To the PC gamers of System Wars. What kind of PC gamer are you?

I just play what interests me at the end of the day. it could be a PC melting monster of a game or something that could run on a potato. 2D, 3D, realistic, stylised, RPG, racing, strategy....it matters not. If a game piques my interest then i will get it.

I play mostly indie games these days.

While I like both Visual Novels and Arcade-style games. I am more drawn to games with good gameplay.

Gameplay, immersion and graphics last. Don't care about story one bit.

Gameplay matters more than graphics to me. If a game has a great story but sub par gameplay I just watch Let's Plays since I won't feel like I'm missing out on the full experience. Having a good story is a bonus since it can suck me into the game more than graphics.

Immersion. Everything has to come together to create an immersive experience that I enjoy.

TES games are very immersive but kinda shit in the gameplay and story departments.

As long as you are immersed and enjoying yourself, then enough of the elements are coming together in the right way. No game is perfect.

Gameplay>Graphics>Story

For me gameplay is easily the most important it's what keeps me coming back to the game and graphics help me get immersed as for story it's more of a afterthought most of the time to me. If atmosphere was on this list I would rank it after graphics. Atmosphere is another level of immersion that can really suck me into a games world.

Why is the question for pc gamers only 🤷🏻‍♂️? Why not post it in the pc forum then?

I'm addicted to RPG

Gameplay>Graphics

i was orginally going to put graphics first (cuz im a graphics whore) but then i remembered how much im addicted to Animal Crossing New horizons and that shit looks like a PS2 game but the gameplay keeps me coming back for more, so i changed my answer.

Why choose when a proper game offers all of the above? All i can say is that the story is the least important of the three.

I play anything no matter what, but for the sake of your poll Gameplay > Graphics > Story.

Why? I mainly play strategy/simulation games. So story is non-existent for me as it doesn't matter. Graphics don't have to be technically great, just a nice UI and art direction.

You be surprise how the outcome turns out and its really for everyone. Never said PC gamers only lol.

Oh and we also had a similar thread many years ago here in SW.

Gameplay first then graphics then story. while story is very important but it should not do that so gameplay take back seat.

Gameplay>Graphics>Story

As I've gotten older I care less and less about story. I just want to play.

Gameplay, followed story and then graphics. Yeah, pretty is nice, but i'd rather be engaged on some level... Otherwise i'm browsing on my phone whilst playing.

From those options, voted Gameplay>Graphics>Story.

But a rough breakdown for my preferences would be

1. Game design (with many sub-categories that could unfold into a monster post of its own lol)
2. Performance.
3. A tie between art direction and music. Would say sound in general, but a lot of that loops back up to game design.
4. Technical graphics.
5. .
6. .
7. .
8. ..
9. ...
10. Story.

And yeah, don't really see this as some PC gamer thing. Just my thoughts on games in general.

I'm big on immersion/atmosphere and my favorite games tend to be strong in these areas, but I'll take each game on its merits and try to enjoy it for what it is.

Gameplay >>>> >>>>> graphics >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>x3000 story.

I want to press buttons and play a game absolute first, graphics come next after it but i couldn't care if the game is even 2D, story no interest in at all.

Gameplay and graphics are sometimes tightly knit. Story is nice but not needed.

Yeah, thought about listing animation as a separate thing, but that often gets into game feel, communication, feedback, etc. which just loops back into gameplay.

I'm finding graphics matter less and less as I get older, while gameplay becomes ever more important. That said if Anti-aliasing, pop-in, and framerate fall under the graphics umbrella then it is quite important; absolutely despise jaggies and framerates dipping below 30. Don't know how Nintendo keeps getting away with jagged graphics in this day and age.

I really don’t care myself. I’ll play anything that I find enjoyable. It can vary depending on the game and how much its strengths offset its weakness. Sometimes the gameplay will be enough to pull me through a game, sometimes its graphics will, and sometimes its story will be enough for me.

@davillain-: Gameplay = story, really??? if the gameplay is shithouse but has an "excellent" story then the game is a waste of time, may as well turn it into a film.

