With The Sims, graphics is important, because gaming is about telling my story. With every other game, gameplay is what matters. I grew up playing games on monochrome monitors and graphing calculators, playing text-based games like Zork, so fancy graphics almost get in the way for me with most games. But with The Sims, it’s completely different for me, because it’s more like a dollhouse than a regular video game.
SimCity and The Sims are literally two great examples of this... SimCity 2013 is a beautiful game, but the gameplay was severely lacking (especially in comparison to past games in the franchise). Just like how Sims 4 (especially in the beginning) was (and still is) lacking in comparison to Sims 3 and Sims 2. Though, Sims 4 is NOT necessarily a bad game. It's actually one of my favorites... I just wish it was being allowed to reach its full potential.
However, this doesn't mean graphics and art style aren't important to me... if I'm playing a simulation game, I prefer the graphics/art style to be as realistic as possible.
I accidentally clicked gameplay, but for me it is graphics. I like both, but if a game doesn't have a certain level of graphics, it is hard for me to really enjoy it no matter how good the gameplay.
I would rather have less "sophisticated" graphics if it means far better gameplay. I should not have to use mods for simple gameplay. It would be one thing if I was using a mod to make my sim Superman or a mutant from The X Men or add in occults that the community is divided on. (Which I do use for kids to use magic and added occults for gameplay options) but I mostly use them to add social interactions (that still are in the T rating), for my sims to react to things like cheating realistically for gameplay, better autonomy, better traits etc.
It's not like the devs are spending days on making models, rigging, parenting this to that. There are plenty of places to get stock models and stock animation to cut down on time which means cutting costs all around. I love and can appreciate good graphics but if a game has great gameplay I don't mind poorer graphics. Unfortunately, EA has a nasty habit of buying successful gaming companies and destroying that game. Instead of just acting as a publishing company which is what they should simply do, they have to try to make games. They fail at this. Let gaming companies make incredible games with a decent time to make them. I wouldn't ask the CEO at Random House to write a mindblowing novel because they run a publishing company and they aren't an author. Why does EA insist that they should make games when all they should do is simply publish them?
Playtesting - not just tabletop games and card games any more. Really that should have been playtested in Beta and not [img]just with accounting and marketing but actual players. https://i.imgur.com/t48COW6.jpg[/img]
I think gameplay is slightly more important but if the graphics is not something I like, then I can't enjoy the game that much.
It's kinda like when I listen to a song. I focus on the instruments and the melody more than the lyrics but if the lyrics are really bad or meaningless, it just makes it less good, ya know...?
Gameplay is more important it keeps me coming back to a game but graphics, more importantly even art style might turn me on or off from the very beginning enough to not even be able to stomach proceeding with a game.
Sims 1 graphics by todays standards are really bad but that game kept me interested. Of course they weren't considered bad at that time I guess.
I still play minecraft too, but it needs long rests from time to time.
Graphics is important, but IMO gameplay is essential, without engaging gameplay you just have a shell of a game. Galaxy's Edge is a good example of that, really good looking, although IMO not better than Brindleton Bay and Selvadorada as they fit the style of the game more, but very little gameplay and what there is doesn't carry over well to the existing games
Another example of this is FPS's of the 2000's. For 10 years they emphasised breathtaking graphics, but gameplay stagnated and atrophied. Other types of games came along and grabbed the public's attention. Shooters almost lost their crown as most popular games (if you don't include casual gaming and The Sims (which "hardcore gamers" like to pretend dont exist)). So modern shooters are now including new gameplay, as well as stunning graphics.
EDIT Also, another thing to keep in mind is how your graphics age, which is important if you want to have a long lived game. TS2 graphics seem to have aged better than TS3, and TS4's will probably age well to as generally speaking more stylised graphics tend to age better. Also, they are often cheaper to produce and easier on your graphics card.
I wanted to vote both.
In any case, graphics are very important to me. I like to have beautiful scenery and beautiful sims. This is why I spend hours downloading CC. TS4 has beautiful graphics!
All the prettiest graphics and visuals in the world do not equal gameplay. I dont know why the developers seem convinced that the players just want nice things to look at, but not have anything to do. Yeah I want the game to look as wonderful as possible, but I dont play games to just stare at them. I PLAY them.
This was a hard choice but I had to be honest with myself 😖😖😖😖
Though I should clarify it depends on the game. Some games I actually went back to the older game because the gameplay was better. Like a few rpgs. Looks don't really matter.
For a game like the sims which I assume we are talking about here. I literally look at it like a dollhouse and the graphics are more important to me than it probably should be. 😬
Gameplay. Hands down. I don’t care if the game is the most aesthetically pleasing thing to look at and take photos, if I can’t do anything or get bored, it’s no good.
In order to be irreplaceable, one must always be different.- Coco Chanel
I've only played the sims 4 but when looking at the sims 2 smallest details like pulling out drawers while cooking, the runaway teenager, cuddling in bed, having to actually buy clothes without having access to all clothes from the beginning of the game (which imo would give clothes stores that came with get to work a meaning), plus other small details. I feel the details is really important to gameplay and the details in the sims 2 were amazing imo but i guess i can try find some mods that will fix the problem with details :)
Huh. So this is going about how I thought it would go so far but for those who picked graphics, is it more a certain art style you don't like and wouldn't play (like 8-bit vs realistic for example) or just bad graphics in general?
