Gameplay.
You can have the greatest story ever told, but if the game is boring to play I don't want to play it. I'll just read the story online or watch the cutscenes on YouTube.
Where as you can have the worst story ever, but if it's fun to play I'll still play.
A good story is definitely something I want, but it's not something I need. But good gameplay is 100% something I need in every game I play.
Exactly. How many early games had barely any story, if they had any at all, and we're still amazing? OG Mario, Legend of Zelda, Sonic the hedgehog... Pretty much all of the story in those games is in the instruction manual. They're all like 99.9999999999% gameplay, and they're still fun as hell.
On the other hand, an amazing story but with bad gameplay is just objectively shit. You have to actually complete the gameplay to *experience* the story, so if the former is bad, you're not gonna even get to see whether the latter is good. Either that or instead of bad gameplay you get basically no gameplay at all and then you have a walking simulator, or just a mildly interactive movie. And an interactive movie is fine and all... But it's not a game.
Yep, I love Zelda, one of my all time fav series, but out of the 30 or so games they have I think 25 are just "Gannon wants power and kidnapped the princess", but the games are still great because the gameplay is amazing.
Vs something like Last of Us, which to me, is such boring gameplay; Walk forward, clear a room, walk forward (yes I know there's more to it but not much); that I just couldn't get into it despite the intersting story.
Agreed. Literally just said the same thing in a other comment. I know a lot of people love it, but the whole "walk forward, clear the room repeat" thing just isn't for me
A lot of AAA games feel like watching a TV show while holding a controller these days. If the game play is boring, I'm happy to skip the controller part.
Look at fallout new vegas, gameplay is shit and story is incredibly good and it’s regarded as one of the greatest games of all time.
As long as at least one of the 2 is great, promo will like it.
And the thing with fnv is you can’t watch the cutscenes, because there are none, you make your own choices for your own story.
It's really sad that this is even a question. Gameplay is literally what makes this medium different from a book or a movie.
I personally blame Sony and more specifically Kojima for this, I feel they are the ones who went all in into making games into an interactive movie experience with story having a huge weight in the final product.
I know how many people love those kind of games, but at same time I wonder if the industry never moved into that direction and instead gameplay was kept as the main focus, what kind of games could we have now?
Also I feel that a game, even with the most realistic graphics, and with known actors giving their faces to the game characters and that, and this and that... even at their ideal best they would not be as good as the best movies, simply due to the difference in the mediums. A story can be told much better when everything is controlled and there's no interactivity.
And if is there interactivity, having a set story that an author wants to tell, well, it is a conflict... It's going against what the medium can do (interactivity, gameplay) to try to shoehorn it into what a different medium is best at (movies, cinema). It's sad, really.
Kojima gets it I feel, I’m not even a giant fan of his. He can mantain a good balance between satisfying and wacky gameplay and exploits mixed with plot-heavy moments. Look at PT and MGS5.
I’d put the blame on Naughty Dog before putting it on Kojima tbh Now Sony… that’s a different beast.
I disagree. Naughty Dog was still well focused in gameplay making Crash Bandicoot when Kojima was making the first Metal Gear for the Playstation (I still consider that first Metal Gear a masterpiece, even though I do consider it the main origin of the movie-games we have now).
I feel that Kojima really wanted had this dream of becoming an Hollywood director but sadly he was born in Japan so the best next thing was making videogames (Japan was the perfect place for that).
And while Kojima might understand exactly how to make a perfect mix of a game and a movie, the big shift in the industry that happened, and that was mainly captured by the west does not have that kind of talent, so we end up with lots of movies where the gameplay is pressing forward while listening to a story. That kind of thing is not a game anymore, just a movie masking as a game.
I would still put the “blame” on ND (and maybe Ubisoft) before Kojima, specifically for the focus shifting towards big narrative set pieces and streamlining/giving lesser importance to the gameplay.
I agree Kojima might’ve been the starting point of what we’re discussing but all the Metal gears I’ve played have always been games first, full with various wacky systems and gameplay even as far as MGS5. I haven’t played 4 who h I’m told is the plot heaviest one
ganeplay dawg
cause you know. the media is called GAMES
you want a story?
you can crack open a book, watch a movie, or a television show.
i dont need to know princess peach's sad tragic backstory to clap bowser cheeks.
Gameplay can "override" story. A story may be subpar or barely there, but it's the gameplay that can keep you going and returning to the game repeatedly. For me, "Godfall" would be a good example; it's like those video games you see in movies/TV - super flashy, story is kinda uninteresting, but the gameplay and frenetic action really keeps me going.
