Its an appalling realization witnessing the definition of gaming lost on its audience.
Interaction, by means of a screen and a peripheral. The digital output of cause/effect, born from inputting the perfect sequence of calculated key strokes we gamers strive for, in the name of fun. In short, Gaming.
Any game that compromises the basics core concepts, should never deserve a positive score despite how "good" it is in all other areas. It is a game first. Not an art museum, cinema, or concert. Value each art form by its cores.
But the always positive "dismissive" reviews by the newer generations of ever dumber professional critics, who lower their standards in fear of displeasing the establishment sacrificing the off-change of maybe getting a job in the industry, have a direct impact on the mediocrity that same industry produces.
And you - the gamer who votes with its money- are every bit as guilty as the former mentioned parties by rewarding "no pre-launch reviews" policies with "day one buying", or the ultimate sacrilege of pre-ordering. You are instantly rewarding mediocrity and encouraging developers belief that indeed not only professional critics are getting dumber, but the audience as well, fueling the next wave of new ideas to screw you over.
You start the trend. The bed has been made. Never have I seen a year so lacking in core concepts as 2016
gaming is ded rip gaimu
To clarify, I like games. I like old games. I like new games. I think Overwatch is one of the greatest, most fun to play games ever made. Doom as well. Hyper Light Drifter, Inside, Superhot, Darkest Dungeon, Mirror's Edge, W3 Blood and Wine, WoW: Legion, ABZU, Stardew Valley, Titanfall 2, Battlefield 1, Stellaris, Civ VI were all great games that stand up to all but the most powerful of nostalgia goggles. Maybe the issue isn't games or devs or the gamers themselves, maybe you just enjoy games less.
Edit 2: Forgot Owlboy.
To clarify, I like games. I like old games. I like new games. I think Overwatch is one of the greatest, most fun to play games ever made. Doom as well. Hyper Light Drifter, Inside, Superhot, Darkest Dungeon, Mirror's Edge, W3 Blood and Wine, WoW: Legion, ABZU, Stardew Valley, Titanfall 2, Battlefield 1, Stellaris, Civ VI were all great games that stand up to all but the most powerful of nostalgia goggles. Maybe the issue isn't games or devs or the gamers themselves, maybe you just enjoy games less.
Edit 2: Forgot Owlboy.
Last edited by veloxStrix; Today at 12:51 PM.
i think you need to hold off a bit on the coffee
"game industry" games will always exist, I think.
I agree with what I think you're getting across, though, it does sometimes feel to be like marketing seems to be sharping perception and expectations, but if it were always a case maybe it's just the shift to an emphasis on cinematics and guided set pieces in that marketing. That might be the problem.
Totally agreed on pre-order culture, it's largely irrelevant today yet big publishers are doing a better job than ever at securing a purchase beforehand.
I agree with what I think you're getting across, though, it does sometimes feel to be like marketing seems to be sharping perception and expectations, but if it were always a case maybe it's just the shift to an emphasis on cinematics and guided set pieces in that marketing. That might be the problem.
Totally agreed on pre-order culture, it's largely irrelevant today yet big publishers are doing a better job than ever at securing a purchase beforehand.
#MakeGamingGreatAgain
I dunno what this thread is supposed to look like, but on mobile there's large gaps between each of your paragraphs and I don't understand why.
Also, I'm sorry for taking devs for granted and assuming they're not going to try and fuck me. Fortunately refunds and poor reviews exist.
Also, I'm sorry for taking devs for granted and assuming they're not going to try and fuck me. Fortunately refunds and poor reviews exist.
Originally Posted by Conkerkid11
I dunno what this thread is supposed to look like, but on mobile there's large gaps between each of your paragraphs and I don't understand why.
Also, I'm sorry for taking devs for granted and assuming they're not going to try and fuck me. Fortunately refunds and poor reviews exist.
It's also the same on a computer.
I think it's to allow you time to digest and think on every important sentence.
Powerful stuff.
Or maybe it's so teacher can print it out and comment under every line?
Your definition of "gaming" is quite narrow, unlike your spacing.
What are you trying to say, it's like the meaning is lost between the lines.
Ah, the classic "games have to meet MY definition of gaming or else they are invalid" speech.
Play the games you like. Don't play the games you don't. Don't tell other people what games are or aren't.
This is the entire discussion to be had and we have it every time. Play Nintendo games, Soulsborne, Doom or Titanfall, Overwatch, Rocket League, or any of the abundant and diverse collection of games that seem to meet your expectation. Don't make a big fuss about how The Witness or something isn't a real game.
