• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why is action-gameplay so importaint in games? What do you feel you get out of it?

L

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
Ask yourself, what do you get out of games with great gameplay, but no other redeeming features? The answer I guess is "fun while you're playing them". But after the game is done, what are you left with? It almost seems like it's better motor skills, and wasted time, pretty much. This goes for most games that center around chasing high score. You can also feel re-energized and happier, which is great (and is certainly the case for me after playing Guitar Hero or Amplitude), but just that thought like "wasted" time comes up is interesting, and I remember seeing this mentioned on this forum a few days ago. Why do I *never* think this way after watching a good movie for example, but the older I get, the more I think that way for some objectively great games?

I think this may be the reason why almost all my all time favorite games center around the good story/experience, but also puzzle-based gameplay, and only then action-based gameplay. I guess with puzzles I feel like I can have my brain working in ways other than Pavlovian trained impulses, and with good story and experience I feel I'm left with something that was worth sitting down and looking at/interacting with, as it has enriched me somehow, be it artistically or in some thought provoking way.

What do you feel you get out of action based gameplay in games?
 
I just think action games are more suited to my lifestyle... I like pick-up-and-play games as a stress reliever or challenge test. More often than not, story tends to get in the way of gameplay, and inventive play mechanics or epic setpieces are a lot more interesting to me than a contrived plot twist.
 
I don't think that "action gameplay" and a good story and puzzles are mutually exclusive. Zelda is based on all three concepts.

I agree with you that a good story is key to making a game great. All games can't be great though. Good gameplay will make a game good enough to play through, I feel, even if I don't remember it with much fondness years later.

As for high-score chasers, I don't really get it either. Guess it isn't my thing.
 
Marconelly said:
What do you feel you get out of action based gameplay in games?
Click to expand...

I get satisfaction, or frustration if I suck at the game :lol

Anyway, it's a big problem of gaming, games are jsut a waste of time as opposed to other medias. Books, and music cultivate you, sports is good for you health and for your social life, but video games? They just isolate you in you're room.

I think it's one of the thing that prevent people, namely older people to don't consider gaming, and maybe that's why non-games works so well with older demographic.

But don't worry, Haze will change the world of narrative in video games with its uber mature storyline. It will be so mature every dev will fallow the exemple, and your mother will enjoy Halo 4 with it's shinny Haze-like story :)
 
KyanMehwulfe said:
It's because action gameplay is the virtual extension of physical activity, not a cousin to film cinematic narrative.
Click to expand...
I don't see how that's true. Excluding Wii or Eyetoy games, you are sitting down and moving your fingers. There's no physical activity involved there at all.
 
I do things that I couldn't do in real life. Such as flying helicopters, killing collosi, and being an amoeba that goes around eating other amoebas.
 
Until the quality of the writing increases, a storyline cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great
Until the quality of the puzzles increase, adding puzzles cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great
Until the quality of the action gameplay increases, focusing on the action gameplay cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great


some players prefer one area over another
some games excel in one area over another
barely any games excel in more than one area

another example of this is recees. Just because peanut butter and chocolate do mix well doesn't mean that all candies that contain one should contain the other. Nor does it mean that getting peanut butter, chocolate, and sour apple mixed is a good combo

IMO: the storylines in games are horrible and most of the puzzles are oversimplified garbage. If a game has good gameplay, I can play it regardless of the other aspects. If it does not, then the story better be great. Puzzles I don't care so much for. The best puzzles are always found in games with no semblance of a story, anyway
 
For me, plot and atmosphere comes far above anything else in a game. I can completely forgive terrible glameplay if the story is good - I mean, Broken Sword is my fav. game ffs, and the gameplay there is just awful.

I just love storytelling. Cinema, literature, art, games, theatre, whatever, I love a good story.
 
Marconelly said:
Ask yourself, what do you get out of games with great gameplay, but no other redeeming features?
Click to expand...

If the game is good enough, and not a mash happy fun fest, you get an immense sense of satisfaction from using your brain and your wits to outsmart an intelligent AI/human opponent. Ideally, every battle situation is a puzzle in and of itself, with multiple solutions.