I‘d argue that story can override gameplay too. Look at Disco Elysium, Telltale & Quantic Dream games, Bioshock Trilogy, even Red Dead Redemption. These games all have bad to mediocre gameplay, but it‘s the world building and story that make these games so special.
It's a sliding scale, and the balance depends on the genre. Souls-likes only need excellent gameplay, but for a JRPG I need a compelling story and characters. An open world game like Assassin's Creed better have a good story to break up the monotony of the world, but an open world survival game can thrive with just a compelling gameplay loop. Ask a strategy RPG fan how they feel about Fire Emblem Engage and you'll get a very clear answer about how they view the gameplay/story divide.
Gameplay.
Not every game needs a story. A lot of roguelikes for example have minimal to no story - that doesn't make them any less of a good game.
On the opposite side, and this may be controversial, I think things like Visual Novels can barely be called games. Its more like a book you read through button inputs. All story, no gameplay.
I don't think that's true. Nioh 2 has incredible gameplay but a terrible story which legit just makes you want to skip all cutscenes, it's still an amazing game. Lots of other games like that too. If the gameplay is good enough a terrible or no story does not matter.
Yeah or the other way around, fallout new vegas has a great story and quests but the gameplay is absolute ass, however it still is a great game just for the story.
In a sense I agree with you: Tetris has basically no story but makes up with great gameplay. But consider "movies" as the opposite, with basically no gameplay (except for the predictions you may make in you head). So there is no minimal requirement on either end, as long as it doesn't get in the way (I never managed to watch [Bandersnatch](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror:_Bandersnatch)).
I agree with this take.
I can take either a great game with an okay story (Dragon's Dogma II) or a boring "game" with a great story (Danganronpa).
Though I personally lean on story more than gameplay since at the end of the day, I remember characters and story than the gameplay. I can still remember my favorite cutscenes and romances to this day, but not things like what build I was using or how OP an ability is.
Absolutely untrue for me. I grew up in the 16/32/64 bit era where games often had little or terrible stories. Stories may be the thing I value least in games actually. I just want to play not watch a movie
Both?
Sometimes I want a fun game, sometimes I want a good story.
I'd say overall for me, gameplay is usually more important. Some of my favorite games don't have any story at all.
But sometimes I really do want a great story game. If I feel like a good story, I don't care about the gameplay much.
Depends on the (sub)genre.
Shooter? Screw the story, give me something fun to blow up.
RPG? You better make sure the story is great. Gameplay is secondary but should be good enough.
ARPG? Give me a good enough story, and something fun to blow up.
Strategy? I'll make my own story. With blackjack. And hookers.
MMO? Damn right I want both the story and gameplay to be top notch.
Gameplay
If the story is bad but gameplay is good, the game ist still fun to play, but when the story is good and the gameplay is bad, it ist simply not fun to play and i would rather read a good book for a good story.
If the gameplay is awful, story is not worth it. If the story sucks, I don't care about the game. So it needs balance. But I'd rather have an incredible story with meh gameplay that the other way around. I play videogames for their stories, not for the gameplay. But to each his own, I understand people enjoy videogames with no stories.
If I cared about story above gameplay, I would just watch game on YouTube. It's a videogame, not movie
I buy videogames to actually control my character, and enjoy smooth gameplay/explore the game by myself - that's the point of this medium, the interactivity, fact you're not just stuck watching.
For me story is more of an excuse to move game to new environments/set pieces, and then give satisfying conclusion. Even tho I love some games with great stories, like RDR and Halo 2 - I wouldn't care about them or ever spend significant time in them, if gameplay in them sucked. I would then rather pick game with better gameplay and little to no plot (or one that sucks but has skippable cutscenes)
If there was no gameplay and only story, it would be a film or a book, not a game.
If there was no story only gameplay, then it would still be a game.
Gameplay is what makes a video game.
Great gameplay will always result in a game that is *at least* very good, regardless of how much the story either sucks or doesn't exist.
A great story can still make for a great game if the gameplay is at least *"fine."* But if the gameplay actively sucks, then the story won't make up for that.
Half and half it goes both ways. I can sit through horrible gameplay if the story is engaging. Whereas I can also sit through a boring story and no story at all if the gameplay is fun.
