InSaintMonoxide: Aesthetics are more important than substance.
tag+: Hi
InSaintMonoxide, your opinion totally got my attention.
Would be possible to provide some examples to understand it better?
Sure thing. First i should clarify what i mean with "aesthetics" and "substance" in the context of video games. When i'm talking about aesthetics, i mean stimuli regarding audio or visuals, so for instance the feedback you get when punching an enemy in the face (sound of the hit, animation, reaction by enemy). When i'm referring to "substance", i mean depth regarding complex gameplay decisions and their results within the game, so for instance being able to create many different equally strong character builds which reward certain styles of gameplay.
So when i say that for me, aesthetics are more important than substance, i mean i get more pleasure out of arcade-style experiences which by their nature focus more on providing a quick to understand and instantly satisfying gamepley experience than out of games with very deep gameplay but very limited audiovisual reward regarding the gameplay (such as many old tactical RPGs where attacks and spells are barely animated).
This preference hierarchy stacks up in that even within genres, i'm willing to sacrifice substance in return for aesthetics, so i would rather play Hitman Absolution than Thief 2: The Metal Age, even though Hitman Absolution is fairly linear and therefore provides much less choice regarding gameplay approaches, because the actual actions i'm performing feel inherently more satisfying in Hitman Absolution.