Support NeoGAF

[manfestival]

Not really. These games aren’t impossible, usually this saying comes up in threads where someone is complaining about the games being trash or too hard and it’s like, no, not really, you just have to keep trying. Don’t give up on yourself. You aren’t good? Git good. It’s actually positive reinforcement. A negative response would be “stop playing, you will never be good”.

lol wut? I can't even right now. Is this a joke post? I can't tell.

 

[guggnichso]

The Guardian spits on gaming. Gamer posts thread criticizing aforementioned Guardian article. To ask "why" would be the equivalent of asking why someone complains when a person spits on their breakfast. We're humans, we react. It's part of being a real person & not an NPC.

„The Guardian“ did not „spit on gaming“. One person employed by the Guardian wrote some half serious OPINION PIECE on what they don’t like about current gaming trends.

And it’s ok to think this article is dumb. It’s also ok to, like me, think that there is some real issue with competitive online gaming in the current situation, where it tends to push you to microtransactions, and therefore I think the author went at this from a flawed perspective.

On the other hand, if you don’t want to compete, simply play games that are not competitive, the end. It is a nothingburger of an article, and stylizing it to be a part of a culture war against „evul feminismz“ is just lame shit.

There are and will be competitive and non competitive games, because BOTH SELL. There will also be hard games and easy games, because BOTH SELL. I don’t get what the fuss is about except „evul feminist don’t like muh gamez“.

 

[strange headache]

Btw on intersectionality which is pretty critical of modern takes on the concept, so perhaps that's something the OP misread.

I don't want to derail this topic by starting another debate on intersectionality. I consider her article to be part defending part criticizing the notion. Unfortunately her criticism is far too mild because it fails to identify the axiomatic premise as utterly false. Some choice quotes:

If Crenshaw were the final word on intersectionality, the concept would be a useful metaphor to capture the awful real-world shortcomings of anti-oppression efforts based on rigid categorical abstraction.

This makes it an interesting tool with which to consider contemporary left debates about identity, class and the eternal question of what is to be done.

It is no coincidence that modern identity politics and neoliberalism were born at roughly the same time.

Although I appreciate her effort at refocusing the debate on social inequality on the basic problem of class (which is a classical leftist approach) by dissecting the divisive identitarian approach of the populist left. Unfortunately she kind of ruins it all by blaming it squarely on neoliberalism in her conclusion.

You're not wrong though and since I really don't want this topic to devolve into another endless debate about feminism, I decided to take it out of the OP.

 

[Mr Wonderstuff]

Not a fan of 'Git Gud' - just comes across as flippant, arrogant and patronising.

 

[hariseldon]

I don't want to derail this topic by starting another debate on intersectionality. I consider her article to be part defending part criticizing the notion. Unfortunately her criticism is far too mild because it fails to identify the axiomatic premise as utterly false. Some choice quotes:

Although I appreciate her effort at refocusing the debate on social inequality on the basic problem of class (which is a classical leftist approach) by dissecting the divisive identitarian approach of the populist left. Unfortunately she kind of ruins is at by blaming it squarely on neoliberalism in her conclusion.

You're not wrong though and since I really don't want this topic to devolve into another endless debate about feminism, I decided to take it out of the OP.

Nothing there I disagree with, I just figured it might be worth mentioning that she's not a complete fruitcake, ie she's at least thinking on some level outside of the white-men-are-evil rhetoric that is common today, and it's possible that her article is tempered for its audience! Good call on removing that bit and I'll shut up about feminism from here-on in this topic.

 

[Raven117]

The Guardian spits on gaming. Gamer posts thread criticizing aforementioned Guardian article. To ask "why" would be the equivalent of asking why someone complains when a person spits on their breakfast. We're humans, we react. It's part of being a real person & not an NPC.

Eye roll. Spits in your breakfast? Again, holy overreaction! That’s not what happened. A person didn’t like gaming in the internet (not even that, just one part of gaming).

So.What.

Yes, we are human, but perhaps you and the OP might be better served by not succumbing to the weaker parts of the human existence. In other words, sometimes, it’s just better to let it go things that truly don’t matter. Slide.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Eye roll. Spits in your breakfast? Again, holy overreaction! That’s not what happened. A person didn’t like gaming in the internet (not even that, just one part of gaming).

