# Bad Game With Good Looks vs Good Game with Bad Looks - which one?



## Zanessa (Oct 10, 2013)

So we all know The Sims 4 is coming out and many are complaining about the looks. They're saying it looks too cartoony, so they won't buy the game. I asked many why they got Sims 3 and they said it was amazing (look wise) while game play was a little crappy. 

So I must ask this (all games, not just The Sims)

Would you buy a game with good looks and okay game play or a game with bad looks but great game play? 

I played The Sims 2 and The Sims 3. Sims 2 had okay looks, but it had so many options and interactions. Then when you looked at Sims 3.. it looked good, art and all of that, but when you looked at things like the game play, it was lacking. Then I played something a little neutral, The Sims Medieval, standing alone - no Sims 2 or 3 required. It was fun. I wasn't a fan of the looks, but I had a lot of fun with it. That's why I'm thinking game play is more important than looks.

So what do you guys think? Wanna tell us what you've played that you're basing your argument off of?


----------



## EeveeGirl (Oct 10, 2013)

Looks are just pretty wrapping paper imo. The story/game itself is what I want to play so I'd rather have a good game


----------



## meowlerrz (Oct 10, 2013)

Gameplay would be the most important for me. I can stand to have not so good looks if an amazing game makes up for it.


----------



## Zanessa (Oct 10, 2013)

Someone just said this:



> If the game is ugly and the story is amazing, I still won't buy it because it looks like trash.


----------



## Unidentified Floor Orange (Oct 10, 2013)

Good game, bad looks > bad game, good looks

That said, really sloppy art design and/or graphics would be a turnoff, and I'd be less inclined to buy it.


----------



## EeveeGirl (Oct 10, 2013)

Their opinion/loss I suppose.


----------



## Unidentified Floor Orange (Oct 10, 2013)

ZanessaGaily said:


> Someone just said this:


Well, it's not like consumers can only choose between two games, one with good gameplay and bad appearance and the other with bad gameplay and good appearance. 

There's a lot of different games to choose from. If some games have both good gameplay and good appearance, and especially if you have limited time and funds to dedicate towards gaming, it's not unreasonable to turn down a game that is lacking in one area.

Idk, who you quoted doesn't necessarily state that they would go with the bad gameplay/good looks game.


----------



## Zanessa (Oct 10, 2013)

Unidentified Floor Orange said:


> Well, it's not like consumers can only choose between two games, one with good gameplay and bad appearance and the other with bad gameplay and good appearance.
> 
> There's a lot of different games to choose from. If some games have both good gameplay and good appearance, and especially if you have limited time and funds to dedicate towards gaming, it's not unreasonable to turn down a game that is lacking in one area.
> 
> *Idk, who you quoted doesn't necessarily state that they would go with the bad gameplay/good looks game.*



Somewhere else, on another forum, I mean.


----------



## ShinyYoshi (Oct 10, 2013)

I'd choose the good game with bad looks.

When I was younger, I played the crap out of Pokemon Yellow, and we all know it looks awful but is an amazing game.


----------



## Peoki (Oct 10, 2013)

D'oh. Leave it to me to misclick my vote, lol. 
I've never been able to pick up on The Sims series but I know many people that are fans of the game. I'm all for good gameplay. Depending on how "bad" the art style and/or graphics are, I'd still give it a try if the game received decent feedback in reviews.



ShinyYoshi said:


> I'd choose the good game with bad looks.
> When I was younger, I played the crap out of Pokemon Yellow, and we all know it looks awful but is an amazing game.


Ditto. Classic games are still as good as ever, despite their lack in graphics. To each their own.


----------



## Midoriya (Oct 10, 2013)

I'd rather do good game play and okay art style


----------



## Chromie (Oct 10, 2013)

Writing > Gameplay > graphics for me.

My favorite game this generation is Witcher 2. Well...that doesn't help since it looks amazing but the writing! Incredible stuff. I can't get enough of it. Ofcourse I like good gameplay regardless of graphics which is why I bought Dark Souls on PC. Graphics are important sure but writing/gameplay trump graphics for me. I like a good art style too. Nintendo understands the importance of art style look at Wind Waker which I still gorgeous to this day.