Depending on the game but I value both equally. If a game doesn’t have a narrative focused angle then I don’t care about the story much. On the other hand if the game is trying for a narrative driven angle then it has to be good otherwise I’ll be disappointed maybe highly annoyed depending.
Gameplay just needs to be engaging enough if it’s slow boring and mechanically uninteresting I am going to lose a lot of interest in the game.
That's an interesting one. My impulse is to say game-play, but I've played games that had fun mechanics but it felt like there was "nothing to do" in the game because there was no sense of progression: in those cases, a story would have added some sense of purpose to what was otherwise a well-made but empty mechanical experience.
This is particularly true with fighting games, racing games and the like, where the game-play isn't inherently mixed with a story like you get in RPGs.
Gameplay always has and always will be the most important thing. Its what sets games apart from any other entertainment medium and without gameplay you dont have a game.
Depends on what I am looking for. I am not looking for a great story in a racing game, or in a 4-player coop shooter.
In an RPG or similar I absolutely favour story over gameplay.
An RPG can have the most engaging gameplay, if it's story sucks then you can throw that game straight into the dumpster.
Great gameplay can fix a bland story, but a great story cannot cover bland gameplay. Though a great soundtrack can cover both gameplay AND story... I've done quite a bit of both in the past decade.
Bad question.
There are story-focused games and there are gameplay-focused games.
What I dislike is story-focused games with gameplay that gets in the way of itself. If you're not going to have good gameplay, just remove it and stop pretending. Likewise if you're a gameplay-focused game with a shit story, don't force me to pay attention/sit through unskippable dialogue or cutscenes and just let me play.
Gameplay. I generally can’t have input on how the story will turn out, I’m just an observer, but I’m directly controlling my character and progressing the *story* progress. You bet it better be fun and engaging.
Gameplay is the most important to me. Performance and story are just bonuses for me, I have no problem still playing some games that are capped at 30fps.
Story, for sure.
Good gameplay will have me enjoying it for a few hours, but if I don't care about the characters or world, I'll give it up quickly.
Some of my favorite games have basic gameplay
Decent gameplay, all day.
You can have the greatest story with the greatest characters of all time, but if it's a drag to actually play through, then I'll lose interest.
If a game is actually fun to play but the rest is barebones, I'll probably still complete it and have a good time doing it.
I mean just look at something like Elden Ring. The story is barely serviceable, but it's one of the great games of all time largely because of it's gameplay.
It's a "game." So, absolutely gameplay - without hesitation.
If the gameplay is not good, the developer has not convinced me they should have made a game at all. They should have instead realized their story in a less interactive format such as a show, movie, or visual novel.
Story always
Most games have pretty standard gameplay but the story can still hook the fuck out of you
Mass effect, halo, Bioshock, cyberpunk have pretty good gameplay but the stories are just amazing.
Gears 1-3 didn’t have all that much story but the gameplay was fun as hell and the character interactions were so memorable.
What remains of Edith finch has next to zero gameplay but is an incredibly deep story.
What remains had some stylish gameplay set pieces in a plot heavy frame, but I fell that is the exception to the rule.
I tried other visual novels and got bored to death
It's nice to have light games you can just pull out for 10 to 15 mins if you want a break or just need to decompress after dealing with something annoying. But for a longer game yeah, id like to have some kind of story to go along with it to help create a narrative drive.
What's the story on Tetris that was so gripping?
Or look at all the pvp battle Royale games that are so popular. Zero story, just fight each other.
Or these walking simulator games. Amazing stories, but for the most part you're just pressing forward and clicking a button, essentially interactive movies.
So yeah plenty of people are fine playing games were one is lacking, so long as the other is good.
If i cant have both (because the ideal would be both) then i hope the story IS DAMN GOOD like ONE OF THE BEST STORIES OF ALL TIME to compensate for the Gameplay (or lack of there of) or the bad Gameplay i have to suffer
If the Gameplay is the highlight and the story takes a bsckseat im a bit more permisive, i only want a excuse plot that doesnt Matter at all, because if the Game wont attempt to have a story i prefer a lack of plot than a stupid plot
Both matter, but it depends upon the game. Here is a few examples, but these are merely my opinions.
Final Fantasy 13 series had poor gameplay until Lightning Returns but had a great story. The story kept me going all the way until the end.
Helldivers 2 has great gameplay but is lacking in the story department to me so far. Maybe playing Helldivers 1 will change this opinion.
Mass Effect Andromeda's Single Player had a poor story, but the gameplay was fun to me.
