But... it was a test to try a scenaio without visuals... : (

I don't mean graphics are not needed at all. Graphics are a part of a game needed to be complete. The level of importance of graphics for each person is what I'm curious about.

As long as I can notice different from old generation games that's fine for me

Putting graphics aside, is not really the point, there is no single part of a game that is "essential" to everyone all the time.

Now, low resolution pixel art can look great, many old low resolution games do look crappy... however Sonic 2 and Mega Man X were graphical show cases when they were around, everybody used them to say one system holds up or the other has better graphics... they also played great! Same goes for Mario 64, it was one of the most impressive game of its day, at least outside of the arcades.

Talking about Arcades, back in the 80s the games released in the arcades had the best visuals, best animations, offered more special effects, smooth 3D before everyone else, etc. AND they had the very best game play... some of them at least, there was always some great looking games that had stiff controls, people just forget them really fast, this is nothing new.

Same for current day games, good graphics have no effect on gameplay (other than offering a nice presentation of what's ahead of you) ... they're like the cherry on the sunday... same for sound design, great music/sound is great to have, it may bring more people in... same goes for interface design, etc. even "gameplay" will take a back seat for some, if they find something to like in the game.

But yeah, everybody like to play some tetris from time to time...

I was able to play the King's Field series so I think I am qualified to say I don't really care about them.

They are nice to look at but they don't make or break a game for me. The soundtrack on the other side... that one is a bit more important for me.

100% awesome games consist of = 20% gameplay, 20% story, 20% art direction, 20% graphic, 20% replaybility.

They're not necessary, but I do have a high appreciation for them. I'll play an ugly game if it's fun, but I'll enjoy it a lot more if it's pretty.

I got a X1,wiiU, and 3 month old PC connected to 2 monitors and a 50 inch tv.

with the Wii U graphics dont matter to much cuz the games are fun. xbox 1 are fine and on my pc i always put max max max max settings and i play with the x1 controller.

but i voted in the middle. I really didnt know how to answer since I have a wii U ppl would think graphics dont matter to me...but they kinda do?? its a tough one.

I guess what I am saying is: It should depend on the game, and be about the same amount of importance for everyone.  Imo some people just can't afford the best graphics, and this is fine (There will always be someone out there who has a better rig), but then they justify it like they just don't want better graphics.

Stop kidding yourself people - a game like BF4 will always play better the higher the resolution/textures/framerate you can get it to.  It is a realistic fast-paced shooter that can always benifit from better graphics.  Period.

Better graphics are never a negative.

Going for the equal divide approach? I like that x D