How Much Do Graphics Really Matter?

The recent rumors of the Wii-U's supposed graphical ineptitude have lead me to a very interesting question: how much do graphics really matter anyway? I think I should start by pointing out that the hardware powering the Wii-U's graphics is said to be close to, but not quite on par with the Xbox 360 and the PS3. I think that's pretty damn good personally, especially when you factor in the cheap price tag it's almost certain to have. I'm still buying games for both of those systems that impress me graphically, and even early 360 and PS3 games still look very nice. So it's not as if the graphics are still going to look like Wii games.
                          
But, as is always the case in the gaming world, people are passionate about their games and their beliefs of what makes them great. So it came as no surprise that the rumors were followed by fan rage. Some even said that they wouldn't buy a Wii-U if the graphics weren't up to snuff. Personally I can't imagine a scenario where I skip out on a new Nintendo console and all the fantastic games that will only be available on that system. But are graphics still that important to people?
                          
At this point in each consoles life, many developers are more focused on art style rather than how many technical terms they can check off on the box. Sure, there will always be developers that push the envelope and make games that look closer and closer to real life, but they tend to be the minority. And do great graphics automatically equal great sales? Of course not. Visual fidelity is just one of many systems working together in a game to bring the experience to the player. Take a game like Battlefield 3 for example. Visually, Battlefield 3 stands head and shoulders above it's biggest rival, Call of Duty, but still wasn't able to outsell it. It sold very well, no doubt about it, but it still was out sold by a game that for all intents and purposes doesn't even look as good as it's last iteration, Modern Warfare 2.
                          
And what about games that go with a visual style that is more simplistic like Team Fortress 2. Team Fortress 2's visuals are beautiful to look at, and can be run at high settings on just about any hardware configuration. Another example would be a game like Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved on Xbox Live Arcade. This is the game that, it could be argued, single handedly solidified the digital distribution of games on consoles, and it barely has graphics at all. It doesn't have a story either. But what it does have - amazing gameplay - it has in spades. Even World of Warcraft, technically the biggest game in the world, has very simple visuals. And the list goes on and on.
                          
But we're here to talk about Nintendo games, and they have no shortage of beautiful games. Nintendo is notorious for taking their games in directions that almost always create panic in the fanbase, but almost always turn into amazing experiences. The biggest example of this would be The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker. Initially, Nintendo had shown early footage of a more realistic looking Zelda game that wooed fans with the promise of a realistic Link. But when the full unveiling of Wind Waker came, it had cel-shaded or "cartoony" graphics. The fan rage was monumental, but at the end of the day Nintendo won the fans over with an amazing zelda game that, because of the cartoony graphics, was able to portray more emotion and personality from the characters than ever before.
                          
The SNES was probably the last time that Nintendo had a system full of games with cutting edge graphics, but since then there's been a definite shift in focus toward art style and direction. Almost all of Nintendo's games have had simple graphics, but the art styles and art direction have always more than made up for any lack of technical capabilities.Nintendo has shown that there are many ways to make a game's visuals pleasing to look at. One could argue that while games running on cutting edge technology have "better graphics", games like Wind Waker and Team Fortress 2 have more beautiful visuals.
                          
And then there's the Dolphin Emulator. If nothing else, the Dolphin Emulator proves that Nintendo's games can keep up with the 360 and PS3's wow factor by simply running the games in HD resolutions. Wii, and even Gamecube games running in HD on the Dolphin look amazing. And HD is something the Wii-U is already confirmed to support. Take that and couple it with Nintendo's amazing ability to crank out simple graphics with amazing art style and direction, and we should see games that can hang with the best of the other systems.
                          
So while it does seem to be a rule that graphics sell consoles early on, it's the games that keep it selling later on. Great graphics alone can't make a bad game fun. But great gameplay can make an ugly game fun. At the end of the day it's all about the games. Games make systems. Without quality games, your big powerful console might as well be a paper weight. The Wii-U is pretty much guaranteed to have great games, and as long as it has that it should do just fine.