Which matters more, graphics or gameplay?

Likewise, gameplay has evolved in leaps and bounds. We no longer suffer extreme death penalties, and we can find random people to run dungeons and raids with by only clicking a couple of buttons. New gameplay ideas are being presented seemingly with each patch, and to a lot of success -- a simple gameplay hook can keep people coming back and playing a game for months, even years.
But are the two mutually exclusive, and have they become so?
Obviously, in an MMO, no one wants to run around an ugly world populated by trees that look like pipe cleaners, but is it a deal breaker? Would you rather play a fun, fulfilling game that looks a bit dated or play the most gorgeous, graphically stunning MMO that may lack good mechanics or an involving story?
Take Rift or Aion, for example. Both games surpass WoW visually, but both failed to retain the subscriber bases they needed to thrive. On the other hand, we've seen games like Ragnorok Online that boast cute, simple graphics and (at least somewhat) addicting gameplay.
MMOs themselves are a unique group in that they don't solely rely on graphics for good storytelling. The point of an MMO is that you:
- Create a player avatar of yourself
- Explore and play in a world in an immersive, non-linear fashion
Blizzard realized how far WoW had come and that it was in dire need of an overhaul (both lore-wise and visually) -- namely, Cataclysm. By the time Wrath rolled around, it was hard to miss how old, dated and unpolished the vanilla areas looked. You could watch the aurora borealis in Northrend, then go back to The Barrens to see the majestic sky box seam line. Now, WoW looks fresher than ever (except for that one nagging thing).
When visual advancements are progressing at a rate that most people can't keep up with, do you stare longingly at the shinier games walking by, or does reliable and genuinely fun MMO make you happy?
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 7)
Nadia Jan 10th 2012 1:05PM
One word: Minecraft.
almoderate Jan 10th 2012 1:24PM
Indeed.
I look at it this way... I love to look at something pretty, but the "ooh look at that!" effect is only going to keep me interested for so long before I get bored. If something is fun to play, I'm going to keep playing regardless of graphics-- unless said graphics are causing some sort of technical issues for me.
emberdione Jan 10th 2012 1:24PM
I was clicking through just to say "Minecraft would like to have a word with this post."
As a game designer, with a Master's Degree in Level Design, I can tell you, all the big names in the industry agree: Graphics are secondary to good gameplay. Yes, they need to not detract from your game, but they should never be detrimental to your gameplay.
Eternauta Jan 10th 2012 1:26PM
Minecraft is overrated.
Am I the only one who finds that game boring after a while?
The problems with Rift or Aion aren't issues of gameplay or graphics, their problem is that they're competing in the fantasy MMORPG market, dominated by WoW.
Dropping, say, Call of Duty to play Battlefield isn't a big deal. Just $60. Even then, you can play both games at the same time. Playing two or more MMOs simultaneously is nearly imposible unless you play them in a extremely casual way.
Leaving behind all the time you invested in an MMO like WoW, all the aquaintances you made, all your progress, to jump ship to the new MMO on the block isn't something you can decide based just on shiny new graphics or maybe a new game gimmick or two.
That's why I think the "WoW is dying" crowd is pretty dumb.
SDevil Jan 10th 2012 1:30PM
I agree, I think the word Minecraft says it all. If that's not enough though, look at the number people playing facebook games.
blazenor Jan 10th 2012 1:48PM
@SDevil
People who play Facebook games........... I really wish I can come up with a word to describe them, but whatever I come up with it won't be good.
04blurex Jan 10th 2012 2:04PM
@blazenor
I believe I found the word (or words) you are looking for: Cow Clicker
Twill Jan 10th 2012 2:13PM
Like many aspects of art and design, video games have lots of pieces that create the game. While one element cannot make the game on its own, it can certainly destroy it.
TL:DR - There are bad games that have amazing graphics and bad gameplay. There are bad games with cool gameplay and terrible graphics. Both games are bad.
You need to find the sweet and shiny spot where everything just "clicks."
Arturis Jan 10th 2012 2:19PM
@Eternauta
Saying Minecraft is overrated is much the same as saying Legos are overrated. It is a construction set, and you get out of it exactly what you put into it. I play the hell out of Minecraft when I have the time, because I love to build things that are persistent - when I make changes the the world, they stay changed, and the other players on my server get to see the impact that I have made to the environment, be it building a castle or digging a new mine shaft.
Its the one thing that I wish MMOs had - The ability for an individual to make a significant impact to their world. As it stands, you can slay the dragon, but that sucker is gonna respawn in 5 minutes (or appear in a separate instance) so the next player can be the vanquishing hero as well, because otherwise it wouldn't be fair. This is the "elephant in the room" that MMO developers have to work around, and the day that someone figures out a system that is fair but diverse, that is when the true "next generation" of MMOs will begin.
Chokaa Jan 10th 2012 3:36PM
@Arturis
Everquest had it that way. Instances weren't around, you camped for hours so you could tell your guild when a dragon had spawned only to have some other raid group show up while you were summoning your own and then you would lose and would wasted over 12 hours. Yea, I don't miss that!
