I'm buying this game even though the developers are greedy fucks and the game is shit because it's just X dollars on a...

...

Why do people do this?

Your post isn't really clear on exactly what kind of user you're talking about. You can give advice to not buy a game without personally caring whether or not the advice is heeded.
But that's wrong. There are numerous games I might have bought if I wasn't advised not to, particularly where censorship is concerned.

why OP do this?

...

...

What people?

You already know why, because they have no self respect. They just want the identity of being a "gamer" but don't actually care about the games they play, or games at all actually

What do you think people mean when they say a game has aged Holla Forums?

I will occasionally do this for multiplayer games. Much as I would like to be a purist and 100% boycott shitty developers, I also like to play games with other people sometimes.

It means it's not nearly as good as you thought it was. Like, when you're a kid the world is all shiny and shit but then when you get older you get to do fun stuff like your taxes.

"I'm stupid as fuck and unable to adapt to gameplay mechanics I'm not accustomed to."

They really mean that the entire industry has changed, and imply that it has improved as a whole. In other words, a game which was above average in the past is now average or below because the points of comparison today are better.

An example which is arguably correct would be Goldeneye or other early shooters: the genre has been refined since then with better control schemes and mechanics such that if it were released today it would look a lot worse compared to current shooters.

Generally if something "ages", it means it's perceived quality was only because it was comparatively better than everything that had came before it, or because of some sort of technological fidelity. This means it was not good "in itself", it was only good because of those other circumstantial things.

Usually this is most noticeable in graphics. Many earlier 3d graphics look like absolute dogshit compared to today. Anything that failed to use stylized assets will age immediately upon new graphical developments. This is why games like Link to the Past, Mega Man X, and Super Metroid all are still very aesthetically pleasing. Because they did not try to stipulate on realistic display, and thus their imagery was representative or iconic, it never will be compared to anything but itself and if it represents itself properly. And because they are well designed in that regard, it will never "age". Your determination on if they are pleasing to look at will be the same regardless of context.

Examples of 3D graphics like this, I'd use Wind Waker or Shadow of the Colossus. Both use stylized designs. WW used a very animated style which means that, if you liked it then, you will like it now, and if you never liked it, it won't suddenly change. SotC is a little harder to notice because it seeks to depict things in a less exaggerated way, but notice the lighting, use of colors, and overall design. Even as it sought to depict things more realistically, it never tried to make it's appeal based on approximating reality. It is why, even today, it is still very visually stimulating to look at.

Though I have identified a secondary, related, though not necessarily negative, use of the word. To denote a design paradigm which has made things more efficient or streamlined in modern games that simply didn't exist for whatever reason beforehand. Starcraft and it's 12 unit max selection feels like absolute dog shit if you play it today. But a game like FF11 and lack of minimap or verticality feels aged, but it doesn't make the game worse. It feels aged in that you can't think of an MMO doing that today because that just wouldn't be acceptable in terms of design space.

"lol thos graphix look liek shiet and not liek my EA-approved Battlefield!"

No it doesn't. I played Warcraft: Orcs and Humans, which had a group max of 4 units and I had no problem. Stop projecting modern mechanics onto older games.

You can definitly notice aging when you play through a whole series, mostly in gameplay. Take metal gear for example. Metal gear had line based sight, then solid implimented cone based vision, then solid 2 had first person aiming. After playing 2, going back to 1 is hard because first person aiming made the game flow really well. Its not that mgs aged badly, its just hard to play after playing later installments.

This is what children believe.

Congratulations on ruining your kid's innocent years.

You should really leave and not come back until you're at least old enough to drive, kid.

Consumers gonna consum

Hell fucking no. That shit was terrible, and the fact that it was mandatory with the fucking tranq gun because you needed headshots for 1hkos absolutely broke the flow of the game compared to the first.

...

t. casual

Okay, sonny.

ajj lmau

Why do you care?

...

Extreme / MGS1 snake VR has no autoaim, flows just fine if you know how to play.

Na, you're just so used to terrible consoletrash control schemes at this point that you aren't even bothered by how shit they are anymore. Eat shit for long enough and the smell stops bothering you.

Nah m8 you're just trash.

Casual plz.

Kill yourself.

Because they can.

Because it's just X dollars on a steam sale

Fucking retards always have more money to blow on whatever bullshit tickles their balls, because they are the majority, and voted in other fucking retards that make it a law that they must get more money. Few capable people are permitted to thrive, to keep the illusion of a meritocracy running.

The dumbest people you will ever come into contact with likely make triple what you make, if not more. Their jobs require little if any physical or mental dexterity. The harder you work physically or mentally, the less you make compared to others. Having a STEM degree doesn't mean that say, mechanical engineering stops being hard work, no matter how simple it may appear to be to the learned man.

So your'e saying that the PR persons, financial consultants, and other highly social jobs are what make people tons of cash and not jobs that actually keep society running?

You may have a point. Being hyper social these days pretty much guarantees you a job, while socially inept people are left unemployed regardless of skillset because they didn't meet the right people.

Look at how much of a game's budget is spent on actually making the game. Look at Mambo No. 9.

Competence just becomes bitterness. Idiocy becomes ecstasy.

This entire thread is some weird mish mash of "stop buying what I don't like" and retards trying really damn hard to show how amazing they are at games on anonymous imageboard.

That's got to be some sort of mental illness. Oppositional defiant disorder?

...

Sounds like all the right ingredients for a good dubs thread.