Depends on the game and genre. Take an F1 sim for example. I want it to be as realistic as possible, so graphics are incredibly important for games such as these.

Atari 2600

Sega Master System

Sega Mega Drive

Playstation

Playstation 2

Playstation 3

Graphics only need to reach acceptable consumer levels. It's been reached with the PS2. Most of the PS fans are now spouting that it's more important because that's what the PS3 has. Last gen the big phrase was "it's all about the games". Interesting isn't it.

FYI some of these analogies are really stupid.

Graphics do not allow for new types of games. They never have. We here PR saying only able on the X system. That's a load. AI, Physics, lots of object instances. It's all old. It's just that the trend has been for gfx not better gaming. It's easier to sell shine that game play. Shine is showable game play is experience.

Not really no. I was happy with the UE2 and the graphics it could spit out. Things that were supposed to be round were round, flashy things were flashy, shiny things were shiny, and all that runs on a nice old system too. Everything past UE2 is just tackiness and useless I think. I really don't give a damn about some shadow of a leaft or of a railing, i probably won't even give a damn enough to notice it.

If you do notice such things like the shadows of railings and trees and what not that are not perfect then the gameplay of the game sucks and it's not worth my time.

Graphics also do not allow more stuff for current types of games. Have you seen what reviewers have said for example about Mercenaries 2 and its graphics? Every single review mentions that game has graphics that are subpar in todays graphics. Question is can you even achieve better graphics on PS3 or X360 when theres as much stuff going on as in mercenaries 2? Making such a game with graphical quality of heavy rain is impossible with current gen. Do reviewers realize that? Do you realize that?(yes, all of you) I know that merc 2 isn't that good game when it comes whole game, but its good enough example for this matter.

Graphics is a part of a game. Just like the audio and the gameplay. It is the most important to some, the least to others. Some games and genres it matters more than others. You cannot make a blanket statement about graphics mattering or not.

Very important, would you like to see metroid prime 3 with Gears/Cod4 graphics? i mean, maybe is a good game, but, wouldnt be better with other graphics?

if graphics didnt matter than there is nearly no need to upgrade from older systems BAM!

Advances in graphics is a part of advances in technoloy. New technology has allowed games to do more, e.g. GTA etc with open interactive worlds. It's not about the graphics, they're just the side effect of new technology that can be used to make games better.

Graphics are important, whether they are classic 8-bit or 16-bit, or they are High Def, or have anime sprites, etc., it matters. Now, how do you know which one deserves one or another, that's a different thing...

Take for example Mega Man, the Mega Man classic series had their best games on the NES, with 8-bit style graphics, and when it passed to 16-bits SNES it was good but it felt weird, same with the 32-bit Playstation, that's why the 8-bit style suits better to Mega Man, on the other hand, Mega Man X is a total different story, it was born in 16 bits, and it translated excellent to 32 bit graphics and anime cutscenes (the darker story and character designs helped it a lot) and it went so far that 2 games were released on the PS2 and a remake on the PSP...

It depends on what suits better for what game...

It's easy to tell that half the posts in this thread are incredibly sarcastic, so I won't be.

Of course graphics are important to a game! Next to gameplay, they are the most important feature! When graphics can be what they are, there is no excuse for games that do not have these graphics.

Obviously gameplay is more important, but a fully priced game which is not part of a long series that should really be dead by now with bad graphics will get abysmal sales and ratings.

Anybody able to tell what I meant by that last paragraph? Yes, Mega Man 9. They are the worst graphics I have seen in a game for at least 10 years. The gameplay is bland, it's like something out of the NES or Gameboy Colour and they are charging FIFTEEN BUCKS for it. I would have to be paid to play that game.
Now I am not prejudiced against side scrollers. I have played Bionic Commando Rearmed and loved it. I am annoyed when Rearmed gets an 8/10 from GameSpot and Mega Man 9 gets an 8.5. WHAT DO PEOPLE LOVE ABOUT IT SO MUCH?

You want retro, go buy an NES on ebay for 5 bucks and find some games in your local dump. I'm sure this was game of the year material and revolutionary 20 years ago. It's not anymore. It is completely out of place in this generation.

And before you say "couldn't beat the first level", more like "couldn't beat the demo because it was so god damned stupid and I quit and deleted it after around 2 minutes"

They should provide it free of charge. Then maybe they could find 1000 people who like it out of 15 million PS3 owners, 20 million 360 owners and 32 million Wii owners.