Importante
 

This came up in the Best Console Thread. I thought it might need expanding upon in its own thread.

... Wait what the...? Sorry, hold on... Ah there we go. Here:

Which leads into one thing. A game back in the day had to just be good. We will play the heck outta Donkey Kong just to get to the kill screen which is our stopping point. We play Mario for the same feeling we got as a kid. Now if we don't get a story with our game in this generation (and if the graphix look like PS1 era) we just won't play it.

So what's the most important thing to a game? Story? Graphics? Bump-mapping?

My opinion comes later.

My favorite games:

Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, Max Payne, the Legacy Of Kain series, Half Life 2, the Thief series, the Quest For Glory series, Tekken, and a few others I can't remember. The point is that I still play the hell outta all of these games because, even though the graphics aren't as pretty as their next gen counterparts, they're unique and involving - as well as having a damn good story.

...If only my PC could play (or I could still find) the Quest for Glory series. What gems those were. And now hardly anyone's ever heard of them.

I'm that rare kind of gamer who really prefers storyline and character development and plot and superb dialogue over aspects like, well, gameplay. I like the interactive component of videogaming and I really do enjoy nonlinear games -- so long as the plot's still damn phenomenal regardless of which path I choose. (IE, Fallout 2.)
But for me, personally? I could give a damn less about the graphics. I'd rather replay Chrono Trigger then play most the crap that's coming out these days. You can call me nostalgic, but for whatever reason, I definitely think the best time for great stories in gaming has past us, and while a few new videogames recapture the magic, the vast majority are dung.

I mean I'm the type of gamer who, based on the factors I prefer in my videogames, will play Fallout 2 or Planescape: Torment and think it's far better than a new release even if the graphics are shiney and the people's faces look neat and even if the new game has epic Wii controls that make you feel as if you're really swinging a sword or some shit. Once videogame companies start actually making a videogame with half the programming complexity of Fallout 2's infinite number of dialogue branches and subquests and possibilities while somehow incorporating delicious, pure superb plot development into every feasible outcome I will rejoice.

Unfortunately these days the emphasis is on making money with significantly famous titles and releasing them after only a year or two, tops, of development, with the vast majority of the effort invested into some "crazy awesome new gameplay mechanic" or some "new graphic effects that look absolutely amazing, it's as if you're really there." So I'm stuck with a "modern RPG" like Fable where I'm told the game is new and fresh and exciting but the goddamn game's story is as cliche as could possibly be imagined and there's only stereotypically good and evil choices and it feels so pathetically immature in scope compared to 1998's Fallout 2 and Planescape: Torment I damn well want to rip game developer's eyes from their sockets.

...okay, I don't really want to rip anyone's eyes out, but still. This is a point that aggravates me.

See, I like the Thief games because you can stand in the shadows for ten minutes, waiting for a guard to walk by, and not think it tedious at all. These new-fangled "stealth" games - MGS4 not included - are just parodies of actually doing anything "stealthy."

Innovation and improvements make games good.

Your statements remind me of an old PC game called "Deus Ex" where I experienced the same phenomenon and it's really one of the few games other than the MGS series that really did stealth right for me. Deus Ex is another example that my personality absolutely adores in a videogame -- it's all about complex decisions, tons of worthy and well-fleshed out solutions to problems, conspiracies and character development and plot twists, with the gameplay thrown in almost as an afterthought. And I love those kinds of games. How else could I enjoy the MGS series?

Anyway, in the very first level of Deus Ex -- outside the statue of liberty -- I can legitimately enjoy waiting a good ten minutes in the dark, priming myself for a perfectly aimed sniper's shot at a single opponent, and love every second of it. Somehow the game actually works in such a way. The manfucaturing of tension is just right, keeping your heart pumped as you sneak around. And enemies are actually tough enough that you'll quickly die if you try to face more than just one or two at once.

EDIT: Innovation and improvements can make games good, but I'll rarely like a game based on a gameplay innovation alone. Prince of Persia is one of my favorite more-recent-generation series and one of the few recent series I really thoroughly loved, and the sands of time angle included some substantial gameplay innovations, but if the three games in the series didn't include phenomenal stories that kept me intrigued and characters like the Prince and Farah (who I really cared about) I'd probably suffer through the experience regardless of the unique gameplay.

Nope. Not even on the mark for me. I just can't play any games prominently featuring Sam Fisher. Those Splinter Cell games are supposed to be a "step up," but to me, the controls are a nightmare. Innovative my ass.

For me its always the way it makes the gamer feel.

That's more or less why Shadow of the Colossus is easily one of my favorite games.

And the adrenaline high I get off fighting games provides me hours of entertainment, but I'm also pretty competitive.

I'm like this. It's hard to track but it's mostly how well the games connects with me and how immersed I feel.
In particular I find hand drawn art works very well on me. Gritty realistic graphics I just can't get into.
Also controls. The simpler and more intuitive the better. Having to learn a million controls just removes me from the experience. Give me a jump and an attack and I'll be happy.

I prefer to play bad games, because then at least I get to hop onto the Internet and complain about them and inform them they have bad taste for liking those games.

Gritty I don't have a particular draw too but it's not an unattractive feature; I do like how advanced physics engines are breaking into the spotlight, since to me that spells good fun. The things I can do with an open city and 4 friends is just pure gaming bliss.

So that probably is the crutch, and the one thing that brings lasting pleasure to me in games: multiplayer. So I guess the social aspect is most important and probably always will be, hence I'll probably always prefer a pen and paper game or a night of Earth Defense Force with my friends. Yes yes, even the introspective nerd appears to enjoy company. I...I think I might like girls...