Gameplay > Graphics > Story

Gameplay > Graphics > Story
This is the objective raking. You cannot argue against it.

All three are equally important. It's the same thing as with the movies with writing and visuals. Games just add a third component.

nah, I feel gameplay is proportionally more important than the other 2

please kys for posting spiders especially tarantulas, please dive in a volcano you fucking dickhead

>wahh I'm scared of this thing that is 1/10th my size

>MUH GAMPLAY
Grow up.

>MUH STORY
Go read a book.

>1/10th

Goliath bird eaters are ~30cm but are fucking harmless. A fucking stray cat could do more damage to you.

all three supporting eachother and covering each other's inherent weaknesses > Gameplay and any of the 2 supporting each other > Gameplay alone > Graphics alone > Story alone
this is the objective ranking. you cannot argue against it.

I've read one recently, it was shit.

Go read Dostoyevsky.

Story>Gameplay>Graphics

Oi. Don't shit on Gatsby. It was a pretty good story with a meh ending.

No thanks, pseud

If graphics includes soundtrack then I agree with you

You are a fucking pussy. LMAOing@urlife

Go read a book if you want good story.

I can't believe we're still talking like this. I dont view them as separate categories for evaluation, I just see them as all part of the whole.

It's gameplay > story > graphics.

Gameplay>Story>Soundtrack>Graphics

>Game with terrible story
>Ok graphics
>Great gameplay

Can't think of a game with terrible story.

All can be reasons to play a game but gameplay is obviously the most important and if you disagree you're fucking nuts.

If a game has really great gameplay but a shitty story (like many many great games) it is still worth playing. The story is something you deal with because the real substance - the playing - is so much fun.

If a game has a great story but really shitty gameplay, it doesn't matter how great that story is. The majority of the time if you're fighting against jank, terrible controls, bad design, the story is not worth it.

Keep in mind, the standards for storytelling in video games are incredibly low. A "great" story in video games wouldn't even make a good TV story, let alone a movie or a book. It might make for a decent anime though.

I'd argue that you can't say gameplay is more important than story, and vice versa (graphics is least important though, but not unimportant).

Imagine Deus Ex but with a worse story and better gameplay. You'd get something like Human Revolution, a good game, but not great like Deus Ex.

Imagine taking Fallout 1 & 2 and making the gameplay better at the expense of the story. You'd get something like Fallout Tactics, again a good game, but not the equal of 1 or 2.

Sure, there's the "go read a book" argument, but that relies on books offering nothing buy story (true), and games offering nothing but gameplay (false). Books offer nothing but story, movies offer both story and visuals and games offer stories, visuals and gameplay. You need all three in a game to make it a game, even Pong has a story (the story is: You're playing Ping Pong).

here's one: tetris
here's another one, umm.. tetris the grandmaster?

>it might make a decent anime though

This is why there is so much overlap between fags who play games for stories and who watch anime. They're really both children whose exposure to storytelling is so limited that they think the garbage they get from these mediums is remotely good.

By this definition then every puzzle game is top tier because of no story, ok graphics, and great game play.

What's good about that book?

>Blah blah, I'm a mopey fuck, blah blah I know a rich dude, blah blah parties, blah blah let's be vaguely mopey a bit more, blah blah yes that dude sure likes his parties, blah blah blam dead

But the thing is, games are the only thing that provide gameplay. You can find story and visuals elsewhere. The same cannot be said for gameplay.

play drakengard and tall me that again

>this thread

This is why people think gamers are so juvenile. You look retarded when you actually try to rank stuff like this, and you don't understand they can't just be totally separated. Every game is different.

Thanks for proving his point

It's a high school tier novel. It's good, short, with a clear message that's important for superficial teenagers to get.

It's like Brave New World or The Crucible, perfect for high school English class. Much dumber and it wouldn't be worth teaching, much smarter and it would be above most of the teenagers in the class.

1/10
Jesus fucking Christ I'm not scared of spiders but if I saw one the size of a small dog I'd burn my house down

There's PnP-games, there's boardgames, there's sports. All offer gameplay.

It would be very difficult to divorce a game from story, the only way I can think would be to make it a completely abstract puzzle-game, like Tetris. And no disrespect to Tetris, but I don't think anyone on Sup Forums holds that game up as the pinnacle of gaming (or holds any puzzle-game dear to heart for that matter).

I have played Drakengard you fucking moron.

Have you played Drakengard? I see a lot of retards bringing it up today and I'm pretty certain that none of them actually played it, they just watched Youtube plot summaries after finishing Nier Automata because they wanted to jump on Nier fans and say "WELL I PLAYED THE PREVIOUS GAMES YOU PLEB HAHA I'M SO SMART!"

