The Last Of Us vs. Breath Of The Wild: the age old debate – Reader’s Feature

A reader continues the eternal debate of graphics versus gameplay and argues that focusing too much on one or the other is rarely a good idea.

I’m kind of late to the party here but I had a number of thoughts on the issue of graphics versus gameplay that I couldn’t cover in one or two paragraphs. For me the debate is a somewhat difficult one to answer. Mostly people tend to say gameplay is the most important factor and whilst I tend to agree it’s not always clear cut, as for me the two things can sometimes be interlinked.

For example, my favourite game ever is probably Zelda: Breath Of The Wild. Now, I’m sure many would point to its gameplay as reason for this and it’s probably the most important factor, and sure the graphics aren’t as impressive as other recent games. However, Breath Of The Wild is an open world game and would it be as enjoyable to explore the Kingdom of Hyrule without at least a certain level of polish? I would argue it would not.

My other favourite game is The Last Of Us, which is sometimes accused of being style over substance. Obviously The Last Of Us’ impressive graphics and cutting edge motion capture is a huge part of its appeal but I think the gameplay adds to the experience. I don’t think it would’ve been as successful without it. Sure, the gameplay isn’t doing anything new or groundbreaking but it does it to a high standard.

I don’t feel it’s what is better but how much are you willing to compromise between the two and the genre of game. For example, indie games are often pointed out as being engaging from a gameplay perspective but less so in terms of graphics. I’m willing to play certain games that don’t look as good as others but only to a certain point.

I know that Undertale is meant to be amazing but I really don’t know if it’s my thing, to be frank it looks ugly as sin. On this occasion I’m not sure the gameplay can make up for inadequate presentation. But indie games don’t have to look terrible, the upcoming The Plucky Squire, for an example, looks amazing.

Two indie games I’ve enjoyed in recent years have been Inside and Limbo, both these games, though not particularly impressive from a technical perspective, were still visually interesting. I guess that’s down to art style but that’s probably a whole other debate, what’s the difference between art style and graphics and are they the same? Indie games can still have decent graphics.

The opposite is also true. Star Wars: Battlefront 2 is probably one of the most faithful recreations of the Star Wars universe and looks visually stunning, yet wasn’t a great success despite this in part due to the mostly average gameplay. I do, however, think graphics are important when it comes to open world games. At the moment I’m playing Horizon Forbidden West and I think part of the appeal is that the graphics are so stunning the world begs to be explored.

I believe that a great game needs a good balance between graphics and gameplay. You often hear the phrase ‘this hasn’t aged well’ when talking about older games and usually this a combination of gameplay and graphics.

Gameplay has improved since the mid-90s when I first started playing video games and this is in no small part because the technical advances in the graphical capabilities of home consoles has gotten us to the point that the only limitations of what is possible is the imaginations of the game designers themselves.

By reader matc7884

The reader’s feature does not necessary represent the views of GameCentral or Metro.

You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at [email protected] or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email.

Follow Metro Gaming on Twitter and email us at [email protected]

To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here.

For more stories like this, check our Gaming page.