Brown and Grey are the new reality colors... anything with a "medium to good" levels of green or blue is childish (Red is allowed as long is just for the blood)...

No matter the limitations of the RAM and the Graphics Chip onboard, the CPU will compensate them and push them above the High-end PC limits... anyways, who needs more than 640kb of RAM if you have a nice CPU...

Surely number 7 the uncanny valley is a great reason to push for even higher poly counts, texture res, lighting and post-processing effects. The idea being to push past the valley with fantastic technology so it isn't an issue anymore. Using this argument would be going against graphics whores and saying, well after this is starts to look less realistic and it's too much effort to push past the valley, so let just stick with current graphics.

The Wii <-- That must be what the poor people play.

I don't think I understand the first one. Anyways, here's couple of my general suggestions you can pinch.

Form over Functionality - Between a mold breaking near photo-realistic looking game with horrible framerate, terrible pop-in, disappearing textures, long load times, terrible glitches and a less than impressive looking one with the faster stable framerate, quick loads, general stability, and polish in every aspect, you're of course must always choose the former. Regardless of the content or context of either game in question.

Interactive Movies - Graphics do matter and gameplay doesn't because if a game so "beautiful" that it makes someone forget the gameplay, it's not only the better game, but also an interactive movie which makes it the highest art form there is, which also excuses any and all possible terrible interactive portions of the beforehand mentioned interactive movie. 

Technical Double Standard - If confronted with something akin to a visually high profile game claiming to re-create entire real living worlds, you are to forgive any minor short comings, such as minor texture pop-up, recycled voice over, recycled character models, recycled pre-scripted animation, unusual or simply poor A.I., strange or unnatural animations, or horridly unrealistic physics. After all such things can't possibly deter from such realistic living world, and it's more important on the technical benchmarks the game has created than it's how close it comes to it's original goal.

However games that don't meet the above criteria are to be repeatedly chastised for any and all errors without mercy. After all, if they aren't achieving breaking new (technical) ground like above, they have no possible excuse such mistakes. Other games that both don't achieve spectacular new visual heights or have any major technical issues to speak of are to simply to be disregarded entirely. What's the point of viewing something so well put together if isn't attempting to redefine what you watch?

Only the Best - You are naught to settle for anything less than the best equipment for your sophisticated visual appetite. Cost is not an issue, you need the very best 1080p Television with a 100,000 : 1 contrast ratio or better that you can afford, along with expensive gold plated Monster HDMI cables to be completely certain that no piece of your graphics whoring experience is diminished in the slightest. You must also always be ready to replace your set-up with any and every new item that surpasses the current market best for video viewing.

You must also only grace your best with the best. You will not sully your high end theater set-up with something as crude as non-HD content and never consider anything less than the very best designed explicitly for your type of viewing pleasure.

Basically, be a graphics whore, not a console fanboy. If you only talk about the graphics of your company's system, you're a fanboy, not a graphics whore. 

Boom Blox - WTF? It's just blocks and it's only a kiddy casual game.  Minigame compilations are ruining the industry.

Little big Planet - Now that's hardcore since it relies on user created content. Casuals could never get that since it's all physics based and look how realistic it look! OMG!

 I figured it was like that. You might want to expand on that bit to make it more clear. As they are plenty of console based graphics whores, but they wouldn't be "proper" graphics whores which is what your guide is about. You put a little more detail into that first one it'd make a good intro to everything that follows.

"suggestions welcome". As in, if you think I should expand on it, you please give me some hints. 

I believe that graphics whores are a viable target, so I appreciate the effort, but there are several points that could use some work:

In #4 you seem to imply that better graphics do not improve a game, but that swinging your arms does, which would be an even more tenuous argument.

Crysis did not have dismal sales; it topped the PC charts for some time and sold above expectations. It deserved to do dismal sales, however, because it was utterly generic and the gameplay was piss-poor. Also, sales are not a reflection of quality, so your whole point is essentially moot.

The "uncanny valley" doesn't exist. That is to say, it is only a non-scientific theory that has become popular in reference to computer-generated representations of the human form. Personally, I think the theory has some merit, but it is certainly not a truism. In any case, it is not an impediment to photo-realism, only to near-photo-realistic representations of the human form. It's also worth noting that, in the absence of a bridge, you will need to descend into a valley in order to emerge on the other side.

Also, on point #3 from your blog, "Beauty is in the details, not the art", I would say that, arguably, the details are the art, but that would be the subject of a much more complex debate on the nature of aesthetics. Perhaps a more salient point is the fact that Renaissance artists did have better tools and techniques than in previous centuries, and more importantly that the Renaissance only happened due to the patronage of the Medici family and other financial backers. You state that "The cost of graphics is skyrocketing", but like "great graphics", great art almost invariably requires financing, and being a visionary is useless if you don't have the means to achieve your vision. Finally, I would suggest that using the Renaissance as an example is a bad idea anyway, as one of the key factors of Renaissance art was the pursuit of greater realism. Perhaps you realised this and that is why you excised it from this revised version?

Also, you make a reference to using a straw man argument, when your entire piece is essentially a string of straw man arguments. I will reiterate that I think graphics whores are deserving of scorn, but you would have been better off just saying "gameplay is more important than graphics" and leaving it at that. Frankly, I would be more interested in knowing why so many Wii owners think having better graphics detracts from gameplay, as is frequently implied in the "gameplay vs. graphics" (read: "Wii vs. PS360") arguments that resurface from time to time.

@ FJ-Warez
Killzone 2 and Gears of War look great, just as Viva Pinata, SMG and LBP do, but I have never once heard anyone claim that a game looks good because of it's use of greys and browns. On the other hand, I have heard countless people repeating ad nauseam that certain games look "bland" due to a muted palette. Also, your point about CPU vs. RAM/GPU is a valid one, but a faster CPU can alleviate the requirements for RAM/GPU in a variety of ways (streaming, pre-processing vertex operations etc. etc.)

@ twesterm
Straw man. I've certainly not heard anyone claim LBP is "hardcore", just that it looks great due to it's innovative mechanics and excellent art design. Why not just say "the PS3 is shit and the Wii rocks! Huzzah!"? That's clearly what you meant. I know it would be trolling, but don't mods have diplomatic immunity or something? Then again, that didn't help the bad guy in Lethal Weapon...

@Played_Out:

Um, I'm not sure if you think this is serious or not. It isn't, BTW.

 Then you haven't been paying attention.  A lot of the Sony fanboys actually get angry when you refer to LBP planet as casual.  If you really don't believe, make an honest thread asking if you think LBP is casual or hardcare with no hints at this thread and I promise you that you will see *many* people call it hardcore.

Also, remember this thread is clearly a joke and nothing more and I'm pretty sure I said absolutely nothing negative about LBP (Boom Blox has actually raised my interest in it).