Which of the major aspects of a game is most important?

[Nyerp]

all of the above plus voice acting [if it has it]  cjlubdoods;

video games almost never have really good voice acting

[ME##]

video games almost never have really good voice acting

decent voice acting is leagues better than awful voice acting

[Samus Aran]

video games almost never have really good voice acting

now bear my arctic blast

[Nyerp]

now bear my arctic blast

i hope my body can take it

[Kalahari Inkantation]

i should probably mention that story alone, if truly good enough, can make a game enjoyable, as the entire ace attorney series relies entirely on story, but ace attorney is one of the very rare exceptions to the rule

[bluaki]

Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation

I'd say that gameplay is the most important aspect in most games, except visual novel-like games (including Ace Attorney), where story is more important. I'm not familiar with rhythm games, but perhaps they could be another exception in which music is more important than gameplay.

I once played MapleStory and I'd say that its music and art are great, but it's not worth playing because of dull and slow gameplay

video games almost never have really good voice acting

Don't English-translated games very often share voice actors with the anime dubs you prefer so much over the original Japanese voices?

[Samus Aran]

Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation

oh definitely

that's why wind waker is one of the most beautiful-looking games ever created

[Nyerp]

Don't English-translated games very often share voice actors with the anime dubs you prefer so much over the original Japanese voices?

what the fuck?

also yes overall aesthetic is more important than graphical prowess, which is why even though games like the wind waker and okami don't have the best graphics per se, they still look more appealing than say gays of war or cawadoody

brown 'n' bloom may attempt to make a game look more "realistic" (even though they fucking don't at all), but that doesn't mean it looks more appealing

~imo~

[Kalahari Inkantation]

Great graphics isn't necessarily high-polygon, realistic, and HD. Especially with 2D games and cartoonish 3D games, it can be about the art style, creative character/setting designs, and quality of animation

I'd say that gameplay is the most important aspect in most games, except visual novel-like games (including Ace Attorney), where story is more important. I'm not familiar with rhythm games, but perhaps they could be another exception in which music is more important than gameplay.

I once played MapleStory and I'd say that its music and art are great, but it's not worth playing because of dull and slow gameplay

yes, but unfortunately "good graphics" is usually taken to mean high-polygon ultra-realism (which is why people often say "the wii has horrible graphics" when the reality is any game on any console can have "great graphics" or look absolutely horrible despite the polygon count)

many of the wii's games have more attractive graphics than brown&bloom ultra-"realistic" "next-gen" games, but in the sheer graphical power sense, wii games do have lower-tech graphics

still, that doesn't necessarily mean they're uglier than hd titles, as even a game as old, simple, and low-tech as oracle of ages still looks infinitely more attractive than something cutting-edge like resistance which is entirely brown

[Samus Aran]

well-done realism is definitely an accomplishment too though. it all depends on style and how it's presented, really.

[Kalahari Inkantation]

and even worse to have to restrict yourself in battle in such a simple game

but it would be no more restrictive than it already is

common actions would be mapped to buttons while those used less frequently would remain in menus like they already are :'(

i think a turn-based game designed with this in mind could work :'(

[bluaki]

but it would be no more restrictive than it already is

common actions would be mapped to buttons while those used less frequently would remain in menus like they already are :'(

i think a turn-based game designed with this in mind could work :'(

In something like Mario&Luigi or Paper Mario, you mean that when the block-based "menu" is displayed for Jump/Hammer/Special/Item/etc, pressing X or Y would immediately select Hammer or Jump respectively no matter which block is currently selected?

I suppose that would be nice, but it's no more than a little shortcut. You'd still have to select which enemy to attack and, when badges are equipped, you'd still have to select which type of jump or hammer attack. There's no sane way to do those without menus.

Have you seen the battle system in Super Mario RPG? Instead of scrolling in a menu to select the basic Attack/Special/Item/Etc functions, one function is mapped to each of the four face buttons.
[spoiler=from the game's manual][/spoiler]

[Samus Aran]

yep, but even so, you still need a menu to select which special, which item, which enemy to attack, etc.

[Kalahari Inkantation]

"People who play RPGs are depressed gamers who like to sit alone in their dark rooms and play slow games."

[spoiler]ohgodsettledownidon'tactuallyagreewithhim [/spoiler]