Not at all. Links pointing to your site is still the number 1 Google signal that determines how popular/authoritative your content is, which in turn dictates your ranking position.
What has changed is the way back linking is done.
The old days of having thousands of spammy backlinks pointing to your site are over, or at least according to Google.
So it's down to quality versus quantity.
eg, in theory, 1 link from the BBC and 1 link from the Daily Fail would give you more authoritative and back link kudos than a 1000 spammy links.
Likewise the days of reciprocal links, ie you link to me and I link to you are over. It's perfectly ok to have some reciprocal links, and Google would expect any genuine linking profile to have some, but it's no longer a strategy to build links. So if most of your links are reciprocal, then it will work against you.
Google wants us to live in a Utopian web where people genuinely link to your content because they feel it was useful, quality or needs to be seen by others. Every time someone does this, it sends a message to Google that your web stuff is tip top, and you get a push in the right direction. They claim we are there now, but plenty of other people claim otherwise and seem to be still successfully gaming the search results with spammy links
But it's a dangerous strategy and things have changed significantly since the Penguin Algorithm.
If Google suddenly see a barrage of links pointing to your website from spammy locations, or dubious or same keyword driven anchor text, then it will work against you and you will get beaten with a stick, or in Google speak, beaten with a Penguin