So.What.

Yes, we are human, but perhaps you and the OP might be better served by not succumbing to the weaker parts of the human existence. In other words, sometimes, it’s just better to let it go things that truly don’t matter. Slide.

You're falling into the same ironic pitfall as the author of the piece:

"Sometimes it's just better to let it go," I typed, passing on this wisdom to the internet stranger I saw on a videogame forum. "Slide," I finished and then gazed out my window into the great expansive reality.

It's okay to laugh at absurd contradiction. We don't actually need to make an equal-and-opposite defense of it.

 

[UltimateUnknown]

In one article she managed to s**t on gamers, farmers, truck drivers, her own job/employer, and most importantly - herself.

And 90% of that was most likely unintentional. Man, that's quite the gift.

 

[Valonquar]

This reminds me of the part in Monkey Island where the guy in the alley tells you how to beat the game. Tells you to press F5. If you press F5, it says "YOU WIN" and the credits start to roll.

 

[RScrewed]

I enjoy video games, but I’m not good at playing them and I don’t want to be.

Lol....reminds me of this.

Sour grapes.

snowflakes... snowflakes everywhere....

Let's not lose our heads. I'm willing to bet 95-99% of the gaming community has no common ground with this incredibly vocal minority.

We should all be able to sleep well at night knowing it's just a few wackos who are taking full advantage of the internet age.

If we start thinking the whole world has gone nuts, we're going to be lumping completely innocent people in with the few crazies. The world is a pretty great place. Check out r/gonewild and see for yourself! (...NSFW).

 

[Ixiah]

Sounds like she needs to git gud at writing....

 

[strange headache]

Yes, we are human, but perhaps you and the OP might be better served by not succumbing to the weaker parts of the human existence. In other words, sometimes, it’s just better to let it go things that truly don’t matter. Slide.

We're here to discuss a Guardian article about games and its surrounding culture. We're a gaming forum after all, aren't we? If you think it's a discussion not worth having, that's fine, but then why are you even here in the first place?

 

[Blam]

Farming is a “middle of the road” and “dead end” job apparently.

I wonder how this chick thinks food gets to her table?

What an arrogant idiot.

Or truck driving.

I wonder how her Amazon deliveries get to her house or even worse god forbid the food making it to the grocery store or the coffee in her Starbucks.

 

[Ichabod]

She should play Shadow of Mordor.

 

[ruvikx]

„The Guardian“ did not „spit on gaming“. One person employed by the Guardian wrote some half serious OPINION PIECE on what they don’t like about current gaming trends.

Here's my "half-serious" reply to the Guardian's "opinion piece", based upon this excerpt:

I find this response baffling. I don’t want to “git gud” at video games. I play games for purely escapist reasons, and part of what I’m trying to escape is the relentless pressure to improve myself.

A game of chess is considered... a "game", yet some people are really, really better than others. Some people also play it at a highly competitive world class level. Rules must also be learned & respected. Yet it's also considered escapism & entertainment. Until someone can be plugged into a super-computer & learn an activity whilst sleeping, this "journalist" will be forever barking up the wrong tree via demanding route one towards winning without effort. BTW, The Guardian doesn't just release stuff without a reason, i.e. they post this sort of shit to get under peoples' skin & change the industry itself to suit their own wants.

 

[Raynes]

Amazing people get paid to write low effort, trash like this. Probably took her 10 mins.
She should git gud at her job and do some real journalism.

This low effort article generated a lot of attention. It was inline with SJW values of The Guardian and baited many people. She would be nothing with you people to eat her shit up.

 

[Raven117]

You're falling into the same ironic pitfall as the author of the piece:

"Sometimes it's just better to let it go," I typed, passing on this wisdom to the internet stranger I saw on a videogame forum. "Slide," I finished and then gazed out my window into the great expansive reality.

It's okay to laugh at absurd contradiction. We don't actually need to make an equal-and-opposite defense of it.

Not really. I am asking a very specific question to the OP of why this bothered him so much.