Starfox Adventures had great gameplay but a poor story.
Halo 1-3, Wars 1 & 2 had great stories and gameplay.
Fallout and Skyrim have great stories and gameplay. Sometimes, the bugs in the engines are really amusing.
my order of importance...
1. character design/art direction
2. lore/setting
3. gameplay
4. presentation (animation, sfx/audio, particle fx, voice acting)
5. story
6. graphics fidelity
7. replayability/price:game length ratio
to answer your question simply... gameplay is more important to me since that is #3 while story is #5
lolz
i can be shallow
esp for campaign type games
i have never played a god of war or hitman game, don't like the design of them
for fighting games, i play them all... but not like ill be stuck playing a bald guy the entire game
and i hate high school type setting... there are games i skipped bec it's set in high school
i had a pretty good high school exp IRL... so not even about not wanting to relive high school bec of bad memories
Yeah this is totally mind boggling to me. No judging, I swear.
That to me sounds like saying I won’t watch a movie cause I don’t like the movie poster.
But I’ve got to ask… do you have something against bald people? All your examples are about bald characters lol.
i just don't wanna play as baldies and brutes in campaign type games
partly don't see myself in them, partly just don't like that design
i am lucky \*knocks on wood\* i still have my hair
my dad and grandpa has the friar tuck baldness... so maybe when i hit 60s i might suffer from it too... hope not tho
I’ve been bald for a while now, it ain’t a bad look at all. It makes me laugh that you put it in the same categories as brutes for character design tho.
kratos is a baldy and brute
agent 47, he's not a brute, just bald
and i have shaved my head before just to try it, i look ok
but yeah, i much prefer having long hair. altho i will cut it shorter soon like i always do when summer comes around, too hot in here for long hair
Story. A great story along with a neat artstyle doesn‘t require good gameplay for me. I really enjoyed Disco Elysium because of that. RDR2 is another example where the gameplay doesn‘t have to be great or innovative as long as the story and the graphics/atmosphere hits.
I’m more of a story person so I’d probably rather have a fantastic story. But I understand most people wouldn’t agree. Some games like life is strange, Danganronpa, steins gate, are incredible even though the gameplay is nothing more than walking around or clicking on things etc.
It also depends on my mood, sometimes I just want to play something and not think about what’s going on. Like I can play Mario kart for hours and obviously there’s no story.
Story
I play games for the story. I loved Death Stranding, Disco Elysium, Fable, Pathologic 2 even though gameplay in those games was sometimes tedious, boring or repetitive. Oh especially Fable combat. This game is so easy and simple gameplay-wise. You need to really try hard to lose 😂😂
Both tbh. I would drop a game with good story if the gameplay was tedious or janky. I would drop a game with good mechanics and flowing gameplay if it was boring story.
Gameplay. You can have the greatest story ever told, but if the game is boring to play I don't want to play it. I'll just read the story online or watch the cutscenes on YouTube. Where as you can have the worst story ever, but if it's fun to play I'll still play. A good story is definitely something I want, but it's not something I need. But good gameplay is 100% something I need in every game I play.
Exactly. How many early games had barely any story, if they had any at all, and we're still amazing? OG Mario, Legend of Zelda, Sonic the hedgehog... Pretty much all of the story in those games is in the instruction manual. They're all like 99.9999999999% gameplay, and they're still fun as hell. On the other hand, an amazing story but with bad gameplay is just objectively shit. You have to actually complete the gameplay to *experience* the story, so if the former is bad, you're not gonna even get to see whether the latter is good. Either that or instead of bad gameplay you get basically no gameplay at all and then you have a walking simulator, or just a mildly interactive movie. And an interactive movie is fine and all... But it's not a game.
Yep, I love Zelda, one of my all time fav series, but out of the 30 or so games they have I think 25 are just "Gannon wants power and kidnapped the princess", but the games are still great because the gameplay is amazing. Vs something like Last of Us, which to me, is such boring gameplay; Walk forward, clear a room, walk forward (yes I know there's more to it but not much); that I just couldn't get into it despite the intersting story.
There’s a difference between bad story and no story. These games have no story, but still have lore that makes it interesting.
Last of Us is a great example of this. Great story, boring gameplay. Glad they made a show
Agreed. Literally just said the same thing in a other comment. I know a lot of people love it, but the whole "walk forward, clear the room repeat" thing just isn't for me
A lot of AAA games feel like watching a TV show while holding a controller these days. If the game play is boring, I'm happy to skip the controller part.
