Most Important Factors in A Game ?

[Azunite]

So, in you opinion, what are the most important factors in a game which will make it a good game ?

[Perseus]

Story.
Characters.
Gameplay.
Graphics.

[Azunite]

Please vote and 2 factors only

[Kaius]

Graphics and Setting

[Perseus]

Please vote and 2 factors only

Well, too bad since those are the four that set it for me.

[Azunite]

Allright, vote 4 then

[Perseus]

Allright, vote 4 then

Your poll lacks essential parts of a game like gameplay and story.

[Amnesiac]

Graphics and setting.

Well, graphics don't count for the Wii.

[Solace]

I only picked bugs because of Fallout: New Vegas. That game corrupted my saves after playing for 26 hours.

Graphics and setting.

Well, graphics don't count for the Wii.

Why wouldn't graphics count on Wii? Wii has some pretty good graphics, granted it doesn't have 1080 pixels, but that's just resolution.

[scuba steve]

I would've picked Graphics and Story as the key ones for me, but I chose Setting in place of Story.
If a games Story is pants at least I have the Graphics to stare at but if the Graphics are poor I would struggle to even see the point of the story, unless it's a scuba steve past time game like Golden Sun!

[Sage]

Here's an idea: Being fun to play.

[Jess]

just for video games?

anyways I agree with Sage, if it's fun to play then it's a good game - in opinion at least. I don't care much about anything else...maybe graphics...but nothing else

[Amnesiac]

Why wouldn't graphics count on Wii? Wii has some pretty good graphics, granted it doesn't have 1080 pixels, but that's just resolution.

It's not a console made for graphics. It's stuck in the 480p age. When it comes to the Wii, you can throw graphics out the window — in the end every game made for it will have horrible anti-aliasing and textures.

[Lonely_Shadow]

Graphics.
Multiplayer.
Setting.
inventory.

[Peace God]

What about the plot?

[Magus]

Character
Setting and
Music.

Where is the "Story"? The story is the most vital component of the game.

If there is no story to tell, then there is no game to play.

[Commander Thor]

The story is THE most important thing in a video game for me (For most games.). If it doesn't have a good story, then the game is not worth playing. I don't care how 'pretty' it is.

[Azunite]

I forgot to put story, but count story in "SETTING" part

[Continuum]

Who cares about bugs. Bugs are fun to squish. :D

I go for setting and graphics.

[Hatsune Miku]

Call of duty is the only factor

[Church]

Graphics, originality, replay value (as in you wanna keep playing it), smooth controls, good multiplayer and good single player. Many options for outside multiplayer and campaign.

[aussiecasper]

depends. multiplayer is not really a part of the game more as it is considered an extension of the game thats completly different from the orginal story.

if im playing a fallout game i want plot, setting, charecters and music to bind the whole exprience.
but if im playing call of duty or battlefield i want lack of bugs, guns coustimablity and social networking elements. ya know what i mean?

[Raptor22]

depends. multiplayer is not really a part of the game more as it is considered an extension of the game thats completly different from the orginal story.

if im playing a fallout game i want plot, setting, charecters and music to bind the whole exprience.
but if im playing call of duty or battlefield i want lack of bugs, guns coustimablity and social networking elements. ya know what i mean?
Agreed, for instance Battlefield isnt a horrible game because it has no story, its all about the multiplayer experience.

As far as graphics are concerned, I dont really care as long as they are decent for when the game came out. BF1942, MOH:AA, and Half Life are still amazing games and they came out nearly 10 years ago...

[Azunite]

Yep, graphs aren't that important. People still play Doom 1

[Magus]

Yep, graphs aren't that important. People still play Doom 1
No. The graphs should meet the current console's power. When you have a powerful image processing engine which can display millions of pixels per second(or something of that sorts), then you should make something that meets the ends. If you are a techie, you can even extract more powers from your consoles, to that very limit it can reach. Who knows, next genes might emulate true life-like images.

The graphics also played an important role in developing better consoles, you know. It was all about graphics to begin with.

People plays Doom because of Nostalgia; some will play for just pure experimentation. Some people grew with those games that we consider as old or classics. I play Super Mario using an emulator, not because I want to play that game, but because I did played that game a while back, you see.