Everyone has become so sensitive nowadays. Opinion. Response. Commentary! Over and over.

You give these people power by churning it over and over. The offense. The outrage.

We need to bring back 2006 internet. Don’t feed the trolls.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Not really. I am asking a very specific question to the OP of why this bothered him so much.

Everyone has become so sensitive nowadays. Opinion. Response. Commentary! Over and over.

I poked fun at your super-serious response but apparently "everyone has become so sensitive nowadays".

Miss me with that projection, bro. I'm feeling great. You?

 

[Raven117]

We're here to discuss a Guardian article about games and its surrounding culture. We're a gaming forum after all, aren't we? If you think it's a discussion not worth having, that's fine, but then why are you even here in the first place?

I do love me some games. Kinda hate the culture surrounding games at this point, but meh. There was a much better and tactful way to use this article to discussion culture that the OP didn’t do. It read like it was written from a 20 year old “gamer.” Instead of an attempt at discussing something deeper.

I poked fun at your super-serious response but apparently "everyone has become so sensitive nowadays".

Miss me with that projection, bro. I'm feeling great. You?

We are missing on tone. (Big surprise. Internet and all).

The OP wrote a very impassioned response to a trash article, and I responded why he was bothering responding to trash articles. I was not offended by this, just offering a different perspective to the OP to question why he chose to respond the way he did.

 

[strange headache]

She would be nothing with you people to eat her shit up.

That's a fair assessment, but what would be the alternative? To just let these people reign supreme and allow them to go unchallenged? It's the reason why we are in this mess in the first place, because we ignored that stuff for far too long in the hope that it would simply go away all by itself.

Not really. I am asking a very specific question to the OP of why this bothered him so much.

Should have read my reply on page 3. The author clearly doesn't want a reasonable discussion about attitudes in gaming, it's more vitriolic clickbait designed to garner attention at the expense of whole demographics. It's despicable and not befitting a publication such as The Guardian.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

We are missing on tone. (Big surprise. Internet and all).

The OP wrote a very impassioned response to a trash article, and I responded why he was bothering responding to trash articles. I was not offended by this, just offering a different perspective to the OP to question why he chose to respond the way he did.

Sounds like we're both not offended, then. Works for me.

What's the deeper issue you thing we should be focusing on instead, out of curiosity? I don't know if the article is really a good launchpad to discuss the merit of challenge in games, but I'm down for that topic.

 

[Whitecrow]

We are missing on tone. (Big surprise. Internet and all).

The OP wrote a very impassioned response to a trash article, and I responded why he was bothering responding to trash articles. I was not offended by this, just offering a different perspective to the OP to question why he chose to respond the way he did.

Sometimes, the stupidity is soo big that one doest not simply let it slide.

One more little grain of sugar may give you diabetes if you are already on the edge = )
(I just came across this analogy)

 

[Raven117]

Sounds like we're both not offended, then. Works for me.

What's the deeper issue you thing we should be focusing on instead, out of curiosity? I don't know if the article is really a good launchpad to discuss the merit of challenge in games, but I'm down for that topic.

IM OFFENDED! Can I get something? Im offended and thus should be afforded more rights!

Since you asked, that article could have been used to discuss whether the online gaming community is either helpful or harmful to new players. (Yes, the answer is that it depends on alot of things). The article, as you stated, could have been used, to discuss the variety of games saying some are harder while others are more "escapism." An even edgier topic would be whether there is a gender difference between men and women and what kind of challenge they like in games (if there is any distinction) among people that play more complex games (ie, not mobile, but actual sit on the couch or computer chair games).

Should have read my reply on page 3. The author clearly doesn't want a reasonable discussion about attitudes in gaming, it's more vitriolic clickbait designed to garner attention at the expense of whole demographics. It's despicable and not befitting a publication such as The Guardian.

Of course it is. And the OP swallowed the bait hook line and sinker. Not everything deserves a response. Yes. Even on the internet!

 

[Raven117]

Sometimes, the stupidity is soo big that one doest not simply let it slide.

