|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah, lets dismiss the political themes of a game made in the USSR where you have an endless task that is impossible to achieve It's what I'm doing. All I'm really interested in is getting a high score. 
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
Archer666 posted:It's what I'm doing. All I'm really interested in is getting a high score. Super, which is just as valid of a thing to do as someone else that wants to make a political point about the game in a blog or video or even someone that wanted to call for boycotting Tetris because the inventor was unfairly compensated. I just thought it was funny that Tetris kinda proves the point that politics and gaming have gone together since the get-go. Even Pong's early beginnings have political roots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Junkfist posted:No. I suppose Zork was "just reading things" and not a game?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I suppose Zork was "just reading things" and not a game? Did you type a thing and hit enter? This is a limited form of gameplay. Would this be your 2015 GoTY contender or is the point system too traditional for you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
I don't think any of you understand what "gameplay" means.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:This was a weird post. First, yes, I do know a lot of 'extraordinary' women--I teach kickboxing, and I know a lot of six foot tall, athletic women. In addition, 'muscling' something around is partially being used to doing it and being dexterous, not just the actual muscle mass. If you are used to lifting and moving around stuff, you're better at it than someone who is not. This is part of the reason why 'women' in general aren't as 'strong' as men, they're raised to not use their bodies in the same way. If you get a woman who actually does a lot of physical activity, it's not just that she'll be stronger in terms of muscle mass, she'll also be better able to use that mass. Whatever you said about the average women not being able to use their muscles you can add on top of her muscle mass deficit. For what it's worth, I (a man) used to kickbox a bit and was thrown to the floor by a few women - women who could beat up men much better fighters than me (I was, as is of course so obvious as to be barely worth mentioning, always very poo poo at this). Yet, if by (physically) "stronger" you mean anything but kickboxing, I was much stronger than all of them. Obdicut posted:My contention was 'By being male, you're not stronger than every woman you meet'. What you posted has nothing to do with that. Did you get confused and think I was asserting that the average man isn't, pound for pound, stronger in raw physical force than the average woman? That was one thing you can take from my post, and you can put a number on that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Most, if not all, of the women I know who aren't literal geriatrics (and even some that are!) can lift 100lbs. Am I surrounded by Amazonian super-women or are they all juicing? I need to know before any of them try out for Major League Baseball so a timely answer is appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Bholder posted:I don't think any of you understand what "gameplay" means. And so on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:In this case, it's because OMG JC a Bomb! was talking about what the 'bone of contention' was, but I didn't feel it accurately represented what's under contention, especially because he himself posted a lot of posts about how Sarkeesian is Bad. I was just saying that I suspected her of being motivated by profit rather than a genuine desire to promote womens' interest, and couldn't support her. Then some guy started getting mad and namedropping his favorite philosopher, and it all kind of snowballed from there Not sure why what I said was controversial. I'm not wishing the plagues of Egypt on her, I'm just not interested in supporting her and her pretentious weirdo employer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Junkfist posted:Did you type a thing and hit enter? This is a limited form of gameplay. What's wrong with gameplay being "limited"? Running around in an open environment and shooting things is "limited." Everything is "limited." Why does the year matter? Are we supposed to ignore simpler or less resource intensive forms of gameplay because it's 2015? Fun games are fun games. If you disagree that a game is fun, go cry about how journalists don't agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
OMG JC a Bomb! posted:I was just saying that I suspected her of being motivated by profit rather than a genuine desire to promote womens' interest, and couldn't support her. Then some guy started getting mad and namedropping his favorite philosopher, and it all kind of snowballed from there My personal intuition is it's a subconscious "Of course I'm not a sexist, but where do I go with all my hatred?" sublimation. Though maybe it's anger that a man could join the
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Holy poo poo who cares about whether or not an FMV game is goty worthy
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Gamergate cares. Thankfully. Who else would?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Super, which is just as valid of a thing to do as someone else that wants to make a political point about the game in a blog or video or even someone that wanted to call for boycotting Tetris because the inventor was unfairly compensated. As long as we agree that's there's nothing wrong with not reading deeply into every single thing, then we're cool. On the whole "What makes a game" thing, don't we already have sub categories for everything? If Dear Esther can be a game, everything can be a game I think...