Take Ninja Gaiden Sigma. I just beat it last night, and now mission mode is unlocked. Each mission offers a unique challenge, and your strategy for each one varies depending on what weapon you're good with, what items are available for use in the stage area, and the type and number of enemies on screen.

In conclusion, good action games should feel like a puzzle in and of themselves.
 
Because it can provide lots of replayability in many different ways.
Take DMC3 for example,it spawn lots of videos of people executing beautiful combos or SS'ing DMD mode or even completed the game with that particular weapon.etc. It even have it's own True Style tournament where players compete against each other to see who can clear a stage with the best stylish fighting for each style category.(Ask Dahbomb or C Warrior)
 
KTallguy said:
If the game is good enough, and not a mash happy fun fest, you get an immense sense of satisfaction from using your brain and your wits to outsmart an intelligent AI/human opponent. Ideally, every battle situation is a puzzle in and of itself, with multiple solutions.

Take Ninja Gaiden Sigma. I just beat it last night, and now mission mode is unlocked. Each mission offers a unique challenge, and your strategy for each one varies depending on what weapon you're good with, what items are available for use in the stage area, and the type and number of enemies on screen.

In conclusion, good action games should feel like a puzzle in and of themselves.
Click to expand...
That's a very good point. Now that I think about it, figuring that stuff out is what I like most about action games.
 
Marconelly said:
I don't see how that's true. Excluding Wii or Eyetoy games, you are sitting down and moving your fingers. There's no physical activity involved there at all.
Click to expand...
Virtual extension, not simply extension. It's a matter of feedback.

Let me illustrate an example, a racing game. You asked why a racing game doesn't leave you with the same sense of feeling as a movie, specifically its narrative. Now ask yourself, what is the sense of exhilaration you get from a racing game more akin to: the creative narrative of a movie, or the real physical racing of a vehicle. Is it starting to make sense now?

Action gameplay gives a virtual sense of exhilaration akin to that same exhilaration which similar physical can provide. It's different than the creative stirring you get from narrative. Thus why I stated simple that the root comparison was misplaced.
 
When I play a videogame, I want it to mostly have action in it. Most so-called "puzzle games" are a joke if you think they -- in any way -- elevate your mind. They're just as bad as action-based games in that respect.

Something as simple as Tetris is very fun, but it doesn't make you smart. The same goes for Lumines, Puyo Pop, Meteos, Puzzle League, etc. You're getting absolutely nothing more out of it.

Other games like Zelda are neat, but their puzzle-based parts are total crap. Figuring out that you need to lay stones certain ways? That you need to light certain torches to advance? A gahdamned joke. And what are you left with when you figure out these puzzles? Nothing, because you already know how to do the puzzle -- whereas you may be able to continually improve your motor-based skills in the very same game.

You're nuts (or sheltered) if you think than more than maybe 3 or 4 games ever have been mentally stimulating in terms of plot. Otherwise, you're insulting every other medium in existence. If you want a good story, read a book. See a good film. Even read a handful of blogs. But, stay far away from videogames.

Outside of something like Brain Age or Big Brain Academy, I haven't seen any games where I come away saying, "You know, I actually feel like my brain got a workout."
 
Marconelly said:
Ask yourself, what do you get out of games with great gameplay, but no other redeeming features? The answer I guess is "fun while you're playing them". But after the game is done, what are you left with? It almost seems like it's better motor skills, and wasted time, pretty much. This goes for most games that center around chasing high score. You can also feel re-energized and happier, which is great (and is certainly the case for me after playing Guitar Hero or Amplitude), but just that thought like "wasted" time comes up is interesting, and I remember seeing this mentioned on this forum a few days ago. Why do I *never* think this way after watching a good movie for example, but the older I get, the more I think that way for some objectively great games?

I think this may be the reason why almost all my all time favorite games center around the good story/experience, but also puzzle-based gameplay, and only then action-based gameplay. I guess with puzzles I feel like I can have my brain working in ways other than Pavlovian trained impulses, and with good story and experience I feel I'm left with something that was worth sitting down and looking at/interacting with, as it has enriched me somehow, be it artistically or in some thought provoking way.

