... and, to the experience we receive from games.

I am not denying that, directly compared, an HD game will be more appealing than a 480 p counterpart.

However, I am convinced that this is only the case because the comparison is made.

Played individually, with nothing prior to compare to, I am convinced that the experience would be of almost equivalent quality.

Graphics superior to anything we have previously seen create a certain sense of awe, just as graphics bellow what we are used to seeing create a sense of disapointment. (an effect which is temporary.)

The problem is, the negative impression given is greater (lasts longer through your playthrough) than the positive one.

Devellopers putting alot of focus on graphics most of all harm the reception that the games of competitors will get, as they will, following the release of the product, have the need to equally put further focus on the department, to offer the same experience to gamers - now awaiting more. 

I firmly believe that, had companies somehow magically come to an agreement to go no further than what they had in, let's say, 2003, people would be enjoying gaming more today, as the ever growing ressources of the industry could have been distributed towards other domains, with non-relativised impact on the experience given, or simply making additional quality titles. 

I agree,some of the best experiences this gen are from smaller indies games with graphics not uber great yet these games will stick with me,and the awesome "omg graphics" but noo gameplay will fade away.

For example.
A tale of two sons.
Life is strange.
Shovel knight.

2003? Graphics were already top notch in 2003, there was already a graphics war in 2003. If you really believe graphics are detrimental to videogames you need to go deeper with your logic.

We need Nes graphics. Welp, Batman on NES was already too good looking!

We need Pong graphics on Atari in order to make gameplay, innovation and experience the heart of what videogames should be...

With that kind of reasoning, it's either Pong graphics or continuous graphics improvement like we have today. You can't choose a good enough hardware in the middle.

A minimum is needed to represent things appropriately in games.

I would claim that that had been reached in the gamecube/ps2/xbox era.

The minimum necessary varies, depending on the type of game produced. For 2d platformers, less is necessitated - SNES graphics (with improved physics/controls) is enough to get you through. 3d gameplay needs a certain minimum, artstyles need a minimum (like having colours). Nothing new can be achieved thanks to the GRAPHICAL improvement of the last 10 years. I did not say there should be a technological standstill.

A lot of friends that I talk to, the first thing they talk about are graphics. Not about how fun the game looks or what new does it have to offer, it's just about graphics. Most of those friends play sports or shooters. I think there is a place for graphics in the gaming industry. No, I wouldn't take a Pong game over a PS4 game. That's common sense... but I think graphics should never take priority over gameplay. And there are games that do well in both categories.

And there's this thing called an opinion. A lot of people will only play games with certain graphic fidelity and that's okay. What I have a problem with is downplaying a game because it doesn't look "current gen". Not because it doesn't look fun but only because it doesn't look like it would on X or Y console/PC.

That's my beef with graphics. I wouldn't say no to amazing graphics, nor would I say no to highly stylized graphics. The graphic war isn't for me. Not only does it render the game outdated the next console but the value of the game immediately drops as well. It never fails.

There have always been games that focus more on graphics than anything else. There will always be games where graphics are the top priority. I don't think it's detrimental to the industry, only to those specific games. The Order is the more recent and most severe example of it imho, and the developer of that game suffered greatly for it.

You see the same thing in other mediums, as well. There are movies with lots of explosions, music with loud obnoxious guitars, books with smut, etc. Graphics are just one piece of the pie. Some will make it a bigger piece, there will always be developers who strive for balance though or think about graphics less.

What about those of us that are older?  Why 2003?  Maybe we should all still be playing pong. 

Graphics have always tried to improve. 1080p and 4K are just a continuation.  It doesn't hurt anything. 

No it is not. Some of us played text adventures when you get in the vic20/c64 days. 

Yes. I agree. The industry is losing sight of whats important - games - and is thinking its some sort of technology market with gimmicks and cutting edge tech aplenty in mobile phone models.

To finance this suicidal model, gaming variety has been suffering aswell. All that is allowed are genres and games that can pull multi-million sales.

I am hoping that consumers give a pretty clear message of what VR and the new consoles are by not purchasing them and putting the focus back where it belongs.