I don't care about graphics, only gameplay matters

>I don't care about graphics, only gameplay matters

youtube.com/watch?v=yZg6CV4E4Co

Mushroom Mushroom

>What is art direction?

You're right. Only gameplay matters.

Not that neo-Sup Forums believes that, because kids under 13 only care about "muh pretty grafixs"

Thats actually a good way of exposing this fedora-tier argument. The gameplay concept looks pretty neat, but literally everything else about this game looks terrible

Here, let me illustrate. Pic related has comparable graphics (animated 2D) but the art direction is actually good.
Besides, the gameplay looks like shit, what's your point?

Too bad Darkest Dungeon's a glorified slot machine in most respects.

But that has nothing to do with graphics or art. .

I know. I'm just saying it's too bad that it has such a nice aesthetic when the gameplay is ultimately less than stellar.

>I don't care about graphics,


People who say shit like this are fucking liars.

The technical aspect of graphics is unimportant, however people care a hell lot about the visual style.

Even in games like Dwarf Fortress there are purists that would never touch a sprite pack because it isn't true to the original looks.

git

looks like a flash game. I aint paying to play a fucking flash game.

This guy! But seriously, a lot of it comes down to RNG. Yes there's ways to prepare for and somewhat mitigate RNG from completely fucking your asshole, but that's not "getting better". You're just prepared.

It's not that I don't care, It's just that I don't desperately need them to be bleeding edge 8k 120 fps indistinguishable from real life quality.
Nidhogg is fun as shit, it's just rectangles.
Gameplay is more important than graphics, but if the art style is a turn off, it's much less likely to be played. I didn't get in to Salt and Sanctuary at first because the characters looked like 12 year old drawings, but eventually I gave it a shot and thought it was pretty fun.

risk management is a real skill you get better at

>only gameplay matters
>gameplay consits on clicking on monsters while you cant even move

>consoleplebs dont know you can have both

I play on PC, lets not start another fucking console war, ok? thanks champ.

>tfw can't play on PC anymore cause all the games look bad

Is that supposed to be good gameplay?

>that picture of Runescape
fuckin kek.

Seriously though, anyone considering replying to this, it's just cherry picked bait. Don't waste your time.

thanks so much for your contribution

Taking the bait
>A UE4 demo is a New PS4 game
>All those PC games are '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''new'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

You can't provide a better looking pc game

>Gameplay is more important than graphics
Objectively false
If graphics are more important than gameplay then why do developers keep improving graphics and making gameplay worse and still keep selling better and better?

>but literally everything else about this game looks terrible

How does that disprove anything when that's literally what they're saying -- "it's okay for a game to look terrible as long as the gameplay is good and the graphics don't impede it".

This shit is Adventure Quest tier but it's not messy.

Gameplay now is better than any outdated arachic 90s game you can name

Retards, PCucks and so on.

Because marketing.
Also, everyone's entitled to le own opinion

It just shows the absurdity of the statement, that "muh gameplay" elitism. This is the result of "gameplay is literally the only thing that matters". Granted its low budget Newgrounds-tier, but nobody can honestly tell me "this game is really appealing" with visuals as messy and ugly as that.

Guys it was sarcasm, I'm the guy he replied to and I can see that.

Most of the best selling games on PC have wank graphics, so I think you're misdirecting your blame. All the graphics wank games that are used for benchmarking are console ports.

Kek. I remember that Simcity thread where everyone complained and quoted its original developer about how later games (starting with 3000) ruined the original vision with variety and deeper mechanics. What did they remove to achieve it? Fun, of course.

people don't actually believe that, do they?

The only people who think it's absurd are people who disagree with the statement "graphics aren't important" in the first place. It's not an argument against the statement in any way.

> visuals as messy

This is just you being blind. The visuals are unappealing due to how sparse and simplistic they are. "Messy" would be something that clutters up the gameplay or makes it difficult to distinguish elements.

>Granted its low budget Newgrounds-tier, but nobody can honestly tell me "this game is really appealing" with visuals as messy and ugly as that.

And if you're claiming that no Newgrounds-tier game is fun, then you are falling for an entirely different kind of elitism.

Darkest Dungeons sucks balls. Disciples 2 does two groups fighting eachother and exploring way better.

So long as the framerate is stable and I can understand what's happening on the screen easily, the graphics are fine. The example in OP is horrible. Not because the pictures aren't pretty, but because everything seemed so confusing. Particularly in the overworld.

Truly bad graphics are a hindrance and truly great graphics can enhance the game, but if they're in the middle 50% in quality, that's good enough for me.

>And if you're claiming that no Newgrounds-tier game is fun
Literally didn't even say that but whatever.

The game is actually pretty fun

One finger death punch

Fucking stickmen, man, but it is so fun its a sin

Can you stop shilling your ugly game? Its enough having tonsee you whine about it in AGDG and Sup Forums gamedev threads. Yes your art is shit and we can sometimes get past that- but the gameplay looks shit too. Feels like a flash game. Fuck off and let it die ok?

Come on man, why are you shilling your game with a shitposting thread? I would have bought your game in a bundle if you didn't go full retard, but now I just have to laugh at how bad it is without caring how much effort you have put in.

You said, and I quote,
> nobody can honestly tell me "this game is really appealing" with visuals as messy and ugly as that.

Which means you don't think any such game is appealing. That means that you could never consider something appealing from gameplay alone. It could look like the most innovative and mind-blowing experience of your life, but you'd dismiss it outright if it had Newgrounds tier graphics.

If that's not what you meant, then phrase yourself better.