One more little grain of sugar may give you diabetes if you are already on the edge = )
(I just came across this analogy)

LOL, don't get diabetes dude. And I disagree to a certain extent. Just let stupid be stupid. Its not like we are discussing this with the author, so our discussion is doing nothing to help change the author's mind or anything else.

 

[hariseldon]

that article could have been used to discuss whether the online gaming community is either helpful or harmful to new players. (Yes, the answer is that it depends on alot of things).

That would be a useful topic though likely not so good for clickbait. Tbh online gaming communities are a mixed bag. Forums can be quite helpful, due to their old-school nature (yes you get dickbags, but because they lend themselves to long-form discussion you end up with a lot of useful discussion around game mechanics etc which can help a newcomer immensely). Social media and online chat (especially voice chat during the game) tend to be less useful, but as you say this depends on the community. If you're playing COD for instance some 14 year old is going to call you the N-word regardless of whether you fit the description, because it's so edgy. On the other hand, play iRacing and the voice chat in practice sessions can be really useful with drivers giving advice on how to approach a particular corner, car setup discussion, advice on how much fuel you'll need, discussion of optimal gaming hardware etc being commonplace on the road side, less so on the oval side which tends to be a bit less friendly. I will admit that the sweary 14-year-olds rather put me off playing Team Fortress for instance, and the welcoming nature of drivers on iRacing helped me to become really quite decent at racing, so the nature of the community absolutely does impact upon take-up and retention of new players (I will add that iRacing does have its issues - the rookie classes where you start until you prove yourself worthy are an absolute shitshow and can put people off at the start).

 

[Whitecrow]

LOL, don't get diabetes dude. And I disagree to a certain extent. Just let stupid be stupid. Its not like we are discussing this with the author, so our discussion is doing nothing to help change the author's mind or anything else.

But people is bored, and people wanna talk about things : /

 

[BANGS]

I really don't understand this notion. If you don't want to be good at gaming, that's cool. Just play easy games or accept defeat with games that are too hard. The only reason "git gud" comes up is because people ask why they can't beat a game that's too hard for them...

In most games, the challenge is part of the fun. If you don't enjoy the challenge that's cool, but you can't expect EVERY game to NOT have challenge. Complaining about that is just insanity. Why should every game cater to you? Should people who enjoy challenge not be able to enjoy games? Again, I just really don't understand this notion...

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

IM OFFENDED! Can I get something? Im offended and thus should be afforded more rights!

Since you asked, that article could have been used to discuss whether the online gaming community is either helpful or harmful to new players. (Yes, the answer is that it depends on alot of things).

Online gaming is a separate issue from challenge itself. It is one way to find a challenge, yes, and it is also an outlet for competition, but that's not challenge itself. I think the issue at hand is deeper than the problems caused by an onling gaming community.

The article, as you stated, could have been used, to discuss the variety of games saying some are harder while others are more "escapism." An even edgier topic would be whether there is a gender difference between men and women and what kind of challenge they like in games (if there is any distinction) among people that play more complex games (ie, not mobile, but actual sit on the couch or computer chair games).

That would be interesting. What do you think?
Quantic Foundry did the work of grabbing the data for us, at least. I find myself citing this article every so often.

The #1 and #3 are essentially "puzzle" (I'm not certain why there's a distinction, since there is no "hardcore puzzle" option, so I'm guessing it's all puzzle).

A friend of mine is superb at Vs puzzle games. She stomps me (and her husband) at games like Baku Baku Animal, Magical Drop (though I can hold my own), Landmaker, and Octomania (Puzzle Takoron). She's one of the best IRL opponents I've ever played. And -- if I may be allowed to brag to serve the point -- I'm pretty darn good at Vs puzzle games.

The genres that women enjoy doesn't seem to put any sort of cap or limitation on their desire or their ability to grapple with challenge. Those games can be plenty difficult in their own way.

 

[JimboJones]

The term is definitely obnoxious if you used it when someone was genuinely asking for help on a forum or something like that.

Kinda depends on the situation, I wouldn't recommend going into a competitive FPS lobby and asking people "hey guys need some help" because people on there are already in a competitive mind frame looking for any kind of weakness to exploit, so your just going to get lots of posturing and dick waving.

