I was thinking the other day of what people base their opinion of games on. So to bring that thought to closure, I am going to try and get you people to post exactly what you perfer in games on a percentage scale.

I'll list a few catagories and sub catagories. All you do is place the percentage of how important it is to you. Here is what I came up with... feel free to add to it.

Story: Storyline consists of the main story, plot, side quest and stories, character development, and endings.

Gameplay: consists of overal gameplay, battle system, and replay value.

Sound: consists of the Soundtrack and sound effects.

Graphics: consists of resoultion, pixelation count, game environment, and realism.


Mine would be:

Story: 60%
Gameplay: 25%
Sound: 10%
Graphics: 5%

First I'm going to answer with respect to your categories, but I think these categories commonly miss some of the point.

Story 35%
Gameplay 35%
Sound 10 %
Graphics 20%


One reason that I think these categories can miss the point would be to look at many RPG’s or survival horror games. Story wise, many RPG’s are cliché and many survival horror games have almost no story.

Gameplay wise, many RPG’s are monotonous and repetitive and many survival horror games are simplistic.

Sound and Graphic wise, many RPG’s and many survival horror games are mediocre or not much better than average.

Yet many of these same RPG’s and survival horror games gave us some of the best times that we’ve ever had. Why is that? I think my categories try to address that specifically.


The categories that I would choose in the order most closely related to your categories:
Immersion 34%
Experience 33%
Presentation 33%

Presentation:
Starting with the last part (relative to your categories) first, I think that sound and graphics are really part of the overall presentation. I don’t recall ever really playing a game with horrible sound but excellent graphics or horrible graphics but excellent sound, enough to the point to distract me that one was bad and the other good. It is the overall presentation of the sound as it relates to the graphics that is important, but not only that. It is largely about cinematography, camera angles, choice of 2D or 3D, color, etc. and timing of the music and sound effects. Presentation gives you a REASON to play the game.

Experience:
I value games like Ace Combat because I will never be a fighter pilot, yet I feel like I have some idea of what kinds of missions the pilot flies, what aircraft is useful, the best strategies in the air. Sure Ace Combat also is well presented and highly immersive, but my point here is that the experience of playing the game is worthwhile because it provides me an experience I might otherwise not have. By playing the game I get a sense of what it means to be a fighter pilot. The same can be said of hunting and fishing games as I am a city/suburban boy, and also for the worlds and relationships in RPG’s. Thus experience is a combination of gameplay and story. It is based on enough of a story to give you an understanding of the MEANING of your role in the world and the uniqueness of gameplay that would be suitable for conveying that type of meaningful experience.

Immersion: Immersion is a function of both presentation and experience. Immersion is the art of serious, sensitive, and oftentimes intangible combination of the other two categories such that a game with great presentation is more than a ‘movie’ and a game with a great experience is more that a ‘simulation’. It is when the gamer has a sense of PURPOSE. Immersion is the most important part of any gameplay as no book or movie can ever reach a gamer in the way that a truly immersive game can.

Mine would be:

Story: 40%
Gameplay: 45%
Sound: 10%
Graphics: 5%

I can't really answer this in a percentage scale. So an explanation instead.

Starting with sound. Sound is pretty important to me. It doesn't have to be memorable (though memorable is nice). It just can't get on my nerves. Final Fantasy 5's panic theme is a song that gets on my nerves. Super Mario World Advance's music gets on my nerves (it's so tinny compared to the original). In fact, while we're at that, the music of a port has to be at least as good as the original, otherwise I'm not gonna be too happy.

Story needs to be something I'm interested in. If a game doesn't have a story, that's okay. If the only story is during the intro and/or ending, it's not as important. But if there's a story existing throughout the game, it needs to be interesting. What's interesting? Well, I found FF12's story interesting. Doesn't need to be exciting. Just needs to keep my attention. Dragon Quest 8's story kept my attention, too. What doesn't work as a story? Actually, I'm not really that picky with story.

Gameplay is pretty important. If it's clunky, I won't play it. If I'm falling asleep while playing it, the other aspects better be good enough to make up for it. Great if something in the gameplay is actually something enjoyable, but that usually isn't the case with RPGs. Still, most cases, I haven't been bored by an RPG's battles. Except Dragon Quest. Also, I don't like games where I get lost. If you're gonna give me a boat, you better tell me where I'm going with it.