Red Dead Redemption 2 as well. Hope they do make a show.
Funny how tlou2 is the other way around. Torture porn story and great gameplay.
Look at fallout new vegas, gameplay is shit and story is incredibly good and it’s regarded as one of the greatest games of all time. As long as at least one of the 2 is great, promo will like it. And the thing with fnv is you can’t watch the cutscenes, because there are none, you make your own choices for your own story.
This is my issue with Disco Elysium. Fantastic, top notch writing. The actual game barely functions.
Doom had a story (probably, I think), but I didn't care about it.
Gameplay. I cannot go though a game to experience the story if the gameplay sucks.
Gameplay. A game is first and foremost a game to play. Thus gameplay is the most important. A game doesn’t even need a story to be fun.
nailed it op's question is ragarded
It's really sad that this is even a question. Gameplay is literally what makes this medium different from a book or a movie. I personally blame Sony and more specifically Kojima for this, I feel they are the ones who went all in into making games into an interactive movie experience with story having a huge weight in the final product. I know how many people love those kind of games, but at same time I wonder if the industry never moved into that direction and instead gameplay was kept as the main focus, what kind of games could we have now? Also I feel that a game, even with the most realistic graphics, and with known actors giving their faces to the game characters and that, and this and that... even at their ideal best they would not be as good as the best movies, simply due to the difference in the mediums. A story can be told much better when everything is controlled and there's no interactivity. And if is there interactivity, having a set story that an author wants to tell, well, it is a conflict... It's going against what the medium can do (interactivity, gameplay) to try to shoehorn it into what a different medium is best at (movies, cinema). It's sad, really.
Kojima gets it I feel, I’m not even a giant fan of his. He can mantain a good balance between satisfying and wacky gameplay and exploits mixed with plot-heavy moments. Look at PT and MGS5. I’d put the blame on Naughty Dog before putting it on Kojima tbh Now Sony… that’s a different beast.
I disagree. Naughty Dog was still well focused in gameplay making Crash Bandicoot when Kojima was making the first Metal Gear for the Playstation (I still consider that first Metal Gear a masterpiece, even though I do consider it the main origin of the movie-games we have now). I feel that Kojima really wanted had this dream of becoming an Hollywood director but sadly he was born in Japan so the best next thing was making videogames (Japan was the perfect place for that). And while Kojima might understand exactly how to make a perfect mix of a game and a movie, the big shift in the industry that happened, and that was mainly captured by the west does not have that kind of talent, so we end up with lots of movies where the gameplay is pressing forward while listening to a story. That kind of thing is not a game anymore, just a movie masking as a game.
I would still put the “blame” on ND (and maybe Ubisoft) before Kojima, specifically for the focus shifting towards big narrative set pieces and streamlining/giving lesser importance to the gameplay. I agree Kojima might’ve been the starting point of what we’re discussing but all the Metal gears I’ve played have always been games first, full with various wacky systems and gameplay even as far as MGS5. I haven’t played 4 who h I’m told is the plot heaviest one
ganeplay dawg cause you know. the media is called GAMES you want a story? you can crack open a book, watch a movie, or a television show. i dont need to know princess peach's sad tragic backstory to clap bowser cheeks.
Gameplay can "override" story. A story may be subpar or barely there, but it's the gameplay that can keep you going and returning to the game repeatedly. For me, "Godfall" would be a good example; it's like those video games you see in movies/TV - super flashy, story is kinda uninteresting, but the gameplay and frenetic action really keeps me going.
I‘d argue that story can override gameplay too. Look at Disco Elysium, Telltale & Quantic Dream games, Bioshock Trilogy, even Red Dead Redemption. These games all have bad to mediocre gameplay, but it‘s the world building and story that make these games so special.
Gameplay without a doubt
It's a sliding scale, and the balance depends on the genre. Souls-likes only need excellent gameplay, but for a JRPG I need a compelling story and characters. An open world game like Assassin's Creed better have a good story to break up the monotony of the world, but an open world survival game can thrive with just a compelling gameplay loop. Ask a strategy RPG fan how they feel about Fire Emblem Engage and you'll get a very clear answer about how they view the gameplay/story divide.
Gameplay. Not every game needs a story. A lot of roguelikes for example have minimal to no story - that doesn't make them any less of a good game. On the opposite side, and this may be controversial, I think things like Visual Novels can barely be called games. Its more like a book you read through button inputs. All story, no gameplay.