What do you feel you get out of action based gameplay in games?
Click to expand...

Outside of work, eating, etc most of the stuff we do is just passing time. As a father of two kids, my game time is extremely limited. All my leisure activities come under scrutiny, because I have to choose between watching a movie, reading a book, playing a game going to the gym. After my parenting tasks I can basically do one of these each day.

Looking at leisure time from this perspective you have to be pretty ruthless with your choices. I choose story based games for this reason. It took me 6 months of play time to complete Dragon Quest 8, because I could only devote a few hours each week. I have been playing the PS3 version of Oblivion since May, I probably won't finish that until September. All other games are just dipped into whilst I progress these epic story driven games, which are like book substitutes for me. Stuff like Guitar Hero and Singstar are great for parties, but I can't give them any solo game time.
 
loosus said:
You're nuts (or sheltered) if you think than more than maybe 3 or 4 games ever have been mentally stimulating in terms of plot. Otherwise, you're insulting every other medium in existence.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that, I think there's more than just 3-4, but a small number nonetheless, but such games almost by a rule happen to be my favorites - which is why I started this thread to begin with. Should there be more game stories that challenge other kinds of media? I don't see why not.

Other games like Zelda are neat, but their puzzle-based parts are total crap. Figuring out that you need to lay stones certain ways? That you need to light certain torches to advance? A gahdamned joke. And what are you left with when you figure out these puzzles? Nothing, because you already know how to do the puzzle -- whereas you may be able to continually improve your motor-based skills in the very same game.
Click to expand...
I think there's some brain workout involved in figuring out logical puzzles, or even illogical ones, or puzzles that require you to think "outside the box". The type of puzzles I had in mind when I mentioned them are those found in P&C adventure games, or in games such as Zelda, Ico, GoW, etc. Not the puzzles like Tetris, Lumines, etc.
 
It'd be fine if there were more games with good storylines, but I'd be just as fine without it. When I want a good storyline, I know where to go. When I want to play a fun game, I know where to go. I just see no reason for the two to mix. I don't get "immersed" in games where I feel like I'm that character or something.
 
Marconelly said:
Ask yourself, what do you get out of games with great gameplay, but no other redeeming features? The answer I guess is "fun while you're playing them". But after the game is done, what are you left with? It almost seems like it's better motor skills, and wasted time, pretty much. This goes for most games that center around chasing high score. You can also feel re-energized and happier, which is great (and is certainly the case for me after playing Guitar Hero or Amplitude), but just that thought like "wasted" time comes up is interesting, and I remember seeing this mentioned on this forum a few days ago. Why do I *never* think this way after watching a good movie for example, but the older I get, the more I think that way for some objectively great games?

I think this may be the reason why almost all my all time favorite games center around the good story/experience, but also puzzle-based gameplay, and only then action-based gameplay. I guess with puzzles I feel like I can have my brain working in ways other than Pavlovian trained impulses, and with good story and experience I feel I'm left with something that was worth sitting down and looking at/interacting with, as it has enriched me somehow, be it artistically or in some thought provoking way.

What do you feel you get out of action based gameplay in games?
Click to expand...

You're ****ed, there are only a handful of games with really good stories. 99.5% of games are a waste of time by your mantra.
 
For me, gameplay redeems all. Give me interesting and sharp mechanics, high replay value, and just fun gameplay, and I will play the game over and over. I can appreciate an enjoyable story, great atmosphere and high-quality presentation, but give me solid gameplay, first and foremost, so I can appreciate that story and that atmosphere and that presentation.

If I was really looking for that higher experience, I wouldn't find it in video games. There are a lot of things with story that you can only do with interactive media, but few have excelled at using that potential. There are a lot of enjoyable puzzle-based games, but most aren't that complex and onces you have the solution, the enjoyment of figuring out the solution is diluted. Solid overall gameplay gets the least dilution with each playthrough for me, and that's why my purchases are skewed towards games with high replay value.

