Original post by abstractimmersion The thing about graphics is that they need to show the flavor of the game. I've heard this TRPG Disgaea is supposed to be pretty good, but I'm not going to play it based on screenshots I've seen. Spending that much time what looks to be a campy snarkfest does not appeal to me, because I can't stomach that posture. Graphics are a gamer's first impression, and the gameplay is the game. Story? Eh.
what you're saying is sad and true... because I've played Disgaea and it's in my top 5 of the greatest games I've ever played... even though the graphics are somewhat way below the average
For graphics, I think it's important to do as well as you can with the resources you have available. For example, I personally am of the opinion that the SNES Starfox graphics are better than the PS1 Final Fantasy VII graphics, because Starfox maintained a clean aesthetic, whereas in FF7 it was often difficult to tell what was going on. Similarly, N has "good" graphics because it goes for a minimalist aesthetic and pulls it off very well. I suppose what I'm saying here is that graphics should be intelligible and consistent. Anything above and beyond that is just gravy.
Incidentally, do try to think of alternative ways to do RPG combat. I'm sure I'm not the only person who's utterly sick of Square-style linedancing, which hasn't significantly changed since the first game (yeah, yeah, you can throw out all sorts of "major changes" through the series, but the bottom line is that you have characters on one side and monsters on the other and they take turns whacking each other and casting spells). If your budget allows, try playing some other RPGs with different battle systems. Off the top of my head, Grandia II, Tales of Phantasia (and Tales of Symphonia), Chronotrigger, and the Seiken Densetsu/Legend of Mana series all are RPGs of varying stripes that have distinct combat styles.
Jetblade: an open-source 2D platforming game in the style of Metroid and Castlevania, with procedurally-generated levels
I think, in a RPG, no need to ultimate graphics. ofcourse if graphics good, it will be good but not very necessary. the story must be exellent i think. personally, i hate that storyless hack'n slash games. even i'm telling that they're not games.
and as nature of rpg, there must be freedom in gameplay. the amount of freedom affects directly to player.
Graphics are marketing. It's the pretty pictures on the box that will attract your attention to the game and get your initial interest, but they won't keep it while you're playing. From this perspective, graphics are essential for a commercial title, but as far as my enjoyment of the game goes, not that important. Games like Fallout have awful graphics by today's standards, yet they remain popular.
Story. I don't want to be told a story. I want to be given a plot and then the freedom to develop my character(s) and create my own story based on that plot. If I just wanted a story I'd go watch a film or read a book. Again, I'll refer to Fallout, because this game managed this extremely well.
Gameplay is the mechanism by which the player develops the character and develop the story. Ultimately, this has to be an enjoyable experience for the player and not a tedious chore, otherwise the player will lose interest in advancing the story and give up on the game. If the gameplay is good, the game could have the cheesiest storyline in the world and still be entertaining to play.
All the well known genres are like cuisines you have tried & tasted before. If your trying something new for the first time then you normally go through the following steps but the order is not particularly dogma!
Step 1: Graphics/Appearance
Does it look good? Does it look appetising? 'cus if it doesn't then it's sure as hell very unlikely to taste or smell good. However sometimes appearances can be misleading, something that really smells great and tastes good might be arranged like crap on the plate. Adversely, something that smells like crap and tastes like crap can be neatly and artistically decorated on the plate. ;)
Step 2: Storyline/Aroma
After judging by the look you move on to the smell. Does it smell nice? Hardcore chefs may even go as far as saying that "the Aroma of a cuisine tells a short story of how it was created". Sometimes however this category is not valid because some kinds of food emit a very faint aroma. RPGs (Sweet & Sour Pork) are heavily story-oriented and as such smell is very valid in this case but for like FPSs (Chocolate Bar), smell is not really that important *cough*Doom*cough*.
Step 3: Gameplay/Taste
Seriously, when it comes to food, taste rules! If you know for a fact that a particular cuisine tastes fantastic then you might be willing to overlook the appearance and the aroma. But if you think about it, most things that taste great smell great and i challenge anyone to prove me wrong! :P
You can only go so far with appearance & aroma but you can constantly shock people by the taste of your masterpiece. Anyways, the whole point of this analogy was to repeat what some others have said earlier, but through a different perspective:
Taste > Aroma > Appearance
Gameplay > Story > Graphics
But note, in order to reach the taste of your dish i will most likely have to go through its appearance then its aroma. I could go into other factors like hearsay and all that (this guy said your dish tastes like crap!) but that's another story. ;)
I don't think you should focus on any of those elements more than the others. The entire product should be up to the best standard you can produce, should be polished, and should be well thought out. All features should be designed to work well together, and to provide an enjoyable experience to the player.
You're making a game, so obviously gameplay is very important. This should be what most of the player's time is taken up with, and if it isn't good people are unlikely to be interested in addons and/or sequels, and may be wary about other games from the same developer. I would argue that gameplay is the most important aspect of a game, but that it still shouldn't be given preferential treatment over the other elements. Gameplay alone is unlikely to save a hideous game with a horrible story.
A story, if included in a game (which is pretty much a given for an RPG) should be well thought out and presented to the player as well as possible. Games are an interactive medium, and therefore the player should feel as though they are really a part of the story, or at the least that thier actions really matter. Stories are often lacking in games, and I think it's an area where indie games probably have a real chance to stand out.
Graphics are really the largest part of what sells a game. Good visuals are really the main thing you can put on a box or show off on a website, and it's that interesting screenshot that's likely to grab someone's attention and get them to take a closer look, or perhaps try out a demo and hopefully purchase the game. Remember that good graphics don't neccesarily have to be realistic, they just need to suit the game, and often a highly stylised game can stand out very well while not neccesarily being as difficult to implement as something more realistic.
In an RPG, the story must be designed in such a way as to provide motivation for the gameplay, which must in turn be designed so that the player's actions push the story forwards. The graphics must be able to adequately display the story, and should not distract the player from gameplay (or in the case of interface graphics confuse the player). In a well made game all the elements work together, and if any one of them isn't polished and well thought out it will have a negative effect on the others as well.
So, to directly answer the question from the title... a well thought out and polished gaming experience is the most important thing, and no element of the final product should be ignored or not given proper attention in order to produce this experience.
I find that games that had a huge focus on graphics when they were released tend to be the hardest to go back to when they're no longer beautiful by new standards. I can play Thrust or Asteroids or Breakout all day long without being offended by the looks. If I play Turok, though, I'm quickly bored by the lack of inverse kinematics, the weak particle effects and the abyssmal draw distance.
In a more pointed example, I'll play Survival Crisis Z before I'll play Dungeon Siege 2, based solely on graphics. Dungeon Siege 2 uses low-res texturemaps, poor geometry collision, and over-the-top special effects. SCZ uses lame sprites, atrocious 3d backgrounds and almost no animation.
The difference is that DS2 has a gorgeous cutscene that shows how huge their graphics budget was. SCZ just drops you into the game with freaking zombies attacking you. That's a game.
Also note the best RPGs have stuff and usually lots of it. People are amazing in the love of strange loot. Also it's fairly important to include enough number info so that the math inclined can deduce how the game works. You also need to have many different paths. Linear games aren't well recieved today.
I don't think graphics, gameplay, and story are totally distinct things. Also they are very general terms, especially whatever is meant by story.
Look at the Earthbound series. People love Earthbound. Why? The graphics aren't good, the gameplay is just oldskool fare, and the story isn't really so profound. The game just has a certain *style* that's hard to explain in those three terms.
