Stupid irrelevant shit about games that people always have an opinion on

Verbatim · May 17, 2016, 08:20:29 PM

1. Difficulty.

We've all heard this one. "This game is too hard!" Generally, no--you just kinda suck at it, and need to get better. Games are kinda meant to be challenging, and blaming the game itself for your own incompetence is just kinda lame. There are times when a game's difficulty can be based off of luck/chance/RNG bullshit, and those are valid complaints--but that's separate from difficulty in my eyes. RNG is not a test of player's skill--it's a lottery, so you can't really expect to conquer it. If there's a boss that you can't beat, though, then chances are, it's your fault.

Let there be no double standards, though. "This game is too easy!" is not really a valid complaint, either. I know what I said earlier--games are meant to be challenging--but games can also have varying degrees of challenge, too. That is to say, they're allowed to be less challenging than others. It doesn't always have to be ball-bustingly hard. Sometimes, it's more about taking the player on a wondrous journey that's meant to be fun in a more relaxing or lighthearted way. Some people may find this boring, and that's okay, but I wouldn't necessarily blame that on the difficulty--I'd blame the player for being a little closed-minded.

Wind Waker's one of my top 3 favorite games, and one of the biggest complaints about it are that it's "too easy," when there's really no such thing--it's not meant to be very difficult, because it doesn't have to be. It manages to find other ways to be fun and compelling beyond challenge--like atmosphere, story, immersion, light puzzle-solving, and perhaps most importantly, the exploration. It's a very emotionally-driven game--it's not meant to fuck your shit up, and it shouldn't be criticized for that.

2. Graphics/frame rates/other technical aspects.

Simply put: They don't matter and have never mattered.

3. "Seniority" (couldn't really think of a better word for this).

Too often do I find people praising a game for doing something "first." As in, "Oh, that game you like might have had that cool feature, but Halo 1 did it first, so that makes Halo 1 better!"

Bullshit. Who gives a fuck whoever did it first? Why does that even matter? I guess the logic is that, without x game being the forerunner of a given trend, the trend would've never occurred at all.

That's a pretty myopic, or short-sighted, argument. It fails to recognize that our planet is inhabited by seven billion human beings, a large portion of which are very intelligent and very creative people. If Prometheus didn't discover fire, someone else surely would have. There is nothing special about Prometheus. Just like there's nothing special about x game for having y feature first.

The important thing is that the feature is good, and that the game has it. Whoever came up with the idea first shouldn't matter to anyone, and I'd really like it if people would stop praising games for beating others to the punch on some obvious feature.

Any others?

ban me · May 17, 2016, 08:32:49 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Verbatim · May 17, 2016, 08:35:26 PM

Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:32:49 PM

Graphics don't matter, but frames and other technical aspects do.

Bad frames = unplayable game.

No, inconsistent frames (typically) = unplayable game. Even then, "unplayable" is a strong word.

There's no such thing as a "bad frame."

ban me · May 17, 2016, 08:41:17 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Verbatim · May 17, 2016, 08:45:08 PM

Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:41:17 PM

Anything under a consistent 30 FPS is unplayable.

Tell that to the millions of people who have played and enjoyed games like Ocarina of Time--which runs at 20fps, which can drop to 15fps depending on the area. Considered one of the greatest games of all time.

You may not agree with that, but it sure makes your sweeping statement sound pretty dumb.

snurch · May 17, 2016, 08:49:44 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 08:45:08 PM

Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:41:17 PM
Anything under a consistent 30 FPS is unplayable.
Tell that to the millions of people who have played and enjoyed games like Ocarina of Time--which runs at 20fps, which can drop to 15fps depending on the area. Considered one of the greatest games of all time.

You may not agree with that, but it sure makes your sweeping statement sound pretty dumb.

depends on the game

you can maybe play skyrim at like 10 fps cause the combat is dumb and slow but you probably cant play an fps effectively at less than 20 fps or a fighting game competitively at less than 30 fps

ban me · May 17, 2016, 08:50:45 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Verbatim · May 17, 2016, 08:57:48 PM

Quote from: 🇵🇪🇵🇸🇮™ on May 17, 2016, 08:49:44 PM

depends on the game

you can maybe play skyrim at like 10 fps cause the combat is dumb and slow but you probably cant play an fps effectively at less than 20 fps or a fighting game competitively at less than 30 fps

I don't really see why not.

Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:50:45 PM

And OOT was also released like 20 years ago. I bet Dark Souls would be real fun with a consistent 20 FPS.

If it were specifically designed to be run that way, then sure, why not?

