It is really hard to compare games. It is one thing to compare the same game on different consoles... but it is not possible to make a fair comparison between games.

Although I am a big Fan of Naughty Dog since the old Crash Bandicoot days, I decided to skip "The Last of Us" simply because I have no interest in this game. I do not like a post-apocalyptic setting and I do not want to spend time with that game, especially with this multiplayer mode. Although it is praised as a masterpiece I have zero interest in it and I do hope that Naughty Dog will drop this franchise and will continue with Uncharted instead. If I had bought this game and I had to review it I would have given it 0/5. (Not because of issues with graphics or gameplay... Simply because I have no interest in spending time in this gameworld.)

It is the same with Gran Turismo. Although it might be the best racing simulation in the world... If you are not interested in difficult racing simulations you will not like this game a single bit despite the game having stellar reviews and a huge gamebase (even if it would have perfect graphics and gameplay....).

I once read a comparison between Hitman and Assassin's Creed about which of these game is the better assassination game... The funny thing is that I didn't really cared about the assassination part. What really impressed me about AC was the historic settings. AC2 was a brilliant game and I really liked being able to roam aroundin Renaissance Firenze and Venezia. I was truly impressed by the setting of the game... not the gameplay or the graphics (although I really enjoyed sightseeing). Well, Hitman. Even though I got it on PS+ for free I did not want to play that game.

So my personal point of view on this topic. Neither Graphics nor gameplay is the deciding factor for me. It is the overall setting of the game that makes me want to buy a game. I can cope with mediocre graphics or mediocre gameplay, but I despise a mediocre or boring setting of a game.

Even with perfect photorealistic graphics I would never buy a military shooter. I will never play a American Football game no matter how good the graphics or the gameplay are. I will never like non-linear openworld games... I need interesting characters, an interesting story or an interesting game world/setting. If i do not find something interesting about a game neither graphics nor gameplay can help me enjoy the game.

Both are important, there is no reason for not wanting the two of them.

I'm having tons of fun with Terraria right now so yes I'm a graphics whore.

I prefer story > gameplay > graphics.

It's a little harder to compare, since newer games with better graphics usually have gameplay improvements. Yesterday, I've played Twisted Metal 4 on PS1. It is one of my favorites on PS1 but I was shocked seeing how much better the Twisted Metal game for PS3 is. And it's not about visuals, the newer one has 15 years of gameplay improvements that allows it to play much better. Of course visuals do help, since the new one has a lot of destruction in the environment and that really makes a difference.

But I would take Medal of Honor for the PS1 anytime over BF3. It was a memorable game with a nice sense of humour, amazing soundtrack and great details on the AI (enemies returning your grenades, etc. And the dogs that grabbed the grenades with the mouth and runned at you).

I don't consider myself a graphics addict, but it's hard to play older games because of the bad graphics. 2D games aren't a problem, but old 3D games simply look horrible in some cases, specially shooters and racing. But if the older game is pretty good, I'll play it. I prefer to play Super Smash Bros 64 instead of the newer ones simply because Melee and Brawl have worse gameplay mechanics (slow response for a fighting game and the environment interferes too much in the match).

Theres many like him and he loves to play my console. I even created an account for him on my PS3 but he refused to play but everytime I get games he has to see them. Then he takes pride in console multiplats porting over to PC and showing me how superior they are. He then sees the exclusives on the PS3 and he says if they were on PC imagine how great they could be. Thats the point...imagine it because its not happening. Hes a good guy, he just thinks PC is the end all be all and I've never seen creative characters and games like what Sony or Nintendo provide on a PC. PC is a great place for graphics and buying cheaper games because they come digitally, but outside of that I have no use for it. All I do is marvel at the graphics because its the best it can do. It has no central oganization and first party exclusives and even he couldnt argue with that. Not once did I ever see him gloat about a PC game to me outside of Starcraft and Diablo. When those two games were coming out he would hype them so much and then there was nothing to  talk about for such a long period of time. Consoles are lacking, but what give back to you in return for lacking hardware are some of the best quality games made for the era.

P.S.

Here is the philosophy....

Give me a console with finite power and make the best product you can around its shortcomings. Give me a PC so I might marvel at the best consoles already have to offer.

I think we just like what we like...

So would you say that the anime style is not a selling point for some people?

Two things that people need to get through their head:

1) Good graphics and Realistic graphics are two very different things.

2) Graphics (like controls, sound, and pacing) are part of what makes gameplay, gameplay.

Great graphics complement great gameplay.

Games can still be great with poor graphics.

Great looking games with poor gameplay will still be crap. You can't polish a turd...

Ergo Gameplay is the most important, but graphics can greatly enhance the experience.