Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => Hardcore Gaming 101 => Topic started by: ROCKMAN X on August 26, 2014, 06:29:38 PM
-
I mean its funny how i don't give 2 licks of a damn "next gen" games anymore.... i care more about low-budged mighty no 9,H-hour,The evil within,Stasis,next car game,Hotline Miami 2! its CRAZY!
It seems like indie gaming is completely going to curb-stomp the nauseating mediocrity that is casual gaming.. sure there's your multiplayer bullshit that keeps the crowd in line but for how long? it seems to me like an endless stream diverse games from indie games will simply obliterate shooter fad for good.
And if you own a PC you already know that Steam library is MASSIVE its only a matter of time when its the same for PS4,xbox one.
-
I dont have sure how to answer this be reading the title, since FPS and casual are a genre, while indie isn't. A perfect example is that we can have a indie game that is a FPS or casual if some person wants to do one.
If you look at steam you will see that almost 50% if not more than that of their library are casual games, you will find a lot of these point-n-click games and casual games. Almost all made by indies.
-
Heavily doubt that indie games will completely dominate the non-indie market. The damn indie market is just as oversaturated with shitty games and clones as the non-indie market is. People complain about all the CoD games and clones? Well what about all the Minecraft and Slender clones out there?
The "scariest" games the indie market brings us are the ones that rely solely on atmosphere to bring horror to people, using the same first-person gameplay in all of them (you know, the Slender clones). They're exceedingly bare-bones and have absolutely no replay value.
Not to mention the indie market almost ALWAYS relies on minimalistic ways to tell stories.
Hell, there's an indie game with the concept being "broken and glitchy". Like, literally glitchy. Not even clever use of the engine to make it look like it's glitching. They're literally marketing the game as unfinished and releasing it as such.
Basically, what I'm trying to say is, no. Indie and non-indie games will pretty much co-exist from here on, since both are just as good and bad as the other.
-
Hell, there's an indie game with the concept being "broken and glitchy". Like, literally glitchy. Not even clever use of the engine to make it look like it's glitching. They're literally marketing the game as unfinished and releasing it as such.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIaFtAKnqBU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIaFtAKnqBU#ws)
Goat Simulator? lol
Because if my guess is correct, its not fault from the developers. They said it out loud that it was meant to be a video showing the new engine they we're working for a racing game, its basically a collision test, they even said that they never planned to release it, but people insisted that they wanted this game for "teh lulz".
-
No, not that. Some other game I saw on... one of those bundle sites (Humble Bundle, Indie Gala, or Bundle Stars). Goat Simulator wasn't necessarily advertised as broken and glitchy. This game, one of its selling points literally was that it was broken and ridden with glitches.
-
I dont have sure how to answer this be reading the title, since FPS and casual are a genre, while indie isn't. A perfect example is that we can have a indie game that is a FPS or casual if some person wants to do one.
If you look at steam you will see that almost 50% if not more than that of their library are casual games, you will find a lot of these point-n-click games and casual games. Almost all made by indies.
.Heavily doubt that indie games will completely dominate the non-indie market. The damn indie market is just as oversaturated with shitty games and clones as the non-indie market is. People complain about all the CoD games and clones? Well what about all the Minecraft and Slender clones out there?
I think you guys are missing the point.. "indie" isn't a genre or a niche its just games developed by solo-developers and crowd funding.
And i'm looking forward to these crowd-funded,independently developed games more than say games like destiny and far cry 4 that is the point i'm trying to make.. we have yet to see a new Next gen IP which is something new&unique like GTA 4 or mario 64... most of AAA games are creatively bankrupt we're just seeing the same old games being polished in HD visuals but with indie games you can already see its something different&promising.
I'd argue that Steam has more quality games then there are on XBLA&PSN especially many niche RPG's that are only available via steam downloads.
It just seems to me like with the increased amount of budget no company is willing to make games that are creative and diverse they just want to sell what's assured to sell... IE:call of duty clones,assassins creed clones,skyrim clones,god of war clones etc etc
-
.
I think you guys are missing the point.. "indie" isn't a genre or a niche its just games developed by solo-developers and crowd funding.
Never said indie was genre, nor did I imply it. I simply said indie games will not dominate the non-indie market.
And i'm looking forward to these crowd-funded,independently developed games more than say games like destiny and far cry 4 that is the point i'm trying to make.. we have yet to see a new Next gen IP which is something new&unique like GTA 4 or mario 64... most of AAA games we're just seeing the same old games being polished in HD visuals with indie gaming you can already see its something different.
To each their own. I don't need a unique and innovative game every time I finish another game. As long as the game is entertaining and fun, then isn't that all that matters?
And besides, you actually need to look. There are games that are doing unique things all the time. Hell, every Suda game takes a typical ol' genre and puts a unique spin on it, like Lollipop Chainsaw taking beat-em-up and adding a layer of strategy to it, or Killer Is Dead combining the aspects of a hack-n-slash and a third-person shooter, mixed in heavily with puzzle game elements and other psychological elements.
On the flipside, the indie market also has its share of the exact same game being published with a different name and different graphics. Yes, it has tons of unique games in its market, but it also has a ton of games that are absolute shit. Case in point, take a look at the XBLA indie section. I found one game worth buying (Tempura of the Dead, fantastic game).
Both markets have their share of fantastic games, good games, bad games, and absolute shit games.
I'd argue that Steam has more quality games then there are on XBLA&PSN especially many niche RPG's that are only available via steam downloads.
Well, obviously Steam would have a bigger variety. It is PC, after all, and its far easier to make video games for PC than consoles. Especially with RPG Maker being big as of late, too, there will be a lot of niche RPGs only available on Steam.
-
I think you guys are missing the point.. "indie" isn't a genre or a niche its just games developed by solo-developers and crowd funding.
Never said its a genre, but instead I said it ISN'T a genre :P
I dont have sure how to answer this be reading the title, since FPS and casual are a genre, while indie isn't. A perfect example is that we can have a indie game that is a FPS or casual if some person wants to do one.
And i'm looking forward to these crowd-funded,independently developed games more than say games like destiny and far cry 4 that is the point i'm trying to make.. we have yet to see a new Next gen IP which is something new&unique like GTA 4 or mario 64... most of AAA games are creatively bankrupt we're just seeing the same old games being polished in HD visuals but with indie games you can already see its something different&promising.
I'd argue that Steam has more quality games then there are on XBLA&PSN especially many niche RPG's that are only available via steam downloads.
It just seems to me like with the increased amount of budget no company is willing to make games that are creative and diverse they just want to sell what's assured to sell... IE:call of duty clones,assassins creed clones,skyrim clones,god of war clones etc etc
Like I've pointed before, it seems that the "Indie market" have more good games recently only because it gets more "chances". For example:
Big corporations way:
Guy 1: I've got an idea
Guy 2: Well, it will be lucrative?
Guy 1: I don't know, but it can be good because of..!
Guy 2: If you don't know, forget it and think about something that give us more money!
Indie way:
Indie man: I've got an idea, I don't know if it will sell well, but let's find out. :P
And because of this, we get more good games while we also get more shitty games. You see? Its because the amount of games being launched is bigger that we get more good games, the difference is that you would never know about these bad indie games because they dont appear on TV-ads and people will not talk about them, while people talk about bad games made by big companies and some of them even are advertised on TV.
-
the non-indie market.
