Why do you assume that's the reason

...I don't?

I'm just saying if it happens to be the reason.

Fallout 3 was good, Skyrim still sets a benchmark for modern games, and Fallout 4 looks to be packed with an obscene amount of content. I'm getting pretty sick of these mopey threads talking about how shitty Fallout 3 was supposed to be, how boring Skyrim is (hint: if you're bored in Skyrim, you're a boring fucking person and there's no fixing that), and how supposedly bad Fallout 4 will be.

































/s

oh, i wasn't entirely sure what you meant by that

Pretty sure everyone thinks Gen IV was the worst, actually.

If only because of the shitty cross-generational evolutions. I mean, today, I'm able to recognize that it was only done to make those Pokémon competitively viable, but still. They coulda done a better job with those.

This is controversial? Or an opinion?
I thought it was like, common fact?

What constitutes a genre is often based on personal opinion, yes.

Lots of people seem to think LoZ is an RPG. Just because you can name yourself, and it has fantasy elements.
They're dumb.

Sly Cooper is the worst of Playstation's PS2 mascots.

I mean, between Ratchet, Jak, and Sly, I think this is generally understood. What other mascots did the PS2 have again?...

You know what you should do Verb?

Make a game that plays on your honesty.

Make a couch potato class.

triggered

naoto is a misogynist

It's an RPG. Role Playing.

I'm just saying--there are good ways to handle it. I've played RPGs where, instead of it asking you if you're a boy or a girl, it'll ask "what is your alter ego" or some shit. That makes more sense to me.

Or, like in Skyrim, where it doesn't ask you anything at all. That's a good way to handle it. Probably the best way.

It's weird when guys play as girls and vice versa.

If someone chooses to play as someone simply because they find them sexually attractive, they can go fuck themselves.

Violence in video games (and all forms of media) can and does have a psychological impact on the player, and is desensitizing us to other forms of violence, be it simulated or otherwise.

I honestly don't think very many people deny this.

What people deny is the notion that violent video games will not only make you a psycho killer, but are the primary catalyst of violent behavior. Or that the psychological impact is anything but negligible.

un-inverted or bust

That would be stupid.

You said set in, not for authenticity.
But still no.

How?

If a developor can get a game to run at 60fps without sacrificing anything, but chooses 30fps, then they're stupid.

Nope. Why would they be?

Nice straw man.
And possibly the worst comparison I've ever seen.

You're the one who's trying to say that "smooth" is intrinsically good.

It's not. And I just proved it with that example.

60fps can't be better than 30fps in any intrinsic sense. It's all in your head.

You can have preferences, sure--maybe you honestly prefer 60fps, and that's fine--all I'm saying is that it's possible for 30fps to be an artistic decision. If a game is meant to emulate the experience of playing some old '90s game before 60fps was so prevalent, then that, in my opinion, is a good decision. Because it wouldn't make sense if the game was in 60fps.

your face turns to the right

But not the back of my head. Which is what I imagine turning when I use the joystick.

Quote

30 frames would be objectively better in that context.

No it wouldn't.

If you wanted to create an authentic '70s feel?

Yes, it would.

Double the frames per second results in a smother, better flowing picture, so yeah it's better.

What if you don't like smooth? What if smooth isn't the effect you're trying to go for?

You're just using adjectives that don't intrinsically prove anything.

Under your logic, people who are 300 pounds obese are better than people who are 200 pounds of muscle.
Because obese people have "smoother" skin. And "smooth" is apparently intrinsically good.