Would you rather have a deep game or a pretty game?

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Ideally a game will have both. But if I had to choose, it'd be deep games all the way.

Spoiler: For crying out loud, I play games that look like this:

Where do you think my priorities lie?

 

[dimensional]

Well if I had to choose I would go with deep but sometimes I just like to play a pretty looking game that dosent require much thought.
I like the depth to come from a subset of skills and options (that are intuitive to use) and their combination rather than having to sit down and read a manual.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I'd rather have deep gameplay the fact that most SNES RPG's are still really playable is a testament to the fact that you can skimp on the graphics and still make an awesome game.

I also play Dwarf Fortress and that is the gaming equivalent of a 1000 foot sinkhole.

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

A deep game, without a doubt. However, a deep game is always helped by pretty graphics.

this

 

[Thanato5]

I think what I want is a good game. There are a plethora of games that may look really good but just aren't fun. Neither depth nor graphics equals a good game.

 

[Whateveralot]

I really prefer a deep game with great and gameplay that lets you do what you want.

 

[GundamSentinel]

First: one does not exclude the other.

Second: on the short term I like pretty games, but the longer I play (the more immersed I get) the more I tend to a deep game.

 

[Vault101]

Id prefer the new Deus ex to the original

am I going to hell? mabye....but its just the way Im wired

now if we are talking say crysis graphics vs fallout 3 graphics then Ill defenitly go ith the fallout 3 ones in favour of a deeper game, if that makes sense

 

[Prince Regent]

Deep, but it shouldn't be too ugly.

 

[hazabaza1]

Sometimes, I just want to kill the shit out of things.
One of the problems with deep games is the lack of being able to pick-up and play. That won't stop me from playing them, but if I just want to chill for half an hour or so and play something, I won't be picking up Dwarf Fortress.

 

[Vimto]

Currently playing Alice, so I have a good chunk of both.

 

[LilithSlave]

Well, I personally don't like brown and grimdark. So aesthetics do matter a bit.

I don't, on the other hand, care of course more about depth I would say.

Can I have both, though?

 

[Eggbert]

I play Dwarf Fortress. That should tell you about where I stand here.

 

[sageoftruth]

Crysis 1: 12 hours played, last played 10/13/2010

Fallout: New Vegas: 365 hours, last played 9/5/2011

Garry's Mod: 467 hours, last played 9/7/2011

Terraria: 76 hours, last played tuesday.

Answer's pretty clear I think.

Both?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

This wasn't the right question to create an interesting poll.

What you should have asked is "would you rather have a deep, rich game with a horribly complex, dense, punishing interface, or a really shallow but pretty game that's easy to pick up and play".

 

[sageoftruth]

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/graphics-vs.-aesthetics

I couldn't watch any more after he said how much he liked the style of that stupid rapper game or whatever the fuck it's called.

He actually says that it has better aesthetics than Golden Axe: Beast Rider. Are you really trying to tell me that you don't agree?

Idk, it looked pretty shit to me.

A friend demoed the game for me once. True, the imagery wasn't pretty, but the game and storyline were crazy and nonsensical in an Adult Swim sort of way, so the choice of imagery couldn't have been better. With the Unreal engine, the game would have looked as out of place as Marcus Phoenix at the Babysitter's Club.

 

[dickywebster]

Well considering how (just what it looks like to me) the market is currently kinda little full with shallow games that either look pretty or only use a few shades of brown and what not, some more depth in games would be nice
And I dont have much against fps games, but they might struggle with that somewhat