Have a super fantastic awesome splendid amazing day! -TheQxxn
Graphics is first. With the sims games especially, good graphics make the entire experience more dazzling, for me. And in no way does nice graphics keep them from also creating a fun game.
As for art style i like the slightly realistic look a lot more and i hope sims 5 takes a more realistic appearing art style .Once i can post images , ill share a photo of a current game, that looks like how i dream of sims 5 looking.
If they made it realistic what if your sims set themselves on fire
Gameplay is absolutely more important, but if the graphics are so ugly that it hurts your eyes then it is hard to play. In 4, I like my characters. I like how they look and develop attachments and stories for them. The personalities ingame are not impactful enough to be brought to life without a lot of imagination, so I had to like them for them to exist.
Not so much in 3. It took me a long time to design a character that I did not despise the look of to be my absolute favorite. It was also much easier to craft a variety of characters of varying importance and personality. Note here, I really disliked 3's graphics. I prefer 4's, but I would have been more than happy with the main game of 3 with 2's graphics.
Anyway, even though I despise 3's graphics and prefer 4's, I still consider 3 (and honestly 2 when solely based on live mode) the superior games because of the available gameplay.
Graphics is first. With the sims games especially, good graphics make the entire experience more dazzling, for me. And in no way does nice graphics keep them from also creating a fun game.
As for art style i like the slightly realistic look a lot more and i hope sims 5 takes a more realistic appearing art style .Once i can post images , ill share a photo of a current game, that looks like how i dream of sims 5 looking.
If they made it realistic what if your sims set themselves on fire
Comments
Perfect example
However, this doesn't mean graphics and art style aren't important to me... if I'm playing a simulation game, I prefer the graphics/art style to be as realistic as possible.
Sims 1: Hot Date
Sims 2: Seasons
Sims 2: Happy Holiday Stuff
Sims 3: Seasons
Sims 3: 70's, 80's, & 90's Stuff
Sims 4: Seasons
Sims 4: Paranormal Stuff
Sims 4: Strangerville Game Pack
Sure, but video games are largely a visual medium, whereas the appearance of candy doesn’t matter.
I would not accept a game with immense life-like graphics, that allowed bare minimum gameplay.
However, I have answered this with The Sims 2 and 4 in mind...
I prefer TS2 gameplay but because of its graphics, I play TS4...which has better graphics.
It's not like the devs are spending days on making models, rigging, parenting this to that. There are plenty of places to get stock models and stock animation to cut down on time which means cutting costs all around. I love and can appreciate good graphics but if a game has great gameplay I don't mind poorer graphics. Unfortunately, EA has a nasty habit of buying successful gaming companies and destroying that game. Instead of just acting as a publishing company which is what they should simply do, they have to try to make games. They fail at this. Let gaming companies make incredible games with a decent time to make them. I wouldn't ask the CEO at Random House to write a mindblowing novel because they run a publishing company and they aren't an author. Why does EA insist that they should make games when all they should do is simply publish them?
I think gameplay is slightly more important but if the graphics is not something I like, then I can't enjoy the game that much.
It's kinda like when I listen to a song. I focus on the instruments and the melody more than the lyrics but if the lyrics are really bad or meaningless, it just makes it less good, ya know...?
Sims 1 graphics by todays standards are really bad but that game kept me interested. Of course they weren't considered bad at that time I guess.
I still play minecraft too, but it needs long rests from time to time.
Another example of this is FPS's of the 2000's. For 10 years they emphasised breathtaking graphics, but gameplay stagnated and atrophied. Other types of games came along and grabbed the public's attention. Shooters almost lost their crown as most popular games (if you don't include casual gaming and The Sims (which "hardcore gamers" like to pretend dont exist)). So modern shooters are now including new gameplay, as well as stunning graphics.
EDIT Also, another thing to keep in mind is how your graphics age, which is important if you want to have a long lived game. TS2 graphics seem to have aged better than TS3, and TS4's will probably age well to as generally speaking more stylised graphics tend to age better. Also, they are often cheaper to produce and easier on your graphics card.
In any case, graphics are very important to me. I like to have beautiful scenery and beautiful sims. This is why I spend hours downloading CC. TS4 has beautiful graphics!
Tumblr | Sims 4 Gallery | Sims 3 Page
Baby Darling: My 100 Baby Challenge | Generation 1 | Donors 10 | Adult Children 8 | First Post | Most Recent
Give Me a Story, I'll Give You a Build | The Bunker Challenge | CowplantSports
Though I should clarify it depends on the game. Some games I actually went back to the older game because the gameplay was better. Like a few rpgs. Looks don't really matter.
For a game like the sims which I assume we are talking about here. I literally look at it like a dollhouse and the graphics are more important to me than it probably should be. 😬
If they made it realistic what if your sims set themselves on fire
Not so much in 3. It took me a long time to design a character that I did not despise the look of to be my absolute favorite. It was also much easier to craft a variety of characters of varying importance and personality. Note here, I really disliked 3's graphics. I prefer 4's, but I would have been more than happy with the main game of 3 with 2's graphics.
Anyway, even though I despise 3's graphics and prefer 4's, I still consider 3 (and honestly 2 when solely based on live mode) the superior games because of the available gameplay.
They wouldn't look too healthy I assume.