Im not sure how to put this but it all DEPENDS on the kind of game being made.

For eg in Crysis the graphics made everything come alive and made it so much more immersive. Lets say they went with a cartoonish style or cel shaded with impressionistic design then maybe when the aliens appeared the difference wouldnt be much.

The world functioning naturally in a hyperealistic feel and suddenly aliens in the story made you feel more attached to that hyperreal world. The graphics contributed heavily to that so it worked there.

Similarly I thought of Metro 2033 and Spec ops and some other games and I understand why devs want to chase realism.

This is how I see it:

Halo's art style and their approach to not imitate reality but only give a sense of it works for the game. There is nothing gritty and ultra realistic in the plot or feel of the game. Its more about chivalry, honour, and many other aspects. The concept of the iconic, symbolic hero works well with the artstyle. If it borrowed aspects from korean film style gritty realism the art style would require changing to more impressionistic or hyperrealistic again depending. /as an example

Now games like BF3, Spec ops, metro, and many others tell a much more serious story with micro details that rely on gritty realism. Subtle animations, colours, textures that we can related to such as what a dirt alley in some downtown fish market would look like or a bombed city scape etc.

They could have gone with a non hyperealistic feel but the effect would not be the same. Ppl would get the message but the the effect of the minute details would be lost. PPl would understand that Paris is nuked but would not get to see how bad it is for eg. what would an actual torn limb and blood look like. What kind of cracks in the building would a bomb make etc. These provide information that we as human assimilators of information like to soak in like a sponge and it comes down to taste and conditioning.

Another example is Darksiders 2 artstyle does not make the game scary at all and thats not what the devs went for which worked for them. If they wanted to show death in a real deathlike gritty manner then maybe they would have gone with realistic graphics tech and make Death feel very dark, scary and a true deathlike feel with blood dripping of his scythe etc but no its more symbolic and iconic like in comics.

So basically it all depends on the kind of game that devs feel the audience are interested in.

Regardless of the gameplay devs will always consider graphics separately initially to engage the gamer visually. Without teh visual we cannot communicate the reference or reason for playing.

There can never be an argument about graphics vs gameplay, it does not make sense. Graphics will always be a communicator and gameplay will be interactive feedback to that communication. Always hand in hand.

It all depends on the gamer. I like pretty graphics and fun gameplay. But if a game has really good gameplay, I will sacrifice graphics.

Thanks for all the discussion. It is really interesting to read your feedback.

RIP! His art style was amazing to say the least!

52 is old af. His work was incredible, though. RIP.