It's easy to take a modern game and say "this would be bad if it had a lower number of that," because modern games are designed to have higher frame rates--such that, if it were lowered, it would play like shit. Of course.

snurch · May 17, 2016, 09:03:12 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 08:57:48 PM

I don't really see why not.

a lot of fighting games use frame count for their moves and this could really mess up competitive games, you could end up having twice the amount of invincibility frames or such playing at half fps or something

snurch · May 17, 2016, 09:04:39 PM

im not sure about the technical thing, some mechanics do count under that and are done very well, i think you mean just graphics

id like to say graphics do matter depending on the game, whether you like the game or not new graphics technologies make it easier for developers to follow artstyles and concepts closer, while it isnt necessary some games do make great use of it, not only being in an artistically consistent world but a beautiful one too

i do prefer stylized graphics and such if it's done really well like in firewatch, and high-resolution textures such as the map allowed me to actually use a map in the game and navigate from it

i have games where i just sort of chill on for fun

YouTube

it's possible to enjoy a game without any fancy graphics obviously but it is nice to play in a convincing and detailed, polished environment

low-poly art is great

Verbatim · May 17, 2016, 09:09:48 PM

Quote from: 🇵🇪🇵🇸🇮™ on May 17, 2016, 09:03:12 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 08:57:48 PM
I don't really see why not.
a lot of fighting games use frame count for their moves and this could really mess up competitive games, you could end up having twice the amount of invincibility frames or such playing at half fps or something

Well, if you're playing at half fps, that's a problem--the game wasn't meant to be run that way, so you're gonna have problems. But if the fighting game is designed to be played at 20fps, it could totally work out.

I don't know any fighting games that have that low of a frame rate, but still. The point is that frames just have to be consistent. Whether it's consistently 30 or consistently 60 doesn't matter.

The only thing you can argue is that more frames = smoother animation, but not everyone places importance on that.

snurch · May 17, 2016, 09:16:48 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 09:09:48 PM

Quote from: 🇵🇪🇵🇸🇮™ on May 17, 2016, 09:03:12 PM
Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 08:57:48 PM
I don't really see why not.
a lot of fighting games use frame count for their moves and this could really mess up competitive games, you could end up having twice the amount of invincibility frames or such playing at half fps or something
Well, if you're playing at half fps, that's a problem--the game wasn't meant to be run that way, so you're gonna have problems. If the fighting game is designed to play at 20fps could totally work out.

I don't know any fighting games that have that low of a frame rate, but still. The point is that frames just have to be consistent. Whether it's consistently 30 or consistently 60 doesn't matter.

The only thing you can argue is that more frames = smoother animation, but not everyone places importance on that.

if everyone had to play at the same fps for any game they probably wouldnt care that much which is pretty much whats going on with the console side of things

and there's also beta movement i learnt about in perception computing

it's just easier on the eyes, perceived motion is just more convincing with a higher framerate, human eyes obviously dont operate on refresh rates but it helps, especially with things like VR

again you probably dont need more than 30 fps to play any game, its just one of the nice to haves

Super Irish · May 17, 2016, 09:34:06 PM

I'd argue the first point, but only for one game. WipeOut 3's Phantom-class difficulty was impossible to play without breaking the game, because it was so simple in its method of scaling-up difficulty for a racing game; just add more speed, to everything. Only thing is, the AI is designed to follow the track and so they can bend the rules and defy the game's mechanics whilst you end up bashing around hairpin turns at 500mph. For example, here's the a time trial of the difficulty on a smooth track; most have 90 degree turns and spiral descents -

YouTube

As for framerates, you'd need to make a very specific game to make it enjoyable or immersive at 6fps, because like how we experience life, it's fluid and smooth, without stuttering. I'm guessing it would have to have a similar mechanic to SUPERHOT, although it's popularity is down to it's originality (and even then, it's running at 30/60 fps);

Jono · May 17, 2016, 10:17:57 PM

When people say that zero-bloom Reach takes skill.

Mordo · May 17, 2016, 10:25:07 PM

"It's not realistic enough"

The fuck are you playing a game for then?

Ian · May 17, 2016, 10:43:03 PM

What if the difficulty of a game is admitted to be too difficult by its own creators?

Naoki Yoshida admitted in a Live Letter for FFXIV that the difficulty for Alexander Savage was overtuned too much and the development team made an error on the difficulty scaling for the fights. They were still beatable, but they claimed that it was still too difficult from what they had intended and group clear rates reflected that, and the groups that did clear have to "cheat" the game's server and timing system.

Quote

1. Difficulty.

We've all heard this one. "This game is too hard!" Generally, no--you just kinda suck at it, and need to get better. Games are kinda meant to be challenging, and blaming the game itself for your own incompetence is just kinda lame. There are times when a game's difficulty can be based off of luck/chance/RNG bullshit, and those are valid complaints--but that's separate from difficulty in my eyes. RNG is not a test of player's skill--it's a lottery, so you can't really expect to conquer it. If there's a boss that you can't beat, though, then chances are, it's your fault.

Elai · May 18, 2016, 05:25:27 PM

I think your argument for difficulty needs a bit of work.

Games being too difficult to enjoy, like Uncharted 1 on Crushing, fucking suck to play. Bottom line. (Not that Uncharted 1 is any good to begin with.)

