Having downloaded several soundfonts to experiment with Daggerfall Unity in, I can safely say it can make all the difference.

So you'd hope, but that hasn't stopped Ubisoft or Bethesda.

Chess isn't bad, but there are some bad by design/accident board games. Monopoly, for example.

I liked Monopoly.

It's quite literally about how terrible and unfun having one person take ownership of everything is. Losers are exiled under the guise of bankruptcy, implying the potential of death by absurd land rates.

There's also the issue that there will be a point in the game where it is apparent who is going to win the game, but the game is far from over. Actually playing out the game from then on can take a while, during which the losing players don't have a chance to catch up.

(This problem can arise in other games as well. I believe it can affect Civilization games, for example.)

While I'd also list gameplay as number one, video games are a complex medium. By which I mean they combine music, visuals, immersion, story, gameplay, and other factors into one. All oi those factors absolutely matter.

Ultimately it depends more on gameplay and controls than graphics, but when I look at screenshots, I'd say my cutoff point is generally between EGA and VGA graphics. I've played CGA and EGA games back in the days (as well as C64 or Gameboy and Atari STF monochrome games), but I don't really feel like going back there anymore. In part also because I expect gameplay to be too simple or niche or controls to be too cumbersome to be worth my time today, compared to all the more comfortable games I could play. But I really prefer the VGA look to EGA and below as well.

I agree that good graphics can enhance a video game; however, I would personally put them right at the bottom of that list of factors (after also level design and AI). For me, as long as the graphics are functional and I can clearly tell what's going on in the game, it's good enough for me.

Imo, graphics are the first thing that should get cut if/when a game runs into budget issues (however, sadly it's often the last).

Nothing wrong with that.

I don't mind it, but would hesitate to say I loved it.

Personally I see it as all being about context. So if a bunch of people just play it for fun and laughs and don't take it too seriously, then it can be a great game ... or at least a great time.

What can spoil it however, is those who play it too seriously and too cutthroat ... where winning seems to be all that counts.

I prefer games where the level of competitiveness is not too big a factor. Especially as competition can sometimes bring out the worst in people, and it can become more than just a game.

But then I play games for their entertainment value and personal challenge, not to show off any superiority.

I'm put off by outdated mechanics, unfair difficulties and clunky interfaces, all of which are rather common in the oldest games, but that doesn't necessarily mean I won't play them anyway.

Doing a bit of introspection, I think that it depends if I grew up playing that game or not. If I already know how that game looks and plays, I'm a bit more tolerant since I already learned some of its quirks. Also, older games are more likely to run fine under emulation in Linux.
This is especially true for older 3D titles. Even back then they looked unappealing.

However, the greater problem lies with the interface. Armageddon Empires (2007) is a great game I loved, but its interface is so very annoying!

Gameplay, however, is still king. If the interface does not get in the way and the graphics fit their purpose, I am willing to make the jump. Still, I have yet to invest time into Dwarf Fortress.

I guess I could agree on technical graphics, but I'd disagree when it comes to... visual design, let's call it. Like Morrowind is my favorite game, and it looks ugly on a technical level nowadays, but I still think the art design is amazing. Something like Ultima 1 has such primitive graphics though you get very little artistic design to it, which does turn me off. That would impair my ability to play it to some degree.

My Favorite Console Generations =

NES, SNES, SEGA Genesis, N64, PS1, PS2, X-Box Original, Finally The PS3

My Favorite Computer Generations =

MS-Dos, Apple II, Windows 3.1, Windows 98, IMAC, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, & sorta Windows 10

Windows 98 & Windows XP & Windows 7 being my Favorite

My Favorite Computer Game Generations =

MS-Dos = Where In The World Is Carmen Sadiago
Apple II = A Medival 2Player Game & Oregon Trail & Amazon Trail
Windows 3.1 = SimCity 2000 & Sim Chopter & Sims 1 & Indiana Jones 2 Games & Dune II
Windows 98 = C&C Tiberium Sun & Moto Racer 1 / 2 & NFS 3 Hot Pursuit & SW Galactic Battlegrounds
Windows XP = FEAR 1 & Quake 3 Arena
Windows Vista = Battlefield 3 & BF Bad Company 1
Windows 7 = Command & Conqure 3 Kane's Wrath & ES Skyrim & The Movies & The Sims 2 & Quake 4
Windows 10 = Star Craft II Without The Commanders, Star Wars The Old Republic & The Sims 3 & Quake Champions
Windows 10 = GTA5 & GTA Online

I mean it's something like that, whatever I didn't buy on Console, I bought on Computer


Games I MODDED = Sims 1, C&C Tiberium Sun, Quake 3 Arena, FEAR, 1 & Left 4 Dead 2
Games I Created My Own MODS For = C&C Tiberium Sun & FEAR 1



So you can see where I jumped from Console to Computer

But that's kind of missing the point; I was asking at what point that games are too primeval for your tastes.