"Content" and "value" are closely related, but they aren't the same thing. Content is what determines value when we are talking about entertainment. An interesting 10-page novel for $20 is a bad value. A boring 1000-page novel for $20 is also a bad value. An interesting 1000-page novel for $20 is a great value. But the value is not the content. The content is what you actually experience when you read the book. The content is the reason why you buy.
For a book, the content is closely related to the story. But games are much more than just a story. The best word for games is just content.
Content is different from gameplay. Mario Kart, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Mario RPG, and Mario + Rabbids all have very different gameplay. The content of these games is very similar. In any of these games I can experience Mario, Bowser, Goombas, Peach's Castle and all of the other parts of the Mushroom Kingdom. The way I experience it is the gameplay. But the actual world and the stuff in it are the content.
Graphics are experienced with the eyes. Music is experienced with the ears. Gameplay is experienced with the hands. Content is experienced with the mind.
But is it really? For example is in a racing game the world content or the cars/karts or actually both?
Waluigi has different stats in a kart vs toad on a bike making it gameplay but also content
"I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007
Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions
Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.