Support NeoGAF

[Akuun]

"If you're not literally one of the top 10 best players in the game in the entire world, then you are trash. None of your opinions matter and you should quit/uninstall the game/kill yourself."

There are varying degrees of this mentality, but damn. Gaming communities are way too quick to dismiss, put down and write off everyone.

There's also its cousin, "Lol you found that thing hard? It was SOOO EASY FOR ME. Like, are you retarded or do you have coordination problems? I CAN'T BELIEVE it would be hard for anyone because IT WAS SO EASY FOR ME."

 

[Tigress]

Game is too linear.

I mean, what kind of argument is that? Some of the best games in history are linear. Bad game design makes games bad, not linearity.

I have the opposite... open world game design is bad game design. I think both of these things really boil down to personal preference (and the fact that either can also be badly designed but it's more due to being badly designed, not whether it is linear or open world). But it drives me nuts we constantly have people trying to claim that their dislike of open world is because open world is a bad game design as fact, not that they prefer more linear games. I don't mistake my preference for non linearity for linear games being bad game design, they just aren't for me.

 

[Siege.exe]

I really hate the idea that niche Japanese games have to have a dub when they get localized, if they ever do. It seems like some people would rather just not get these amazing games than read a few lines of dialogue.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

i may be wrong but you don't buy the game, you buy the license to play it

So if you buy a book in a store, hardcover with pages. You just own a license to the story within and not the pages holding the story?

It's the same with a game, you buy a cart/disc. But if you only own a license to play it that means you don't actually own that physical disc/cart and merely the code.

It's an all or nothing thing either all media is license based or none of it is. That's why first sale and copywrite law is so important to understand and focus on. What we own, how we own it, and how we can pass that on (either by a future sale or as a gift) is important.

 

[iceblade997]

The notion that "anything less than 60fps is unplayable". You wind up missing out on so many games that way, just for the pursuit of a framerate. And for some games, it really doesn't even matter what the framerate is all that much - like it's so far at the backseat of the experience (like CK2) that if you stick to just that metric, again, you miss out on so many great games that you might enjoy if it weren't for that one sticking point.

And the other annoying thing with that is the hyperbole too. Unplayable means, cannot be played (ie, doesn't run at all). Sub 60-FPS can very often be played, (ie, runs lower than that framerate).

 

[Blobbers]

*hard game* should have an easy mode

 

[Spuck-uk]

"PC Master race" and all the associated bollocks that goes along with it.

"Lazy Developers" inevitably spoken by someone with 0 knowledge of development.

 

[TheMink]

When people argue against allowing options that make games more accessible, and insist that others should just have to "git gud" like them

Examples: people arguing against an optional easy mode in Dark Souls. More recently, people arguing for the removal of things like fast travel or save anywhere from Breath of the Wild

I have said this already in this thread, but the fundamental experience of a difficult game is overcoming adversity. The combat, world, RPG, and character building systems do stand on their own obviously and are huge reasons I love the game. That being said lowering the difficulty would adversely affect all of these systems. If you were to take less damage the game might be criticized in the minds of those for being hacknslash. Dodging would be less important and therefore grabbing the heaviest item and swinging it around haphazardly would be a viable strategy. And who knows what other repercussions there might be.

If you were to not lose souls upon death you could be as aggressive as possible show an utter disregard for the games systems and never truly be punished other than lost time. Literally you could just keep leveling up with the xp gained from failed attempts and go further and further into the level without losing anything because the way the game works is that death doesn't reset you to a save point it keeps the world as it was and that includes items. The game encourages risk versus reward gameplay by deciding if going for a heavily guarded item is to much of gambit and risk losing your souls. Take that away and you just charge every item with no consequence. The joy of unlocking a shortcut would be heavily undercut by the fact that there were never really any stakes to not finding it. So then would the system have to be reworked to support the lack of lost souls? Have simply a reset state that the game goes back to? That would take away from the experience the one that people were claiming an easy mode would allow to have.

"Getting the experience" is one of the most misleading things you could tell yourself about a potential easy mode because the experience would at it's core be fundamentally different without the intended difficulty spikes.