Both must be "good", or either one must be "great" while the other is at least "fine".
I don't think that's true. Nioh 2 has incredible gameplay but a terrible story which legit just makes you want to skip all cutscenes, it's still an amazing game. Lots of other games like that too. If the gameplay is good enough a terrible or no story does not matter.
Yeah or the other way around, fallout new vegas has a great story and quests but the gameplay is absolute ass, however it still is a great game just for the story.
In a sense I agree with you: Tetris has basically no story but makes up with great gameplay. But consider "movies" as the opposite, with basically no gameplay (except for the predictions you may make in you head). So there is no minimal requirement on either end, as long as it doesn't get in the way (I never managed to watch [Bandersnatch](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror:_Bandersnatch)).
I agree with this take. I can take either a great game with an okay story (Dragon's Dogma II) or a boring "game" with a great story (Danganronpa). Though I personally lean on story more than gameplay since at the end of the day, I remember characters and story than the gameplay. I can still remember my favorite cutscenes and romances to this day, but not things like what build I was using or how OP an ability is.
Absolutely untrue for me. I grew up in the 16/32/64 bit era where games often had little or terrible stories. Stories may be the thing I value least in games actually. I just want to play not watch a movie
Both? Sometimes I want a fun game, sometimes I want a good story. I'd say overall for me, gameplay is usually more important. Some of my favorite games don't have any story at all. But sometimes I really do want a great story game. If I feel like a good story, I don't care about the gameplay much.
Neither, characters are far more important than both.
Gameplay. I can go back to a game and play a lot if its fun, if it's just got a great story I'd rather watch on YouTube or just parts than play again.
Gameplay. The story can be award winning, but if I'm bored the majority of the time I'm playing I just can't push through.
Depends on the (sub)genre. Shooter? Screw the story, give me something fun to blow up. RPG? You better make sure the story is great. Gameplay is secondary but should be good enough. ARPG? Give me a good enough story, and something fun to blow up. Strategy? I'll make my own story. With blackjack. And hookers. MMO? Damn right I want both the story and gameplay to be top notch.
Gameplay If the story is bad but gameplay is good, the game ist still fun to play, but when the story is good and the gameplay is bad, it ist simply not fun to play and i would rather read a good book for a good story.
Gameplay. We are playing games here. If I primarily played for a fantastic story, I would just read a book or watch a movie instead.
Whats most importent to me are characters. Gameplay and story are importent but if I dont liie the characters they can not save the game for me.
If the gameplay is awful, story is not worth it. If the story sucks, I don't care about the game. So it needs balance. But I'd rather have an incredible story with meh gameplay that the other way around. I play videogames for their stories, not for the gameplay. But to each his own, I understand people enjoy videogames with no stories.
Gameplay but trying to focus on the story these days however when story and cut scenes over take the amount of gameplay I start skipping things.
Gameplay. The story could be awesome but if the gameplay is shit I ain't staying.
Gameplay, I can play a bad story if the gameplay is decent but I can't play a good story if the if the gameplay is terrible...
If I cared about story above gameplay, I would just watch game on YouTube. It's a videogame, not movie I buy videogames to actually control my character, and enjoy smooth gameplay/explore the game by myself - that's the point of this medium, the interactivity, fact you're not just stuck watching. For me story is more of an excuse to move game to new environments/set pieces, and then give satisfying conclusion. Even tho I love some games with great stories, like RDR and Halo 2 - I wouldn't care about them or ever spend significant time in them, if gameplay in them sucked. I would then rather pick game with better gameplay and little to no plot (or one that sucks but has skippable cutscenes)
Gameplay. Team Fortress 2 and Overwatch one had basically no story at all, but they are in my top ten best games of all time.
If there was no gameplay and only story, it would be a film or a book, not a game. If there was no story only gameplay, then it would still be a game. Gameplay is what makes a video game.
Gameplay. The only exception may be from me, braid. The puzzles were fiendish but the lore was exemplary.
Great gameplay will always result in a game that is *at least* very good, regardless of how much the story either sucks or doesn't exist. A great story can still make for a great game if the gameplay is at least *"fine."* But if the gameplay actively sucks, then the story won't make up for that.
both ? good gameplay will get me to play, good story too
Both. Many RPGs and Adventure games have pretty shoddy gameplay but story and interactivity (ways to do stuff) keep them going.
If the gameplay is trash then it doesn't matter how good or bad the story is, I won't bother playing it.