And especially don't claim that games have a responsibility to be any one thing. Games can, and should, be thoughtful and artful when they want to be. If you don't like games like Journey or Firewatch, fine. Cool. Don't try to degrade them because you only want visceral mechanics and complex systems.
Broaden your expectations and stop trying to define games to only what you like.
Play the games you like. Don't play the games you don't. Don't tell other people what games are or aren't.
This is the entire discussion to be had and we have it every time. Play Nintendo games, Soulsborne, Doom or Titanfall, Overwatch, Rocket League, or any of the abundant and diverse collection of games that seem to meet your expectation. Don't make a big fuss about how The Witness or something isn't a real game.
And especially don't claim that games have a responsibility to be any one thing. Games can, and should, be thoughtful and artful when they want to be. If you don't like games like Journey or Firewatch, fine. Cool. Don't try to degrade them because you only want visceral mechanics and complex systems.
Broaden your expectations and stop trying to define games to only what you like.
Well I will agree there seems to be a movement towards cinematic experience titles because those are the ones we always see demoed at the main press shows.
Even God of War, an arcady hack and slash series, was turned into a walk and listen simulator this year. Heck, even FIFA has felt the need to add in a story mode.
But that's only if you look at the big budget titles designed more for showing off than playing.
There's still plenty of plug in and play titles around.
EDIT: Seems I misunderstood what the OP was saying and thought they were saying something reasonable.
Even God of War, an arcady hack and slash series, was turned into a walk and listen simulator this year. Heck, even FIFA has felt the need to add in a story mode.
But that's only if you look at the big budget titles designed more for showing off than playing.
There's still plenty of plug in and play titles around.
EDIT: Seems I misunderstood what the OP was saying and thought they were saying something reasonable.
Last edited by BGBW; Today at 01:48 PM.
Personally I think it has been a great year for gaming, but then again I don't know what a core concept is.
I've tried reading between the lines but there is nothing there.
I've tried reading between the lines but there is nothing there.
Last edited by jesu; Today at 01:06 PM.
Pffffft. It is good to have things that blur the lines. And because it's impossible to make a cinema experience interactive or let everyone walk around the stage on concert, those things that blur the lines usually end up in a game form, or at least distributed along the same channels as regular games. A visual novel with full voice and zero choices? Not possible on a printed book, not possible as an audiobook, but it would be a waste to just consider it a game with bad gameplay.Originally Posted by spyshagg
Any game that compromises the basics core concepts, should never deserve a positive score despite how "good" it is in all other areas. It is a game first. Not an art museum, cinema, or concert. Value each art form by its cores.
Gaming is synonimous with playing for me.
And there's much more to playing than pushing buttons for input, sorry.
And there's much more to playing than pushing buttons for input, sorry.
Very little empathy / agreement for you on this OP.
Aside from your asinine way to get across your point, I don't feel the types of top selling titles have changed dramatically over the decade or two.
There are so many, so many great games to play. There is practically a stream of titles for everyone*
*not exactly true, but more of a distraction, about approachability, unrelated to the core of your point
Aside from your asinine way to get across your point, I don't feel the types of top selling titles have changed dramatically over the decade or two.
There are so many, so many great games to play. There is practically a stream of titles for everyone*
*not exactly true, but more of a distraction, about approachability, unrelated to the core of your point
This thread's core concept feels a little lacking.
I don't like thing, and it's everyone else's fault.
I don't like thing, and it's everyone else's fault.
I don't think my father, the inventor of video games, would be too pleased to hear about this thread.
Who made this definition? Are you the king of gaming or is this the divine word whispered into your ear by the almighty?
I feel OP is still really angry that people liked Gone Home.
OP got a thesaurus for his birthday.
I'm still waiting for the pictures in his post to load
What...
Don't... buy games you don't like...?
Don't... buy games you don't like...?
It's this incoherent or is it an ironic inside joke? What exactly is this post directed at?
I thought we were done with the empty posturing rhetoric after Tuesday, at least for a while. What is this?
I value games however I want. I love Journey, The Last of Us, Super Hexagon, Jazz Jackrabbit 2 and 999, and these games couldn't be more different from each other. Who are you to say which ones I shouldn't enjoy because they are betraying your arbitrary idea of what's a video game?
As for pre-ordering, it's probably wise to wait, but sometimes I trust a game to be good, so I'll take the chance. Fortunately Steam allows me to get my money back if I don't like it, provided that I play it for less than 2 hours. I don't feel any kind of guilt.
