[Rant] What's Wrong with Video Games These Days?

Loving the anecdotes.

Not really.

If I really wanted to splice on about genres, then I'd just take solace in the store return rate of Grand Theft Auto 4 being higher than other games in the series. Moreover, Nintendo had 20 of the 30 top selling games of last year. What is it that they're known for putting out?

I'd be able to take Crash and Brady seriously if I didn't know that most folks who play FPS games do so for competitive reasons, so the skins their games implement aren't as large of a factor as the kind of game provided. Will a person who plays Team Fortress 2 be able to spot the differences and similarities between it and Tribes 2? Rainbow Six: Vegas? Who fucking cares? If you want to get into a game, maybe the aesthetics shouldn't exactly be your first priority over learning the damn game.

There's room enough for EVERY kind of game and player. Whether that space is small or large, whether you're in a tiny box of interest or a large room, you're gonna get in there in some capacity. Perhaps if you don't see something you like, you should make it or shut the fuck up if you're not going to. I'd like fighting games to be more prominent, but I understand why some folks just don't get down like that. I do not blame Mega Man 9 or Gears 2 for the obscurity of my preferred genre, nor do I engage in tunnel vision about genres or preferences.

Hardcore vs Casual is the dumbest non-argument in existence anyway. Someone care to define what makes a "hardcore" gamer and a "casual" gamer and then signal us when they start seeing the holes in the swiss cheese that is said argument?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I never accused you specifically of it, I addressed points made about it. Your argument is something else entirely.

Saying a game is another WW2 game is a personal gripe, saying that another FPS is another variation on Halo is a retarded simplification. And your personal feelings on a game series you don't even like is sending all kinds of signals at me as to how much you actually know about the games you're criticizing outside of "It looks like a duck and quacks like a duck." You, like most of us, probably don't know shit about what you're criticizing other than something that amounts to "I'm not interested" and "These people eat this shit up." For instance, not every fighting game plays like Street Fighter, not every FPS plays like Halo. It gets pretty ridiculous, but it's nothing as homogeneous as, say, Madden.

Here you are, falling into the same trap, not believing that there's a wide enough market to fit in every kind of interest group at this point. When it comes to genres, you have to account for the majority of the audience who plays those games. I really don't think a person like Crash is looking to play an FPS. As much as he makes it seem like if they tried REALLY hard to make one for him, he'd bite the hook of competitive games.

Of course game are made to cater to their respective demographic interests, Brady. Last I heard, some folks like making money as well as making something fun. Why is this a bad thing? I know folks don't always like Street Fighter, but Nintendo got around to making Smash Bros., so now you folks who can't zone can pretend that zoning doesn't happen in a game that offers you slightly more immediate enjoyment and get just as frustrated when folks who know the game better sap all the entertainment away.

Fact of the matter is, you're asking for a disposable, one time experience when there's a market of people who will play this shit and follow all the minute little changes and graphical faggotry because they enjoy the scene you're so repulsed by. Give them a better reason to make the games you suggest.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I'm not projecting shit, Brady. You, on the other hand, are the one trying to pass out personal stories about "Friends placing third at Quakecon." So let's talk about the games, if that's what it's gonna be about. Or are you too butt hurt to not sling insults? Dabbling into something doesn't mean you have something of worth to say. I know a few folks who actually play competitively in tournaments, it really doesn't say anything about what they know of fighting games. You're full of shit if you think I'm gonna take you at face value. You are, in fact, the fuckstick who was worried about Fallout 3 not being a great game.

Was that last line dumb enough for you? STREET FIGHTER FOUUUUUUUUR.

For all the complaining you do about how FPS games are only about competitive multiplayer, why do you choose to complain about Rainbow Six Vegas? A game that is heralded for its single player mode over its competitive mode? You're trying to say that the more action than simulation based squad controls aren't worth noting as a contributing factor (if not, sole reason) to its unique single player experience, and I'm gonna ask "why?" Why is the game "in a rut", Brady? You draw a comparison between Call of Duty and Rainbow Six: Vegas here, yet both games are offering ENTIRELY different experiences from each other. Call of Duty is a game about its competitive multiplayer offerings, while Rainbow Six: Vegas is mostly appreciated for its single player campaign and cooperative campaign modes? What are you trying to say?