Graphics, not a big deal. I like to be able to tell what I'm looking at, and what I'm looking at has gotta be interesting. But it doesn't neccessarily have to be high-quality. But don't give me any flashing effects. For example, Goemon 64 had characters brightly flash to show that it was a false image. That hurt my eyes. Don't do that.

Is that it? Yeah, I think that's it. I could probably go on if I wanted to, but that's all I can think of right now.

It totally depends on the genre for me so I'll skip the the the percentages.

Story- For an RPG story is counts for a lot of it, and its nice if the story is great, even if the gameplay sucks. However, if the gameplay is good enough or the game is loooooooong enough then it really doesn't bother me if the story is bad. In any other genre I really don't care about the story, I'll pay attention to it, but that's all. Killer7 being the exception.

Gameplay- Gameplay is important, that's why they call them games. It's definetely good to play an awsome game once in a while, but I'm not like those people who can't stand to play an average or below average game. There's something fun about just playing something new.

Sound- Sound is important. I never really realized how important it could be until I tried playing without it. Playing a horror game with the sound off is boring, and an action game with bad BGM is annoying. A lot of games now are taking the low road with music development in lieu of fancy explosions and echoing screamy, voice overs, and that makes me mad. Thankfully I always have Iron Maiden on standby to fill in for crappy battle music.

Graphics- I hate graphics. Every time I see a hi-res, lip-sync'ed, explosion-filled, blood-boiling FMV I shed tears of acid. Over-inflation of graphics represents the downfall of gaming. Not to say that I don't want games to look "nice". I always like to see creative environments and simplistic beauty in design of graphics. Games can look good while still not punching you in the face with polygons.

Boobies- Seriously. Pron is pretty cheap these days. I'm not gonna buy a game just because there are hot girls in it.

That just totally took me back to the 'ZOMG, GTA has hookerz!!!' kick that everyone thought was so freakin awesome. >.<

*SPAZ* "OMG, you can screw then and kill them and GET YOUR MONEY BACK"

...sad that there was so much hype about that.

And while I'm on the topic, I dare say that the GTA series is over-played and watered down.

Graphics ARE important.

True, these days there is too much emphasis on them and I think that they can be distracting in a game similar to when Lucas did the Star Wars remake where it was distracting to see EVERY SINGLE muscle, tendon, and ligament animated in the creatures that the stormtroopers road on Tatooine just to show they had the technology to do the animation.

But graphics themselves are not overrated in games. Graphics have been driving competition from the start. Ever since George Plimpton said the Intellivision makes the Atari look like shiz, graphics have been an ESSENTIAL part of gaming. Graphics provide artistic presentation, environmental distinction, and realm immersion.

The problem is that people who buy games are placing too much importance on them nowadays. So while I agree that the mainstream gamer and the dollar oriented developer use graphics as the blood of the business, I would strongly recommend placing your frustration with the mainstream gamer and the developer and not hating graphics themselves for being used as a pawn. Good graphics make games better.

Ya know...

When I saw this on the front page I would have SWORN the thread was started by TheTreuCoolness!!

But on topic -

Story: 0.3%

Gameplay: 0.1%

Sound: 0.2%

Graphics: 0.4%

Sillyness: 99%

Story - 1%

Gameplay - 97%

Sound - 1%

Graphics - 1%

Okay, primary argument: It's a game! What it is, is in the
word. "Game"play. If it's not fun, if it's not interesting, if it's tedious, if
it's boring, then I've already pulled out the cartridge or removed the disc
and shelved it. It's a game that you play and interact with. The stuff I'm
interacting with had better be fun and engaging. F U N. Fun. My time on
this planet is limited. I don't have the time to spare for entertainment that
isn't fun.

A story is not a game. A story is something you read in a book or watch
in a movie. Even the most awesome movie bores me after I've seen it a
few times. An awesome video game? I can keep coming back to it and
keep playing it. Especially if different things can happen each time the
game is played. But even a scripted game where I'm exploring the same
environments I've seen many times before (because I've played it many
times already), if it's got good action and interesting environments to
explore, it doesn't lose its appeal.

Sound and graphics enhance the gameplay experience. If it's all sound
and graphics but isn't fun to play, then it hits the shelf and stays there.