There's challenging by way of developer competency (the right way to do it) and then there's other bullshit, like OP AI, for example.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · May 18, 2016, 06:46:47 PM

Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:50:45 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 17, 2016, 08:45:08 PM
Quote from: Iberian Husky on May 17, 2016, 08:41:17 PM
Anything under a consistent 30 FPS is unplayable.
Tell that to the millions of people who have played and enjoyed games like Ocarina of Time--which runs at 20fps, which can drop to 15fps depending on the area. Considered one of the greatest games of all time.

You may not agree with that, but it sure makes your sweeping statement sound pretty dumb.
And OOT was also released like 20 years ago. I bet Dark Souls would be real fun with a consistent 20 FPS.

That just sounds like Dark Souls any time there's a voodoo priest or a shit ton of wyverns around. Basically, any time there are more than 5 enemies on the screen.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · May 18, 2016, 06:51:17 PM

Every shooter, no matter what it is, gets compared to Halo and CoD.

X but made by Platinum/plays like Dark Souls

When Nintendo doesn't print enough of anything, resulting in atmospheric prices on yellow carts only available through scalpers

Verbatim · May 18, 2016, 06:52:43 PM

Quote from: Prehistoric on May 18, 2016, 05:25:27 PM

I think your argument for difficulty needs a bit of work.

Games being too difficult to enjoy, like Uncharted 1 on Crushing, fucking suck to play. Bottom line. (Not that Uncharted 1 is any good to begin with.)

There's challenging by way of developer competency (the right way to do it) and then there's other bullshit, like OP AI, for example.

Disagree. If you're playing on "crushing" difficulty, expect to get crushed. That's kinda the idea.

Either get better, or lower the difficulty--or play a game you actually like, for that matter.

If playing at higher difficulties isn't fun for you, then just don't bother. That's precisely why there are difficulty options in the first place. I just hate this notion that games need to be made easier for people who suck, when, no, they shouldn't.

Azumarill · May 18, 2016, 06:57:45 PM

Quote from: Jono on May 17, 2016, 10:17:57 PM

When people say that zero-bloom Reach takes skill.

LOL

Verbatim · May 18, 2016, 07:02:49 PM

Quote from: Prime Kruphix on May 18, 2016, 06:51:17 PM

Every shooter, no matter what it is, gets compared to Halo and CoD.

Eh, I don't really see a huge issue with this. They're the most popular and relatable games in the genre, so drawing comparisons to them only makes it easier for people to grasp how a different shooter plays.

If we're talking about people who dismiss other shooters solely on the basis that they're not CoD or Halo, then yeah, fuck those people.

SecondClass · May 18, 2016, 07:03:57 PM

the art style

🍁 Aria 🔮 · May 18, 2016, 07:07:04 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 18, 2016, 07:02:49 PM

Quote from: Prime Kruphix on May 18, 2016, 06:51:17 PM
Every shooter, no matter what it is, gets compared to Halo and CoD.
Eh, I don't really see a huge issue with this. They're the most popular and relatable games in the genre, so drawing comparisons to them only makes it easier for people to grasp how a different shooter plays.

If we're talking about people who dismiss other shooters solely on the basis that they're not CoD or Halo, then yeah, fuck those people.

I'm referring to D44M's negative backlash.

"This is just a Halo/CoD game with a doom skin, 0/5 would not recommend"

The only two factors that tie it to either franchise are the armor designs (Halo-ish, but better than 343) and loadouts.

Naru · May 18, 2016, 07:50:28 PM

lets be honest, in the difficulty standpoint, there can be some bullshit that will always make the game hard. like the hitboxes of the iron golem in ds1, fuck that.

Luciana · May 18, 2016, 07:51:03 PM

A game being popular = meaning it's good

hue

Luciana · May 18, 2016, 07:51:27 PM

Quote from: AstroNaru on May 18, 2016, 07:50:28 PM

lets be honest, in the difficulty standpoint, there can be some bullshit that will always make the game hard. like the hitboxes of the iron golem in ds1, fuck that.

If you let him hit you then you have an issue. Let TARKUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS do the work.

Naru · May 18, 2016, 07:54:05 PM

Quote from: Luciana on May 18, 2016, 07:51:27 PM

Quote from: AstroNaru on May 18, 2016, 07:50:28 PM
lets be honest, in the difficulty standpoint, there can be some bullshit that will always make the game hard. like the hitboxes of the iron golem in ds1, fuck that.
If you let him hit you then you have an issue. Let TARKUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS do the work.

oh he did. so much farming for a humanity...

Zonda · May 18, 2016, 07:54:20 PM

Dick measuring contests on skill ceilings/the amount of skill required to be 'average' at a specific game tbh

Verbatim · May 18, 2016, 07:56:20 PM

Quote from: ROCKETMAN IS A FURRY on May 18, 2016, 07:54:20 PM

Dick measuring contests on skill ceilings/the amount of skill required to be 'average' at a specific game tbh

could you expand on that