next »

[P Diddy]

eva has her lucid moments, as do sinclair and robf. p diddy so far as none. as far as i can tell, he's just a ridiculous caricature

guitar mobster was bad but at least he didn't constantly multi-post like a complete moron.

You just never had to answer to so many posts like I did.

Edit

Scroll down

Insert quote next to the post you want to discuss.

You're welcome.

okay ya I see, that's pretty easy to do.

[Gimym JIMBERT]

@eva you are my new mascot, so easy to poke  

BTW it's easy to criticizes the industry and the culture I came from, It's just in not healthy to stay in too long, no wonder there so much turn over + lapse gamer. And those critics are not specific to indie, you heard them right inside the mainstream industry too from influent (and proven) people. This had lead to the creation of 4 branch of gaming: serious, casual, indie and social. So far casual is the most healthy and social being a casual version of the current industry.

I bet people who argue in this thread are all under 30

[shig]

i think eva was AMAZING in this thread so far. also, sinclair, im sorry bro but you got trolled by substance, not the other way around.

[jwk5]

<--- The power of Eva!


Anyways, the Uncharted games weren't bad, they had their moments, but you know what game is awesome? Etrian Odyssey (especially part 3)! Getting violated in the woods by an angry deer, now that is survival horror!


Also, F.O.E.

[mirosurabu]

Also Uncharted (the first one, haven't bothered with 2) is everything I dislike about modern corporate games in one neat, tidy package.

I thought its strange that Michael Samyn had so many nice things to say about it. The game lacked almost every aspect of exploration. It wasn't exploration at all (as it should be when you're playing Indiana Jones inspired game), it was pure hand-holding. You have someone with you and you follow him until he stops and asks you do some trivial task in order to break the path. Platforming is not challenging, its just this - hold the button and Drake will do what he has to do. I liked environments though, so maybe THAT coupled with lack of challenge was what appealed to Michael. I don't see good storytelling in there tbh.

[jwk5]

I liked it because the combat was really focused and tight-knit, like in the Halo or Siphon Filter games. The lack of exploration didn't bother me so much (actually, I liked that it was linear) because I was more interested in the combat which the little "platforming" segments (if you can call them that) were a nice little diversion from, pretty much serving as "cool down" sessions. The storyline in either game was nothing to write home about but overall the experience was pretty decent, especially graphically and sound-wise.

Speaking of Siphon Filter, I need more...

[Gimym JIMBERT]

Also Uncharted (the first one, haven't bothered with 2) is everything I dislike about modern corporate games in one neat, tidy package.

I thought its strange that Michael Samyn had so many nice things to say about it. The game lacked almost every aspect of exploration. It wasn't exploration at all (as it should be when you're playing Indiana Jones inspired game), it was pure hand-holding. You have someone with you and you follow him until he stops and asks you do some trivial task in order to break the path. Platforming is not challenging, its just this - hold the button and Drake will do what he has to do. I liked environments though, so maybe THAT coupled with lack of challenge was what appealed to Michael. I don't see good storytelling in there tbh.

He actually praised the game for its potential of what it could be, and there beginner and obviously not literate gamer. They have a refreshing perspective on the matter. I guess it's not much the exploration but the expressive and organic qualities (ie not abstract symbolic) they seek. I'm looking further for new fresh insight they would have on gaming and programming. I still think they are clueless and lost in a land they find strange and fearful (gaming).

[mirosurabu]

Yeah, I was mostly concerned with exploration part. The combat is okay-ish, I liked multiplayer aspect better though, as I didn't find story mode combat challenging enough.

Also, I used to be obsessed with Syphon Filter games.  But I find them funny nowadays.

