The C-E staff give their views on gaming's most important issues.

It'll come as no shock to you that games are the result of different components, compounded. Some people will shell out for new hardware because they love having the best graphics around. Some like to be immersed by surround sound. Others just want fun gameplay, or some craic with their mates in multiplayer. Obviously a successful game depends on the developer harnassing different elements, but if forced to choose, which element does the CE staff consider the most important?

What aspect of games is the most important to you?

Jordan:

You can't say something makes a game. A great game requires something of everything.

But to put it down to something it would have to be the weird choice of music. For me the music can make or break a game. The fact that you can even create your own soundtracks and even import your own music is fantastic. Recently I was playing Burnout 3 at my friends on his XBOX, the soundtrack became annoying after a while. So I transfered some of my own music to the game. I mean even on my favourite game Unreal Tornament 2004, some levels just due to the music playing makes the game even better for me and I even play better. It has a big effect on me, probably more than most.

Although a bit of nice looking graphics can't go wrong either!

Wildo:

Well there seem to be 2 different factors there that can really make a game for me. The first thing, and this is the main one, is the story. If you have a great story with lots of twists and a very clever ending you straight away have a great game on your hands already. For instance the Zelda series have a great story, ok fair enough perhaps sometimes the story maybe the same but with the twists it makes for a different story in the end. Have you ever played a Zelda game and thought, wow I didn't expect that (except for when your playing the game for the second time)or thought 'I must complete this and find out what happens next'.

The next part is the music, you must have the right type of music though. The best type is found in creepy games, such as Resident Evil or my prefered fav, Eternal Darkness. Although I admit if a fun game such as Mario Kart has some music it needs to be a bouncy type of music that we can race along to. Either way music is very much a crucial part of any game, they make you jump, they make you happy and they let you know when something is lurking round the corner.

pdhq64:

To me, it's not about graphics. It's not about sound. It's not about gameplay. It's not about the story. It's about fun.

If a game is fun to play, then it's a good game. Who cares if it has the worst graphics ever? Not me. Take Donkey Konga as an example. Does that compare to any of the latest games graphically? Hell no. However to me, it's one of the most fun games I've played in a long long time.

GCTonyHawk7:

To me, there are many important aspects of games. For one if the game has bad or not clear graphics, it can never be good. I am not saying the NES games for example are bad games because of there graphics, they have a graphics style that works for them. If Nintendo released a 3D Mario game with everything made of 50 pixel sprites, it would not turn out good at all.

Another importance of games is the music. To me if the game has bad music that just dosn't make me feel like playing, it is no good. A game needs music that fits its style well. Can you imagine a Donkey Kong game with rap music?

For the, the most important aspect of a good game would have to be the depth and quality of the game. A game really needs to make me feel like I am in it. It also has to seem like it took time, and a big team of members to make it. Some games feel like 3 people threw it together and called it a game. Also, games have to have depth. What fun is a game that is short, and not involved? One of the best examples that comes to my mind of a game with good depth would have to be Metroid Prime. It is long, and you are always searching for the next upgrade or item. It keeps you wanting to play, and makes you always leaves you feeling content. At least in my opinion.

Not much to look at but fun, fun, fun

Tom:

It's a very hard question.

To solve it I have looked back at what have been 2 of my gamecube highlights and tried to see what they have in common. Hmm, the only obvious similarity between Metroid Prime and Mario Sunshine is that they start with an 'm'. Need to look harder here. Then it hit me. The answer is quite simple: they are both instantly gripping and very acessible.

Anyone who can see the opening FMV to Metroid Prime and not be hooked immediatly has a mental definency. It also eases you in gradually, with simple, but not insulting tutorials and controls that become as natural as writing. The same for Mario Sunshine. It's so easy to get into! As soon as you pick up the control pad it somehow fuses itself to your hand until sleep or food forces you to stop. The learning curve is so perfectly measured, and the controls so tighly honed there is no effort involved in loving the game.

Many perfectly good games have been ruined for me by simply being overly complicated and not accessible. For example, True Crime: Streets of LA has few actual flaws. In theory it is a perfectly good game. But, it's over complicated and fiddly. For me to love something it has to welcome me, cushion me, and ease me into it.

Sure, music helps, story helps, but none of it is crucial. Mario Sunshine has a weak story, only occasionally good music, yet is one of the best games of this generation.

Wouter:

Tough question indeed...

I think gameplay is the most important aspect if I have to give one, but it's not very far ahead of the rest. Now that I think of it, I guess I can appreciate games that excel in different aspects. I like the Resident Evil series for its graphics, sound and the atmosphere that comes from those two, I like Beyond Good & Evil for its story, design and gameplay, I like Burnout 3 for its gameplay, sound and graphics, I like Viewtiful Joe for its challenge, gameplay and look.

A game doesn't need to have all of the aspects down to be enjoyable, a few of them can make a game very good. Games that have all of them down can be even better though; Metroid Prime is one of my favorite games for that reason.