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What's wrong with gameplay being "limited"? Running around in an open environment and shooting things is "limited." Everything is "limited." Why does the year matter? Are we supposed to ignore simpler or less resource intensive forms of gameplay because it's 2015? Fun games are fun games. If you disagree that a game is fun, go cry about how journalists don't agree with you. This is why Papers Please is an Objectively worse game than APB Reloaded. Papers Please has very limited gameplay while APB Reloaded has open world interactions. QED. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What's wrong with gameplay being "limited"? Running around in an open environment and shooting things is "limited." Everything is "limited." Why does the year matter? Are we supposed to ignore simpler or less resource intensive forms of gameplay because it's 2015? Fun games are fun games. If you disagree that a game is fun, go cry about how journalists don't agree with you. But games shouldn't be "fun" either
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
The perfect game is MS Paint. I can create my own adventure, without any restrictions. It's also much better than reality, where I have a lot of restrictions, or chess, which is ridiculously restricted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Bholder posted:But games shouldn't be "fun" either God knows most board games aren't. I mean its called bored games for a reason amirite.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:No idea what you mean by "lift". Please refer to noted gender expert Minarchist for the correct definition and how no woman can possibly do it without years of injecting bull testosterone between their toes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Can somebody armchair psychoanalyse this shift of hatred from Sarkeesian to McIntosh? They hate both Anita and McIntosh equally. However, pointing out that a man is the real "brains behind everything" instead of a woman is supposed to discredit the feminist implications of the movement somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Look at all these scrubs who have never known the joy of a text adventure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Bholder posted:But games shouldn't be "fun" either Games aren't as fun as when you were ten years old. Who stole fun from the games?! 'Gamers': the liberal-jewish-feminist conspiracy is hoarding all the fun, censoring our free speech, forcing games to be more multicultural and so-on. If we simply 'deregulated' the industry and got rid of such things as affirmative action, the invisible hand will carry us back to the state of innocence of when I was ten years old. 'SJWs': games were fun when I was ten, but now I'm aware of insane neonazis on the Internet. The games industry really needs to be made more multicultural, like Starbucks. If major corporations simply tell gamers that racism is bad, these rednecks will have to stop openly fantasizing about rape holocaust. Reality: games have never been 'fun', and cannot be. The capitalist system that produces them is deleterious to human existence and cannot be reformed or purified. You will never be ten years old again, and no-one can be singled out for blame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:They hate both Anita and McIntosh equally. However, pointing out that a man is the real "brains behind everything" instead of a woman is supposed to discredit the feminist implications of the movement somehow. Who What Now posted:Please refer to noted gender expert Minarchist for the correct definition and how no woman can possibly do it without years of injecting bull testosterone between their toes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
OMG JC a Bomb! posted:Look at all these scrubs who have never known the joy of a text adventure. Actually, it's photopia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Can somebody armchair psychoanalyse this shift of hatred from Sarkeesian to McIntosh? Not much to it. McIntosh's opinions are so hilariously ridiculous and out of touch, they are hard not to ignore. Anita looks reasonable in interviews and her videos didn't really carry his views. Also, previously the FemFreq Twitter was a lot less polarizing and abrasive compared to his. Though this has changed recently. EDIT: Some like the idiotic brains narrative, others feel he is actively hurting Anita's cause and think she would be better off without him. And still others just laugh at him. It depends. Also a game does not have to be fun. However, it has to be engaging and not be boring. If you make your game unfun and boring, it will fail and frankly it deserves to. Dapper Dan fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Jul 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Dapper Dan posted:Not much to it. McIntosh's opinions are so hilariously ridiculous and out of touch, they are hard not to ignore. You choose to not ignore McIntosh. The question is, why?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:There are a lot of people whose views are much more ridiculous and out of touch than McIntosh, such as the people who believe in the lizard conspiracy or Obama Fema Muslim Death Camps. McIntosh is also really easy to ignore; I for example have never heard of him before I entered this thread. I chose to look at him for the same reason I chose to read The Weekend Web or Awful Link of the Day: Because sometimes it's fun to watch crazy people say crazy things. Edit: Or a better example, the ten megathreads on D&D that exist only to ridicule idiots. OMG JC a Bomb! fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Jul 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:God knows most board games aren't. I mean its called bored games for a reason amirite. I just got finished played six hours of Terra Mystica so how about we agree youre a dummy, and you need to pick up and study a copy of Caylus
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:There are a lot of people whose views are much more ridiculous and out of touch than McIntosh, such as the people who believe in the lizard conspiracy or Obama Fema Muslim Death Camps. McIntosh is also really easy to ignore; I for example have never heard of him before I entered this thread. Because he is 50% of the most influential organization of cultural criticism in some people's only hobby? And I find him hilarious. Same reason why people laugh at freepers or insane right wingers in this very forum. Why should this nut be spared from mockery and the others mocked?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What's wrong with gameplay being "limited"? Running around in an open environment and shooting things is "limited." Everything is "limited." Why does the year matter? Are we supposed to ignore simpler or less resource intensive forms of gameplay because it's 2015? Fun games are fun games. If you disagree that a game is fun, go cry about how journalists don't agree with you. Most of the people who complain about "limited gameplay" titles that they label as "not videogames" do so out of fear. They think that the success of games they don't like threatens the market for games they do like. This is, of course, silly because as time goes on, more kinds of games can be made due to new methods of funding and distribution, there's no replacing or pushing out going on. But gamers still fear "hardcore" games being threatened by "the casuals", "the SJWs", or "indie not-games".