I do want developers to continue explore using story in video games. But that doesn't mean they can leave interesting and fun gameplay behind.
 
A great game needs great game play. There's just no way around it. If you have great game play and a crappy story, you will be forgiven. if you have a great story and crappy game play, you will be hung. No one is going to play through Kakuto Chojin just because the story might be good(not saying that it is).

I honestly don't think I would pick one above the other in absolute terms though. Because I'm sure there are a ton of great games that I don't play just because they aren't my style (atmosphere, genre, story, whatever). I haven't gotten into the GTA games, for example, because the gangster stories and ugly visuals don't appeal to me. I avoid games with bald space marines altogether. Whether their game play is gold or not means nothing to me.
I don't play Mario or Zelda because their worlds are filled with too much glee.

People blast game stories too much though. They really aren't as bad as they're made out to be. It's common to see a guy/host/hater bash MGS's story for example, yet they go right out and buy shit like Armageddon, Crank, or the Transporter. They make The Transformers, the 300, or Spiderman 3 the blockbuster of the year and then they come to GAF and call Final Fantasy's story crap. @_@ It makes no sense.
 
Gattsu25 said:
Until the quality of the writing increases, a storyline cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great
Until the quality of the puzzles increase, adding puzzles cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great
Until the quality of the action gameplay increases, focusing on the action gameplay cannot be considered a requirement to make a game great


some players prefer one area over another
some games excel in one area over another
barely any games excel in more than one area

another example of this is recees. Just because peanut butter and chocolate do mix well doesn't mean that all candies that contain one should contain the other. Nor does it mean that getting peanut butter, chocolate, and sour apple mixed is a good combo

IMO: the storylines in games are horrible and most of the puzzles are oversimplified garbage. If a game has good gameplay, I can play it regardless of the other aspects. If it does not, then the story better be great. Puzzles I don't care so much for. The best puzzles are always found in games with no semblance of a story, anyway
Click to expand...

Im interested to hear what you think is a decent story? I enjoy some of the story in games, but it is the immersive element in games which draws me in. I think they have the capacity to be closer to book than films manage in terms of narrative and development. I find most block buster films have absolutely garbage stories though.

As for action games, I find quite a few of them lacking in other elements: story etc. They often do what they set out to do, but rarely hold my attention

peace
 
karasu said:
A great game needs great game play. There's just no way around it. If you have great game play and a crappy story, you will be forgiven. if you have a great story and crappy game play, you will be hung. No one is going to play through Kakuto Chojin just because the story might be good(not saying that it is).

I honestly don't think I would pick one above the other in absolute terms though. Because I'm sure there are a ton of great games that I don't play just because they aren't my style (atmosphere, genre, story, whatever). I haven't gotten into the GTA games, for example, because the gangster stories and ugly visuals don't appeal to me. I avoid games with bald space marines altogether. Whether their game play is gold or not means nothing to me.


People blast game stories too much though. They really aren't as bad as they're made out to be. It's common to see a guy/host/hater bash MGS's story for example, yet they go right out and buy shit like Armageddon, Crank, or the Transporter. They make The Transformers, the 300, or Spiderman 3 the blockbuster of the year and then they come to GAF and call Final Fantasy's story crap. @_@ It makes no sense.
Click to expand...


I agree...but I think good gameplay and good story in an adventure game etc is what makes a game trully great.

As for games with a good story and tedious gameplay, xenogears fits the bill. The story appealed to some my own interests, and had an air of mystery and 'controlling' narrative rarely seen in games, yet I found the gameplay to be terrible most of the time

peace
 
Yixian said:
For me, plot and atmosphere comes far above anything else in a game. I can completely forgive terrible glameplay if the story is good - I mean, Broken Sword is my fav. game ffs, and the gameplay there is just awful.

I just love storytelling. Cinema, literature, art, games, theatre, whatever, I love a good story.
Click to expand...

It's weird that you mention that because I've found, at least this gen, that advances in graphics and gameplay have enhanced what would otherwise be pretty lame stories. Like, I was rivited to the story in Gears Of War, just because everything else about the game was so enveloping. It was like "OKAY, WHERE NEXT WHERE NEXT."