See this is what i was talking about there's no "non-indie market" it is just as much of a part of active gaming market as AAA&Casual gamers(ie:angry birds,candy crush)... i was just suggesting that future big budget indie games will change the interests of common gamer enough to end the shooter craze.To each their own. I don't need a unique and innovative game every time I finish another game.
isn't that why we play different games anyway? we always want to try our something new,no one likes playing the same old thing over and over we'll get bored someday and buy games that do offer us something different.As long as the game is entertaining and fun, then isn't that all that matters?
People say the same about transformers movies.And besides, you actually need to look. There are games that are doing unique things all the time.
sadly indie scene is the only place where they're trying something new.. in AAA games only 2 games that do something "Different" are Portal and Dark souls.
Killer Is Dead combining the aspects of a hack-n-slash and a third-person shooter
Crimson sea 2 did it better.. killer is dead was mediocre the humor&sexual innuendos was annoying.Both markets have their share of fantastic games, good games, bad games, and absolute shit games.
Indie still has more diversity&innovative games though nowadays in AAA games all you can find is cinematic shooters or an overabundance of generic WRPG's ugh i'm sick of it.
its far easier to make video games for PC than consoles.
its actually a myth that consoles are harder to develop.. only coding games for consoles with alien architecture like PS3&Sega Saturn is harder consoles like xbox are based on PC architecture that is just as to make games for and current gen consoles have adapted a more common pc like architecture.
-
Non-indie market = Video games in the market that aren't made by indie developers. Do I seriously have to explain this one?
And no, that's not why I play different games. For example, Dynasty Warriors 8 and Darksiders are both games that I enjoy, but neither of them are innovative. But they're different from each other. And they're both fun, and thus I play them.
Also, your Transformers argument is pretty dumb. It's different for movies where story is literally a focus on keeping people interested. If a movie's plot is shit, then most people won't watch it. But for a video game, if the plot is shit, it can still be immensely enjoyable for gameplay, atmosphere, plenty other things. So no, the Transformers movies aren't a good comparison to interactive entertainment.
The indie market is not the only place to find something new. Tons of popular indie games are very similar to each other. Example? The Slender example. Slender, Amnesia, Outlast, etc. are all popular, but are all pretty much the same thing. SOUNDS LIKE VARIETY TO ME. Oh yeah, LOOK. TONS OF "8-BIT" AND "16-BIT" PLATFORMERS WITH A GIMMICK THAT MAKES THEM SOOOO INNOVATIVE.
See what I did there? I dumbed down indie games to first-person horror games and retro-styled platformers. Kind of like how you dumbed down the gaming industry itself to shooters and casual games.
It doesn't matter whether or not Killer Is Dead or Crimson Sea 2 did it better. Fact of the matter is they both did it. (for the record, I think Killer Is Dead did it better because the game is far deeper than Crimson Sea 2).
Give me an example of this diversity in the indie market that you speak of that completely destroys the rest of the gaming industry. And would you stop dumbing the gaming industry down to AAA titles? There are tons of other niche games and developers that also provide gaming experiences that range anywhere from beautiful to crap (just like the indie market!).
And no, PC is easier to develop for, because it has the far better and more developed modern RPG Makers and then even Game Maker to back it up. Neither of these require coding skill in order to make good or even decent games. I'm not sure whether or not Game Maker can port to other consoles, but doing so requires coding skill, which, in turn, makes it harder to develop for. Most of these niche RPGs that you find on Steam and such were made on RPG Maker, a lot of which use basic coding at best, most of which you can find pre-done for you on various RPG Maker message boards.
Basically, neither indie nor non-indie is better than the other. You're just so stuck on the AAA games and only seeing stuff like Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Titanfall, Halo 5, Assassin's Creed: Unity (and Rogue), Grand Theft Auto V, Uncharted, The Last of Us, etc. and ignoring more niche games or not-as-popular games like Drakengard 3, Dynasty Warriors 8, TRINITY: Souls of Zill O'll, Sonic Generations (because we know Sonic isn't mainstream anymore), the Tales games, and... oh yeah, the Ys games.
-
The "scariest" games the indie market brings us are the ones that rely solely on atmosphere to bring horror to people, using the same first-person gameplay in all of them (you know, the Slender clones). They're exceedingly bare-bones and have absolutely no replay value.
Not to mention the indie market almost ALWAYS relies on minimalistic ways to tell stories.
Hell, there's an indie game with the concept being "broken and glitchy". Like, literally glitchy. Not even clever use of the engine to make it look like it's glitching. They're literally marketing the game as unfinished and releasing it as such.
This is actually exactly my reference of what not to do with Kadath. :P
I dumbed down indie games to first-person horror games and retro-styled platformers.
Bu...but I'm combing both of those things! Does that still count as dumb?
And for the record of being on-topic; X, while I share your distaste for how watered-down the FPS market has become, that doesn't mean all FPS games (or any shooter, really, there've been some good run-n-guns) are automatically bad and should be phased out. I don't want the 'shooter craze' to die out; rather, I'd prefer they start becoming less about swapping a few guns and changing characters and stages, but still shooting terrorists in the desert and more about doing something a little more original. Granted, that'd be easier if there weren't already and FPS for almost every theme you can imagine, but even so.
And, actually, CoD and its like games aren't all bad. It's their goddamned fanbase of hormonally-charged, sexually frustrated twelve-year-olds that ruin the series' image. Because Wolfenstein: The New Order could easily be lumped in with the CoD craze in play style, but it's still a great fucking game.
EDIT: Hey, now. Goat Simulator is pretty fun and good for some cheap laughs...for about ten minutes.
-
Non-indie market = Video games in the market that aren't made by indie developers. Do I seriously have to explain this one?
well saying that "indie games will never completely dominate non-indie market confused me" why can't they? they're made by devs that are willing to take more risks and with enough budget they can match AAA quality of graphics.But they're different from each other.
This is the point i'm trying to me most AAA are not different enough.It's different for movies where story is literally a focus on keeping people interested. If a movie's plot is shit, then most people won't watch it.
That's not true AT ALL! transformers movies have shitty stories... people only watch it for explosions and cool CGI fights its analogous to the COD crowd who only play games because they like to blow stuff up and look at 1080P graphics... this is something i would like to dub "Shallow entertainment".But for a video game, if the plot is shit, it can still be immensely enjoyable for gameplay, atmosphere, plenty other things.
That's because in video games story doesn't matter,if you take down the story from all the popular video games they're all just B-movie level writing at best but they compliment the game so it doesn't matter.The indie market is not the only place to find something new.
You are partially right there is a sh!t ton of ps2/ps1/16&8 bit games.
SOUNDS LIKE VARIETY TO ME.
HA HA is that a joke? just because you've only heard about 3 popular games you've automatically decided that that's all indie gaming has to offer? ever heard of KICKSTARTER? there is shit ton of different games being made... Mighty 9,The Girl and the Robot,Next car game,Stasis,Dreamfall chapters,Shantae,H-hour,A hat in time,Chasm these are just few of the ones i'm looking forward to! you're just simply turning a blind eye towards all these games just because they're not as rabidly popular as awful indie horror games like slender and amnesia.Oh yeah, LOOK. TONS OF "8-BIT" AND "16-BIT" PLATFORMERS.
Only 2 games i've listed above are 2d sprite based platformers go figure.. most recently Cloudbuilt has caught my attention and it was also a kickstarter/indie game.Kind of like how you dumbed down the gaming industry itself to shooters and casual games.