Chose option 3.


----------



## beffa (Oct 10, 2013)

Good Game play and okay art style.

I played an RPGMaker horror called The Crooked Man, and it's a pixel kind art style and I still found it amazing as heck. Honestly one of the best short games I've played. The story was wonderful and the gameplay was fun and exciting. I also played Paranoiac, a similar RPGMaker horror, and that was fantastic despite the crappy graphics. 

Sometimes I think graphics are enough to make you love a game though. I didn't enjoy The Last of Us, but the graphics were awesome and I loved the look of it. It's not fundamental for an amazing game, but I think it can contribute towards it. If a game has an amazing story AND great graphics, you can tell a lot of effort has gone into the game imo.


----------



## Bacon Boy (Oct 10, 2013)

There's a whole essay to be written on this, but I'll try to keep it short. Graphics don't make them game (cough Half Life 1 cough). It has been proven time and time again that a game can succeed without them. That being said, it is a standard nowadays to have good graphics. When a company makes a game, but skimps on the graphics because they don't view them as important, it hurts the game's credibility. However, that usually means they did not put a lot of work into the game to begin with. As was the case with Third-Party support with the Wii (i.e. Marvel Ultimate Alliance and Ultimate Alliance 2). However, I disagree when people say first party Nintendo games had terrible graphics. Super Mario Galaxy looked more beautiful in 480p than half of the games out there during its run. People that say graphics don't matter are stupid and people that say gameplay doesn't matter are also stupid. A good game needs a balance of gameplay, graphics, and story (although, this is not always the case: Mario). Note: Resolution ≠ Graphics. All that is to say, I prefer the happy medium or a perfect combination of the three (cough LAST OF US cough).


----------



## Kaiaa (Oct 10, 2013)

I don't really care about any of that stuff but Legend of the Dragoon has terrible graphics and is one of the best games I've ever played story wise.


----------



## Officer Berri (Oct 10, 2013)

'Good/bad' art is in the eye of the beholder. I can still enjoy games on the N64 and stuff like that. I like Minecraft and as well as more modern games like Skyrim.

However, a game with bad gameplay is never going to appeal to me. Games are meant for fun, and bad gameplay can easily ruin the fun in a game.

You can still play a game that looks like it was made in the dawn of the 3D era. You can't play a broken game no matter what era it is.


----------



## Lauren (Oct 10, 2013)

i like good games, the art isn't as important to me.


----------



## chillv (Oct 10, 2013)

I wouldn't care if a game's graphics looked terrible. If the gameplay is spectacular then the graphics aren't really a big deal to me. I never cared about graphics and I never understood why critics complain so much about them sometimes.


----------



## Silversea (Oct 11, 2013)

I'm a good gameplay person, so looks, while they may slightly put me off, are not an ultimate decision maker.


----------



## TheCreeperHugz (Oct 11, 2013)

I have one wprd to explain my opinion on this: *Minecraft.*


----------



## oath2order (Oct 11, 2013)

It depends on the game for me. I could barely make it through the original Legend of Zelda because I got a headache. I believe it's from the graphics because the same thing happened when I tried to play the original Pokemon.


----------



## Cass (Oct 11, 2013)

Honestly, I was iffy about the graphics with TS4 but I'm thinking of it this way.
TS3 was *extremely* computer intensive and lots of people who play The Sims series, don't have epic computers to run the game at it's full capability and that sucks.

With the cartoony look, not only are they tracing back to their roots and being a bit nostalgic with it, but it's making it easier for people with less than epic computers able to run the game with higher settings.

I love it, and I'm looking forward to it.

But besides that since the thread isn't about The Sims, I'd choose a good game over bad graphics.


----------



## DJStarstryker (Oct 17, 2013)

I can honestly do both. Because sometimes "bad games" are like B-movies - they can be so bad that they're good. Case in point - I like the bad game Operation Darkness. It's an Xbox 360 tactical RPG that takes place during World War II and has werewolves and zombies in it. It's not that great graphics wise and to be honest it isn't that great of a game, but somehow it's still fun to me anyway. I don't know why. 

Gameplay is number one, music is number two, graphics are number three. Of course, I'm old enough to have played text-only DOS games so, obviously graphics being pretty is optional.


