| Mnementh said: And the bolded says it. take away the gameplay, and it transform into something different, not a game. But more importantly, have bad gameplay, and the game is ruined. You say Steins;Gate practically has no gameplay, but it does have one and it works. If the gameplay wouldn't work, the game wouldn't be good, besides story, visuals and whatever. You dismiss this too easily because the gameplay seem simplicistic in your view. But the point is, even simplicistic gameplay can be good. And complicated gameplay can be bad (actually it often is). So my point stays: gameplay plays an integral role. And while the other components are not essential, they still can have heavy impact on the general quality, but while a good game without good sound/graphic/story can exist, a game without at least basically working gameplay never is good. |
I covered all of this in my post ^^;
I never said gameplay wasn't important, just that it doesn't have to be the focus of a game. Quote from my last post: "I'd agree with anyone that said having a solid interactive foundation should be the highest initial priority (regardless to how bareboned), but it being the overall focus is optional."
Something being a necessity doesn't immediately make is more important than everything else. If that were the case what i said about video game visuals would be true, yet it's not. The "most important thing" is whatever is motivating someone to play the game. That motivation being built on something else doesn't make the foundation more important, because without that motivation they wouldn't be playing it at all (thus making it its own sort of necessity).