[Dustin Smith]

this thread jumped five pages since i last was in it
in that time i played halo with friends and discussed relationship woes. i also mucked around with some cool indie games, when i'm not so tired i'll get around to to reviewing them, seeing as how costik is currently out of commission.

i wasn't mentioned as one of the shitty posters itt yet? woah i better quit while i'm ahead. i think i'm done with this thread (for realz), assume i'm nodding in agreement with whatever radix is saying.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

i'd still like to know why pdiddy considers the idea of easy games that take very little skill 'cynical', btw. it isn't really enough to say 'if you were a gamer you'd see why they are cynical!' because i at least *used* to be a gamer and i don't see how it's cynical. it's not my cup of tea, but i don't see why games that are so easy as to take no effort can't be good escapist fantasies for those who like that sort of thing. not everyone plays games to test their skills, some play games to imagine being someone different for a while. so if the argument is just that it's against tradition, that isn't a good argument.

i'd *like* to dislike casual games, note. i don't like playing them and if i could think of a good reason to dislike them i would, but i can't think of any good reason to dislike what they are doing. the worst that could be said about them is that they don't do something they aren't trying to do (test skills or provide challenges). but they are fun for the people playing them. there are a *ton* of people who enjoy games like peggle, and i don't really see a good reason to dismiss that as pure cynicism rather than just a different play style or getting different things out of games than what we get out of them.

[jwk5]

I find casual games to be great for when I am just too tired to do something constructive but am too bored to do nothing. Like that Cityville game on FaceBook, I played it off and on for about 2 or 3 days and while it isn't my cup of tea it was a fun little time consumer when I played it. Sometimes mindless repetition is like music you can relax to.

As for easy games being cynical I don't think that is the case. Some games focus on testing your skills and some games focus on keeping you entertained. Just because most games tend focus on both fairly equally does not mean that the ones that focus on one or the other are cynical or are just for the "hardcore" elite. They are just catering to specific tastes, not necessarily specific levels of intellect.

[P Diddy]

i'd still like to know why pdiddy considers the idea of easy games that take very little skill 'cynical', btw.

It concerned JoyRide. What I meant was that the concept of making a car auto-steer without having the player know about it is a very cynical form of game design. It's insulting to have the player be fooled into thinking they won 1st place when in fact they didn't do anything (yes sometimes auto-steer gives you 1st place). When a player doesn't move but yet the car turns drastically, it pretty much signals that the game designer was very cynical about the intelligence of the user. It's like they expected their audience to be less then what they could be.

It's like when Scott Adams said "You can never underestimate the stupidity of the general public."

It's cynical to assume that. Imagine if you bought this game for your mother, wouldn't you want to tell her that she's being fooled if she's sitting down? Because if you knew, I'm sure you would eventually tell her that she wasn't actually getting better at the game, that she was in truth just sitting down. And I'm sure you can imagine that her reaction will never ever be "wow that's great".

So if wiser gamers/ex-gamers support this idea, then they are being cynical in there vision of where interactive media should go.

And to add for fun, I might aswell mention my opinion of easy games, I feel that in a perfect world, a videogame should not be 100% escapism, it should also be part virtual-reality. In other words, your avatar should represent you in some way, and that if a user is clumsy and stupid in real life, then the virtual representation of the user should be clumsy and stupid also. That's what makes interactivity so interesting (it's actually YOU in that world). Interactivity for me is about bringing together fantasy and reality in one experience. If it's not you doing those actions (auto jump in the AAA games mentioned above) then it's not really you playing the game. It's almost you, and therefore almost interactive.

if you can win automatically in a game without effort, is that really bad game design?

[...]

when you escape into a fantasy world, don't you want that world to be pleasant? don't you want it to be supportive of you, rather than antagonistic towards you?

There's a huge difference between letting go of the players (letting them be themselves) and taking control and say "get out of my way now I'm taking over you suck". Let the player be the master of his/her destiny. Let them learn about how they measure. It's what makes games fun. Because then, winning actually means something, and then you truly get a rush that outdoes all media.

[jwk5]

I feel that in a perfect world, a videogame should not be 100% escapism, it should also be part virtual-reality.

In a perfect world, people probably wouldn't be cooped up inside playing video games.

In other words, your avatar should represent you in some way, and that if a user is clumsy and stupid in real life, then the virtual representation of the user should be clumsy and stupid also. That's what makes interactivity so interesting (it's actually YOU in that world). Interactivity for me is about bringing together fantasy and reality in one experience. If it's not you doing those actions (auto jump in the AAA games mentioned above) then it's not really you playing the game. It's almost you, and therefore almost interactive.