Arturis Jan 10th 2012 3:57PM
@Chokaa
That isnt at all what Im talking about. Increased spawn timers dont really solve the issue, they just frustrate the player.
What Im talking about is more of an... ecosystem. Lets say you decide to slay all the goblins in the area. Well, now youve earned the title of Goblin Slayer, because you managed to single handedly run them out of the town, and its going to take awhile for the goblins to build up the courage to resettle the area. But in that time, the gnolls have settled in, in order to take advantage of the resources the goblins no longer are scavenging, and your fellow player managed to drive them out, gaining the title of Gnoll Bane. But now the ogres that were using goblins and gnolls as slave labor are pissed, so they push in...
Basically, what I am advocating is a dynamic story, less tied to specific "OMG you are the chosen one!" scripted moments, and more geared to allowing people the play out their characters in a shared world. Think Skyrim style sandbox play, but on a multiplayer scale. Of course, this is just a dream of mine, but some day they will do it and I will be completely delighted.
quelaenvyn Jan 10th 2012 9:18PM
@Arturis
I know this isn't 100% what you taking about but that wipe out until they gone for awhile doesn't work well with a good questing system just ask Dark Age of Camelot when 10 is on the same Kill X quest and now ever1 one is at X-1 one and it going be a hour before one even spawn again
Gazpacho Jan 11th 2012 8:32AM
@Arturis
The Dynamic Events of Guild Wars 2 is almost exactly what you describe. :-)
http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/dynamic-events/dynamic-events-overview/
Check out some of the movies for more detail.
herra.ledonne Jan 11th 2012 9:52AM
@Arturis
Sure, that might work with ogres and their mooks, but I'm not sure the system would work with some more challenging opponents. I mean, say you kill Deathwing, then what? Is Deathwing 2.0 going to come at us next, and where did he come from, and why haven't we heard of him? Did the Old Gods get a new one by mail order since the first one broke?
Part of Warcraft's charm is the ability to tackle those guys, the buildup until you actually get to stab them. If Cataclysm was just brought along by some unnamed, replaceable dragon rather than DW, you're not gonna get the same feeling of accomplishment from killing some unnamed, replaceable dragon, no matter how strong he is. And if it's brought along by DW, you either have to be there that one and only one time he's killable or live with the regret of not having participated in that epic moment (hello, Gates of Ahn'Qiraj), or Blizzard will have to kill him off without the players getting to help. Either way the playerbase, either those who weren't there to down the Destroyer or everyone who did but could just watch and munch popcorn as Thrall blasted a hole through him would not feel all that great, I reckon.
Arturis Jan 12th 2012 4:14PM
@Gazpacho
Oh yes, I am quite aware of GW2... oh yes.... ^_^ My wife and I got some great hands on time at SDCC last year. I applaud GW2 and to a lesser extent Vindictus and Tera for trying out new things in the MMO genre (in the latter cases, the action focused MMO).
@herra.ledonne
In the system I envision, there would be two types of "big bosses" - Dynamic and Event driven. Dynamic would be large monsters that are seeded as "elites" and, by killing players and other monsters, level up themselves. It wouldnt take long for one monster to reach the top of the food chain, so to speak, and be the Big Bad that everyone wants to take down.
The other type, Event driven, would be GM spawned and controlled, much like the world events they have at the end of betas.
This is all entirely hypothetical, of course, and would require playtesting to get the system right, but I honestly think having more dynamic content is a large part of the next MMO evolution.
Brasson Jan 13th 2012 1:08AM
If I may raise a counterpoint: Dwarf Fortress. Zero graphics, infinite fun*.
*warning: fun may consist entirely of losing creatively.
Thundrcrackr Jan 17th 2012 4:25PM
While I agree great graphics aren't a requirement for ALL games (e.g. Minecraft) I do feel they are a requirement for MMOs. You're supposed to feel like you're really in this fantasy world, so if the graphics can't pull that off, it lessens the overall experience.
My take on gameplay vs graphics is:
Gameplay should be so good that i never notice it.
Graphics should be so good that i always notice it.
Pantro Jan 10th 2012 1:06PM
Hmmm for me games act like I fall to love like it would be a girl. At first sight the looks make you do the next steps, but eventually you'll fall in love with the inside or gameplay in this situation xp
flow_snowboarding Jan 10th 2012 1:07PM
I think the popularity of Runescape says a lot
Scunosi Jan 10th 2012 1:49PM
Well, that's probably only partially true. From what I've heard the main playerbase of Runescape is a much younger demographic than WoW, meaning they're having to target players that for the most part likely aren't allowed to a) pay to play and b) see lots of scary/gory stuff. I have no idea if Runescape even has quests or anything, but from what I've seen and heard about it it seems more like something you'd play only because you don't have access to anything else.
Plus the fact that you could run it on a calculator probably helps as well.