Come on man. WTH? You can not use a scientific element in an arguement to prove your right. Especially in an arguement where science isnt a factor at all. 

You have to understand. Someone who thinks graphics is important is going to hold to high value. Whereas you dont really care as long as it's fun to you. 

2 different preferneces.

It's perfectly fine to say someone is wrong when science has proven it to be different. To say someone is wrong when the only guage is some people have your opinion is rediculous. 

I'm not saying either 1 of you is right. I'm saying each of you has an opinion on the matter, and you will continue to like what you like.

I'm a 360 user but I agree with you as I am also a wii/ds/sega megadrive/ dreamcast/ngc/ xbox/ ps1/ps2/gba/gbc/psp owner and as I say there seems to be to much of this I think the wii and ds sucks because they can't do what the 360 and ps3 can. no they can't graphicaly but they can produce the same quality of game or better in terms of gameplay, story and enjoyment factor just with weaker graphics.I mean take chrono trigger or the ds remake for example it didn't have exactly the best graphics for the time but it was one of the best rpg's ever made so if there was ever an example of what your saying that is it, that or final fantasy VII. 

Do you even know what you're talking about?

He's not holding graphics in high preference, he's literally saying that they are things he likes most in the game which is exactly what this thread is defaming.

Even if he is why does that make him wrong? 

It's an opinion. God damn. It doesnt matter why you think he's wrong. He'll always like that. 

He in no way is wrong. Likeing something is a feeling. A feeling that gives him entertainment. You diont have to like it, or him for being that way. But you arent right or wrong. And niether is he.

Better graphics don't make for better games, that simple.

Just because something is an opinion doesn't make it right, wrong, healthy, or unhealthy.

IMO, E.T. for the Atari 2600 is the best game that has ever been invented.

Even though it's subjective, it's wrong for objective reasons. There are glaring flaws in that game.

Gameplay is more important to playing a game than graphics, that is a fact. And on that fact, I say that he is wrong for thinking Graphics>Gameplay.

When did you opinion about Gameplay being the most important thing become fact?  What if someone says that the most important thing to them about a book is the beginning, but you and most other people think the ending is the most important part of a book?  Does the fact that most people agree with you turn your opinion into a fact?  Simple answer is no, it's still an opinion.

No your not wrong for thinking that that game is the best. 

And we need to stop this right now. I'll leave it at that. 

Your naming saomething as fact that has no backing whatsoever other than yours and others 'opinions'.

Facts are something  that is I have £600 in the bank. Etc etc. 

Me and you need to stop discussing this. It's silly. 

I just want him to know, he's entirely entitled to his opinion as far as I'm concerned. And I am sure he enjoys his games thoroughly. :)

No only trying to further my point from before, the style of RE4 was gripping, even though it was a drastic change for the series it felt familar for Resident Evil, just gritty, a bit nasty, and the effect of being alone.

RE5 was a bit too clean, I really dislike the engine they used for it which worked really well for Lost Planet 1 and 2 but not so much for keeping that Resident Evil feel if you ask me.  RE5 is technically superior on every level but it's more my point of a team coming together to make a game with a certain feel from it, you can tell RE5 was not made by the same team that made RE4

Because the literature in a book is constant from beginning to end, they are still words and they still have the same story.

In a video game, graphics are not gameplay. The ability to play a game stems from the gameplay, not the graphics. "You can't play graphics"