By splitting the community of people who played the "correct" difficulty versus playing the easy mode would have these extremes where people say the game needed this thing to be better, then upon finding out they played on easy they are now subject to the fact that they didn't play it on the intended difficulty and thus their criticism is invalid. Which depending on circumstance may actually be true.

Maybe there are more creative ways at lowering the difficulty, redefining every encounter manually to make each one individually easier? How much work would that be?

Is it so awful that a game have an entry barrier? Why does a game have to be for everyone?

If a person thinks Dark Souls looks fun but they don't think they can do it, I think they can. I believe they are capable. It may be frustrating at first but then they will come to love it.

 

[Costia]

"Devs are lazy"
Comes up every time there is the slightest of bugs/glitches in a game.

 

[kromeo]

I'm sure it's already covered somewhere in here but

"I literally can't play games at 30fps"

 

[muteki]

"<classic gameplay system/mechanic> is old/behind the times/dated, we must never ever use it again"

 

[King Gilga]

"this game aged bad/well"

games don't age

Yes they do.

Especially early N64/PS1 level 3D games.

 

[ogbg]

So if you buy a book in a store, hardcover with pages. You just own a license to the story within and not the pages holding the story?

You own both. The physical book is bundled in with the license just like the game disc is bundled in with the software license.

 

[HvySky]

"You like a thing that I don't therefore you're wrong and your opinions are bad"

This sentiment is obviously prevalent in most things, but goddamn I see it alot in reference to games.

 

[Spuck-uk]

Yes they do.

Especially early N64/PS1 level 3D games.

1000% agreed. Rose tinted glasses are terrible.


..having said that, Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo is a treasure and still looks good.

 

[Blobbers]

"I don't like indie games"

"I don't like Japanese games"

you just happen to not like thousands of games that encompass a wide variety of genres.

 

[CAR105 3]

'30 fps is a slide-show'

This.

I can understamd that someone prefers 60 FPS, but saying that it is unplayable is just ridiculous.

 

[sibarraz]

The peoplefrom this company are complete idiots for not releasing niche games that I want, and if I were the president of the company I will actually make them shitloads of money

Specially since they seem to imply than those games are easy to make, or are cost effective, this happens a lot when talking about emulation.

Also this gaming sentiment that game sucks now with terrible stories and gameplay, when IMO we have advanced a lot this last 2 decades. Today most people can make games from all tastes and have better channels of distribution

 

[Tarextherex]

I don't play Nintendo games

I don't play Japanese games

Something something performance

Game is a good game, but not a good *insert series* game

Any variation of "this is bad because it's different", especially when you got people disregarding a lot of games in a series(ex. 2D zelda fanboys, retro FF fanboys "6 and 9 are the best rest is jpop trash", melee fanboys, ds2 haters, third strike fanboys, list goes on)

This is the best time to be a gamer, aka people who don't question at all the progressions/regressions made in different aspects of game design and blindly think that all games "age to the point of being unplayable"

Edit: *insert character in a game* is an UNBEARABLE asshole, I can't play this game (especially if it's a jrpg)

 

[Tambini]

"I can't play God of War because Kratos is so unlikeable"

Who cares I just wanna kill shit, I guess too many people cared because now we have Last of God of War dad simulator coming out (sort of /s)

 

[Kiddy Dong]

"Devs are lazy"
Comes up every time there is the slightest of bugs/glitches in a game.

Preach. Becoming a software engineer has made me appreciate so much more in games that most people take for granted. If the average gamer knew how much work went into all the games they play (even the buggy ones), nobody would be complaining about the minor shippable bugs anymore.

 

[Bloodporne]

Bosses, especially in Souls threads, being either "unfair" or "a fucking joke lol" with basically no middle ground. Sometimes this may even be posted by the same person only several pages apart in the same damn thread.

Unless the boss fights consist of fucking A For Awesome type design, can incredibly smug terms like that be retired already?

Extra smug-points for the usage of "LOL" in same post.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

When playing a ranked/competitive mode and people use "It's just a game" as an excuse to not try/ take the match serious. Nothing boils my blood more in a team game. Like thanks for wasting my time you filthy casual.