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Motto posted:Most of the people who complain about "limited gameplay" titles that they label as "not videogames" do so out of fear. They think that the success of games they don't like threatens the market for games they do like. This is, of course, silly because as time goes on, more kinds of games can be made due to new methods of funding and distribution, there's no replacing or pushing out going on. But gamers still fear "hardcore" games being threatened by "the casuals", "the SJWs", or "indie not-games". Lets not pretend the fear isnt validated. Look at the immense number of idiots in the business world pushing Nintendo to go mobile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Motto posted:Most of the people who complain about "limited gameplay" titles that they label as "not videogames" do so out of fear. They think that the success of games they don't like threatens the market for games they do like. This is, of course, silly because as time goes on, more kinds of games can be made due to new methods of funding and distribution, there's no replacing or pushing out going on. But gamers still fear "hardcore" games being threatened by "the casuals", "the SJWs", or "indie not-games". No, everyone will be forced to put on tan coveralls to hide their sex, and the only game on the market will be a flash game with a button you push that flashes text "YOU'RE RACIST" The camel's nose is in the tent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
Ever since Nintendo posted its first quarterly loss in like 14 years back in 2014 there was no end to the "Nintendo is dead unless it gets into mobile" speculation. Even after they bounced back and started posting profits again, without touching mobile, you could still find one or two "Sure, Nintendo might look like it stabilized, but heres why they need to get into mobile!" articles every week. Imagine if japanese companies actually listened to thier investors, or the public. They might have done it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:That actually makes a lot of sense. I'm guessing his analysis is flawed and it's not that he's surrounded be women who are incapable of lifting the equivalent of an healthy adolescent so much as wherever he works gets a tax break for hiring people who are mentally deficient and they need to give him something to do. But I've read Of Mice and Men before and I know that that isn't going to end well for anybody.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Meme Emulator posted:Ever since Nintendo posted its first quarterly loss in like 14 years back in 2014 there was no end to the "Nintendo is dead unless it gets into mobile" speculation. Even after they bounced back and started posting profits again, without touching mobile, you could still find one or two "Sure, Nintendo might look like it stabilized, but heres why they need to get into mobile!" articles every week. They're making mobile games now though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Meme Emulator posted:Lets not pretend the fear isnt validated. Look at the immense number of idiots in the business world pushing Nintendo to go mobile. Fear of mobile is just as silly. Some companies make bad decisions, as companies often do, but mobile has not come close to threatening traditional games. Square Enix has found much success in mobile, but just last month announced a bunch of traditional games for both mainstream and niche audiences.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
Meme Emulator posted:Lets not pretend the fear isnt validated. Look at the immense number of idiots in the business world pushing Nintendo to go mobile. I'm pretty sure Nintendo, being one of the biggest companies in the industry, falling out of relevance and bringing itself back several times, has a good idea what it's doing. People need not feel a paternalistic desire towards a corporation. If people do, perhaps it is them who are truly mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
Game journalists rave about quirky indie games over big-budget extravaganzas like Batman for the same reason film critics rave about quirky indie movies over the Transformers saga. No conspiracy needed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:People need not feel a paternalistic desire towards a corporation. If people do, perhaps it is them who are truly mentally ill. Corporations are people too!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:What's wrong with gameplay being "limited"? Running around in an open environment and shooting things is "limited." Everything is "limited." Why does the year matter? Are we supposed to ignore simpler or less resource intensive forms of gameplay because it's 2015? Fun games are fun games. If you disagree that a game is fun, go cry about how journalists don't agree with you. You're drawing an equivocation between a text game from 1980(?) to contemporary gameplay in defense of a 2 hour FMV game where you input search terms being considered 2015's GoTY. Or is it to the bold contention that any form of gameplay is required to call something a game? I could ask which and why, but I don't know what answer could possibly satisfy me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 23:41
|
|