And, no, if you're not the "average gamer" you're not shit out of luck. Again, the market numbers read that titles on Nintendo's platforms sold better than games that are played by "The average gamer." Did you know that one of the top ten DS games on Amazon was a compilation of 100 classic books? That's funny, given that the DS should be the platform of Japanese RPG masochism and shitty 2D action platformers. The "average gamer" isn't getting the kind of representation that the supposedly untapped markets that Nintendo's disruption is getting involved. You can talk all this bullshit about how you know these demographics, but why the fuck aren't you actually saying something of substance? What perceptions can we make about video games and their interests and what can we say that's actually of worth regarding sales and how games actually play?

It's funny that you talk about how games are the ultimate opiate and aren't about social involvement, yet you complain about competitive gaming. The irony being that competitive games are one of the few ways players get together and actually, you know, communicate. I realize it isn't the most cerebral of gatherings for some folks, but that's what video games tend to be for some folks. Games. Not that serious, just meant for a quick spice to social gatherings. Competitive games or shit on the Wii are great for this kind of thing, they offer a function that single player experiences can't. Competitive games are often a form of self-improvement via understanding the nuances of a game, therefore understanding the self and having to apply logic and reasoning to various situation.

You say your friend or acquaintance wasted his life placing third at a convention, but I have friends who are rather successful that just went to a tournament for the social experience. Who's word and experience are we going to take into account? Thinking about that, you're talking all this shit about how much games you've played and how much experience you've accrued to say the things you have. However, you confess yourself to potentially be a cynic and someone who doesn't believe in what's available in any capacity.

Why should anyone listen to what you have to say about the matter? Where are your facts, where are your meaningful comparisons? I'm not SEEING any. You've certainly got jokes though. "Rotor r like fighting gaymes." How about we dig deeper? Did it interest you to know that games like Battlefield do vehicles better than Halo does? Should we talk about asymmetrical map design versus symmetrical map design?

No, Brady. I really don't think you're saying anything of worth other than "I hate Gears and Halo and games that seem like them." Killzone 2 is coming out soon, it looks great. And it may very well offer up a completely different experience, but what have you said about it and its predecessor here? It is, afterall, said to be Sony's "Halo wannabe."

Quote:

Putting the onus on me to change things is an unrealistic demand because producers don't respond to the people who don't buy their video games, and I have better things to do than design video games.

I made the challenge of changing things not just to, but to others as well. I've seen Crash say he should be in charge of the Mega Man games in some capacity. I would ask myself "Why?" Why do you have to offer as far as making the product successful in a new and interesting way, what could you hope to refine as a fan that the creators haven't already done with Mega Man 9?

More to you, I ask YOU to change things because that's what you're asking for. And at your level, making an idea that could be considered profitable would be a realistic way of attaining that change. Yes, you admit you don't have the resources, talent, or interest in doing so... so that leaves me at processing the knowledge and insight you have to offer. Something completely suspect at this point.

Yeah, there are a lot of independent developers out there and they aren't necessarily paid attention to. But there are far more meaningful reasons for why that is other than "The average gamer is killing gaming." I don't believe games are art, Brady. But I could tell you how my opinion has been slowly changing when you aren't making accusations and assumptions about what I believe.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Skexis

It's my belief that because gaming has become more popular, it has become more industrial.

I never really thought too deeply about this aspect of development. I know that things were cut from Street Fighter IV as well as King of Fighters XII because of lack of time due to the need to meet a projected release date. I don't quite know how I feel about the time limits set on production. Especially since you make a good point about how players feel in regard to a game that's spent too long in the development cycle.

I liked Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo HD Remix (go figure) for the fact that even though it hit a massive delay due to a problem with redrawing the sprites, Sirlin managed to keep folks interested by talking about rebalanced mode and such. I know that having a transparent development doesn't always help with keeping folks' attention, though. The subject just makes me curious as far as what games have suffered greatly for limited development time.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?