This is a strenge question. It's not like it's something I deliberately look for. Like "Hm, I fancy playing something with lots of blood and dismemberment today..." But conversly it's not something I shy away from either. If it's there it's there, if not, whatever.
I suppose I'm more concerned with whether the gore fits the tone. The carving up of bodies with a chainsaw in GoW fits. Doing something similar in a final fantasy game would not.
"The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never be sure if they're true" - Abraham Lincoln
I don't dislike gore in games and it doesn't turn me off them, but also the lack of any gore in games which logically should have gore doesn't hamper my enjoyment of them.
Case in point, the Dynasty Warriors games, which have been a favourite of mine ever since the turn of the century (DW2 in 2000), those games could have buckets of blood with the amount of dudes you attack with swords, spears and other weapons, but there isn't a single drop shed, nor do you really kill anyone (your score is in KO's not kills), yet I haven't really noticed the lack of gore or felt the game needed it.
Besides, I find that subtle, realistic bloodshed and gore is more visceral that over the top, buckets of blood and gibbed body parts you get with stylised violence.
For example, I find the smaller smears of blood and dented bodywork left on your car by a pedestrian in GTA IV, or the solitary blood splat around someone's head after you push them down some stairs or off a ledge, I find that subtle and appropriate use of gore to be a lot more powerful and visceral than the kind of deaths you may cause in Fallout 3.