I guess my conclusion is that no one aspect is the most important, it's how they are combined that makes them interesting. So no game can be good just because of its graphics, that's only part of the deal.

Iun:

Games mean different thing to different people. The reason we all first picked up a controller is different to our games playing friends, similarly, the reasons why we continue to play are indiscriminately individual.

Speaking personally, there are a number of things that draw me to games; I don't think that there's one single thing that keeps me coming back. The reason I play Morrowind is lifespan, the unending nature of the multitude of different quests and the limitless possibility of exploration.

The reason I play the .Hack// games is mainly the storyline. All in all, their lastability is pretty poor, 20 hours for an average gamer, my average flag save came in at 13 hours. Put that against the hundred-hours lastability of Morrowind, and it seems to pale in comparison. But the difference between the two is that where .Hack// hasn't got the lifespan, it has the powerful central story, in Morrowind, the main quest is more of a side-attraction.

Both of these games are found on non-Nintendo platforms, however, so what of my thoughts on the Big N's games? Well, again, there's a strong sense of duality there.

Gamecube games are a mix of strong elements: usually a good lifespan with that "Just one more go" gameplay that really makes them stand out will suffice to keep me occupied for months on end. I've been playing Fzero since it came out, I've unlocked everything but I still want to come back to it for that adrenaline rush that you only get jumping enormous gaps at speeds of 2000kph. Similarly, although Mario long since cleaned up Isle Delfino, the game will see the Sunshine as often as I have a spare five minutes, because of that instant gameplay that marks every Nintendo game out there.

The GameBoy is a pretty special piece of kit too, it often apes its peers and come soff the better than them: name me a strategy game as good as Advance Wars on any of the home consoles, and I'll call you a liar. There is really no comparison with some of the titles, even on the larger and more powerful machines. However, it's the classic side-scrolling platform adventure that really does it for me on the GBA, a good bash on any of the Donkey Kong or Mario games will pass the time on the dullest of train journeys.

So, there realy is no one single constant that appeals in games to me. Lifespan is important, but a good story can make or break a title. Some games are fantastic because of the pick-up-and-play aspect they have, some require much more time, and they are just as much fun when you spend the time playing them for hours on end.

Not much without the graphics really

Mark:

Personally, I think the really key factor in what makes a great game are the controls. A case in point is Super Mario 64. The connection between player and Mario is what continues to make this game a true classic- the brilliantly versatile movements and responsivity have, with the exception of Super Mario Sunshine, been unmatched for the best part of a decade. Super Monkey Ball- desperately average graphics and sound, made great by an intuitive and extraordinarily simple control system which involves the analogue stick and no other buttons.

The precise inertia and responsivity of the controls in the 2D Mario games, particularly Super Mario World and Yoshi's Island are vital.

The likes of Resident Evil have been badly let down by poor control schemes- it doesn't matter how realistic the graphics are, how chilling the sound and atmospehere is if you can't bloody run where you want without akwardly manoeuvring the character.

Poor controls are why EA's FIFA titles pale into insignificance next to Pro Evolution, and why a thousand and one otherwise quality titles are relegated to the dustbin of history- rubbish controls.

Jan:

Interesting. Almost all of my staffmates think a game lives from a good combination of its parts. Still our reviews and those of most other gaming sites are dissected into "Graphics", "Sound", "Gameplay", as if each didn't have anything to do with the others.

It maybe makes writing easier just to talk about one aspect at a time but it doesn't do the games justice.

Bas O:

Easy, gameplay is everything. Look at Grand Theft Auto, graphics aren't breathtaking but it's the best selling franchise of this generation consoles. Why? Because the gameplay is versatile and inovative. People keep playing.

Next in line is the control system, a game without smooth and intuitive controls is like walking with a wooden leg. It's a burden.

SFX and graphics always should be secondary, it's nice that a game has state of the art graphics and sound/music but it doesn't make the game. Although they do create the atmosphere, it's not keeps the player going.

ThongyDonk:

I can't pick a specific feature that hooks me to a game. I just buy it if it interests me but it has to have the ability to want me to play it. Like an author does with a book, or a director with a movie. Keep the game going, don't overload me with info, don't complicate the gameplay and appeal to my inner child.

Graphics don't interest me, but they obviously help create the illusion of the world you play in, sound matters not, but the music does and it's also got to appeal to the boss (my fiancee, I get married next August by the way) as if she don't like it I don't play it!

Lammie:

Gameplay is the most important thing to me. That's not to say that sound, graphics, playability, etc aren't important - these elements contribute to the gameplay in thier own individual way. But you can have a wonderful, massively gorgeous environment with slick graphics and realistic sound and spanking music yet it's got nothing unless it's got a great story to fully suck the gamer in (definition of gameplay - The Legend Of Zelda). In short, gameplay brings a game to life, it brings everything together into something awesome.