Your focus is only on FPS games, we are talking about the video games as a whole.

When I said Graphic is not important, it doesn't necesserily means we should make a crappy looking game with a nice and driving storyline, no.

Graphics, music, functionality, playability, handling and storyline all should go hand in hand to make truly good games.

If one or more elements are missing, while focusing one element only will turn out to make a very sucky game.

[Azunite]

Like Bethesda's games for example. They are good, EXCEPT the animations !

[Magus]

Like Bethesda's games for example. They are good, EXCEPT the animations !

The only game I played was Morrowind. The graphics are great from that old game(overall game was fine, too) - even the PS2 had games with crappier graphics during those days(2001-2003); even Xbox beat PS2 in terms of Graphics.

[Perseus]

Like Bethesda's games for example. They are good, EXCEPT the animations !

Have you seen Oblivion's graphics? They were amazing for its day; they're even better than same games' graphics today.

[Azunite]

Have you seen Oblivion's graphics? They were amazing for its day; they're even better than same games' graphics today.

Yes, I have oblivion and fallout. I don't have problems with their graphics, they are the state of the art, but you can't avoid all those animation mistakes.

[Magus]

Have you seen Oblivion's graphics? They were amazing for its day; they're even better than same games' graphics today.

Most games' graphics were extreme in Oblivion's days. Mid 2005 and 2006 was the onset of better graphics-ed games, the graphics from that time did not change a lot till day- only few minor adjustments.

[Azunite]

Faris are you serious? Would you please compare Call of Duty 3 and MW2 ?

[Magus]

Faris are you serious? Would you please compare Call of Duty 3 and MW2 ?

Only minor adjustment, tweaking and augmentation. That's it. Better texture doesn't mean better graphics - plus, it is also dependent on your Gaming box.

http://www.overclock.net/attachments/water-cooling/110729d1244074875-would-9800gt-physx-fit-2-wc-08132944860l.jpg

Get this too.

http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/346/asus_physx.jpg

[Continuum]

^You also need a wee bit of RAM and a sizable Hard Drive to store sum porn, remember that.

Faris are you serious? Would you please compare Call of Duty 3 and MW2 ?

Simple. They just changed the time period and introduced several graphical changes and gameplay, while keeping the general formula up and about. No buts, I'm not a fan of graphics, since my PC can't even run Half-Life 2 on full speed.

[Commander Thor]

Only minor adjustment, tweaking and augmentation. That's it. Better texture doesn't mean better graphics - plus, it is also dependent on your Gaming box.

http://www.overclock.net/attachments/water-cooling/110729d1244074875-would-9800gt-physx-fit-2-wc-08132944860l.jpg

Major overkill.
Only 1 of these cards would really be needed.
The only reason you'd really need a setup like this is if you were doing a lot of 3D animation.


Get this too.

http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/346/asus_physx.jpg

Not needed anymore.
Most (If not all) graphics cards come with an on-board PPU (Physics processing unit). (At least the graphics cards I'm concerned with :p )
Not to mention, that the add-in PPU cards were really only needed back in the Pentium/Dual-Core days. Now that we have Hyper-Threaded Quad Core processors, the physics calculations /could/ be done by one of the idle cores (If the graphics card doesn't have a PPU).

[Magus]

Major overkill.
Only 1 of these cards would really be needed.
The only reason you'd really need a setup like this is if you were doing a lot of 3D animation.

Just one is enough. Man, I just googled Gfx cards :P


Not needed anymore.
Most (If not all) graphics cards come with an on-board PPU (Physics processing unit). (At least the graphics cards I'm concerned with :p )
Not to mention, that the add-in PPU cards were really only needed back in the Pentium/Dual-Core days. Now that we have Hyper-Threaded Quad Core processors, the physics calculations /could/ be done by one of the idle cores (If the graphics card doesn't have a PPU).

Then I should get my self something like this: http://images.nvidia.com/products/quadro-5000/Quadro-5000-low-3qtr.png

[darkwoon]

Fun is what I'd put above all. I don't care if the game looks terrible, or if the soundtrack is awful, or even if it shows obvious bugs - as long as it gives me a fun experience overall.

