Well, that's just a false dichotomy,
You're not using that phrase right and it appears you're just trying to throw big words into the discussion to make yourself look smart. My supposition is not a false dichotomy as I made no reference to a 'either/or' scenario. There are many many aspects to game development. Gameplay is one of them and I happen to think it is the most important one.
animations enrich every aspect of every game, remember Resident Evil 4,5, Mass Effect, Plants vs Zombies, Gyromancer....
I very much agree that graphics enrich FPS games like Mass Effect and if your graphics are lackluster the quality of the game is at stake. However, in the RTS/TBS genre the quality of the game is very much in the eye of the beholder and their subjective opinions, I happen to think the game better be fun whether it has good graphics or not.
Every game that failed had some fundamental flaws in the quality of animation.
How about Demigod? Did Demigod fail (and, yes, it did fail) because of the quality of animation? Absolutely not, that game is a beautiful game. Stunning in fact. It didn't even fail because of gameplay. The gameplay is great in that game. The game failed because of the many many problems with netcode and patching mishaps and bugs that still aren't fixed. I happen to love the game but it can be frustrating to play sometimes because of these connectivity issues and exploits people use.
Now, we can rephrase your assertions thusly:
'Will I enjoy seeing combat action as much as I do in King's Bounty?
This is the most important part of the game (to me), after all....'