Same with Dead Rising. I can only imagine, considering how interesting the book is, how mind blowing Mass Effect is going to be.
 
AdmiralViscen said:
You're ****ed, there are only a handful of games with really good stories. 99.5% of games are a waste of time by your mantra.
Click to expand...

QFT

Although I'm not sure I'd really reate any game as having a "good" story, not by even the lowest standards of movies or TV.
 
AdmiralViscen said:
You're ****ed, there are only a handful of games with really good stories. 99.5% of games are a waste of time by your mantra.
Click to expand...
I don't *only* play (or enjoy) games with really good stories. I never said that.

Furret said:
QFT

Although I'm not sure I'd really reate any game as having a "good" story, not by even the lowest standards of movies or TV.
Click to expand...
Grim Fandango, for example, has story that stacks up favorably to many other media, be it movies or TV. In fact, I can think of thousands of movies and TV shows that are much worse in that regard. There's a few more games that the same can be said for, but games not necessarily have to have a good story to be fulfilling in the sense I expressed in the original post. Interesting artwork, or programming, or interesting craft is something I also had in mind. How many TV shows have art design as sophisticated as Ico or SotC (or again Grim Fandango)? Not too many. As long as there's something to admire about the work of people who made the game, I don't think anyone can argue you wasted time playing it.
 
Marconelly said:
I don't *only* play (or enjoy) games with really good stories. I never said that.


Grim Fandango, for example, has story that stacks up favorably to many other media, be it movies or TV. In fact, I can think of thousands of movies and TV shows that are much worse in that regard.
Click to expand...

It had some great lines and characters (as all the LucsArts adventures did) but what there was of a story was largely incoherent.
 
movies, music and games brings me the same thing. It's fun while you play/listen/watch and can relief some stress. It's leisure, it's pleasure that's all. They aren't giving me anything else besides some info/history bits here and there.
the only things you really get something from is educative stuff. And this could be a videogame too, not just a book or a documentary.
 
Furret said:
It had some great lines and characters (as all the LucsArts adventures did) but what there was of a story was largely incoherent.
Click to expand...
Even though I disagree, I still ask do you think the games would benefit significantly if the stories in them were consistently better, or do you think they are just doomed by default to be like you say they are, worse than even worst TV shows, etc?
 
Marconelly said:
Even though I disagree, I still ask do you think the games would benefit significantly if the stories in them were consistently better, or do you think they are just doomed by default to be like you say they are, worse than even worst TV shows, etc?
Click to expand...

Personally I think trying to shoehorn complex narratives into games shows a basic lack of understanding, on the part of developers, as to what makes video games a unique form of entertainment in the first place.

What I find even more perplexing is how role-playing games continue to be endured despite their appallingly repetitive plots, terrible dialogue (most of which suffer from insultingly bad translations) and one dimensional characters.

There are a few exceptions like Phoenix Wright, Paper Mario and the LucasArts adventures but they're so few and far between that they can almost be put down to a statistical anomaly. (And in any case the actual stories, which was the original point, are still awful - they're just a collection of funny one-liners.)
 
Furret said:
QFT

Although I'm not sure I'd really reate any game as having a "good" story, not by even the lowest standards of movies or TV.
Click to expand...

Have you not seen Signs, Elektra, or the vast majority of big budget Hollywood releases? People act like movies are this paragon of quality, but they aren't. Least of all Hollywood movies. Most releases suck, and a good measure of them have worst internal logic, dialogue, and set pieces than you'll find in any game that prides itself on it's story. The story in Beyond Good & Evil for example is better than the story in a number of high grossing movie that was released this summer. It's better than POTC, The Fantastic Four, Transformers, Die Hard, Oceans Thirteen, etc etc. KOTOR tells a much better stories than most of the Star Wars films. The problem with good video game stories is one of perception. It's not typically presented like something as easily digestible as a big budget Hollywood picture, and the themes often require you to challenge your suspension of disbelief AKA find your imagination. People who don't do that just bail out and call the stories 'bad', but nothing could be further from the truth. Sure, gaming has no Martin Scorsese's, Takeshi Kitano's, P.T. Anderson's, or Bertolucci's. But it has storytellers who are FAR more equipped than your Michael Bay's and so forth.
 