So why play the games at all, why not just go out and do "real" activities and skip the virtual interactions altogether? I mean even if your avatar looked like you, acted like you, moved like you, etc. it is still not you. So if you're going to masquerade as something that really isn't you in a world that does not physically exist then what difference does it really make if your 'avatar' is something that resembles you or not?

[P Diddy]

I feel that in a perfect world, a videogame should not be 100% escapism, it should also be part virtual-reality.

In a perfect world, people probably wouldn't be cooped up inside playing video games.

In other words, your avatar should represent you in some way, and that if a user is clumsy and stupid in real life, then the virtual representation of the user should be clumsy and stupid also. That's what makes interactivity so interesting (it's actually YOU in that world). Interactivity for me is about bringing together fantasy and reality in one experience. If it's not you doing those actions (auto jump in the AAA games mentioned above) then it's not really you playing the game. It's almost you, and therefore almost interactive.

So why play the games at all, why not just go out and do "real" activities and skip the virtual interactions altogether? I mean even if your avatar looked like you, acted like you, moved like you, etc. it is still not you. So if you're going to masquerade as something that really isn't you in a world that does not physically exist then what difference does it really make if your 'avatar' is something that resembles you or not?

You have to love videogames to understand. And I love sports btw. and play basketball all the time.

But to be more specific, videogames are a "jack of all trades master of none" type of experience, but that "jack of all trades" aspect makes videogames unique in their own right. It's very interesting to see a little bit of everything all in one package. It makes it a fully satisfying experience (for me).

[Dustin Smith]

HAHAHAHAHAHA

fuck

"you have to love videogames"?

seriously, guys, stop talking to this guy. you can't top that bullshit.

[C.A. Silbereisen]

i'd *like* to dislike casual games, note. i don't like playing them and if i could think of a good reason to dislike them i would, but i can't think of any good reason to dislike what they are doing.

Casual games have their own market of course, and as a "hardcore" gamer I don't really concern myself with them, but I think the trend towards motion controls and other "alternative" control methods that are only really suitable for casual games helps "casualize" games as a whole. Hell, corporate mainstream already are being casualized all over the place. Game designers are restricting themselves for the sake of "accessibility" and I think this has a negative effect on games in general.

Also, as an aside: I've never really understood why the people who want games to be "interactive art experiences" hate challenge and complexity so much. I think if you're going to make an immersive and atmospheric game, challenge and complexity done the right way can help enhance the "experience" rather than detract from it (The Void and Demon's Souls are recent examples of this). I've never found any Tale of Tales game particularly immersive  because of their minimal interactivity.

[jwk5]

You have to love videogames to understand. And I love sports btw. and play basketball all the time.

But to be more specific, videogames are a "jack of all trades master of none" type of experience, but that "jack of all trades" aspect makes videogames unique in their own right.

I hate to break it to you but I do love video games, been playing them since I was 5 and I am creating them now, and I still don't understand.

Anyways, what does that have to do with thinking the avatars in a game need to resemble the person playing them? Yeah, sometimes it is fun to try and recreate myself in a Wrestling Game for example, but somehow I think Kratos probably fits the description of a God of War than I do. I don't see why I would need to fill his shoes just to be able to follow his story and enjoy the game mechanics.

[P Diddy]

HAHAHAHAHAHA

fuck

"you have to love videogames"?

seriously, guys, stop talking to this guy. you can't top that bullshit.

This is what he wrote:

In a perfect world, people probably wouldn't be cooped up inside playing video games.

Does that sound like something a fan of videogames would say?


edit: removed very mean insult

[jwk5]

In a perfect world, people probably wouldn't be cooped up inside playing video games.

Does that sound like something a fan of videogames would say?

I'm a fan of soda and caffeine but that doesn't mean I don't know that it is rotting my teeth and keeping me up at night.

[P Diddy]

In a perfect world, people probably wouldn't be cooped up inside playing video games.

Does that sound like something a fan of videogames would say?

I'm a fan of soda and caffeine but that doesn't mean I don't know that it is rotting my teeth and keeping me up at night.

Good for you, do you want a cookie? Tell me something I don't know.

Even vitamin A is bad for you if you take too much genius.