Drakengard is pretty fucking entertaining but it's worse in the storytelling department than almost any novel they would have a class of high school children read.

why i proved his point? dod's story it waay worh it the bad gameplay

I'd agree, but it's only by merit of being unique to the medium. That does not mean games can't have all 3 and it doesn't mean a game is worse for focusing on things other than the gameplay.

I can't even begin to imagine unironically thinking gameplay isn't the most important aspect of video games unless you don't actually like video games.

Why? Most big spiders are pretty harmless.

depends on the genre

i'm not a newfag like you, asshole
instead of saying "LE ECELEB DICKSUCKER XDDDD" and repeating the shit you saied in the your first post, prove it

I'm sorry user, but if you think Drakengard's story is worth the shitty gameplay, you either have shit taste in storytelling or have extremely high tolerance for shitty, broken gameplay.

The only ones I've seen saying this are console kids who've never played a game with an engaging story.

Go play Fallout 1 / 2, Deus Ex or Morrowind, then come back and say that gameplay is the be-all and end-all of games.

Gameplay > Music >>>>> Graphics >= Story

Post your favourite vidya ost

>Imagine Deus Ex but with a worse story and better gameplay.
I don't have to imagine since I'd mute the game and skip all dialogue anyway.

>Imagine taking Fallout 1 & 2 and making the gameplay better at the expense of the story
Same as the above.

Your game should be able to exist in a complete vacuum of nothing but pure gameplay, with no story, sound, graphics, or anything else of any kind. I should be able to have fun with nothing but polygons fighting on a black background with atari noises. If the game needs story or graphics as a crutch, then there's something fundamentally wrong with it.Those things are supposed to be complimentary, not vital pillars to the entire game.

tell me then why it sucks

I've heard The Witcher 3 has such a great story, but the gameplay is so boring that I didn't care to sit through it. A game can have the greatest story ever written, but if the gameplay sucks I'm not interested.

I never said it sucks. I just don't think it's worth enduring the shitty gameplay for it.

If you aren't trolling then you should realize that you are an extreme minority in regards to how you play games and you can not view yourself or your experiences in any way as representative of how others play/enjoy games.

Basically: Nu-uh, you're wrong.

I probably have an higher tollarance for bad gameplay then...
Watching the cutscenes on yt is ok if you can't stomach the game

Gameplay = Music = Manly men > Graphics > Story

ftfy OP

>MUHJORITY IS ALWAYS RIGHT

Gameplay > Artstyle > Graphics > Music > Story

Of course, that's my point. No single aspect of the game can be utter shit, then the game is shit.

If the story is utter shit then you'll be put off and not want to play the game, unless the gameplay/graphics can make up for it.

If the gameplay is utter shit then you won't want to play the game, unless the story is interesting enough that you'll slog through it just to see the ending, or the graphics are so stellar that you play it just to stare at the landscapes.

If the graphics are utter shit then the game might be a chore to get through as well, though in my opinion it is far more easy to compensate for bad graphics than anything else.

Obviously the story to the Wither 3 didn't hook you enough to skim over the gameplay problems. I never got past Witcher 1 for the same reason (it is dull to play, and the story/dialogue/characters haven't hooked me enough).

No, but the absolute minority are always wrong. That's why it is considered wrong and disgusting to fuck kids and eat shit.

Art style is the same as graphics. You can't divorce the two, unless you split them into art style and something like "graphical technical accomplishment".

>Art style is the same as graphics
No retard, that is not ture
Fuck off

Depends on the type of game. A racing game can have the shittiest story feasible and still be an amazing game if gameplay is good, but a JRPG or adventure game is usually the opposite. The only one not necessary is decent graphics. If you think games needs anything close to decent graphics, go play a MUD or any ASCII based game. So long as you create immersion, graphics aren't necessarily needed. They are an easy way to help with that but graphics won't "age" a game anywhere nearly as bad as story and gameplay.

>No, but the absolute minority are always wrong.
>That's why it is considered wrong and disgusting to fuck kids
Considering this current political climate, that probably wasn't the best example for you to use.

I think story can definitely help make a game worth playing. Look no further than Playstation games. The gameplay in TLoU was nothing special but the story got pretty interesting 3/4 of the way in. Heavy Rain is arguably bad gameplay but I found the thriller aspect pretty interesting.

What it comes down to is people choose to use games as their medium instead of just a book or movie. You just put up with the medium.

Artstyle = graphics

Not him, but what do you mean? I don't really follow politics.

Soundtrack > Story > Gameplay > Graphics

You like shit stories because you're stupid

>i've heard
You're not doing yourself any favors here