Does graphics matter?

*cough*, "do graphics matter *cough*

To me, graphics matter almost equally to a good storyline.
There should be a good story, but it should be interpreted by the creators of the game in a nice, realistic way to the player.
I could make an exception, of course, but only if it's something very original and interesting to play.

Do graphic matters? YES! Regardless of everything else, yes, they matter a lot.

Minecraft is a nice experiment, but most commercially successful games have above average graphics. Ex. The Last of Us, Battlefield, Batman Arkham games, etc. Its the first thing you see and can be a selling point to a majority of kids. Game developers know this and its why new consoles are upgraded to accommodate bigger and better graphics.

Graphics are an important element to a game. They don't determine whether or not a given game is worthless or not, but they certainly help the experience if done well and can immerse players into the experience.When thinking of great graphics, I actually like to refer to two of my all-time favorite games- Legend of Zelda Wind Waker and Okami. Graphically speaking, these games hold up incredibly well by being built around artistic graphical styles that manage to look beautiful and timeless.

Graphics are one of the major aspects in game design because it provides visual interface between the the user and the machine; however, good looking graphics are just aesthetics. I would rather have a game that isn't that aesthetically appealing but is functional and not bug infested instead of a beautiful hunk of flaming shit that you can't play because it is buggy.
Anymore, companies are using pre-order revenue for the alpha and beta testing until the release date, and then using sales revenue to fix the bugs . What happened to the days where games had minimal bugs upon release?

Prime example... Archeage...what a beautiful hunk of flaming shit that is so bot infested you can't enjoy many of the aspects of the game

Graphic matter based on the game
if the game a story line and for the next gen of course its matter
but if the game old and blah blah blah no i doesn't matter

It doesn't matter whether graphics matter

Good HQ graphics sell games, because that's the first impression the game leaves on potential buyers. Eye candies get high sales numbers because subconsciously people (especially newcomers) assume the game is professional and will therefore be fun. The saying "don't judge a book by its cover" wouldn't exist if people... well... didn't judge books by their covers.

Low budget (cheap) visuals may still provide the same level of immersion. In fact there is a theory that states the more abstract the visuals are the easier it is for a player to associate with them (because your imagination will fill in the "blanks" and do it much better than an artist can)

When In-game however, it's all the same as long as:

• graphics don't attract too much attention to themselves and thus break the immersion (screaming colors, inappropriate out of place visuals, elements that just don't blend in and stand out too much, etc...)
• graphics don't contrast with atmosphere, the rest of the game is trying to create (fun pastel colors in a game with a dark theme - e.g. horror)
• visuals don't hinder the player's perception of game world and therefore the gameplay (low contrast, unintentional optical illusions, camouflaged objects that really should stand out, etc...)

Personally, I am quite wary when looking at games with "awesome" graphics and read comments and reviews very carefully, because the game industry has the tendency to pump way too much resource towards visuals and often forget to pay proper attention to other parts of the game. I've had less disappointments coming from uglier games.

Graphics are one of the major aspects in game design because it provides visual interface between the the user and the machine;

I beg to differ, sir!
That's more of a visual design discipline, game design does mechanics. What you refer to is also called "user experience design"

Graphical fidelity is artistically valueless. If the art itself looks good and works for the style of the game, then you don't need complicated particle effects and shaders. It doesn't even need to be polygonal

a little, i mean if you would make a game in 2014 i think it needs to have good graphics (not really true...) but games like from 2005 or something like that don't need to have good graphics in my opinion

While retro-themed 2D graphics are fine, if you're making a 3D game you'd want to make sure it looks like something from at least 2011 if you can't do better.

And if it is 2D, then the art needs to be good, otherwise it feels like an interactive DeviantArt gallery. :V

So, this doesn't look appealing anymore?

P.S. How do you make images smaller O_O

In the 90's it was fine, but ridiculously compressed textures and 20 polygons isn't really a good thing nowadays

...The results of the studies however showed that audiovisual elements are actually of rather little importance. Instead the satisfaction of the basic needs is, yet again, heavily involved: The more a game lets the player make choices autonomously, build competence and experience relatedness to others, the more “immersive” it feels in the end...

- See more at Gamasutra

I was reading this article and thought I should share, it kinda answers the question
(and also supports the points I tried to make :D)

yes they are.... but they dont define a game it has a lot more to it when saying if a game is good or not, also the graphic style shold be considered

I've always been one to like good graphics, but I won't be picky. As long as it's smooth movement then it should be fine.
However, some of my favourite online horror games are the pixel ones, like Misao, or the Crooked Man. I just love playing that style sometimes.
And also, there's the absolute exception of the first 5 Lara Croft games. I still love them no matter the graphics!

Graphics are nice but I think that the best thing about a game is the story. Having good graphics is a plus but now a game maker for me.

Personally speaking, it just depends on the game. I love varied art styles, be them realistic, artsy, retro, so on. Sometimes the art interlinks with the gameplay.
For example, perhaps, if you played Botanicula -- a game about insects, plants, trees, etc. -- it might just be a tad disturbing to see a realistic version of it. By that I mean you don't want to be playing as HD sticks and insects cause that might be more nightmare-ish than the intended cutesy theme of the game.
That said, if the game intends for immersion, such as that of horror games, like Alien: Isolation, the effect would be a little less powerful had it been a more Bioshock Infinite-esque artstyle. It wouldn't draw the player in nearly to the extent it currently does, therefore drastically lessen the horror and overall intention of the game.
As I said previously, the game is the core and the presentation varies depending on its approach.

Graphics matter.
But seeing as almost all games now come with tolerable graphics, its not a big deal.
And it really depends how well the game can optimize the graphics.

Not always I think.

Absolutely Not. Dishonored Is a Game with strong gameplay but the graphics may not be likeable. if it was "yes", minecraft was the worst game ever made!