You wanna bet? Resident evil,Tomb raider,Hitman,splinter cell,fallout they used to be some of the most fun and unique games but now they're just identical shooter adventure games... where the hell did the diversity go?
Give me an example of this diversity in the indie market that you speak of that completely destroys the rest of the gaming industry.
I don't even have to.. all the modern AAA games are as homogenized as white people in full house! anything with a speck of diversity like indie games can make them look inferior.
"because it has the far better and more developed modern RPG Makers"
The only RPG maker game i remember playing was Cave story and that was okayish.
"Most of these niche RPGs that you find on Steam and such were made on RPG Maker"
You can't make games like Transistor,limbo&bastion with RPG maker -_-and ignoring more niche games or not-as-popular games like Drakengard 3, Dynasty Warriors 8, TRINITY: Souls of Zill O'll, Sonic Generations (because we know Sonic isn't mainstream anymore)
are you kidding me? these stupid games are just as popular! dynasty warriors is like the call of duty of hack'n'slash genre and i really don't have any faith in square enix i really don't... they've fu*ked up so many franchises and even their own flagship RPG Final fantasy series they don't have the RPG golden touch they had a decade ago.oh yeah, the Ys games.
err.. YS belongs to the Ps2 generation of gaming and most importantly Ys origin&Ys Oath of felghana is only available on STEAM! they're not on PS3 or 360 thus not for causal&console gamers.
-
And for the record of being on-topic; X
Huh?? I didn't say anything as this is my first post here. I think you mean 'ROCKMAN X' there buddy.
-
It's really bugging me that everytime I quote you it's shoving all the text into one giant block of text. Makes it really hard to quote, lol. (this isn't a crack at you, just saying, lol).
Basically, the crack about me saying indie games are largely first-person survival horror games and retro platformers was a joke on how you were only ever really bringing up AAA shooters and casual games. It wasn't me bashing the indie scene, more of me minimalizing it the same way you were doing so with the non-indie part of the industry.
As for the Transformers movies, I don't really know a single person that likes any of them. I really don't. I like the first one, since it was actually a pretty decent movie, but the next two felt really... bleh. I don't have anything to say about the Mark Wahlberg movie.
Also, yeah, seems you agree with me on the plots/video-games argument. We have no disagreements there.
I'm turning a blind eye to the non-rabidly popular ones? You're kinda doing the same thing to the non-indie market. I don't consider Mighty No. 9 super unique for these reasons: Haven't played it since it's not out, and it looks to resemble Explodemon a lot. As for the rest, I don't think I've heard about any (except Shantae), so I think I'll check them out. Thank you for that. I'm glad you didn't make mention of Fez, because that's by no means a unique game (And Yet It Moves is an indie game where you must also rotate the world to find new paths and stuff, though only on a 2D plane. Lost In Shadow is a game that pre-dates Fez and has the same rotating a 3D world gimmick in it).
Shantae, though, while having a lot of cool uses for its stuff, doesn't seem too innovative.
Also, please note that me saying these games aren't innovative doesn't mean I think they're bad games. After all, one of the ones I mentioned was Tempura of the Dead (which isn't popular either) and is not even close to innovative, but I love the hell out of that game.
I don't see how Hitman or Splinter Cell should be shoved into that list of games that have changed into "generic action-shooter games". Both of their newest releases (Absolution and Blacklist) play just like updated versions of their previous games. Hitman so much so that I stopped playing it cuz it felt way too damn clunky for me.
...Cave Story was made on RPG Maker? I didn't know that. And Limbo's not even an RPG. It's a puzzle/platformer. Why would you make that on RPG Maker? Aaaaand note I said most. Not all of them, obviously.
Dynasty Warriors is not even close to a AAA franchise, you know. Absolutely not. Neither are any of the other games in that list. The only one close enough to AAA would be Sonic Generations.
...Actually, is Sonic considered AAA still? I really don't know on that one.
Ys: The Oath in Felghana is also on PSP. It didn't come here to Steam until I think three years after the PSP release. And Ys: Memories of Celceta, the newest game in the series, is on Vita. Also, what does them being only on PC have to do with anything? We're not arguing PC versus console, you know. :P
Anyway, at this point. I'm only gonna agree to disagree, and leave it at that.
EDIT: I missed Dracula9's post. My bad. Yeah, basically, a game being similar to another game doesn't automatically make it bad. In fact, the Call of Duty games are fun. Granted, I only play them for their campaigns and I usually wait for a heavy price drop, but even then, they're really fun.
EDIT 2.0: I also have to point out that the only time Resident Evil was ever really diverse was RE4. The previous games, the tank-controlled survival horror games? Countdown Vampires, Alone in the Dark, Last Alert, Dino Crisis, Carrier, Vampire Hunter D (though it more resembles Onimusha), Fear Effect, Parasite Eve 2, etc. Most "RE clones" either pre-date Resident Evil, or do a lot of things better than RE. However, I feel RE has this charm that isn't quite replicated in its clones, kinda like Warriors clones don't replicate the same feel as the actual Warriors games.
-
Huh?? I didn't say anything as this is my first post here. I think you mean 'ROCKMAN X' there buddy.
I did, lol. I have a habit of making nick-usernames of sorts. I guess I kinda forgot there were two Xs here. :X
-
I did, lol. I have a habit of making nick-usernames of sorts. I guess I kinda forgot there were two Xs here. :X
*Chuckle* ;D
-
was a joke on how you were only ever really bringing up AAA shooters and casual games.
Yes the market is bloody saturated with shooters! what are the games are the most popular? Halo,Destiny,Bioshock,Killzone,mass effect,call of duty,battlefield,gears of war,borderlands,team fortress,titanfall.. not only is FPS genre creatively bankrupt its insane popularity also affects other genres mainly action adventure,Stealth and Survival horror.
I don't want to sound like an old grump but back in 'My days" i used to hear about different types of games now it seems like only thing that trends is shooters and GTA clones,diversity my ass!You're kinda doing the same thing to the non-indie market.
Not really.. there just aren't any new modern games that have any creativity or diversity the market is saturated with mediocre overhyped games like assassins creed and shooters and beneath the pile of shit you'll find some dark souls or portal but that's it! most of the modern gaming is just SHIT a big pile of shit i have to wade through this mediocrity to play one decent game which doesn't make me puke.I don't consider Mighty No. 9 super unique for these reasons:
I consider mighty 9 unique for 1 reason alone there's no damn game in the market which looks like mighty 9 AKA NO MEGAMAN LEGENDS 3 and btw explodemon looks like Megaman X and mighty 9 is made by the creator of megaman.Shantae, though, while having a lot of cool uses for its stuff, doesn't seem too innovative.
Again what was the last sprite based game you've played on non-handhelds? and besides its adding to diversity to the market so i'll take what i can get.Both of their newest releases (Absolution and Blacklist) play just like updated versions of their previous games.
NO both of them played like neutered versions of their former selves oversimplified and streamlined to cater toward the COD audience anyone who has played blood money to their heart knows how much of shit absolution is,anyone who has played chaos theory to their heart knows blacklist sucks.Ys: The Oath in Felghana is also on PSP
No one gives a damn about psp Ys might as well be on a calculator and it wouldn't make much of a difference is Ys series as popular as Skyrim? no obviously not its a niche game for niche audience and that's how hitman,tomb raider,resident evil were all before they went mainstream casual pandering.Also, what does them being only on PC have to do with anything?