A game like SotC is based solely on gameplay but would you argue that it doesn't leave its mark on the player far after it is beaten? The aftershocks of playing such a game are tremendous. It encourages you to play again, to feel the same sensation and sense of discovery over again. Zelda, Mario and Metroid achieve this same feat.
 
i think that one of the many advantages of using a tv screen as a game allows us to make action games even possible. we could always play a board game or whatever where everyone takes turns strategically and stuff, and that's been around for ages.

but the closest an "action" game can come to in real life is if you have some toys perceivably beating the crap out of each other. except with a game it actually happens :P
 
You know this is what I find so fascinating about this place, things HAVE to be one or the other, you can't thoroughly enjoy multiple things at once be it console brands, different genres or even different games within the same genre.
 
I like competive gameplay, whether it's solo or against friends. If I can basically game on auto-pilot for a few hours between minute bits of story, then I feel like I'm wasting time. It's probably part of the reason why I've been a completionist with the small handful of JRPGS I've played the last few years. They're too often mindlessly easy, so it forces me to stay focused.
 
Heh, I new my comment in the HS thread would be controversial, but I didn't expect a whole thread about it.

First, to the people attacking other peoples' preferences, there is room in this industry for gameplay driven games and story driven games. And, perhaps, every now and then we get a gem that has good gameplay and story.

Copied over from the HS thread: Yes I am a gamer, let me clarify. Obviously, gameplay is what makes something a game instead of a movie. I like being able to play parts of the story, instead of just observing it. It helps me get more immersed in the story if I feel like I have some control over it.

However, the actual depth, uniqueness, originality, and fun factor of the gameplay for me ranks way lower than the story. If you give me a choice between a game that has the best gameplay ever, but a crap story vs. a game with a great story, but painful gameplay, I would pick the great story. But some type of gameplay is a must for the immersion I mentioned earlier. Some gameplay is the price of admission for me, but it ranks relatively low in what determines what I think is a good game.

Make sense?

Obviously I do appreciate good gameplay, just saying it ranks fairly low for me.
 
It's very very rare for me to buy a game based solely on gameplay.Maybe it's because I don't buy a lot of games and it's gets more difficult to justify a purchase with only the action factor.I think that's because I'm still trying to top my favourite games of all time which all were quality games in other aspects other than just gameplay (series :Panzer Dragoon,Myst,Legacy of Kain).

Story and immersiveness in a believable and orignal videogame world (sometimes with it's own mythos and so on) are where I get most of my kicks from.This doesn't mean I don't care for gameplay but I can obsess over these elements a long time after I finished the game and the same can't be said about Ninja Gaiden's gameplay for example (despite beeing awesome).

That is why I get excite about games like Too Human for example even though the glimpses of gameplay we have been given so far leave a lot of room for improvement.
Quite frankly I don't really care if the game doesn't end up beeing as fun as it could be; the mere promise of an engaging story set in a world clearly crafted as a labour of love is enough to let me excited about the game.


karasu said:
A great game needs great game play. There's just no way around it. If you have great game play and a crappy story, you will be forgiven. if you have a great story and crappy game play, you will be hung. No one is going to play through Kakuto Chojin just because the story might be good(not saying that it is).
.
Click to expand...


I didn't particularly like Legacy of Kain :Defiance's gameplay and I still played it so I could progress storywise.
 
I do love the number of people in this thread going "Yeah, I waded through crap gameplay for a b-movie storyline, and it was awesome, so eat that!"
 
Campster said:
I do love the number of people in this thread going "Yeah, I waded through crap gameplay for a b-movie storyline, and it was awesome, so eat that!"
Click to expand...

