Hear, hear! :D

Lol this comment is full of win!

As another guy who grew up in the 8/16/32 bit eras and to be frank even in the pre 8 bit era

Its about Gameplay then Graphics......

My machines thus far

Atari 2600, ZX Spectrum, Spectrum 128, Atari ST, Amiga, SNES, PC, N64, Gamecube, PS2, Wii, Xbox 360

Hopefully a PS3 can be added in the next few years and then its nex gen time.

It's not a criterion for buying a game, but I can see some games being crippled without it, to be honest.

Maybe I have an inner graphics whore, because I always look at gameplay first.
Yet, it still matters to me.

It's nice to see some 2-d love.

Personally, I feel that 2-d gaming is far from reaching its potential. An HD game with artwork as good as that from Vanillaware, with gameplay as good as some 16-bit or 8-bit games, would make my day. It's a shame that thus far most 2-d games are either portable or downloadable, mini-titles.


I'd kill for a 2-d RPG, for example.

When it comes to graphics, the only thing I really care about is Art Style. Amount of effects and polygons means nothing to me unless the artwork is good.
Muramasa has the best visuals this gen imo. Not because of the gazillion polygons per second, but because of the incredible Art.

It seems we have quite a bit in common, then.

Bad Art Style = No Buy.

I wholeheartedly agree with the OP.

Graphics? Meh, I've never been a graphics person. My favorite game when I was a young child was Super Breakout for the Atari 2600. Fun needs to come first, followed closely by gameplay. (After all, if I can't control a game, it's not going to be fun, and thus...) It doesn't take much. Ironically, this is part of the reason I never really became a PC gamer- too many buttons on that keyboard to do different things!

Next would be story and characters. (Plot, if you will.) I like having them fleshed out and all, but if the game is addictive enough (see: Tetris), I can live without them. These usually can make a good game great (or better). Most likely, these will be the things I remember in a game. Take Final Fantasy 6- who doesn't remember (that has played it, of course) some of the key elements in that game? Whether you remember the destruction of the world, the opera house, or just what an ass Kefka is, these all make the sign of a great game.

Then comes challenge. I expect a fair amount of it. If I can steamroll through a game, it's not really going to stay a good game. Yeah, that was a great game... for the 4 hours it took me to beat it! Conversely, something that makes me frustrated from being too hard may deter my enjoyment of the game, though admittingly, as someone who remembers "Nintendo hard", and grew up with that, I probably have a higher threshold than most newer gamers.

Tieing into challenge is my next consideration- length. This is why I so frequently look at RPGs- I get a lot of bang for the buck. Games designed to last me only 6-8 hours are going to be games that I look for cheaply, unless prior experience with the series says I must have it. If I'm on the fence about if I want to get a game, this will probably be the last thing of matter to me.

I... guess graphics would be next (and last)? As long as I can tell what's going on, I'm happy. Even when it comes to movies, that's how I work. I didn't even bother with DVD until the writing on the wall for VHS's death was clear. So I can see the wrinkles, the sweat drops, etc. Big deal! I really don't care; if anything, I see it as muting the imagination some. Old 2-D games knew quite well how to convey things like emotion; I don't need these fancy graphics to do so. If scaling back on those graphics means that you can give me more game, then cut those graphics!