----------



## cannedcommunism (Oct 19, 2013)

"True beauty is within!"
                     -Francine


----------



## XTheLancerX (Oct 19, 2013)

I don't care about graphics for the most part, at all. However, modern games that had a low budget that chose to struggle and look realistic, but end up failing miserably bug me. I still will play the game of course and if it has good gameplay, I will enjoy it. If it is a game like Terraria/Minecraft, it doesn't bug me at all, and actually kind of like the art style. Pokemon in it's earlier days is fine too. I could mention a few more games but I am choosing not to


----------



## Byngo (Oct 19, 2013)

I guess you could say I feel in between? lol

Like, I think: "Is the gameplay good enough to make me buy it despite not so great graphics" and "Are the graphics enough to justify me purchasing it despite the gameplay lacking?" So... Neither, it all depends on the game.


----------



## Orange (Oct 20, 2013)

ShinyYoshi said:


> I'd choose the good game with bad looks.
> 
> When I was younger, I played the crap out of Pokemon Yellow, and we all know it looks awful but is an amazing game.


I actually like the old Pok?mon graphics more than the new 3D graphics.


----------



## Croconaw (Oct 20, 2013)

It doesn't really matter to me. If I like a game, I like it.


----------



## aegis (Oct 21, 2013)

i don't know why someone would pick a bad game with good looks over a good game with bad looks, but i guess it's because i'm the kind who'd pick a clunky system with ugly visuals as long as it has a great story.


----------



## Fearthecuteness (Oct 21, 2013)

You can't let bad looks put you off a game. Look at deadly premonition. The graphics were awful (especially for its time) but the story behind it is soo good. Especially when you get to near the end and there's so many twists you wouldn't expect. It's one of those "do bad it's good" kind of thing. Like the room. I know it's not a game but that film is awful in every way that you just just can't help but love it. That's why there's so many fans for it.


----------



## LinDUNguin (Oct 22, 2013)

Unidentified Floor Orange said:


> Good game, bad looks > bad game, good looks
> 
> That said, really sloppy art design and/or graphics would be a turnoff, and I'd be less inclined to buy it.



This, a thousand times this. It's not as black and white as gameplay v. graphics, the graphics contribute to the gameplay, as to keep you enticed long enough and to help immerse you into the gameplay.


----------



## Gummysaur (Oct 22, 2013)

MINECRAFT.

This game is so fun, lol, billions of people have bought it, and it has godawful graphics on PURPOSE. So, good gameplay is way more important.


----------



## Zanessa (Oct 22, 2013)

aegis said:


> i don't know why someone would pick a bad game with good looks over a good game with bad looks, but i guess it's because i'm the kind who'd pick a clunky system with ugly visuals as long as it has a great story.



If you searched The Sims 3's The Sims 4 forums, they want their "awesome gaming computer" to run beautiful things, like Sims 3 and not things like Sims 4.
Someone even said people who had bad computers need to get with the program and stop trying to play games they simply can't. >_<


----------



## Astrology (Oct 24, 2013)

It depends how you see 'bad looks' though. I've had many an argument with people over Tomb Raider (the PS1 original), Final Fantasy and Zelda because of their graphics. My brother refuses to play Final Fantasy 7 because of the poor graphics. Sorry. Slow down >_> Think back to when it was made. When it came out, they were amazing, especially the cut-scenes. The story is the best ever and it is hands down my favorite game. But bringing it into 2013... Minecraft. Really quite poor graphics but amazing gameplay. I couldn't care less about graphics as long as the game itself is good. I'm not a fan of realistic looking games. Yeah the graphics may be amazing, but I like to know it's a game I'm playing x3x Many indie games have poor graphics but the gameplay or storyline is amazing! Most recently, Papers, Please. The graphics are so bad sometimes you can't tell if a person matches their ID or not xD The gameplay itself is addictive o3o

I will always always always go for gameplay over graphics, but I'm noticing more and more that the younger generation are expecting amazing graphics. I grew up with a Sega, SNES, GameBoy so I know poor graphics. Kids today see amazing graphics and expect all games to be like that. It's quite sad really.


----------