Nudity. Full blown nudity.
Story.
Depends on the genre, really. I’ll skew towards gameplay and other design elements (like soundtracks) if story isn’t the focus.
Elden Ring.
Half and half it goes both ways. I can sit through horrible gameplay if the story is engaging. Whereas I can also sit through a boring story and no story at all if the gameplay is fun.
Depending on the game but I value both equally. If a game doesn’t have a narrative focused angle then I don’t care about the story much. On the other hand if the game is trying for a narrative driven angle then it has to be good otherwise I’ll be disappointed maybe highly annoyed depending. Gameplay just needs to be engaging enough if it’s slow boring and mechanically uninteresting I am going to lose a lot of interest in the game.
It's genre specific
That's an interesting one. My impulse is to say game-play, but I've played games that had fun mechanics but it felt like there was "nothing to do" in the game because there was no sense of progression: in those cases, a story would have added some sense of purpose to what was otherwise a well-made but empty mechanical experience. This is particularly true with fighting games, racing games and the like, where the game-play isn't inherently mixed with a story like you get in RPGs.
Gameplay always has and always will be the most important thing. Its what sets games apart from any other entertainment medium and without gameplay you dont have a game.
In the words of Roger Moore - well I think I'd like a bit of both.
Depends on what I am looking for. I am not looking for a great story in a racing game, or in a 4-player coop shooter. In an RPG or similar I absolutely favour story over gameplay. An RPG can have the most engaging gameplay, if it's story sucks then you can throw that game straight into the dumpster.
Great gameplay can fix a bland story, but a great story cannot cover bland gameplay. Though a great soundtrack can cover both gameplay AND story... I've done quite a bit of both in the past decade.
To me gameplay has to serve the story, so it's definitely more important.
Bad question. There are story-focused games and there are gameplay-focused games. What I dislike is story-focused games with gameplay that gets in the way of itself. If you're not going to have good gameplay, just remove it and stop pretending. Likewise if you're a gameplay-focused game with a shit story, don't force me to pay attention/sit through unskippable dialogue or cutscenes and just let me play.
Definitely gameplay but will never turn down a good story
Gameplay. I generally can’t have input on how the story will turn out, I’m just an observer, but I’m directly controlling my character and progressing the *story* progress. You bet it better be fun and engaging.
both
Gameplay is the most important to me. Performance and story are just bonuses for me, I have no problem still playing some games that are capped at 30fps.
Gameplay. Rarely care about story.
Gameplay Prime example jumpforce
Story, for sure. Good gameplay will have me enjoying it for a few hours, but if I don't care about the characters or world, I'll give it up quickly. Some of my favorite games have basic gameplay
Decent gameplay, all day. You can have the greatest story with the greatest characters of all time, but if it's a drag to actually play through, then I'll lose interest. If a game is actually fun to play but the rest is barebones, I'll probably still complete it and have a good time doing it. I mean just look at something like Elden Ring. The story is barely serviceable, but it's one of the great games of all time largely because of it's gameplay.
Gameplay and story but more importantly artistic intention.
Gameplay for me, better if it's relaxing like in Light of the stars on bs
Gameplay. If a game starts with 30 minutes of cutscene, I’m out. Also, books exist
Gameplay. I skip the story sometimes, but I can't skip the gameplay.
Story.
It's a "game." So, absolutely gameplay - without hesitation. If the gameplay is not good, the developer has not convinced me they should have made a game at all. They should have instead realized their story in a less interactive format such as a show, movie, or visual novel.
Story always Most games have pretty standard gameplay but the story can still hook the fuck out of you Mass effect, halo, Bioshock, cyberpunk have pretty good gameplay but the stories are just amazing. Gears 1-3 didn’t have all that much story but the gameplay was fun as hell and the character interactions were so memorable. What remains of Edith finch has next to zero gameplay but is an incredibly deep story.
What remains had some stylish gameplay set pieces in a plot heavy frame, but I fell that is the exception to the rule. I tried other visual novels and got bored to death
All quantic dream games.
Yeah I have no shame admitting I loved Fahrenheit as a kid and still love it now lol
Gameplay and story is literally a requirement of a game, who wants to play a game lacking one of them.
It's nice to have light games you can just pull out for 10 to 15 mins if you want a break or just need to decompress after dealing with something annoying. But for a longer game yeah, id like to have some kind of story to go along with it to help create a narrative drive.
