image/object/733/733364/50centBulletproof_PS2Box-ratedboxart_160w.jpg

Need I say more?