Well it does have to do with modern gaming.. ys origin is a really old game.I also have to point out that the only time Resident Evil was ever really diverse was RE4.
WTF!? i was talking about diversity in gaming MARKET not in games itself.
Take for example shadow of modor which looks&plays EXACTLY like Assassins creed&batman arkham series this is where diversity is needed.Alone in the Dark, Last Alert, Dino Crisis, Carrier, Vampire Hunter D (though it more resembles Onimusha), Fear Effect, Parasite Eve 2, etc. Most "RE clones"
Parasite eve is an action RPG not a survival horror game,fear effect is a colorful action-adventure game.. i don't how they are "RE-clones" they're not even close.
Alone in the dark is also a unique survival horror game really unappreciated but resident evil obviously went down the gutter after RE4.
-
I think the answer you are looking for is this:
Why are there shitty games?
Simple, because of this.
(http://www.quickmba.com/images/marketing/product/diffusion/proddiff.gif)
Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.
Take for example Assassins Creed: The Innovators and Early adopters loved the first few games and posted about those on social media. Here comes the bandwagon effect with loads of marketing from UBIsoft (they are getting bolder each year with gimmicks) with the majority clamoring to buy and need/want more of these games. Other companies see the winning formula and they too follow the style of the said game and of course to make it appealing to the late majority, those games have to be easy. Now multiply this effect with other games like those FPS and casual games. They will not vanish due to the intense demand but they might branch out to other media, see Angry Birds and Assassin's Creed.
Now to answer your main question:
Indie games as of now are just appealing to the Innovators and Early adapters, only time will tell if they will go and affect the early majority. And eventually, if they got over the curve, then you might start criticizing them for becoming too mainstream. But if the demand for FPS and casual gaming is still strong by that time, that former indie game would just sit happily alongside the FPS, casuals and parkour simulations.
-
Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.
But if you grew up on PS1/PS2 era you'd realize much of these "modern games" are just rehashes of older games and there's little to no variety at all... and older diverse games have simply been shunted to the indie scene while shooters&hollywood movie games are selling millions,God i feel sorry for kids nowadays.
then you might start criticizing them for becoming too mainstream.
I'm not a hipster idiot as long as they don't "sell out" and milk their franchises with rushed sequels after sequels i'm cool with it.. after all wasn't PS2 generation "Mainstream" too? there's a whole lot of variety in its library... whereas in 7th gen market is saturated with complete and utter shit.
You know casuals always existed.. its just the bloody wii and call of duty's insane cross-plat success which completely mutated the industry into the monster it is today.
-
I think the gaming industry is great these days.
We have pretty huge markets for almost every genre of game.
I don't see fads, I see great games of all kinds making waves.
The big budget fps games are great when you're in the mood for them. Just look at Destiny and Planetside 2. If you think those are the only types of games doing well on a massive scale, then you are blind.
The only reason there are more bad games now days is because the market has become insanely saturated. That's not bad thing. It's a lot like the music industry. You just have sift through a little more to find the stuff you like. I would rather have too many options than not enough.
I just don't think that it's anything to complain about. Everything is great these days IMO.
-
I think the answer you are looking for is this:
Why are there shitty games?
Simple, because of this.
(http://www.quickmba.com/images/marketing/product/diffusion/proddiff.gif)
Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.
...
Sounds like someone has been watching this!
Game Theory: Flappy Bird, PewDiePie, and Pasta Sauce (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyXcr6sDRtw#ws)
...or, you're just intelligent and did your own research. :-)
-
You say you're not a hipster, but your argument presents a different rationale.
You've kind of been going in circles now, Rockman, no offense intended. Shiroi basically just answered your original question in as clear a way as one could, and yet you're still throwing the "all modern games are remake and rehashes and the old games were the best," when really...neither of those are 100% true.
Sure, a ton of modern games rely on time-tested formulas (i.e. the 'shooter-craze' probably wouldn't have happened if not for gems like Quake, Doom, and Wolfenstein), but that's the be expected. If I'm the CEO of a gaming company and I want to make the next big thing, it's just flat-out easier and safer economically to use a style that's sold well in the past and mold it however I think will best sell the product.
It's not ideal when you think about it, but Shiroi's chart explains it. These major companies and games don't really HAVE to be innovative or original at this point. They might have been when they were new, but games like CoD have made so much money and have built such a profitable reputation for themselves that, really, they CAN rehash the same shit over and over and not have to worry. They can afford to take one CoD game, change the characters and environment (usually just to a different part of the desert, hue), add/remove a few guns, and get a new game out of it because it's going to sell regardless. They put themselves where they are (well their fans did technically bu that isn't my point) and have become fat and content to loaf about in complacency, because there's no danger there.
Likewise, the indie market isn't as good as you've been claiming. Do you have any idea just how many indie games flat-out fucking suck? The shooter craze you keep referring to hasn't got jack or shit on the retro craze. Now anybody can make a tiny sprite, upscale it by three, put in half-assed chiptunes in a half-assed engine, and expect to make millions. Flappy Bird is all I need to point to on this one. It's rarer than you would think for a person or group to put the time and effort into making a quality product, and when that does happen that game usually dominates the indie market single-handedly for a while (Shovel Knight, need I say more?). And I'm not knocking on the indie developers (well a little bit but for good reason), as they're still making a passion project on their own time, but I think there are a lot of people out there who think just because it's indie and it does X or Y retro gimmick that's been done to death already, it's gonna make them rich. But they get points for trying IMO.
As for rehashing game styles/elements...I'm just gonna point to the TRUE console wars of the 90s and all the parody and copycat games that arose from that. Rehashes were around just as much in your self-proclaimed "golden period," Rockman, if not moreso than today.
Soooo, the impression I've gotten over the course of this thread is that you don't like modern gaming and think indie games are better, therefore nobody can like the modern marker and everybody must agree that indie devving is the way to go. There are pros and cons to both sides, neither is better than the other in the grand scheme. You're entitled to your own opinion just as we all are. But please don't keep pushing biased arguments on us when they've already been answered.
And if I'm way out in left field and painfully wrong on any of this shit, feel free to knock me on my ass. Internet =/= tone, I'm just going by what I'm getting from all this.
EDIT: I'm gonna let rip on this one real quick, just because it really pisses me off on principle.
But if you grew up on PS1/PS2 era you'd realize much of these "modern games" are just rehashes of older games and there's little to no variety at all... and older diverse games have simply been shunted to the indie scene while shooters&hollywood movie games are selling millions,God i feel sorry for kids nowadays.
I did grow up in the PSX/PS2 era (I mean I still had a lot of the old consoles but I wasn't around/old enough for their heyday). I don't "realize" anything but that there are more choices for gamers nowadays than there were when I was a kid, and I'm sure the members on the sit who WERE around for the pre-PSX eras had even less choice (not that Pong or Pitfall was ever a bad thing). I "realize" that there are more console and platform options available at extremely reasonable pricing - compared to some of the older consoles - for what they are capable of than I would have ever expected as a kid. I "realize" that now people can go and make their own games and dreams come true, instead of sitting around waiting for the next one to come out. You just didn't HAVE an indie market in, like, the Atari/Commodore/Intellivision days. And for all of those reasons, I certainly don't "feel sorry for kids nowadays." Just because they might be fans of something I don't particularly like doesn't give me any reason to ignore the near-countless options they have to them that I did not. That's a wonderful thing.