Casual players that play casual modes, I have no beef with you, just stay out of competitive with that casual attitude.

 

[PillarEN]

"I can't play God of War because Kratos is so unlikeable"

Who cares I just wanna kill shit, I guess too many people cared because now we have Last of God of War dad simulator coming out (sort of /s)

I mean this can be applied to any game. I don't think it's senseless to avoid a game if you don't care for the character or character design. Was pretty common with DmC and the characters from that Sony first party open world game series where you can be good or evil but I can't remember the series.

Though I respect the idea of not giving a damn who you play as as long as you get to do what you want to do. In your case wanting to kill shit haha.

 

[jryeje29]

people who shit on other people because of the games they like, e.g. calling someone a casual for liking certain games or casting aspersions on people for liking anime games, etc.

like, how sad is your life that you have to shit on other people for what video games they choose to enjoy? If you are the pinnacle of refined taste maybe you should be busy enjoying all those things instead of being an asshole.

Preach

 

[Spman2099]

I dislike how some people take offence to different styles of games. Don't like sprite based graphics? Okay, fine; move along. Don't like "walking simulators"? Well, then don't play them. There is no reason to lash out against games that don't appeal to you personally. I will never understand people that act in that manner. Gaming is a diverse hobby that provides different things for different people. That is a good thing.

 

[Dlink16]

That just because another indie game has pixel art, it's already looked down upon.

 

[ViolentP]

I might agree with that digitally but when It comes to physical media that's straight bullshit.

If you can have certain accesses that your physical copy provides revoked, I question the use of the term "own" at that point.

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

Rooting for games to sell poorly, bad reviews, and financial failure in general because it will vindicate and opinion that you have about that game.

 

[PillarEN]

I dislike how some people take offence to different styles of games. Don't like sprite based graphics? Okay, fine; move along. Don't like "walking simulators"? Well, then don't play them. There is no reason to lash out against games that don't appeal to you personally. I will never understand people that act in that manner. Gaming is a diverse hobby that provides different things for different people. That is a good thing.

A definite digital high five from me to you. And I like that you point out that there is such a wide variety of games. That's really the biggest hing. If games were so limited then maybe it would be a bother because there are barely any options. But that's not the case. There is such a massive variety of games out there big and small that there is something for everyone.

 

[Tambini]

I mean this can be applied to any game. I don't think it's senseless to avoid a game if you don't care for the character or character design. Was pretty common with DmC and the characters from that Sony first party open world game series where you can be good or evil but I can't remember the series.

Though I respect the idea of not giving a damn who you play as as long as you get to do what you want to do. In your case wanting to kill shit haha.

InFamous I believe you're thinking of. For sure it does depend on the genre but God of War is a violent action game that has like 1 major theme which is revenge, it's like what do they expect? You'd play the violent killing simulator if the main character said sorry after he killed someone?

 

[King Gilga]

This is the best time to be a gamer,

How is this wrong, it's always the best time to be a 'gamer' because you have access to all the games of the past plus the new ones.

Until some world ending apocalypse happens it can only get better.

 

[ElectronicOldMen]

'Keep politics out of my games'
'Any attempts at making games more diverse are forced and pandering'
'Gay or trans people should only be in games if it isn't a big part of their characters and they aren't rubbing it in my face'
'I wish game reviews were more objective'
'This isn't a real game'
The whole phenomenon of hype culture, numerical obsession, platform competition, lists of exclusives, all that

More generally, the insistence that every game has to fit into or represent some sort of established thematic genre, which more than anything I think comes from the nature of the media that's traditionally seen as surrounding games, be it 'nerd culture', 'geek culture', whatever. I think there's massive, massive missed potential in stories in games and more generally things that games can say which aren't tied to some sort of sci-fi, speculative fiction, fantasy, war, crime thriller, whatever, but that's almost entirely what we get in AAA games.

 

[Bloodporne]

InFamous I believe you're thinking of. For sure it does depend on the genre but God of War is a violent action game that has like 1 major theme which is revenge, it's like what do they expect? You'd play the violent killing simulator if the main character said sorry after he killed someone?