I haven't noticed anyone in this thread claiming that they waded through a bad game to progress a bad story. Just cause it has cutscenes doesn't mean it has a good story.
 
evilromero said:
A game like SotC is based solely on gameplay but would you argue that it doesn't leave its mark on the player far after it is beaten? The aftershocks of playing such a game are tremendous. It encourages you to play again, to feel the same sensation and sense of discovery over again. Zelda, Mario and Metroid achieve this same feat.
Click to expand...
You are helping my case with SotC. The action part of the gameplay in SotC is just one of it's draws, and some would argue it's the weakest aspect. For the record, I disagree, and I think physics based climbing is very unique and interesting, and adds a lot to the game. But you're fooling yourself if you think the game would leave the same kind impression on you if not for its art design, story, characters and puzzle based aspect of gameplay.
 
Confidence Man said:
Are you seriously asking what the point to having fun is?
Click to expand...

When I first read the original post, I thought the same thing. But a lot of people are looking for or attributing some higher purpose to their entertainment. It's very common in literature, and less so but still common with movies and music. Apparently videogames as well.

I believe entertainment is an end in itself. Not just that, but the impulse to try to infuse entertainment with any kind of higher purpose indicates a corruption of the art as well as the artist. Having fun or being entertained certainly isn't wasting time, though. We have a distinct need for entertainment.
 
Interesting post, cuz usually I think just the opposite. Games with great stories/puzzles usually are good only for that initial experience. On second playthroughs since I already know everything that is going to happen and how to solve every puzzle, I just get bored immediately. Some might argue that this is the same for watching a good movie again, but it really isnt since the typical movie is about 2 hours and the typical game is at least 5 times that. So playing these types of games again usually feels like "wasted time"

Games with great gameplay though...I will play these forever. Guitar Hero, Pac-man, Street Fighter, Ninja Gaiden, Halo etc....what these games all have in common is a great core gameplay base that is fun to play even after you've seen everything you can do in a game. You have fun immediately, and the replay value is infinite.
 
CrapSandwich said:
When I first read the original post, I thought the same thing. But a lot of people are looking for or attributing some higher purpose to their entertainment. It's very common in literature, and less so but still common with movies and music. Apparently videogames as well.

I believe entertainment is an end in itself. Not just that, but the impulse to try to infuse entertainment with any kind of higher purpose indicates a corruption of the art as well as the artist. Having fun or being entertained certainly isn't wasting time, though. We have a distinct need for entertainment.
Click to expand...
Good point as well. I have nothing against entertainment with zero educational or thought provoking value. Hell, I love watching crappiest crap movies just so that I can cheer to amazingly terrible lines of dialogue. But I can't watch just that, or say that I prefer them over actual masterpieces of cinema. Basically I don't think I can stand constantly be "just" entertained, even if it's about a hobby.

Maybe with games the problem is that you usually have to spend a lot more time to finish them, so you innately expect more out of games that you played for really long.
 
CrapSandwich said:
When I first read the original post, I thought the same thing. But a lot of people are looking for or attributing some higher purpose to their entertainment. It's very common in literature, and less so but still common with movies and music. Apparently videogames as well.

I believe entertainment is an end in itself. Not just that, but the impulse to try to infuse entertainment with any kind of higher purpose indicates a corruption of the art as well as the artist. Having fun or being entertained certainly isn't wasting time, though. We have a distinct need for entertainment.
Click to expand...

A person who entertains isn't necessarily an artist.Art and entertainment intercept themselves but are not always the same thing.
 
Endow said:
A person who entertains isn't necessarily an artist.Art and entertainment intercept themselves but are not always the same thing.
Click to expand...

I foresee this conversation not ending well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
How do you feel about camping in FPS?
2
54
685
CuteFaceJay replied
AI usage in emulation, PC ports of retro games and recomps...how do you feel
2
64
1K
Teslerum replied
What game has the best feel to it, for you?
2
92
2K
ToneyJ replied
Which game has the best gameplay? For you personally
2 3 4
182
658
Black_Stride replied
Doom and Gloom about gaming, eff it. What was/were the best game(s) you played this year in your backlog so far?
Community  2
97
789
Sentenza replied
Top Bottom