And one more thing I've "realized." I "realize" that there will always be snotty guys who think their opinion is the word of gamer God, and will put words in people's mouths (i.e. if you grew up in the same era as me you obviously must feel exactly the same thing i do) when they have no solid argument to fall back on.
Hint, hint.
-
Now, I dropped out of this thread but I've been keeping up with it. Dracula9, you've said everything. I love you.
-
@Android: I already knew about the chart during college (10 years ago, gosh, I'm old....) and yeah I also watched MatPat's show and laughed because I got what he was saying. Going off tangent, I love his channel!
@Dracula9: Thanks so much dearie, I don't have to defend my side anymore. :D
-
You're quite welcome, madam. :)
-
Shiroi basically just answered your original question in as clear a way as one could, and yet you're still throwing the "all modern games are remake and rehashes and the old games were the best," when really...neither of those are 100% true.
I never said "All games are remakes and rehases" its just a good bulk of them are... 7th gen consoles had the least amount of diversity and new groundbreaking IP's.the 'shooter-craze' probably wouldn't have happened if not for gems like Quake, Doom, and Wolfenstein
I'm not talking about that 90's PC gaming FPS craze which died out in mid 2000's i'm talking about the shooter craze that almost completely changed the gaming industry AKA halo&Call of duty.. you can see their game design influence in almost every 7th gen game.it's just flat-out easier and safer economically to use a style that's sold well in the past and mold it however I think will best sell the product.
Well they did that in the past too right? why are they now becoming ever so formulaic&pragmatic? are these big-bad billionaire companies afraid to lose money or something?
Do you have any idea just how many indie games flat-out fucking suck?
Yes yes and yes! most of it is bullshit 8 bit nonsense and shitty overrated games like amnesia but i can ignore it all because there are lots of indie and non-AAA games that i can actually look forward to! i can't say the same for AAA mainstream gaming.
AAA gaming is just repeating the same trend of the last gen.. same shooter oriented,Hollywood-esque bullshit.
So yeah if AAA gaming is like a rotten fish then indie gaming is probably the moldy bread i would like to savor.
The shooter craze you keep referring to hasn't got jack or shit on the retro craze.
just go to any video game website and at the front page what do you see? destiny,titanfall,killzone call of duty or some shit like that.. that alone proves which "Craze" dominates mainstream game market.
(http://gameintrospection.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/4-ps-genre-sales.png)Flappy Bird is all I need to point to on this one.
And that's casual gaming.. they're precisely what's wrong with gaming industry people who want easy,accessible,dumbed-down games... it doesn't make a difference if its call of duty or flappy bird the formula is the same.
Rehashes were around just as much in your self-proclaimed "golden period," Rockman, if not moreso than today.
Nah.. i was referring to the PS1&PS2 era in that library there was so much diversity and no one type of genre actually had any monopoly over gaming like nowadays.But please don't keep pushing biased arguments on us when they've already been answered.
Hey watch what you're saying! your argument is biased to me! you don't wanna accept that 7th gen had a genuine lack of diversity especially compared to the older generations.
but that there are more choices for gamers nowadays than there were when I was a kid
That doesn't necessarily mean newer games are on par with the older ones sure you have indie,nds,Wii,steam,PSN,XBLA and tons of HD-re releases but when you honestly evaluate exclusive 7th gen library you'll "Realize" how much lacking it really is.
FPS shooters used to be massive in the old days nowadays its so awfully linear&scripted.. so what good are those fancy cinematics&graphics when the actual game design is so regressive?
I certainly don't "feel sorry for kids nowadays."
geez i'm not talking about the DARK AGES of gaming..i'm talking about when gaming was really fun *hint* *hint* 5th and 6th gen.And one more thing I've "realized." I "realize" that there will always be snotty guys who think their opinion is the word of gamer God, and will put words in people's mouths (i.e. if you grew up in the same era as me you obviously must feel exactly the same thing i do) when they have no solid argument to fall back on.
Hint, hint.
I love your condescending attitude,is that a side-effect of being a CEO?
-
Saw the PS games sales chart.
I can't help but say: I see you have this hatred for the massive influx of action games in this generation and yet you are complaining on a fan forum that celebrates an action game.
Based on the chart, I see that people nowadays apparently love the action genre and all its "mediocrity", just deal with it, besides if you hate it so much... Vote for your choice with the power of your purse (I know you do). But always remember, other people also have that right.
Besides, companies don't want to lose money, it is just not practical from a business stand point, duh. Especially nowadays when they have to compete with other forms of entertainment which are also entering the video game industry, aside from the fact that everything is getting more expensive and salaries are not rising as fast as inflation...
-
Refinement and innovation are both valuable.
I've been gaming since the 80's. I feel that the 16 bit era was the best, but I don't get all hung up about it. I love what is out there now.
This is a great time that we are in with gaming and you should take the time to really appreciate that instead of complaining about a small fraction of games, that may get a lot of attention, but are most certainly not the majority of what is out there.
I would agree with Dracula 9 that you shouldn't push biased arguments if you had an argument to begin with. This seems like aimless anger.
If you don't like what the mainstream consoles offer than try an Ouya or something. But most importantly, you need to relax.
-
Condescending, am I? This coming from someone who refuses to admit when he's wrong and instead compensates by twisting his already-failing argument in on itself further. Well, I'd rather be condescending than willfully ignorant.
*cracks knuckles*
I had a good giggle there, mate. I tried the nice approach, now I'm gonna change gears since that didn't work (this probably won't either but I'm gonna have too much fun to pass it up).
I never said "All games are remakes and rehases" its just a good bulk of them are... 7th gen consoles had the least amount of diversity and new groundbreaking IP's.
You pretty strongly implied it. By generalizing that "a good bulk of them are" and only listing off console gens rather than providing more than a few generic and obvious examples to back up your argument very heavily suggests that you meant all modern games. You don't seem to understand that you're on a board with a large number of people, many of whom love a good debate, and as such are used to arguments following some form of structure. Yours does not, you've basically just been throwing a tantrum because the rest of the gaming industry doesn't agree with you - and having the audacity to suggest that they should - and then lashing out at anyone who contradicts that.
Don't fucking generalize unless you know how to; you don't.
I'm not talking about that 90's PC gaming FPS craze which died out in mid 2000's i'm talking about the shooter craze that almost completely changed the gaming industry AKA halo&Call of duty.. you can see their game design influence in almost every 7th gen game.
I don't really care what gen you were talking about. You didn't specify - hello, generalizing - so I assumed based on your lack of information that you meant the shooter genre as a whole. As such, I pointed out that almost all shooter games that have survived into mass popularity today were in many ways derivative of the FPS classics like the ones I mentioned. Halo and Call of Duty might have influenced many games already, but I'd be willing to bet money that they were inspired by other shooters before them, and those shooters were probably inspired by the Doom-Quake era. It's called the domino effect, ROCKMAN, and it applies in all genre pieces of all kinds. If something is innovative and successful for its time, it's going to be dissected and studied and rehashed and reinvented and reused in future installments and generations. You don't fix what isn't broken, you figure out why it isn't broken and apply that to new stuff.
Well they did that in the past too right? why are they now becoming ever so formulaic&pragmatic? are these big-bad billionaire companies afraid to lose money or something?