This guy gets it, and its not what hermits wants its what most gamers should want.

Gameplay > Story > Performance > Graphics for me.

I really don't care. If I had to pick it would probably be gameplay>story>graphics, but I think it depends so much on the game - obviously some games are designed to be spectacles or don't even have a story, while others barely have "gameplay" but that's intended

First option for me, there is a reason why I invested in a GTX 1080. Minimum requirement for me is 1080p at 60fps, if either of those numbers go any lower I buy a new GPU (CPU if needed).

Voted: I really don't care, I play anything that I find interesting and most of all, fun!


Just because it's entirely genre dependant...

I'm all about immersion too. Graphics and sound are really important for that.

How immersive was Metro Exodus, when suddenly one of the fiercest nuclear storms hit in that game. Lighting, bad visibility, ... I love that stuff!

@R4gn4r0k: Yup. :)

Gameplay above all else. If interacting with the game is wack, the game is wack. I don't care how good the story is at that point, or how good it looks, or how polished it is, or any of that shit. You can not be bad at the defining characteristic of the medium.

There used to be a time where I was more forgiving to games that tried well above their means, or had a neat story n commitment to immersion at the expense of fun systems, but no dice.

That's not to say I can't play it or finish it. I'm playing OG FF7 for effectively what feels like the first time (since I never bothered to beat it), and its charming enough that in a discord chat with friends I'm having a decent time. But I would never touch this game ever again or on my own time. It's fucking mindless.

It's all about the depth of the gameplay: the amount of meaningful decision making the player does in a given possibility space. If that shit is limited or slacking, the game is a one n done at best for me, and that's if I even bother to beat it.

I find that more often than not this holds true for me as well. I can get past mediocre gameplay, story or graphics if the overall game has an excellent and immersive atmosphere.

It depends on the game.

Stardew Valley has great pixel graphics and incredibly deep gameplay.

Metro Exodus probably wouldn't be that good without good graphics.

The Witcher has everything. The graphics, the gameplay, the story. Would it be equally immersive without good graphics? For me, probably it wouldn't.

I would be lying if I told that graphics don't matter. Yeah, I do like it when a game has good graphics, but it purely depends on the game.

Since the number of times a character or story has impressed me can be counted on one hand and I have played (and had fun with) prototype games, I'd say Gameplay > Graphics/Sound > Story.

Immersion is a big factor for me though. But the immersion can arise from the gameplay without much graphical detail. In Other Waters is a good example of this. I didn't love the game but there was a sense of immersion, even though you are essentially looking at menu's and maps for the entire game. The story didn't have a lot to do with my immersion in that game, but it did help.

Definitely the last option. I like what I like and give games the best chance I can to enjoy them. Graphics are nice, even technically proficient graphics mean less tome than good art style.

Pretty much this to a tee.

Another great example of graphics mattering in that they can enhance the gameplay is with racing games. For a good racer, you really need to be running at your native resolution at 60 FPS minimum. In that sense graphics "matter" but it's really about the core game itself.

I chose the last option. I'll play anything that interests me.

Atmosphere is only one element of immersion though. The visuals, audio, controls, gameplay, story, characters, pacing, world building, technical performance, etc... all contribute to the immersion. It's about the overall experience. When you are fully immersed in a game and there is little that pulls you out of that experience, you know the game is good.

Not dunking on Metro specifically when I say this, but if the only thing good about the game is how it looks, it isn't good.

@jg4xchamp: Graphics can really be tied to your emotions in a game. It might not be a stellar shooter that sets itself apart in a saturated market but the post apocalyptic world and immersive stunning graphics can easily set it apart.

As long as I enjoy playing the game nothing really matters.

To me its:

DO I enjoy the game/gamplay --> framerate/stability ---> everything else

If it looks good and has a good story line its a bonus.

Where did I say it's the only good thing about the game?

I'm simply saying that the graphics are a big part of the immersion in the game.

Story is most important for me.

Sounds like a game that's only good at the superficial shit instead of having any substance.