If it has great art style then how 'real' something looks doesn't matter. Realism is great and it can go well with certain games but I'll personally say games like Journey or Gravity Rush have more 'beauty' than a game like Max Payne.

But when the two co-exist with each other, it can be amazing. Games like The Witcher 2 and The Last of Us are both great examples of this. All graphics are, in my opinion, is a way to visually immerse the player into the game world. So long as the visuals fit and complement that immersion the game can be sprite based, cell shaded, or have as many polygons as it wants.

Graphics have always mattered. Even back in the NES days, don't believe me? Look at the 80's cheesy Zelda for Nes commercial. In the first few seconds of the commercial you'll see the guy going "Whao!! Sweet Graphics! I'd love to get my hands on that game!!"

Graphics have always been important even in the "bit" days.

Graphics add to the overall experience of the game. Not just the idea of a realistic looking game, but for immersion too.

I'm not trying to say graphics are the be all end all. I'm just saying that yes they are important in the overall product. Graphics don't have to be about realism either. Artstyle plays a huge factor. Cell shaded games like Borderlands look amazing because it's a nice blend between realism and cell shaded imaging.

integral to immersion

Putting too much focus on the graphics is taking much needed focus from the gameplay aspect itself.

I dont mind having bad graphics, hell i even play Final Fantasy VII without having second thoughts, i just hate seeing good looking games with terrible gameplay.

But you can't blame the devs for that, players ever since got a look at how good graphics could potentially be, they started bashing game after the other if they saw it lacking in terms of graphics.

Depends on the game. This includes the theme, atmosphere and gameplay that the developer envision it would become. The Arma series for example is a unapologetic realistic take on the military theme so going instead for a cel-shaded look would certainly feel so wrong for it. It's something that Bohemia Interactive have been chasing for years so telling them that realistic graphic is the not way to go is rather rude. It's what they want to do.

The same goes for casual games like any Mario game or Pokemon. Crysis or BF3 level graphic would be wasteful for those games.

Maybe everyone should stop questioning the relevance of realistic graphic in gaming and let it take its course. Some developers, like BI, really want to achieve that holy grail while others are fine with cel shaded graphic.

Journalists may say graphic chasing developers are holding back gaming but in saying so journalists (and supporters) are in a way are holding back what those developers might be able to achieve.

Not necessarily, Gameplay is more Intergal, but graphics can enhance a Great game, meaning great gameplay, story, plot, lore, soundtrack,voice acting, etc., & graphics being secondary to all these "cornerstone" elements of a game. But take all those things, & THEN add top notch graphics, & your talking "Classic AAA" game, Franchise Big seller type of game....