Because formalizing and serializing games to essentially mass-produce a genre fad saves them money. Those big-bad billionaire companies aren't going to invest in a six-year project unless they know the end payout is going to break even and profit from that six-year investment. Changing a few elements and rereleasing something is cheaper and they know it makes them money. Again, don't fix what isn't broken. And another reason they're not investing as much money into bigger projects is simply that there IS no money to invest. There are recessions and market influxes and inflation in salaries and beyond to worry about, and you don't seem to be grasping that. The bigger picture seems to be eluding you continually. You don't honestly believe that gaming CEOs just sit around counting their money and looking down on the street and laughing at the buyers, do you? Not every CEO's like Steve Jobs.
Yes yes and yes! most of it is bullshit 8 bit nonsense and shitty overrated games like amnesia but i can ignore it all because there are lots of indie and non-AAA games that i can actually look forward to! i can't say the same for AAA mainstream gaming.
AAA gaming is just repeating the same trend of the last gen.. same shooter oriented,Hollywood-esque bullshit.
So yeah if AAA gaming is like a rotten fish then indie gaming is probably the moldy bread i would like to savor.
I'm glad we can agree on something, even though our reasons for agreeing aren't even close. Again, you seemed to have missed my point entirely. I wasn't bringing up the indie scene to rip on it so much as I was to point out that your original argument applies to more than just the modern, non-indie market. Which you didn't seem to get. Again.
just go to any video game website and at the front page what do you see? destiny,titanfall,killzone call of duty or some shit like that.. that alone proves which "Craze" dominates mainstream game market.
One, sales figures have absolutely nothing to do with my point whatsoever. Missing the point seems to be your own little craze.
Two, Destiny looks great. I plan on getting it. Titanfall is actually a lot of fun, and that's coming from a guy who doesn't really like FPS games that much. Killzone I've enjoyed but I don't think I'd spend money on it. CoD I just flat-out don't like, but I don't need to try and bring it or its fandom down to justify it. I don't like it. That doesn't mean it's bad, it doesn't mean it needs to die out, and it doesn't mean those millions of fans are wrong. It means I don't like it. It's not my place or right to tell other people what to think because they disagree with me on something. They like it, I don't, it's that fucking simple. You might want to reread that a few times and let it sink in, as that's my biggest point of contention against you and your argument. Learn to dislike something without making it into a giant fucking flame war, just so you feel good about your decision.
And that's casual gaming.. they're precisely what's wrong with gaming industry people who want easy,accessible,dumbed-down games... it doesn't make a difference if its call of duty or flappy bird the formula is the same.
Again, missing the point. And really? Tapping a screen to stop a colorful bird from crashing into a pipe is the same formula as a military story about war and regimes and factional conflicts?
Surely you're not as dense as you appear to be.
Nah.. i was referring to the PS1&PS2 era in that library there was so much diversity and no one type of genre actually had any monopoly over gaming like nowadays.
Oh, of course. The God of War games didn't dominate the market for months at a time (which, by the way, copied in a sense the Orb system seen in Devil May Cry, which AFAIK was the first game to use it (if there's an earlier one, please inform me), so there's a rehash of a formula you conveniently forgot to mention), Metal Gear Solid 3 didn't make fans the world over laugh and cry and spend hours unlocking secrets and be haunted by the ending for however long. The Persona and Final Fantasies on those consoles didn't take shit over for awhile, oh no. Hell, the JRPGs were a very large portion of the PS/PS2 era; I don't know percentages, but I can think of more JRPGs on those systems than I can any other genre (and I grew up with those two, so that's saying something). But you're totally correct. Every genre sold equally across the board on the PSX and PS2. That IS what you're saying, right? Forgive me if I've misinterpreted, you're generalizing and not providing solid examples again.
Hey watch what you're saying! your argument is biased to me! you don't wanna accept that 7th gen had a genuine lack of diversity especially compared to the older generations.
"Watch what I'm saying?" Seriously? You've thrown everyone else's argument under the bus because you couldn't handle that they were right and you were wrong, you brush off every good point made against you, you call out genres you so clearly have invested no time into (which really makes your opinion rather unfair), you bring up pointless charts and figures in arguments they have no bearing on, and you have the conceit to tell ME to watch what I say?
You're fucking unbelievable, you know that? If I'm being honest (which should be obvious I have been), this self-righteous, willful ignorance is easily the most infuriating thing about your argument. By comparison I don't even give a shit about the technicalities of it. This shit needs to stop. Seriously. The rest of us are taking the time to research what we need to and really making an effort to bring forth an argument as fairly as we're able, and here you are throwing up sales figures - which as far as I know you could've just pulled off of Google with no other research into it - and disregarding all that work the rest of us have made. I'd ask you if you have any idea how fucking disrespectful that is if I didn't already know the answer.
And of course my argument is biased, you idiot. Every argument is biased. That wasn't what I was bloody saying. My argument has its bias, yes, but I'm doing my best to present my argument while also considering the other side of it, thus bringing forth points which account for both halves of the issue and expanding my insights of it by proxy. That's called a debate, something you clearly aren't skilled in.
But I'm not forcing my opinions down everyone else's throat as though I'm entitled to do so, like you are (I am now, in a sense, but this is a reactionary response).
That doesn't necessarily mean newer games are on par with the older ones sure you have indie,nds,Wii,steam,PSN,XBLA and tons of HD-re releases but when you honestly evaluate exclusive 7th gen library you'll "Realize" how much lacking it really is.
FPS shooters used to be massive in the old days nowadays its so awfully linear&scripted.. so what good are those fancy cinematics&graphics when the actual game design is so regressive?
YOU'RE MISSING THE GODDAMNED POINT AND THE GODDAMNED BIGGER PICTURE HOW MANY TIMES TO I HAVE TO SAY IT GAWD
geez i'm not talking about the DARK AGES of gaming..i'm talking about when gaming was really fun *hint* *hint* 5th and 6th gen.
Yes, because you are the sole force which can say for absolute certain which things are fun and which ones are not. Because you so clearly are correct where the other seven billion people on the planet are wrong. Because your rights as an individual somehow equates higher than the individual opinions and rights of the rest of us. You arrogant prick, just shut the fuck up with that spiel already. It's not your place to dictate what eras were better than others. Having an opinion is fine. But you're doing that thing again where you're basically disregarding everyone else's that conflicts with yours.
I love your condescending attitude,is that a side-effect of being a CEO?
If I'm being condescending, you appear to be the only one who thinks so. Can you not grasp the finer aspects of a rational and logical argument? That's what I posted. If you got butthurt that I called you out on your bullshit, I'm so very sorry, but I only did what you've been doing this entire thread. Except, I have the decency to forego passive-aggressive bullshit and call you out directly.
And really? You think I'm a gaming CEO? Joke or not, that's fucking hilarious.
No, I'm not a CEO. I'm a twenty-year-old indie developer/spriter/musician doing night audits at a hotel so I can save enough money to finally move out of my folks' house so that I can get my life started and they can get on with theirs. I'm flattered that you think I'm a CEO. I certainly do hope I could get there one day. But seeing as I haven't released anything yet, how you reached that conclusion is beyond my understanding.
SO IN CONCLUSION TO THIS INHUMANELY LONG POST, ROCKMAN X:
Stop being a prick. We're all entitled to our opinions, but that doesn't make mine more right than your or yours more right than mine. It's not my place to tell people what to think and it's not yours either. Learn how to actually argue before you throw down the gauntlet with people that do, otherwise you're going to get publicly curb-stomped, and depending on who you piss off, even more heavily than what I just did.
You're really beginning to piss me off, and I'm sure you've rustled a few other people's jimmies too. So I suggest you stop making bogus claims that have no bearing on reality or the argument, because while you're entitled to your own opinion, I'm just as entitled to knock you on your ass when you start preaching it like it's the word of god.
*exhales*
-
Basically, what I'm trying to say is, no. Indie and non-indie games will pretty much co-exist from here on, since both are just as good and bad as the other.
Pretty much sums it up. This isn't the Highlander. There can be more than one. :P
-
Dracula9: Whew~ That's a great read. Exhale you must. Hehehe.
Stop being a prick. We're all entitled to our opinions, but that doesn't make mine more right than your or yours more right than mine. It's not my place to tell people what to think and it's not yours either. Learn how to actually argue before you throw down the gauntlet with people that do, otherwise you're going to get publicly curb-stomped, and depending on who you piss off, even more heavily than what I just did.
True true, the bigger stompers have largely ignored this post so far.
Pretty much sums it up. This isn't the Highlander. There can be more than one. :P
Exactly. And that makes more choices for all of us.
.
.
.
But, as much as I'm enjoying following this debate, I'm just throwing in a warning before things turn sour soon... Cuz I have a feeling~♫
-
I doubt I'll have anything more to say. If that didn't get through to him, then I know this is a lost cause. I've said my peace. Now all that's left for me to do is have the popcorn at the ready should shenanigans ensue.
-
You pretty strongly implied it. By generalizing that "a good bulk of them are" and only listing off console gens rather than providing more than a few generic and obvious examples to back up your argument very heavily suggests that you meant all modern games.
You're equivocating! i already made it CLEAR that not all games are.. there is no diversity that was my point.you having the audacity to suggest that they should.
Yeah because God forbid i express my opinion online! I don't really care what gen you were talking about.
Well i don't really care about what you have to say about shooter genre's evolution,all i know is that FPS shooters were not this big before COD:Modern warfare and HALO maybe they were in the early 90's but they clearly were not in the PS2 generation.There are recessions and market influxes and inflation in salaries and beyond to worry about, and you don't seem to be grasping that.
YES I KNOW THAT! many big publishers haven't recovered from the recession of 08 but that's no excuse to force the developers to churn out yearly sequels and DLC's.
Battlefield 4 and Assassins creed 3 both these games were rushed into the market marred with bugs and glitches and were overall low in quality when compared to its predecessors.
If they actually let the developers do their thing without streamlining the game for mainstream appeal i would have no problems with them whatsoever but it seems like they just want to appeal to everyone thus the overblown hollywood movie shtick and streamlined casual shooter approach.
Its not like they can't do it.. its just that they're lazy and gamers eat it up instead of boycotting unethical business practices so they keep using the same formula and i don't blame them for it either.
One, sales figures have absolutely nothing to do with my point whatsoever. Missing the point seems to be your own little craze.
Not just sales figure but the games that are trending and the games that are the most talked about i've even heard from people that destiniy is a system seller.. that is insane,this game hasn't even been released and people are going nuts about it,WTF is so good about it anyway? its just a bloody FPS shooter.. its not the next portal or metroid.You might want to reread that a few times and let it sink in, as that's my biggest point of contention against you and your argument.
I can't help people who get easily offended by someone else's opinion or dislike for a certain trend.
I don't have anything against FPS shooters at all.. i only have problem with the reoccurring trend in the gaming industry.Again, missing the point. And really? Tapping a screen to stop a colorful bird from crashing into a pipe is the same formula as a military story about war and regimes and factional conflicts?
The irony is on you buddy! you're the one who's missing the point STREAMLINING and watering down games for Casual gamers is the same no matter if its just a phone game or a big budget AAA game the "Formula" is the same.Oh, of course. The God of War games didn't dominate the market for months at a time
But there were no God of war yearly releases or 10,000 games like God of war on the market.. there was just GOW 1&2 on PS2 that's it. so there's a rehash of a formula you conveniently forgot to mention
Well yeah if you put it like that then Super Mario Bros totally ripped off Pac-land!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sRiFoJMNTU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sRiFoJMNTU)
Pac-land was technically the first side-scroller and super mario bros came a year after that so its obvious that it was inspired by it.
But you're totally correct. Every genre sold equally across the board on the PSX and PS2. That IS what you're saying, right?
EXACTLY! that gen had diversity everyone had something to play.. the market wasn't filled with samey games,every game series felt unique and different from each others but this gen?? hell naw... every big game series has to appeal to the everyone or else it won't make as much money.
lol and i didn't even realize that PS1/PS2 had this much RPG's until i got into searching for it but the thing is they all feel different.. persona,final fantasy,breath of fire,dragon quest,Dark cloud 2,Ys, all feel like different games!
But games like HALO,Borderlands,bioshock,killzone,Call of duty,battlefield don't feel like different games... they all have the same streamlined gameplay,the same health regen,jumping,"Cinematic experence" etc everything just with a new coat of paint.
games like doom had large maze like maps and we don't see that in modern FPS games! we don't see health packs in FPS shooter either.. its always health regen its the laziest game mechanic i can think of.
And this is not only limited to shooters its game design is also present in almost every modern game.. look at GTA 5 they made driving piss easy because 12 yrs olds bitched about driving in GTA 4 look at the "puzzles" in tomb raider reboot they're pathetically easy when compared to the puzzles in legend which actually made me look for an FAQ,look at hitman absolution which streamlined the levels into 3 sections with checkpoints original hitman games had no such checkpoints everything took place in an open-world area where everything happened in real time.You've thrown everyone else's argument under the bus because you couldn't handle that they were right and you were wrong
Oh shush! i have my opinion and they have theirs! no need to be a dick about it.you call out genres you so clearly have invested no time into
I didn't know you were psychic.And of course my argument is biased, you idiot.
Oh thank God you finally came clean with ad-hominem attacks! i was seriously holding back because i wasn't sure about your ambiguous passive aggressive arguments but now i know that you're just an immature guy with little man syndrome.but I'm doing my best to present my argument while also considering the other side of it, thus bringing forth points which account for both halves of the issue and expanding my insights of it by proxy. That's called a debate, something you clearly aren't skilled in.
Maybe i just have a communication error but that doesn't mean i didn't consider anyone's opinion.. i certainly did agree with some of the points made like indie game library being saturated with crappy games and sure the way i get my points my across may not be the best but that doesn't mean i'm completely disregarding what everyone is saying.. i'm replying to everyone's posts FFS if i was just ignoring then i wouldn't quote and reply their post.
And No offense but you're the one who seems like an amateur debater as you're so easily offended and emotionally worked up over someone's hyperbole posts.But I'm not forcing my opinions down everyone else's throat as though I'm entitled to do so, like you are
nowhere did i imply that everyone should agree with me.. everyone is free to have their own opinions and disagree with me,you're just getting worked up for no apparent reason mate!Yes, because you are the sole force which can say for absolute certain which things are fun and which ones are not. Because you so clearly are correct where the other seven billion people on the planet are wrong. Because your rights as an individual somehow equates higher than the individual opinions and rights of the rest of us.
I knew you were psychic but...why are you reading your own mind?You arrogant prick, just shut the fuck up with that spiel already.
AAH! what a riveting argument! i give up! i am too feeble to match your intellectual prowess and verbal beatdowns!