As for pre-ordering, it's probably wise to wait, but sometimes I trust a game to be good, so I'll take the chance. Fortunately Steam allows me to get my money back if I don't like it, provided that I play it for less than 2 hours. I don't feel any kind of guilt.
The misinterpretation of my point may be proving my point.
The topic is about presentation deficiencies that directly impact your interaction with the game. As in framerate issues; controller latency; etc.
This is the core of each game, otherwise you might as well call it a cinema.
With this in mind, I suggest to re-read my OP.
The bad spacing makes this post presentation harder to digest. Doesn't it.
The topic is about presentation deficiencies that directly impact your interaction with the game. As in framerate issues; controller latency; etc.
This is the core of each game, otherwise you might as well call it a cinema.
With this in mind, I suggest to re-read my OP.
The bad spacing makes this post presentation harder to digest. Doesn't it.
Last edited by spyshagg; Today at 01:32 PM.
clear hitboxes are essential for good games
OP, if you want to start a discussion then you should really state your point in a much clearer way. Is this supposed to be an attack on cinematic games? Or on game journalism? Or what? All those blanks you left should probably be filled with details explaining what you actually mean.
EDIT:
EDIT:
Dearie me.The misinterpretation of my point may be proving my point.
Big budget retail games will always be playing it safe - same as big budget Hollywood movies play it safe. But then there are indie games.
And pre-orders aren't anything new.
And pre-orders aren't anything new.
Any examples, OP? I'm a bit confused here.
Stroke your chin for about 3-5 minutes and I think you can sort of understand the OP....sort of
FUCKING META!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!The bad spacing makes this post presentation harder to digest. Doesn't it.
OP, if you want to start a discussion then you should really state your point in a much clearer way. Is this supposed to be an attack on cinematic games? Or on game journalism? Or what? All those blanks you left should probably be filled with details explaining what you actually mean.
EDIT:
Dearie me.
Its an attack on the ability of critics to dismissing core issues with the presentation/interaction of the game and us buyers to buy them in such state.
I think I decoded some of the message.
Where do we find the positive gamer bed? And what will be the next clue?Its an appalling realization witnessing the definition of gaming lost on its audience.
Interaction, by means of a screen and a peripheral. The digital output of cause/effect, born from inputting the perfect sequence of calculated key strokes we gamers strive for, in the name of fun. In short, Gaming.
Any game that compromises the basics core concepts, should never deserve a positive score despite how "good" it is in all other areas. It is a game first. Not an art museum, cinema, or concert. Value each art form by its cores.
But the always positive "dismissive" reviews by the newer generations of ever dumber professional critics, who lower their standards in fear of displeasing the establishment sacrificing the off-change of maybe getting a job in the industry, have a direct impact on the mediocrity that same industry produces.
And you - the gamer who votes with its money- are every bit as guilty as the former mentioned parties by rewarding "no pre-launch reviews" policies with "day one buying", or the ultimate sacrilege of pre-ordering. You are instantly rewarding mediocrity and encouraging developers belief that indeed not only professional critics are getting dumber, but the audience as well, fueling the next wave of new ideas to screw you over.
You start the trend. The bed has been made. Never have I seen a year so lacking in core concepts as 2016
That is just about the most generous possible assessment of what your writing is accomplishing.The misinterpretation of my point may be proving my point.
Based on your last post I think you are taking issue with games being praised/selling well despite technical issues that effect playability?
spyshagg
Should not be allowed to breed
AHEM
Should not be allowed to breed
AHEM
Dude, why dont you try to be more specific?
You played some games you didnt like recently. Lets start with what exactly you didn't like about them. Use short words and sentences if possible.
You played some games you didnt like recently. Lets start with what exactly you didn't like about them. Use short words and sentences if possible.
I couldn't disagree more.Any game that compromises the basics core concepts, should never deserve a positive score despite how "good" it is in all other areas. It is a game first. Not an art museum, cinema, or concert. Value each art form by its cores.
If there's anything "gaming" needs, it's to draw from other kinds of experiences and broaden the emotions and reactions available today. I think games that can draw from art museums, cinema or concerts are where the true invention comes from.
OP's definition of "gaming" is far too narrow. I don't want just fun games. Never. The canvas available to video games is broader than any other medium, and we should embrace that, not throw a tantrum when a product is released that doesn't fit the mold made back in the 80's.