I thought Kratos being an asshole of comical proportions was a funny hook and really sold the mean-spirited atmosphere of the whole thing. Was totally into it.

Not interested in Dad Simulator Kratos one bit, but then again, if the gameplay ends up great, I in turn won't give two shits about the character I'm controlling in the end.

 

[MCD250]

The idea that playing games or "being a gamer" is some sort of unique, elevated activity that confers someone a special status.


I'm pretty sure a good chunk of Gamergate bullshit and some of the hostility and gatekeeping that "gamers" like to engage in against those that they perceive as "outsiders" to gaming (or even other gamers that they perceive to be lesser than them) comes from this nonsensical belief.

 

[pa22word]

'30 fps is a slide-show'

Ehhh, I think most people who scoff at this sentiment don't play games with a mouse. 30 fps does indeed feel like a slideshow when you're using a mouse for 90% of your gaming. Due to Gsync Ive done small experiments and really ~45fps is kind of the bare minimum before the lag starts to get intolerable on an average monitor. If you're on a great monitor with 1ms input lag you obviously have more room to wiggle. If you're playing on a TV tho 60 fps is pretty much bare minimum for mouse users. Anything lower and mouse movement just feels like complete shit.

 

[Comet]

That people somehow hate trophies/achievements. I understand when there are multiplayer ones where you have people cheesing and doing stupid stuff to farm those and it affects the online match negatively for others but c'mon that rarely happens. Otherwise I just see it as people hating on extra goals you can shoot for that don't affect them.

 

[jroc74]

I was gonna quote posts but decided not to as it was turning into too many.

Agree with alot thats been posted already.

 

[Exploratory]

Mass Effect 1 is better than Mass Effect 2.

 

[Comet]

Ehhh, I think most people who scoff at this sentiment don't play games with a mouse. 30 fps does indeed feel like a slideshow when you're using a mouse for 90% of your gaming. Due to Gsync Ive done small experiments and really ~45fps is kind of the bare minimum before the lag starts to get intolerable on an average monitor. If you're on a great monitor with 1ms input lag you obviously have more room to wiggle. If you're playing on a TV tho 60 fps is pretty much bare minimum for mouse users. Anything lower and mouse movement just feels like complete shit.

Also, this guy's sentiment bothers me

 

[Gator86]

When people argue against allowing options that make games more accessible, and insist that others should just have to "git gud" like them

Examples: people arguing against an optional easy mode in Dark Souls. More recently, people arguing for the removal of things like fast travel or save anywhere from Breath of the Wild

I have said this already in this thread, but the fundamental experience of a difficult game is overcoming adversity. The combat, world, RPG, and character building systems do stand on their own obviously and are huge reasons I love the game. That being said lowering the difficulty would adversely affect all of these systems. If you were to take less damage the game might be criticized in the minds of those for being hacknslash. Dodging would be less important and therefore grabbing the heaviest item and swinging it around haphazardly would be a viable strategy. And who knows what other repercussions there might be.

If you were to not lose souls upon death you could be as aggressive as possible show an utter disregard for the games systems and never truly be punished other than lost time. Literally you could just keep leveling up with the xp gained from failed attempts and go further and further into the level without losing anything because the way the game works is that death doesn't reset you to a save point it keeps the world as it was and that includes items. The game encourages risk versus reward gameplay by deciding if going for a heavily guarded item is to much of gambit and risk losing your souls. Take that away and you just charge every item with no consequence. The joy of unlocking a shortcut would be heavily undercut by the fact that there were never really any stakes to not finding it. So then would the system have to be reworked to support the lack of lost souls? Have simply a reset state that the game goes back to? That would take away from the experience the one that people were claiming an easy mode would allow to have.

"Getting the experience" is one of the most misleading things you could tell yourself about a potential easy mode because the experience would at it's core be fundamentally different without the intended difficulty spikes.

By splitting the community of people who played the "correct" difficulty versus playing the easy mode would have these extremes where people say the game needed this thing to be better, then upon finding out they played on easy they are now subject to the fact that they didn't play it on the intended difficulty and thus their criticism is invalid. Which depending on circumstance may actually be true.