To this day, I could play Ms Pac-Man and be entertained by it. Classic
arcade game. I was around when it was in the arcades. Now I have it on
my PS2 (it's in Namco Museum). Simple graphics, bleeps and blips.
Bottom line: I can still be entertained by it.

Sonic The Hedgehog? Those are some of the best games of all time. No
story, non-stop action. F U N.

Come to think of it, almost all of my most memorable gaming experiences
were lean on story. My most memorable RPG experiences have been
stuff like Diablo (different every time, no story), Might & Magic VI
(nonlinear, story isn't intrusive), and Shining Force (tactical, strategy).

I played Heroes Of Might & Magic 2 and 3 (strategy) for months at a time.
I think I made it half way through Xenosaga Ep 1 before quitting out of
boredom. That was a game where I actually wished there was a way to
skip the gameplay and just watch the cinematics (which I found to be
much more interesting, sort of like watching a movie). In the end, I didn't
care if I saw the rest of the story because it wasn't fun to play.

With this said, I do think that graphical and sound quality (or rather, lack
thereof) can be a detractor. It depends on the game. Ms Pac-Man is so
simple that a flashy graphical backdrop would actually detract from it
(Namco Museum has a Pac-Man game that has impressive graphical
backdrops, but they interfere with the gameplay at times; there's also a
version of Defender that is atrocious because it adds graphical backdrops
into the mix). Sonic The Hedgehog has perfect graphical and sound
quality for what it is. If we're talking about a more recent game with a
three dimensional world you can interact with, it had better look good. As
the game environment gets more complicated, the more pressure there is
to keep everything looking appealing. I wouldn't change a thing about the
look of Ms Pac-Man. If we're talking about a more recent offering on the
PS2, the look of it becomes much more important to the gameplay
experience because there's more than one camera angle involved.

To sum up: Video games have been going downhill for a long time
because there's too much cinematic scene to watch and not enough asses
being kicked.

But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Hey, who wants pie?



To me, "game environment" means "level design" or whatever interactive
environment the game has. It doesn't equate with graphical quality;
rather, it's a part of the "gameplay". Graphical quality is the presentation
of the environment. The layout of the environment, the design of the
game world we're interacting with, is part of the gameplay quality. i.e. the
four mazes in Ms Pac-Man are the gaming environment for that game.
Without the design of the mazes, you've just got some graphics that
represent walls, dots, and stuff. Add in the level designs and you've got a
game.

To me, the environment is the game. It's an interactive environment.
There had better be something interesting for me to interact with.

@Crythania
I am reading that you prefer video games to stay traditionally about the gaming aspect. I can respect that. While I agree that this is just your opinion, I see no reason for you to assert that you could be wrong about it. The only way you could be wrong about your own opinion is if you are not being honest with either yourself or us.

I too come from the Golden Age of gaming. I understand that the term “video gameâ€

"But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong" is a line that Dennis Miller used to say after a witty monologue. I expressed an unpopular opinion here. It could be unpopular for a reason.

Yeah, I'm hopelessly traditional. I'm a conservative gamer. I often feel like an old man holding on to his phonograph and vinyl records because "they sound better".

Sorry about the confusion about the Dennis Miller quote. I'm not that familiar with the wit of conservative traditional old guys...like Dennis Miller.

The gameplay versus story issue could be interpreted as a conservative/liberal issue.

Get your politics up to par

If you need to believe in something
Believe in us 'cuz we make it easy
If you need to belong to something
Belong to us and we'll make you PC
Peace & Love Incorporated

That's from an Information Society song.

I wanted to revive interest in this topic because I think it is a good one.

One way that I think may be relevant is to ask Lantis if now that you have the Wii, do you still lean so heavily toward the importance of story over gameplay?

My standards are different for different games.

On the subject of RPG's, I look for three important factors:
Story
Characters
Battle

And out of those three, the RPG has to have either one of the first two, story and characters, while battle is more of a special treat or an extra.
Some games, such as Arc the Lad: TOTS, has a weaksauce story. It's the characters that are so well done, and that's why I love the game. An example of a game that misses the two important factors is Grandia 3. It has boring characters and a crappy story, but a wonderful battle system. However, Grandia 3 is a bad game, because it misses the two important parts of any RPG.