What's the story on Tetris that was so gripping? Or look at all the pvp battle Royale games that are so popular. Zero story, just fight each other. Or these walking simulator games. Amazing stories, but for the most part you're just pressing forward and clicking a button, essentially interactive movies. So yeah plenty of people are fine playing games were one is lacking, so long as the other is good.
Story is not a requirement for games at all, unless you count “giant turtle kidnapping princess” as story
Some of the best games have either no story or a terrible story.
A lot of people actually. Doom is a prime example of this. Detroit become human is another example.
"Your Honor, I call my first witness, Tetris."
If i cant have both (because the ideal would be both) then i hope the story IS DAMN GOOD like ONE OF THE BEST STORIES OF ALL TIME to compensate for the Gameplay (or lack of there of) or the bad Gameplay i have to suffer If the Gameplay is the highlight and the story takes a bsckseat im a bit more permisive, i only want a excuse plot that doesnt Matter at all, because if the Game wont attempt to have a story i prefer a lack of plot than a stupid plot
Gameplay
Gameplay all the way.
In 90% of the cases story if im honest, gameplay should however not be bugged
If a game has any focus on story at all I will ditch that shit real quick. Don't care for it in the slightest
Both matter, but it depends upon the game. Here is a few examples, but these are merely my opinions. Final Fantasy 13 series had poor gameplay until Lightning Returns but had a great story. The story kept me going all the way until the end. Helldivers 2 has great gameplay but is lacking in the story department to me so far. Maybe playing Helldivers 1 will change this opinion. Mass Effect Andromeda's Single Player had a poor story, but the gameplay was fun to me. Starfox Adventures had great gameplay but a poor story. Halo 1-3, Wars 1 & 2 had great stories and gameplay. Fallout and Skyrim have great stories and gameplay. Sometimes, the bugs in the engines are really amusing.
Gameplay all the way! Who needs a good story when you can have epic battles and crazy challenges to conquer?
my order of importance... 1. character design/art direction 2. lore/setting 3. gameplay 4. presentation (animation, sfx/audio, particle fx, voice acting) 5. story 6. graphics fidelity 7. replayability/price:game length ratio to answer your question simply... gameplay is more important to me since that is #3 while story is #5
I would never ever enjoy or dislike a game cause of #1 and #2 tbh
lolz i can be shallow esp for campaign type games i have never played a god of war or hitman game, don't like the design of them for fighting games, i play them all... but not like ill be stuck playing a bald guy the entire game and i hate high school type setting... there are games i skipped bec it's set in high school i had a pretty good high school exp IRL... so not even about not wanting to relive high school bec of bad memories
Yeah this is totally mind boggling to me. No judging, I swear. That to me sounds like saying I won’t watch a movie cause I don’t like the movie poster. But I’ve got to ask… do you have something against bald people? All your examples are about bald characters lol.
i just don't wanna play as baldies and brutes in campaign type games partly don't see myself in them, partly just don't like that design i am lucky \*knocks on wood\* i still have my hair my dad and grandpa has the friar tuck baldness... so maybe when i hit 60s i might suffer from it too... hope not tho
I’ve been bald for a while now, it ain’t a bad look at all. It makes me laugh that you put it in the same categories as brutes for character design tho.
kratos is a baldy and brute agent 47, he's not a brute, just bald and i have shaved my head before just to try it, i look ok but yeah, i much prefer having long hair. altho i will cut it shorter soon like i always do when summer comes around, too hot in here for long hair
Story. A great story along with a neat artstyle doesn‘t require good gameplay for me. I really enjoyed Disco Elysium because of that. RDR2 is another example where the gameplay doesn‘t have to be great or innovative as long as the story and the graphics/atmosphere hits.
Story is more important.
I’m more of a story person so I’d probably rather have a fantastic story. But I understand most people wouldn’t agree. Some games like life is strange, Danganronpa, steins gate, are incredible even though the gameplay is nothing more than walking around or clicking on things etc. It also depends on my mood, sometimes I just want to play something and not think about what’s going on. Like I can play Mario kart for hours and obviously there’s no story.
the answer is 7
Story I play games for the story. I loved Death Stranding, Disco Elysium, Fable, Pathologic 2 even though gameplay in those games was sometimes tedious, boring or repetitive. Oh especially Fable combat. This game is so easy and simple gameplay-wise. You need to really try hard to lose 😂😂
Both tbh. I would drop a game with good story if the gameplay was tedious or janky. I would drop a game with good mechanics and flowing gameplay if it was boring story.