Maybe there are more creative ways at lowering the difficulty, redefining every encounter manually to make each one individually easier? How much work would that be?

Is it so awful that a game have an entry barrier? Why does a game have to be for everyone?

If a person thinks Dark Souls looks fun but they don't think they can do it, I think they can. I believe they are capable. It may be frustrating at first but then they will come to love it.

I like how you replied to the first poster's comment with "but you're wrong and everyone should have to play the game in a way I prefer." Impressive navel-gazing.

 

[cheesekao]

Ehhh, I think most people who scoff at this sentiment don't play games with a mouse. 30 fps does indeed feel like a slideshow when you're using a mouse for 90% of your gaming. Due to Gsync Ive done small experiments and really ~45fps is kind of the bare minimum before the lag starts to get intolerable on an average monitor. If you're on a great monitor with 1ms input lag you obviously have more room to wiggle. If you're playing on a TV tho 60 fps is pretty much bare minimum for mouse users. Anything lower and mouse movement just feels like complete shit.

I do and I still don't think it is.

 

[Tambini]

I thought Kratos being an asshole of comical proportions was a funny hook and really sold the mean-spirited atmosphere of the whole thing. Was totally into it.

Not interested in Dad Simulator Kratos one bit, but then again, if the gameplay ends up great, I in turn won't give two shits about the character I'm controlling in the end.

The gameplay will make or break the new one for me and what we saw in the demo didn't exactly look great combat wise, but then it was a heavily scripted demo and it's Cory Barlog directing who deserves the benefit of the doubt until we see more

 

[Released]

Oh lots of things. One I don't think I've seen mentioned just from skimming through is the widespread acceptance of sequels. Gamers play a sequel that looks a little better, with some added polish and maybe a couple of new features, and it's loved. Why? I'll never understand.

Yes they do.

Especially early N64/PS1 level 3D games.

The game is a piece of technology that hasn't changed at all. It's running the exact same code today as when it was released. WE are the ones who have aged, along with our expectations.

 

[jdstorm]

I want xDollars per Hour of Value.

Seriously Id rather a great 5 hour game then a mediocre 50 hour game. Especially if the 5 hour game can be beaten in 2-3 hours once you know how to play it.

 

[zenspider]

"I think everything should be Dark Souls".

Ftfy

Honestly, I'm so glad Souls had the influence it did, mainly so I can shut up about it, but BotW will be the open-world touchstone for many and I do think it's influence can better the genre, but I won't say another word about it. Promise.

Spoiler

fingers crossed

 

[UserDoesNotExist]

"Don't spoil that 15-year-old game! I may play it some day and I don't want you ruining it for me!"

We've come to the point where we're spoiler tagging generic-ass boss names like Hungry Beast because of some vocal, selfish idiots that want to know nothing about old games you are Darth Revan Aeris dies Rosemary was his sled but yet browse enthusiast video game forums.

 

[pa22word]

I do and I still don't think it is.

I mean it obviously comes down to how sensitive you are to input lag, but if a game has mediocre performance or bad frame pacing (cough arkham knight) I usually dig out a pad for it. The games aren't unplayable, but they do indeed feel like a slideshow in my hands. I'm sorry if that offends your delicate sensibilities, but at the end of the day I really don't care.

 

[Comet]

Oh lots of things. One I don't think I've seen mentioned just from skimming through is the widespread acceptance of sequels. Gamers play a sequel that looks a little better, with some added polish and maybe a couple of new features, and it's loved. Why? I'll never understand.

Because if the original was enjoyable and a sequel offers more of that plus some minor upgrades it can be enjoyed and loved too?

 

[Plum]

"Don't spoil that 15-year-old game! I may play it some day and I don't want you ruining it for me!"

We've come to the point where we're spoiler tagging generic-ass boss names like Hungry Beast because of some vocal, selfish idiots that want to know nothing about old games you are Darth Revan Aeris dies Rosemary was his sled but yet browse enthusiast video game forums.

Come on, why post such bullshit?

Spoiler

Rosebud was his sled