On most other games, I just look for what impresses me.

Zomg, zombified thread!

*breaks out holy water and/or phoenix downs*

But to asnwer your question, Bo. Yes, I still do. Actually, all the titles for the Wii that I have actually have story with them. Like Twilight Princess and the Resident Evils that are out for it. So I still think story way alot more heavily than gameplay ever will. So "addictive" games like Wii Sports/Play aren't really much of anything to me. I'll play Wii Golf with SK from time to time, but that's about it.

I guess I look at it this way. If I find myself thinking of a game's story while I'm not even playing it... trying to figure out the plot, remembering scenes that were great, descussing the story with a friend, ect... I know I have a good game on my hands.

I'm not going to be talking/thinking all to much about how I eagle'd a hole in wii golf. But the whole Resident Evil series or Xenogears (xenosaga) stories can take many hours of discussion. I could go on forever about Final Fantasy tactics... which argueably has one of the best stories out there.

@ Ice - I'm not in complete agreement with you. I mean, I can understand where you come from... but there are non-rpg games that can (and probably should) hold to the same standards. Take my example I used just now of Resident Evil. It's by no means a RPG, but the three most important things would probably still be story, characters, and battle.

Indeed, but my opinion is that story, character, and battle only matter in RPG games, to me anyways. Because in an RPG, I expect a great story with characters I can relate to. In different genres of gaming, such as resident evil, I could give less of a flip if the story matters. As long as it's fun and has great gameplay, I'll give it a shot.

Which reminds me, I typically am drawn to games with excellent soundtracks. I hate turning down the volume because it sucks, and is an important factor for me whenever I play anything. Fortunately, I think I'm rather content with most any music types, so it's difficult to displease me in that caterogry.

If battles suck, the games suck because that is what you'll (as a player) will be doing most of the game. Anyone can sit through or skip the cut scenes of a boring game, but only a player who enjoys the battle can edure playing a game where his advancement to the next level is not guaranteed.

To me resident evil is made a whole lot better because of it's story and it's characters. I feel that Halo is the same way. Even games like Ace Combat 5 to a lesser extent benefit from this consideration.

Yuri from the Shadow Hearts games is probably my favorite video game character, but much of that has to do with what I personally have in common with him.

It is true however, that I identified with Regina from Dino Crisis and the Master Chief from Halo almost as much as Yuri, but it was so individual that it was like watching myself grow, but in a game like Shadow Hearts 2, spending the kind of time I did with not only Yuri but all the other party members was almost like watching my children grow and in that sense, RPG characters may be more precious.

When I first read this I disagreed. But now, a lot of months later, I admit that I kind of think like that, too...

But it still really depends on the game.

A game with a story is putting itself on the same level as a book or movie. A game without a story can't be compared to one. What I mean is:
When you want to see a story, you will see a movie / read a book / play a 'story' game (i.e., most RPGs).
When you want to have fun, you will do anything that you have fun with (like sports or TV, whatever) or play a 'gameplay' game (i.e., Pacman!).

Comparing 'story' and 'gameplay' games is difficult, because they're not for the same purpose. You might as well try comparing books to sports. Yes, you may prefer doing one over the other, but they're all good in their own area.

I mean, I played FFX for years just to see how it ended...
And I've been playing Diablo 2 for years too because i just love that game.
It's two different things. ^^

I look for story in a game that's supposed to give me a story. Example: Final Fantasy. When I play FF, I expect a story. If they give me gameplay and no story, it'll be disappointment. There's also the other way around: you buy a game to play it, period. Diablo II was like that for me. Never expected any story out of it, and never got one. But the gameplay was badass, just as I had expected. That's what counts for this game.
Sometimes you're surprised. Like, me, I had an amazing surprise when I discovered some time ago that Warcraft 3, a traditional 'gameplay' game, offered a Campaign mode with one hell of a story. But surprises like that are rare.

IMO.

The only problem is that in this day and age, it is difficult to find a game that is good due to 97% of gameplay, if graphics, sound, and story really are relegated to a total of 3% of the experience.

Graphics, sound, and story that are really 1% each (or at least significantly less than gameplay) would be comparable to a modern day game that looks, sounds, and has the story of and an atari 2600 game but is as fun as the shooting of Halo, or platforming of a Mario game. That really isn't possible.