The elements I tend to rate higher depend strongly of the type of game; I'd rate graphics as "important" for an FPS, but not so for an RTS; story would be a must for an RPG, but not something I'd look for in a platformer.

Given that I tend to prefer strategy and roleplaying games, Id rank first:
1. Artifical Intelligence
2. Story and setting

[Continuum]

Fun is what I'd put above all. I don't care if the game looks terrible, or if the soundtrack is awful, or even if it shows obvious bugs - as long as it gives me a fun experience overall.

That's why Nintendo sells far more to the general market even though their main foci is not on graphics.

[Sith Lord 13]

Plot and bugs. Minor bugs are fine, but major bugs are an issue.

Plot is key. I play a video game because I want to escape, and no better way than an immersive world with a plot you can get sucked into.

[Azunite]

Plot and bugs. Minor bugs are fine, but major bugs are an issue.

Plot is key. I play a video game because I want to escape, and no better way than an immersive world with a plot you can get sucked into.

Yeah. Also, it doesnt have a meaning when you are playing a game which will take you to another world, as a Human ! Seriously, try Elves for once !


Fun is what I'd put above all. I don't care if the game looks terrible, or if the soundtrack is awful, or even if it shows obvious bugs - as long as it gives me a fun experience overall.

The elements I tend to rate higher depend strongly of the type of game; I'd rate graphics as "important" for an FPS, but not so for an RTS; story would be a must for an RPG, but not something I'd look for in a platformer.

Given that I tend to prefer strategy and roleplaying games, Id rank first:
1. Artifical Intelligence
2. Story and setting

And yes, too bad that Total War series lack adequate AI, I could beat the Long Campaign ( plus took the whole world ) with Prussia in E:TW, very hard battle difficutly, hard campaign difficulty

[Perseus]

And yes, too bad that Total War series lack adequate AI, I could beat the Long Campaign ( plus took the whole world ) with Prussia in E:TW, very hard battle difficutly, hard campaign difficulty

Wtf, I think R:TW has hard AI since the barbarians always start to rape me by sending constant waves of armies, which starts making me go bankrupt since I can't keep building and maintaining my armies that get killed.

[Continuum]

And yes, too bad that Total War series lack adequate AI, I could beat the Long Campaign ( plus took the whole world ) with Prussia in E:TW, very hard battle difficutly, hard campaign difficulty

The lack of actual wave-force weapons and gunpowder seems to be the viable reasons why RTW is hard; you need to be close to kill. :P

[Azunite]

The lack of actual wave-force weapons and gunpowder seems to be the viable reasons why RTW is hard; you need to be close to kill. :P

What was that...
PHALANX !

[Perseus]

What was that...
PHALANX !

Hoplites and the such can be hard to take out when your army consists of a lot of cav and and they have line by line of phalanx units when you have Roman foot soldiers. It is a feat to take down Greek troops in the beginning of the campaign for me when I do the green or blue faction. :P But with the Julii, fucking Gauls, Britons, and Germanics just keep sending wave after wave to my out cities to take them back. It is ridiculously hard. :P

[Death]

Crap, actually managed to vote four times before reading "CHOOSE 2 ONLY". Anyway, I think in a game you must have a sense of purpose and know what you're doing and what's going on. So I'd say the story (and also debugging since there's nothing worse than another 'Fallout: New Vegas') goes first, and everything else is secondary.

[Continuum]

Hoplites and the such can be hard to take out when your army consists of a lot of cav and and they have line by line of phalanx units when you have Roman foot soldiers. It is a feat to take down Greek troops in the beginning of the campaign for me when I do the green or blue faction. :P But with the Julii, fucking Gauls, Britons, and Germanics just keep sending wave after wave to my out cities to take them back. It is ridiculously hard. :P

Plus, I hate what they did with the spartans, they just look.. Lame. :P

Luckily there's Roma Surrectum to fix whatever they did.

[Minimoose]

Story
Longevity

Those are the most important, no point in having a game that you don't play regularly...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk