Nu- Video Games

Anyone else tired of "nu-video games?" Crap like:

It's not necessarily these games themselves, but rather the style that they are made with.
All of these games are all glitter, no substance. They are movie-hybrids with the bare-minimum interaction. The stories are padded out and sound better as full-blown movies. There are barely any extras that add to the gameplay or there isn't any incentive to play through the game a second time other than to get "muh trophies" or "muh cheevos." The cutscenes are invasive and take control away from the player far too much than is needed. Trying to speed through the game, you notice you get bogged down by mandatory tutorials or mandatory cutscenes which were amazing the first time through, but just irritating to sit through a second time. The game stops being a game, and it starts becoming a movie where you just press X every once in a while.

I swear, the dialog in these games is almost interchangeable, because it all sounds the same. I don't know why or how to describe it any better, other than all of these games have the same tone of passive-aggressive dialogue with ironic or snarky comments in between, the kind of Michael-Bay-esque dialog where it's all filler to get the movie going. It's driving me up the wall when they throw an emotional scene at me that I'm supposed to cri erry time at, when I already utterly hate the characters on how bland and superficial they come off as, and when we haven't even got to know the character very well yet. It's this manipulative bullshit that just says to me that the game devs had a checklist they had to run through.

I don't know. Maybe I'm a cynical bastard, but I remember when you had an idea for a game and you needed a story to justify it. Now it just feels like you have a story to tell and "have to" come up with fitting gameplay for it.

This mentality or style of making games is destroying the notion of a video game. The only modern developer that seems to understand what makes a game tick is Platinum, but they are not getting the recognition they deserve. They are the only people left who understand the thrill of getting hi-scores, playing just because the gameplay is fun, playing to get extras so they can get more bang for their buck. Gameplay comes first, story is second. One of my greatest fears is that one day those guys will simply give up due to the sheer volume of crap they have to fight against, the lost art of proper video games forgotten under a pile of western flavor-of-the-month sequelitis.

Pretty good term for them, user.

I'd say they have neither glitter nor substance.

if something like Yar's Revenge is a bag popcorn then these games are a crate of package pellets.

No because I just play good games instead.

I agree with what you're saiyan man but I think you should clear up some of your descriptors. Pic related is a game with all style and no substance but it's still enjoyable.

That's basically No Man's Sky for me.

I will admit, Rising may not have been as solid a game as I was hoping for, but like you said, enjoyable. Rising may have been a slip-up in some regard, but seeing Clover's/Platinum's past performances, that's hardly a mar against them.

I´ve played uncharted 2, TLOU and Bioshocl Infinite recently since I just got a PS3 and I´ve been trying to see the fuzz around it.

Honestly, it baffles me how anyone could consider naughty dog´s games to be the best of all time at anything. They are graphically polished and have good attention to detail, but the writing isn´t anything you wouldn´t see outside of an episode of the walking dead or one of the indy jones´flicks. I think the remake of the first Tomb Raider (Anniversary, not the SE one) is a much better game.

Bioshock Infinite is really really pretty, but I can see why System Shock fags don´t like it. It is an easier game where you really have to struggle to get lost at anything, yet I find it to be more of a proper game than any of the two, and it baffles me how Holla Forums is putting it into the progressive folder when at the end of the day what the game says is that anyone with power will become an asshole, no matter if you´re white or black. I still like it more than SS simply because it´s easy on the eyes and you don´t have to wrench everything to win (You know it fags, wrenching a yellow robot to shmithereens is not the deffinition of fun).

Yes, they´re pretty casual but nothing like Gone Homo or the other indie shit. I wouldn´t buy uncharted 4 though since "I´m not their audience", but still, I think Holla Forums overreacts to everything and has not a true opinion on things. I enjoyed them for what they are, and I see their flaws, just like any other game

Modern video games are shit. All I'm looking forward to is the FF VII remake and Nier: Automata, even if both are probably going to be disappointing.

All of those games were indeed shit, but any way you slice it, they were video games. Life is Strange aside, the rest had gameplay.
You want to see a real movie game? Get on youtube and look up Until Dawn. This is literally a TV miniseries written so poorly that no network would pick it up, but because the standards for writing in video games are so insanely low, here we are. The only gameplay involved is moving the characters from one destination to the next, and that doesn't even happen often. The rest is pure cutscenes with the occasional quick time event. There's a reason that even Sony refers to it not as a game, but as an "interactive drama." This movie game bullshit is infinitely more cancerous than a thousand Call of Duties.

Yes. In fact, I used to be all about games with stories, but these days I play more "videogamey" games. For example, dungeon crawlers, puzzle games, etc. I don't mind story based games and I'm not trying to be a contrarian hipster, but maybe I'm just sick and tired of these games and I'm subconsciously trying to distance myself.

What I'm trying to say is, these games ruined games with stories for me. Kinda joking. But not really.

Yeah, I feel this and it's obvious when a game is designed this way. Even Final Fantasy 7 and 8 were designed gameplay>story. Don't believe me? Materia and GFs. Both are a unique and important point to each game in both gameplay and story. Maybe I'm wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if I'm right.


Nier 2 is the only original game I'm looking forward to. The only other game I'm waiting for is the Odin Sphere remake.

It's mostly the gaming industry as a whole.
The reality of the situation is that the biggest audience, the casuals, don't actually engage intelligently in gameplay. They do not have a desired to be challenged, just a sandbox in which they get to fuck around with some toys.

This situation mostly stems from the fact that there is very little competence in the gaming industry, and that individuals have very little input in actually making games good. When I look at the majority of the gaming industry, all I see is a soulless husk that just copies the same shit everybody else does, and then uses that to carry their shitty movie script that never should've been made into a game in the first place.


But the sad truth is that the companies you think of when outside of this bullshit; they tend to do very little to innovate or improve their gameplay as well. Metal Gear Rising Revengeance is a great example of this. The basic gameplay is very simple (Use invulnerability dodge to avoid attack, then mash attacks until enemy attacks again.) but scales very poorly into higher difficulties. (gameplay doesn't actually become more difficult on higher difficulties; damage numbers just get pumped. The only meaningful change is the parry frames getting smaller.)


I don't worry too much about companies like that going out of business though. They make money, and the things they do are seen as too risky for other companies to copy. The only issue should be the fact that they may not be funded by publishers, but publisher funding as a whole is a blight in the current industry that should be avoided for the most part.

It's mostly the gaming industry as a whole.
The reality of the situation is that the biggest audience, the casuals, don't actually engage intelligently in gameplay. They do not have a desired to be challenged, just a sandbox in which they get to fuck around with some toys.

This situation mostly stems from the fact that there is very little competence in the gaming industry, and that individuals have very little input in actually making games good. When I look at the majority of the gaming industry, all I see is a soulless husk that just copies the same shit everybody else does, and then uses that to carry their shitty movie script that never should've been made into a game in the first place.


But the sad truth is that the companies you think of when outside of this bullshit; they tend to do very little to innovate or improve their gameplay as well. Metal Gear Rising Revengeance is a great example of this. The basic gameplay is very simple (Use invulnerability dodge to avoid attack, then mash attacks until enemy attacks again.) but scales very poorly into higher difficulties. (gameplay doesn't actually become more difficult on higher difficulties; damage numbers just get pumped. The only meaningful change is the parry frames getting smaller.)


I don't worry too much about companies like that going out of business though. They make money, and the things they do are seen as too risky for other companies to copy. The only issue should be the fact that they may not be funded by publishers, but publisher funding as a whole is a blight in the current industry that should be avoided for the most part.

oh shit I'm sorry

You might be on to something, there. Casuals want toys and to be read a story, not compete (either against the computer or other players) in a game.

An therein lies the source of the 'no need to git gud' articles. They just want to stroke casual egos? Or am I giving the "jurnos" too much credit?

it's important to distinguish a casual from a hipster, even if they are basically the same in terms of appearance and general attitude.

casuals are flippant and don't really care for games, while hipsters are equally superficial, but only because a game's popularity, the shark to their remora, is unpredictable.

You forget that hipsters also want to reshape games to fit their morals, while casuals just ignore games they don't like.

My brother bought himself a used PS3 a few months ago with a crapton of games there were supposed to be good like GTA V, God of War, Red Dead Redemption and he got bored by the games very quickly and sold them. The only ones he kept were Call of Duty and Skyrim. And you can say how both are dumbed down (and they are), but at least they still resemble games were you get to do shit on your own accord (not counting CoD single player, no one plays that).

Personally I have just given up on new games. On PC everything is pozzed by Steam, so I just stick to old games from GOG and eBay. On consoles I just emulate whatever I want.

No shit. It's a fucking visual novel, what did you expect?

I liked Red Dead Redemption.

Well that's because it was rising.

I also liked Red Dead Redemption

You are
Easy mode was literally invented because Journos were too stupid to play games properly, easy mode allowed journos the ability to review the complete game instead of just the first level.

I see nothing wrong with being a casual then. I unironically enjoy pretty looking walking simulators with shallow objectives and simple dialogues like FO4 and Skyrim.

You see, this is the next evolution in gaming. IMO, some games should be less competition oriented. In it's early development, video game was a medium for translating logic and reflex engagement oriented activities into digital video format. Some people turn out to enjoy the experience of observing and discovering instead of engaging their reflexes and logic in the game their play. This is how games like Morrowind were born.

Just like the evolution of films. Back in the 20's great directors like Fritz Lang directed beautiful looking films that are focused on the exposition of the plot, but it turned out that the audience were more mesmerized by the grandeur audiovisual telling of the story. Then came Tarkovsky and his unique way of directing films with the logic of poetry where man and nature, instead of plot, are equally the star of the film even though they barely recognized each other. This technique of recreating life using the audiovisual medium stands at the highest ground of the evolutionary ladder of cinema.

People like Todd Howard are the Tarkovsky of video games. With his unique non autistic perspective, he sees video games as an experience rather than a puzzle. With trials and errors, he has tried to create an experience oriented video game rather than the traditional game oriented video games. His technique might still be in the experimental stage, but I hope someday he will find the perfect formula to articulate his visionary ideal, a combination of discovery and world manipulation.

You know it's easy to spot you based on your writing style alone, right? Let along your obsession with Tarkovsky.

OP here again, I would like to elaborate on what I mean with my original post. I may have been a bit vague with my categorization, since people seem to think I only mean movie-like games are bad or that the bare minimun of what passes for a game is still good.

What I meant to say was that I am seeing a lot of games that are done with the same sense of mentality. They emphasize story and novelty over longer-lasting elements like gameplay or replay value, hence never touching your expensive special edition of Uncharted ever again after playing through it once, because you already know how the puzzles are solved and you already know what the gameplay amounts to. It is a "game", but not a very good one. It's an expensive one-trick-pony, and is at the heart of what I was trying to address. Hence my term "Nu- Video Game." They are video games in the sense that you can play them, but are overall shallower than the more classic, "game-y" definition.

While the games I listed are not necessarily all movies or have the bare-minimum requirements for a video game, they are just that, bare-minimum games. I don't know about you, but a good game for me means good gameplay, good replay value, good extras, a capacity to become good at it, and MAYBE a serviceable story that ties in to the game. NuVG's do not respect the foundations of video games in the sense that they are light or casual experiences. While not damnable in and of themselves, it is the fact that these games are now seen as the "height" of what can be achieved, which is a blatant lie.

and?

This man gets it.


MGR is more an expection to the rule. MGR was under Konami's jurisdiction, but they didn't know what to do with it until Plat came along. In a relatively short while, (3 years starting from scratch) they made a decent game. If you look at previous Clover/Platinum titles, they are always polished to serve the gameplays needs. Okami, Vanquish, Bayonetta, God Hand, RE4, DMC, you name it. Some of these are deemed classics. Some of these games (RE4, DMC) had the Plat crew with them and it definetly shows.

I can already tell you've never bothered to get good at a game in all your life. Something that needs dedication and skill is somehow autistic to you? I will just go ahead and ignore, for your sake, your praise of Todd Howard, because I like Tarkovsky as well. What he did to the FO series is unforgivable and shows his total lack of understanding of what makes a video game world interesting or what makes gameplay fun, not to mention his lack of respecting and understanding lore.

I can appreciate how people can enjoy casual games or Nu-VG's, but it is wrong to say that this is the next-step in anything, since player interaction is becoming smaller and smaller in them. You cannot enjoy a video game the same way you can enjoy a movie. The classical definition of a video game needs that you participate, the movie only need that you pay attention to what is going on. Some enjoy harder games, some enjoy casual games, this I can understand. But if you try and say to me that casual games are the way of the future, or that it is the only possible evolution, then I laugh in your face.

Polygon posted a Doom 4 video that looked like the player had never picked up a gamepad before (inability to move and shoot at same time, visible pause when prompt appears to read and press use button).

They disabled ratings and comments and within the week an influx of "you don't have to be good at games" articles started popping up.

I fucken swear

I liked Skyrim as well, GTA V was fun, too.

RDR was a slog for me, my gripes with GTA V are magnified with RDR, and GoW is just a long QTE.

You need to see someone.

so it's pretty much every game made in the past 6 years

This has nothing to do with my post since as you say, Todd Howard games are not video games in it's traditional sense. Autism is not about difficulty, but seeing video game as a puzzle rather than an experience.

Regardless of quality and details, Todd's walking simulator games are an innovation in gaming. The essence of Morrowind is exploration, discovery, and world manipulation, not the gameplay and interaction. Some people appreciate the restrictiveness of video game, but with Morrowind, Todd Howard proved that by reducing restrictiveness and widening the scope as the player discovers new things, a bigger intuition can be achieved. He might have lost his edges after Morrowind and forgot this widening the scope aspect of his game, but I can see that he's still clinging to his style and developing his technique.

Evolution takes a long time, and I believe that there will be a time when Todd's vision becomes reality and his experimental technique becomes contemporary.

I thought they were intuitive action packed interactive stories that appealed to the Call of Duty audience?

I know we shit on things with motion comic or concept art cutscenes, but for fuck's sake, user, you pretty clearly haven't played anything worth a fuck if you think OP is talking about every new game when there's plenty of indie and low budget that doesn't waste everybody's time telling a story that isn't worth focusing on.

You don't expierence puzzles? What the hell do you do then? Just get them beamed unknowingly into your head?

Oh wait, you are about to start spouting nonsense words completely out of any meaningful context.

Do you really think these things did not exist before Morrowind or weren't KEY aspects of games? Super Metroid did exploration and discovery to a degree few games can match.

So you say these things, but they don't really mean anything. You can try to give them concrete explanations, but it will just beg the question why you didn't say that in the first place. You are trying to sound more sophisticated than your ideas actually are, and in the end it just looks bad.

I see what you are doing, and asking you politely to stop because I like discussions on videogames.

So a puzzle cannot be an experience, or shooting something with a rocket launcher cannot be an experience? Is everything I've ever experienced about a game a lie, then? How is my experience of any less value than yours? What you take away from games is yours to decide, not anyone else's.


Contemporary, in the sense that it will become the benchmark for all video games past it? This is how I understand it, what you hope will happen is that video games evolve into movies. Do you not see how counter-intuitive that is? Instead of having the interactivity unique to video games and the stroy-telling capacity of movies, you wish that video games do away with the one thing that makes it unique? If so, you are delusional. All I'm reading from you is that you're a movie-buff with little-to-no experience with video games. Just get the fuck out of here already.

Don't you see? Godd Howard is the Christopher Nolan of Video Game. His character writing compellingly contextualizes the rest of the narrative, making the experience all the more memorable. Much like how The Last of Us has Souls-like themes, Skyrim has epic Game Of Thrones like themes and improves all of Video Games by showing developers how to design games in the future.

Now I see the light. Todd Howard was a clever trickster when he said that you could climb that mountain. The mountain climbing is the player, trying to play the game and reach the proverbial mountain in search of Good game, but he ends up at the mountain realizing he was playing a Bad game all along and there was nothing else to be found. Todd is a revolutionary, he set a new benchmark for all future epic twists.

Also, FO and TES happened in the same universe.

Do you experience math? No, experience is like a childhood memory. You remember the feeling and impressions, but not the details.

Discovery in Metroid is essential to progress the game. It is also dictated by the game. Whereas in Morrowind, discovery comes from the internal motivation of the player. You can finish the game according to the rules, but there is a sense of curiosity that makes the player halt the intended progression and resort to experimentation. This is the beauty of Morrowind, sense of progression is defined by the player rather than the game. Curiosity is what Todd exploited well in this game.

Do you even understand my ideas? Because it sounds like you don't.


As I have explained above, true experience come from intuition, and it differs from people to people, hence why a book read by a thousand people will turn into a thousand books. The details of the puzzle and rocket launching are not the experience, they are knowledge. The feeling you get after finishing your puzzle is what experience in this context is.

No. Contemporary as in he knows well of what he's doing and what direction should be taken.

Games and motion pictures are two completely different mediums. One is a medium for art, the other one is a medium for competition. Video game can't and shouldn't try to be art, but I notice that the interactivity aspect of video game can deliver a different experience that is not all about competition.

Yes, the much praised Mountain Climbing mechanic of Skyrim was also a metaphor similar to the movie Holy Mountain wherein the Protagonist must climb the mountain within himself before he can truly reach the peak of human understanding.

I have read /teslore/ and watch Lore videos quite often and have come to the inevitable conclusion that the Dwarves have in fact time travelled to the future where they helped the American army create wondrous technology which is secretly magic. I have also heard a bit about this "chim" thing and I have figured out that it is console commands. I still cannot believe how many morons out there still believe it is an actual idea in-game.

You must be new here.

Threadly reminder that you're a stupid cunt if you refer to anything you dislike as "New X."

You're literally memeing garbage into existence and deserve every terrible thing that happens to you.

"Nu-male," "Nu-games," "Nu-metal," "Nu-politic."

Don't do Jew work for free.

Please stop posting.

Bullshit. Know how I can tell that's bullshit? Because I can feel awe at blowing some poor fucker up with a rocket and I can also feel awe at puzzles. You are saying I cannot experience things as experiences, because you see them as such. There can be no attempt at this sort of categorization, because people will always have different ideas of what is an experience and what is "knowledge."

Todd has no fucking idea what he's doing simply because he has fucked with game lore, his lack of understanding how VATS work, the stories always being uninspired bullshit, etc, etc. I can see why you praise him, because you have no idea what a good game looks and feels like in the first place. Broaden your tastes and don't solely play modern games. This is all I will leave you with.

You are trying to justify games as simplified movies, I don't have qualms with that. Games as simplified movies as the way of the future? Not on your life.

So I am not the only one! How else would you explain how Oblivion and FO3 are so much alike? People even say that FO3 is oblivion with guns, and vice-versa. The truth is staring the sheeple in the face!

Waitaminute

How deep does this rabbit-hole go!?

Ok I'll ask here.

I like DOOM 1 and 2. Will I enjoy nuDOOM?

nu

What the hell is this "Nu" thing and where did it come from?

DO NOT GIVE MONEY TO BETHESDA. You can get a better experience from serious sam and painkiller.

What I meant was "Should I pirate?"

To be frank. The casual market made vidya bigger than it actually was. The only reason ps2 and wii were huge was because of casuals.
Reason current gen ain't doing massive numbers cause no console has console gimmick for casuals. Hell, points are being made that ps4 may make psone lifetime sales. Which makes sense when casuals are not included. But devs/producers don't see that and think the games are not trendy enough and thus make the shit we have now.

It's an alternative to "Neo-".
I remember the term Nu-Metal from the late 90s, I guess.

By the time the game would finish loading we both already got bored with it. I have no idea how the game itself is, but I would have gladly seen some corners cut if it meant that we could actually get to the content. And to think that I used to get angry at the warning screens on the Wii, I had no idea what was going on on the "real" consoles.

My choice of "Nu-" only serves to poke fun at this particular connotation, it is by no means a serious label. I wanted to label these games as a new category due to their vapid nature and difference between "old" games. The accompanying picture is where I lifted it from.


Depends. A good guess would be "no." If you can appreciate nuDOOM as it's own game, then it's probably an enjoyable experience. If you compare it to past games, then you would probably dislike it. In the end, it's all up to you.

There is no crack yet.

I didn't say that, but the details is not the experience.

Exactly what I was saying?

They actually have the same idea but different way of articulating it. Some might not understand themselves, but still they have the same idea. No, you don't ~remember~ the first car you owned for the exact details of what spare parts you brought or which gasket blew up. You remember it for how you felt like riding trough hell when driving it at summer and how you and your girlfriend got stranded in the middle of nowhere when your gasket blew up.

Not yet, but those are not the main focus in his vision. He always talks about curiosity of the player rather than the gameplay, writing, and mechanics.

No, I have said that I don't want games to be like movies, because it's able to deliver something truly different albeit simpler than movies.

At least the early Uncharteds had a lot of fun unlockables that let you play around with weapons or use various skins or "cheats" like no gravity mode.

So not only is TES and FO part of the same universe, so is Avengers and all the other super hero movies. The superheroes themselves must be a product of Dwarvern ingenuity, like Superman whoms real home is Tamriel and Krypton's destruction is merely a metaphor for Time Travel and the death of an empire. Iron man, whose impossible technology can only be explained by Dwarvern magic and Captain America whose magic shield could only be made from Dwarvern metal.

How many more universes are secretly combined without us knowing? We can only speculate the depths to which this secret goes.

this place is filled with retards
heh


we have IDs newfag

You're a retard and should kill yourself.

ok you retard look at the post id and the op thread id

you retard
retard

Is it your first day here? Yes, most of us are tired of no substance cinematic crap.

So it's the replayability that you aim for? Well, there's a problem with that, as large majority of old games was one-playthrough-only as well. Hell, very few games actually achieve real replayability – most of the time, you replay a game because you forgot how it went or because it was so good you don't mind playing the exact same thing again, but few actually change the gameplay every time you restart it.

From the classics, I think the most iconic one that achieved this was the first Diablo (such as not being able to get all quests in one playthrough, different enemies, different layouts, the differences between difficulty settings, etc.), yet such an approach was unusual even back then. Morrowind, which came six years later and thus had enough time to reflect and learn from this chose not to, and features a vast, but static world where you know the layout of each dungeon, know every quest, etc. Its replayability rests on hoping that the player won't be a completionist and won't choose to go everywhere in one playthrough, or on him figuring he had forgotten a lot of the stuff since he last played it. In the same vein, however, you could say that even Life is Strange (which really is a VN, not a game) is replayable if the player chose not to explore every dialogue option during first playthrough or forgot the entire plot. It's not REAL replayability in the sense that some facet of the game had changed.

The reason why most recent ams aren't replayable is:
1) they're usually in a genre that discourages it (few FPS or Puzzle games feature real replayability, whereas stuff like GSGs offer immense amounts of it, but arent nearly as popular)
2) Achieving replayability requires additional effort (I imagine Diablo would've been much simpler to develop if they just threw together fifteen maps and a few mobs and called it a day), yet there is no real market motivation to spend that additional effort. After all, one playthrough is all you need - peole replaying the same game over and over won't net you any additional sold copies, so why bother? It's just another example of the games being made to sell, rather than to be fun.

I assume this is bait, but you are actually right about something: casual games where experience comes first and challenge come second are an innovation. That said, I differ from your definition of what makes a game.

In the past, when movies were still experimental, they were the celluloid equivalent of gif images: a quick succession of pictures with no audio or context that hardly had any deeper meaning than "this happened in real life once and is now being replayed through this device". Things have changed ever since several times, some steps being brought by new technologies and others stemming directly from creative minds, but in the end what matters is that movies today are much more complex than they were back then. Our best modern movies are not strictly better than the past's modern movies, but they are different; plot is much more important in modern movies than it used to be in older movies, but nobody calls them not-movies nor novels because of this, as the actual movie is still there and the plot just adds another dimension to the film. You would probably get laughed at if you ever implied Lumière movies are the true form of cinema and that everything else is garbage, just like you would get laughed at if you ever said Pong is the pinnacle of gaming.

All the games the OP mentioned are games that were designed as movies with interactive cutscenes. They employ cinematographic techniques, put a lot of focus on story and just opt for the same rehashed gameplay rules you can see in many other games (all modern FPS play the same, for example) over and over. Basically, the only original thing they are doing is the film aspect of the game, so they could as well make a movie of these games and call it a day because you have already played the rest. This is the "experience" in nu-games, it's just a movie.

My counterexample of a good representative of games that put experience first and challenge second is Minecraft. Say what you want about the game, but it's comfy and really fun to play with friends. Thing is, it's not hard, but it's fun and replayable because it's an experience.
But where's the difference between Minecraft and nu-games? Minecraft is fun because of its rules (the thing that makes it a game), not because of anything else. You could combine the lore of TES with Minecraft gameplay and it would still be Minecraft because the essence of the game is not its lore. It's also not its challenge, just the rules that make the experience.
What happens if you take the story out of Bioshock Infinite? It becomes a generic shooter.

New technologies allow games to become something more than a challenge, and there is nothing wrong with that. What they should understand is, they are still games, and if they don't like that fact it's probably because they didn't really have an actual game in mind.

So instead of trying to disprove my idea, you shrug it off as stupid? If it so damned obvious to you, maybe you can enlighten the rest of us.


I feel like there is a language barrier here. I understand some of what you are saying, but not entirely. That car metaphor has me lost. I will say this; if Todd's focus is on exploration and everything else is on the backburner, what will that lead to? It will simply lead to dumbed-down games. What you see as 'exploration' will naturally evolve into a game where you occasionally press X or it will evolve into movies. Exploration and atmosphere alone do not a game make. It will be a bare-minimum game, if even that. If your idea of a game is a walking simulator, then I wish your dream come true. I only hope that it isn't the ONLY video game form that will prevail.

See, you are doing that thing where you take a word and change the definition but then act like it's meaningful.

Yes, you experience a math problem. There is a definition to the word that you are changing. You experience everything you do and encounter.

This is the tip off you are just saying words but have no clear meaning, since you need to throw in "true experience", as opposed to some other type of experience.

Dude just stop. This is beyond bad since you don't even have a coherent definition of the words you use.

Embed related.

It's a thing he does. He uses words in a way which their meaning only seems to be tangentially related to their actual meaning. Or would make sense if you interpreted his lexicon in only the most vague impressions.

Or if it turns out english is not his primary language, that would make a lot of sense.

Or he learned nu-English from his Gender Studies class
Words don't have strict meanings, that's patriarchal. Words are experiences shitlord.

THIS
It's like all these games were written by Joss Whedon. All of the games you mentioned, even The Last of Us, come off as painfully insincere in almost every aspect(and the fact that the VAs always sound bored out of their minds don't help with this.) As a result, every time they try to have some kind of emotional moment, it comes off manipulative and downright insulting to the player's intelligence. Like, you can almost hear the devs saying "This story isn't very good, but the people are still retarded enough to eat it up."

Sorry about the rant, this stuff just really pisses me off.


I seriously doubt that you've ever seen a single Tarkovsky film in your life.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Yes, the heart of the problem. Whereas once games had more replayability and involved an understanding of gameplay mechanics, we are now sliding backwards into cinematic experiences. These games are designed with the fact in mind that the gameplay will never be deep enouh to develop an actual skill at it. Once upon a time it wasn't obvious that ANYONE could beat a certain game. To beat it, you had to do more than simply interact, you had to master and understand how the game works, this gains even more meaning on harder difficulties.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the definitions of a good, challenging game are changing into story-driven QTE-fests where any regular joe can just pick it up and complete in a day or so, and I don't like it.

Hahah, someone finally commented on that bit.


Damned right it is insulting and manipulative. I always thought I was the only one crazy enough to notice or care, but it makes a difference for me. The "acting", like you said, comes off as insincere when they try to make you "feel emotions." It just feels to me like we as an audience are treated like our emotions can be turned on and off like a light-switch. No build-up is apparently required because OMG A KID DIED!!! Every character sounds the same, every character acts the same, every character's dialogue has the same feel to it. That just tells me that no one bothered to write any personality to these characters.

I have a simpler metaphor. You can make your parents talk a lot about their experience in highschool days, but the highschool education they received, not so much. This is what differs experience from knowledge. Experience is memories of the past instilled in your head without it's details, like a dream. This is all your impression of a certain event. Knowledge is empirical memories you have collected along with it's useful details.

Intuition: the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. I asserted "true" to accompany that word because some people don't truly understand the meaning of experience in this context, the process of doing and seeing things and of having things happen to you as defined by merriam webster..


I've watched Stalker, Andrei Rublev, Zerkalo, and Solaris, in that exact order, and I have read Interviews and Sculpting in time. I appreciate Tarkovsky for being an auteur. He has nothing to do with video games, but you can make a parallel anyway to explain the evolution of a medium.

I've tried explaining this concept to younger people, people who have only been "into" gaming for a while, they simply can't comprehend it. This is what games are, to them.

Pretty good summary.

Storywise, I would say that the modern writers are sticking in self-inserts instead of actual characters that would fit those settings.

Most of the main characters in these games are mercenaries/gunsforhire/badasswarriors/soldiers… yet you get dialogue/interactions that belong in college-campuses and other hipster/reddit joints.

So many people living in a bubble.

It's disgusting. These jackasses deserve to be bullied.

Why did the schools ever get rid of bullying? Its obvious bullying is needed.

i don't care. i didn't buy any of those games.

bullying causes victim complex, that's what SJW suffer from

Also fuck you, it's obvious you don't know shit about bullying, what being tormented on school every day can do to yourself. And i'm not talking about these whinny bastards, i'm talking about big psyche problems

You're not alone user (´・ω・`)

On the one hand, some of the games he listed do have gameplay. On the other hand, it's pretty bad. BioShock Infinite had a neat-o idea and then was shat on and Levine said he wanted to have a game where player choice didj't matter. Had I heard that quote going in, I never would have played it. It's a nice movie with some occasional closed off section shootouts, and I thought the characters were okay until the end. DmC suffers from a similar fate in that it's a poorly executed game that had potential. It's just that the potential was immediately lost upon the new design, and later I learned the combo meter isn't about how stylish your combo is, it's about how much damage you've been doing. That's not what DMC as a series was, and it pisses me off that newfags think that's the same thing.

On the other hand, I like shit games like the Tales series on top of this, so I'm not sure if I have a right to talk about story-vs-gameplay drive.

no bully

I think a lot of the blame is on the fact that one is trying anything new. Even with most indies it's just INSPIRED BY X/LIKE Z BUT WITH Y. Any advancement that happens in a AAA game now is either better* graphics or some incredibly minor addition meant to imply depth. Something like WOW I CAN SKIN THIS ANIMAL IN ASSASSINS CREED THE NEXT ONE, NOT THAT IT ACTUALLY MATTERS OR THAT IT'S ANYTHING MORE THAN JUST AN ANIMATION BUT WOW SO DETAILED.
*May not actually be better

There's the occasional gem here and there, games that occupy their own niche or stand out in a sea of clones. Games like Distance, Legend of Grimrock, Orcs Must Die, Styx Master of Shadows, Aarklash Legacy or a lot of Wayforward's games, but they're far and few in between and they also don't get the recognition they deserve.

Speaking of Platinum I'm kind of losing hope in them after TMNT. What were they thinking with that?

It was a bad director and that they still have the potential to make decent games, though. Heck, even Star Fox Zero could have been fun if it weren't for things I'm sure Nintendo required them to put in for WiiU shit, like the gyrocopter.

Probably Activision and Viacom

But then Transformers was good, some may even say great. Did they just not give a shit about TMNT the way they did about Korra? Korra wasn't this bad.

Transformers was done by the Rising guy

I want to cum inside Jake Rapp as his wife fingers herself in front of us.

I liked Uncharted 1-3.
Not enough to say they're worth 60 bucks, or anything.

Transformers was a different director. I dunno what went wrong to make it worse than Korra since I've played neither of them, but Korra and TMNT were both directed by Eiro Shirahama. Transformers was directed by Kenji Saito, who also directed MGRR.

Did you not go to school? Do you not have childhood memories of being in math class?

Sounds like you need to git gud, friendo.

It seems that very quickly Activision is going to end up on my "Do not buy anything forever" list.

Transformers is better than TMNT and Korra though, and that was published by Activision.

They deserve bullying even more then. Fuck your feelings.

I agree,but I feel like in the past 2 years some game developers have begun to wake up to the reality that "wider audiences" are really only interested in Call of Duty and real gamers are sick of this "streamlining" shit.

pic related. This game definitley did have some "nu-game" elements, an awkard story with an even more awkard sex scene, and some awkward stealth missions, but the level design and the gunplay were great and it was the first game I played in a while that actually had the balls to punish you if you didn't git gud. I haven't played the new DOOM but I've heard similar things about it.

Stop projecting. Just because you were a little faggot that couldn't handle it, doesn't make that the case for everyone. Natural selection, if you can't handle it, kill yourself.

We fucking need bullying so the world doesnt turn into faggots like it is now. Fuck your feeling, i was bullied in school too.

Somebody give this man a PhD.

If you want movies, watch movies.

Or you could not do a completely retarded thing. I suppose that's too hard for you people, though.

I'm not sure what you think circumcision has to do with it. Did someone touch your diddle when you were a baby?

They're both shit that people exclaim need to be done to make children healthy, and they're both completely unnecessary. It's only a group of faggots who think either should keep happening.

He was bullied, do you expect him to be mentally healthy?

Kikes circumcise and play victim while bullying people themselves, they don't give a shit about your existence.

This is why I originally got into indie games. Yeah, I know, the stereotypical hipster faggots making 2deep4u games. It disheartens me that seems to be the case with indie games now, but I remember a time when you could find real diamonds in the rough.

Okay, how is that relevant? I said both are dumb, you're just further proving that both are dumb.

Feel free to kill yourself any time.

Ran out of arguments that soon?

What argument? Are you actually offended? Why are you even alive if you're offended over a statement?

That you shouldn't expect too much from a person whose mind has been damaged is advice, not an argument.

How are you using an imageboard if you don't know how to read?

Stop bullying him :^)

My school had kids who were bullied and turned out to be total fags. Same about kids doing the bullying, who were obviously not bullied, just not the same kind of fags. All in all, there seems to be no correlation between bullying and faggotry. Faggotry is a universal concept that just is.

I also used to get bullied in school, but then I got gud at life and kicked my way into respect. I still don't think that has helped me be less of a fag.

Doom 2016 is a fantastic game, i dont care what any shitter in here says.

Holy shill.

You missed the huge backtrack in the DLC, I was pleasantly surprised with the themes of the main game myself.

Jesus Christ, this has to be the most pretentious "review" I've ever seen, it hurts to listen to this fucking guy

While he did a video I really liked about the Red Faction series that summed up almost exactly how I felt about how the series developed, he's an SJW faggot who unironically liked Depression Quest and white knighted Quinn and the rest of those jokers hard. Probably the most pretentious video game reviewer on youtube.

Nice meme I love retro atari 2500 xD

Yeah, didn't he get the memo that fun games stop being fun once they're old?

...

go back to 4chan you little fagos

Fucking this. And the smug shits always have special snowflake oppressed minority identity so you're supposed to sympathize with them, but since you're not a faggot it's just all the more rage inducing.


Yes, it has the opposite effect. They have their inclusion checklist and have to squeeze it in there somehow even though it doesn't fit and is completely uncalled for.

But this is just and effect of the attack in games journalism with the relentless pushing of marxism. There was a thread way back from, I think it was GDC, where someone had a presentation that was literally about how good marxism is for video games.

So it's not like this is a result of supply and demand. It is completely forced, and then the controlled media responds appropriately to make it seem like it corresponds to market demands.

Actual sales figures are another story, and this will probably be what kills the vidya.