I said my piece, made my point and that was that. I never said visuals should take first place over everything else, I never said that I was angry at your assertion, I merely offered my opinion. I did not attack you, I merely disagree with your assertion.

I'll go over your entire piece and show you where I disagree, and where I can I'll explain why. If my grammar or word choice is slightly "off" I apologise in advance but I am having a busy day.

I'll start at the beginning and work my way through it sequentially:

I think some brothers and sisters might've forgotten the point of gaming

Your title. This establishes your belief. In this case that gamers have forgotten what, in your mind, is the core reason to play games. I do not have an issue with this as it is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

Your first paragraph appears to be a trip down memory lane, and gives the reader some insight as to your history as a gamer, as well as a small hint at your preferences vis a vis game style and design. I also have no issues with this.

Similarly, your second paragraph appears to be another anecdotal trip down memory lane, again displaying your personal bias for certain elements of gaming. Once again I have no issue with this, in and of itself, as it is your anecdotal experience and thus is neither right nor wrong.

Now on to your third paragraph, and this is where I will quote you again:

Graphics or framerate never made a game to me, it was always the gameplay.

This is called personal bias. It also seems inconsistent with this statement from the opening line of your second paragraph:

Now that I have experienced such beauty, I can't go back if I have any option

Personal bias itself is not a bad thing, we all do it. The problems begin when we use our personal bias as a way to judge other people. In this instance you make it clear to the reader that you value graphical fidelity and frame rates beneath all other aspects of a games design. There is nothing wrong with this, as I made clear in my initial comment regarding text adventures or other such games whose design centres primarily around the characters or a central theme.

Games are fun and that's what I want games to be about.

Once again a quote from the second paragraph. This, coupled with your previously displayed bias will naturally lead the reader to understand that what constitutes a "Fun game" to you, is not one that needs to have either good framerates or good graphics. Again, this is your personal bias and there is nothing wrong with that. We must be careful, as I mentioned previously, to not allow personal bias to lead us to believe that our bias should be everyone bias. Couple this with information already provided to us by way of your title, and the content which I have already quoted, and it becomes clear we are being led down a very particular path.

So on to the fourth paragraph, and another quote:

What's this, someone in PCMR taking 480p30 over 1080p60, even given the option to use the original graphics at 1080p60?! Someone who despises gaming at 30 FPS and has always longed for better visuals choosing the worse graphical experience?!

This seems unwarranted and sarcastic for no reason.

I would rather play OG Halo 2 every day from now till the end of time over the MCC because lovely graphics and fluidity don't make up for detracted gameplay, and the MCC does detract. Sword flying (as fun as it sounds), AI, gun mechanics, superbouncing (also as fun as it sounds), etc...

Again, more anecdotal commentary regarding your personal preferences (though I happen to agree with the sentiment regarding Halo 2 being more enjoyable, but in my case it is rather down to platform choice). When it comes to this particular game, the problem is entirely down to the shit hardware that the game is being made to run on, and absolutely nothing to do with players demanding (in any way, shape or form) better visuals. In fact, your comments from the following paragraph regarding Crysis and Amnesia back this up. Those games, when run on a proper platform, not a potato, are visually stunning and feature a magnificent storyline, because the game was not limited by being run on the computing equivalent of a tampon.

In fact, now that I have very carefully reread this entire post, I have realized that you do not seem to have much of a point at all. You flip flop between saying graphics were everything when you didn't have them (first paragraph) to saying they don't matter (in the second) to them mattering a fair bit (sixth paragraph) to saying they shouldn't matter too much. None of which has anything at all to do with your title.

You accuse me of being "upset", which at first I took to be a simple miscommunication, but I now realise is your way of trying to back out of what is clearly an unstructured, pointless rant about nothing in particular. I think I've wasted more than enough of my time with you. Have a good day.