Innovations triumphs over graphics and sound

Dominic:

I would have to say that gameplay is one thing I take into mind when getting a game. I'm usually not too fussed over graphics. A game can have really brilliant graphics but it can still suffer from awful gaming mechanics, same as a bad graphics game can, but recently playing games like Katamari Damacy and even Nippon Ichi Software's Disgaea, La Pucelle and Phantom Brave have shown me that you don't have to have super realistic graphics to have a top notch game. The games can still just be 2D and easily be as enjoyable and just as damn good as any other game.

There are other things that can enhance enjoyment of gameplay; obviously those Bemani (Music) games rely on the music controller to get full enjoyment out of the game.

I do find it disappointing that we are in a day and age where most of the general public only really notice games that are flashy and get the attention, but deep down when you look around, you can find some real gems that aren't really all that fancy to look at. Go on, take a look around and be amazed at what you can find.

James:

I think a game has to be really atmospheric and really draw you into the world you're playing in.

A lot of people play games to escape the pressures of reality, and if a game can bring you into a whole new world, either through an involving storyline or fantastic characters or whatever, then you can really become immersed in the game, which shows how much time and effort the developers put into the game. It's these kind of games that make you want to keep playing, even if the gameplay itself is average.

And of course, games need to be fun - something not many recent games have achieved.

Javid:

To me it's the imagination and humour that they can throw into the pot. I mean there are so many games these days, it needs that extra edge that really sticks its nose out and says 'hey, I'm a little different'. Now obviously this depends on the genre, as does any factor of why you would like a particular aspect of a game, my favourite genre though is the adventure/platformers. They need to look good, they need appropiate music, they need cool characters, diverse worlds and a strong enough story. The difference between a good one and a great one though for me is the fun and humour they can incorporate into that.

Aside from this type of game though, id say its down to the gameplay. Graphics and sound etc, they all go without saying, and maybe they are under-appreciated unless they are really extravagant but without the gameplay they may as well have made some kind of cartoon, not a game.

However, its naive to say one thing makes or breaks a game, you need the whole package, a collective gelling of all aspects.

Dan:

I am not concerned about graphics. They have to come in to it I mean I wouldn't pay �39.99 to play PONG now! Look at Animal Crossing a perfect example of a game that does not relay on graphic to shift units. It's the gameplay and the originality of the game that sells it. When I buy a game I go and buy it beacause of the reviews it has received not because of the screenshots on the back on the box. Normally those screenshots come from a 'cut-scene' or the start of the game. So they are a false representation of the game itself.

To me the most important things to me are the gameplay and a good plot. That is what can make or break a game for me. Mario Party has great game gameplay but if it had a better or even a plot then I would rank very highly if me. But that game is aimed at a younger market. Final Fantasy, Zelda, Metal Gear Solid and maybe even Paper Mario are a perfect examples of what I want and need from a game.

There you go a very long winded answer to your question. Next!

Ash:

As my interest in gaming is increasingly fleeting it's interesting to see what interests me anymore. For a long time I have never really cared about graphics as a priority; sure good graphics are a plus but its the gaming equivalent of going after Jordan.

I still like epic storylines, that was what I loved with Ocarina of Time, I felt like I was taking part in a story but even this doesn't interest me any more as I don't have the time to invest in it.

The last game I was excited about was Donkey Konga which just grabbed me, it seemed like a fun pick-up-for-five-minutes game that just didn't require much attention. So maybe that's the most important part to me, just a fun little game that can be picked up and put down again.

Edge:

Immersion: it is all you need.

In my opinion, atmosphere is the key to creating a classic piece of software. If a game can capture your mind, your senses, reel you in to its polygonal dreamscapes, then it has come a good way in justifying videogaming. Ocarina of Time did it, Ico did it; need I say more? Before you answer that, you should bear it mind that I'm going to anyway.

You see the thing about games is that they hold so much potential � the aesthetics of the movies, the evocativeness of books, the simple magic of being there � but it is so often left untapped. That is not to say that we do not regularly enjoy good games, I simply believe that we have only scraped the surface of what gaming has to offer. I suppose that in a way this is what keeps me playing, the eternal optimism for what we might see next.

On a side note, I've noticed that while many games laud their use of hi-res textures and shading techniques, I often find animation to be somewhat lacklustre. How many recent games' characters have you controlled that still look like they are stuck on an invisible treadmill when they come into contact with solid objects? It is rare to find a game when you truly feel a part of the environments � Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time being a notable exception.

Conor:

I know this is a real cheat of an answer, but I'm going to have to go with the soul of a game. For me, it's always the most important part. But what is it you say? It's the part of the game that gives it an identity, a personality, individuality. It's the part that speaks to you and makes the game stay with you long after you've stopped playing it. When you just look at each aspect of the game as an individual entity to be checked off the list you lose the connection between them and your lose the soul of the game. A soulful game is a worthwhile game, and one that goes above just being a product to be played with. It's a vague answer I know, which means a feature on the subject is coming up (I swear!).

So then, what do you look for in a game? And don't just say 'the gameplay' - we know you're all graphics whores in the end!