Ah please "let's agree to disagree" so that we can be friends and you can stop acting like you're on the rag! or are you too edgy for that? you appear to be the only one who thinks so.
AH PLEASE stop reading everyone's mind for fuck's sake Xavier! its not fair! >:(And really? You think I'm a gaming CEO? Joke or not, that's fucking hilarious.
Well of course mister! the way you really seem to believe that you have this "better preservative" and know it all attitude sure as hell made it seem like you're some smug CEO chewing on cigar looking down upon peasants like me sure i could've just called you just another internet tough guy but i was being generous or sarcastic (however you take it).otherwise you're going to get publicly curb-stomped, and depending on who you piss off, even more heavily than what I just did.
Well i'm certainly impressed that my hyperbole posts managed to tick someone off this much,i wonder how much i can rile people up when i do intend to 8)You're really beginning to piss me off, and I'm sure you've rustled a few other people's jimmies too.
Of course! there are obviously a lot of immature people online who get butthurt and offended pretty damn easily and they're kinda amusing to me because i've seen people online who've debated on ultra-sensitive topics and kept their cool the whole way through despite all the tensions and misunderstandings. these people make all those butthurt people look like 12 yr olds.
But alas you made me admit defeat with your razor sharp debating skills! i am simply no match for someone as enlightened as you!
-
>resorting to insults
>admitting miscommunication but still arguing
>offering the 'let's agree to disagree' while still arguing
>holding up olive branch and sword at the same time
(http://s26.postimg.org/4srwx83g9/mj_popcorn.gif)
-
I can't help but say: I see you have this hatred for the massive influx of action games in this generation and yet you are complaining on a fan forum that celebrates an action game.
games differ from generation to generation...
NES-SNES era is known for platformers,RPG's and sidescrollers and shoot'em'up games
PS1-PS2 era is known for its insanely diverse 3d platformers,JRPG's,Sandbox,survival horror,hack'n'slash,stealth,action-adventure(not shooters) and puzzle games! shooters were just "there" as one of the options so everyone was happy back then.
PS3/360 era is only known for HD graphics and shit ton of shooters and holllywood movie mimics.
Yeah my hate is quite justified because i didn't ask for this influx of hollywood-esque shooters i want the diversity back! i don't want one type of game to dominate the market.
I don't know what logic dictates that Shooter = action pretty much every game that isn't a puzzle game has some sort of "Action" that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with shooters.
True true, the bigger stompers have largely ignored this post so far.
Damn.. there are more "Intellectuals" like @dracula9 out there?? damn i'm fucked! :rollseyes:that you shouldn't push biased arguments if you had an argument to begin with.
I think you almost forgot that you are free to disagree.Pretty much sums it up. This isn't the Highlander. There can be more than one. :P
Well the irony in that statement is that AAA gaming is making it seem like there can be only one type of game.. "cinematic",formulaic,streamlined casual magnet games... whereas indie game actually makes it seem like there CAN BE more than one type of game!
Indie gaming makes it seem like there can be diversity in the next gen! so there can be only one.. either 8th gen will repeat the 7th gen or it may actually be different.
-
(http://s26.postimg.org/4srwx83g9/mj_popcorn.gif)(http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11114/111142124/3898460-8864152835-)
-
>resorting to insults
>admitting miscommunication but still arguing
>offering the 'let's agree to disagree' while still arguing
>holding up olive branch and sword at the same time
(http://s26.postimg.org/4srwx83g9/mj_popcorn.gif)
>Can dish it out but can't take it
>Realizes his false accusations but still acts like he has a point
>Can't seem to comprehend sarcasm
>Can't seem to understand what a playful banter is supposed to be.
-
>misusing greentext
(http://s26.postimg.org/4srwx83g9/mj_popcorn.gif)(http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11114/111142124/3898460-8864152835-)(http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121219134513/glee/images/7/72/Jaejoong_popcorn.gif)
-
Alright, Dracula, no popcorn or anything like that, just let the conversation drop and ignore it if you don't think there's anything constructive to be had. Rockman, you too. Both of you, no greentext nonsense, keep that on 4chan.
-
*puts up hands*
Fair enough.
-
Rockman
You're always free to go back and play your ps1 era games. They are still for sale and part of the gaming market today, in addition to everything that has come before them and after.
By choosing to look at the current new library of games in such a slighted, one sided manner, you are only missing out. I see way more diversity in games nowadays than I did in the PS1 era. And I was a gamer long before that era came about.
We're all going to be moving on happy with what is out there and what is coming out. You're the one who is bitter and unhappy because you choose to be mired in the past.
I pity you Rockman. Your posts are pointlessly depressing and exhausting and riddled with untruths. So I'm choosing never to read them again.
Good day sir.
-
Well said, Montoya.
I'm going to chime in on this one final time, only because I realize I hadn't brought this point up before, when I probably should have.
Rockman, obviously this is a forum argument, so this next statement should be taken with a grain of salt; but if this were a legitimate, structured, and judged debate, you'd have been thrown out of it three posts in. Over the course of the thread you've committed nearly every major logical fallacy in the book, and although I've been guilty of a few of the easy-to-make ones myself, it's something I think needs to be noted, for your part just as well as mine.
So far, I can argue that you've committed;
Dicto simpliciter, with your generalizing
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc, by trying to say that one thing is equal/connected to another just because you believe it to be so
Circulus in demonstrando, by your incessant circular logic
Red herring, by bringing up points that had no bearing on the context
Argumentum ad populum, by using third-party articles of speech to suggest that the masses do or should feel the same way you do (no amount of supporters automatically justifies a cause, after all)
Argumentum ad antiquitatem, because of your heavy usage of a supposed 'golden age' of gaming, you're relying on the argument of 'we should stick to the traditional method'
Slippery slope, by assuming that the current trend will ruin future ones solely on the premise that you don't like it
Argumentum ad ignorantiam, simply by assuming yourself right just because nobody's provided completely irrefutable evidence against your argument
Argumentum ad logicam, by assuming an entire argument is wrong simply because one or two of its points have been refuted
Tu quoque, by telling myself and others "hey! You did this too! You're just as wrong as you say I am!"
Argumentum ad misericordiam, by trying to use the appeal of "oh, the poor suffering gamer kids of today!"
Argumentum ad nauseam, by somehow believing that repeating the same point over and over somehow increases its credibility
Argumentum ad numerum, by relying on numbers and statistics that are too generalized and not defended well enough to be considered valid, and also by using the appeal of 'but lots of people feel this way, you know, so I must be right!'
Non Sequitur, with your constant state of 'I don't like this, therefore it's wrong and must be reestablished"
Strawman, by twisting various arguments to their extreme so that you can use them against their orators
Argumentum ad hominem, for going after specific people rather than their argument
I myself admit to being guilty of ad hominem, ad nauseum, red herring, and dicto simpliciter. My apologies to you and the thread for not building around these fallacies. I guess taking that debate class was good for something after all.
But that's all. I don't really need to go any further. I just wanted to point out that in a true debate setting, your argument's poor construction would have quickly resulted in its destruction.
-
@Dracula9: Oh gosh... those things bring me back to my critical thinking and philosophy classes.
Taking a debate class/es will always be good for you in the long run, not just in this situation.
I think this topic should be given it's well deserved rest since everyone already presented their sides and there's no use going in circles. Eventually it would end up with the Diffusion of Innovations Theory which I presented back in page 2.
INTJ out.
Unless you kiddies start another round of stupid bickering.