 

[manfestival]

Excuse my ignorance but what is match 3? I always knew family/farm sims were popular amongst females but match 3? what be that?

 

[BANGS]

Excuse my ignorance but what is match 3? I always knew family/farm sims were popular amongst females but match 3? what be that?

Think Candy Crush...

 

[LukeSkywater]

Excuse my ignorance but what is match 3? I always knew family/farm sims were popular amongst females but match 3? what be that?

Bejeweled, Candy Crush etc

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Excuse my ignorance but what is match 3? I always knew family/farm sims were popular amongst females but match 3? what be that?

Columns, and everything thereafter:

 

[mckmas8808]

The quotes here are just weird, it really does seem like someone angry at other things like their job and taking it out on gaming. How does "meaningless work" relate to gaming? Some people want stimulating experiences where they push themselves and are rewarded with a sense of accomplishment. Gaming is a great medium for that. It's not gaming's fault if the author doesn't want to learn or understand the appeal of these type of games.

Pretty much this!

 

[#Phonepunk#]

lol wut? I can't even right now. Is this a joke post? I can't tell.

it's not a joke post. if you are confronted with a viewpoint not often shared, perhaps you just need to open your mind rather than declare something a joke or a troll.

why do you think it's a joke post? it is that you can only perceive two sides of an argument and anything else is noise to you? maybe try to open your mind. there are memes all over the internet, used by people for all kinds of reasons, used ironically, used sincerely, etc. in some cases it can be a mixture.

personally i just got into playing Bloodborne for the first time. i posted a bit in an RTTP thread. at one point i was having trouble with a certain boss and someone wrote "git gud". i returned to the game and faced with the task of working through it myself, i persevered. i got gud. i didn't give up. it is about overcoming obstacles.

 

[manfestival]

it's not a joke post. if you are confronted with a viewpoint not often shared, perhaps you just need to open your mind rather than declare something a joke or a troll.

why do you think it's a joke post? it is that you can only perceive two sides of an argument and anything else is noise to you? maybe try to open your mind. there are memes all over the internet, used by people for all kinds of reasons, used ironically, used sincerely, etc. in some cases it can be a mixture.

personally i just got into playing Bloodborne for the first time. i posted a bit in an RTTP thread. at one point i was having trouble with a certain boss and someone wrote "git gud". i returned to the game and faced with the task of working through it myself, i persevered. i got gud. i didn't give up. it is about overcoming obstacles.

 

[NickFire]

Why is someone who says they do not want to be good at video games writing about video games? That makes no sense to me at all, unless they just like being a whiny bitch to normal people.

 

[autoduelist]

Of course it is. And the OP swallowed the bait hook line and sinker. Not everything deserves a response. Yes. Even on the internet!

-Culled from different post

LOL, don't get diabetes dude. And I disagree to a certain extent. Just let stupid be stupid. Its not like we are discussing this with the author, so our discussion is doing nothing to help change the author's mind or anything else.

-Culled from different post

. In other words, sometimes, it’s just better to let it go things that truly don’t matter. Slide.

Since when do you have to discuss something with the author to validate discussing it at all? We discuss the works by dead people all the time. People write entire books on the works of dead people. Forums exist to allow discussion between opposing views. And we don't even need to change the mind of the person we are actually talking with to make it worthwhile, sometimes a listener will learn, sometimes it's worthwhile just to exercise our own mind by putting our position into words.

It's not outrage culture to disagree with someone. It's not outrage culture to discuss something. It is outrage culture to attempt to shut discussion down, which ultimately is what you are advocating.

If someone is going to publish ill considered trash as their opinion on gaming, other people have every right to shred them for their stupidity. Not all opinions have actual merit, not all opinions are equal. It is not outrage culture to tell them why you think they are wrong, it is outrage culture to scream in their face that they don't have the right to say it in the first place, which no one seems to be doing here. The author of the article has every right to make their stupidity public. Anyone who writes that they enjoy doing something but actively don't want to be good at it deserves to be lambasted.

And the act of telling people to let a published article slide when you can't let a forum post slide is comical.

 

[Airola]

Excuse my ignorance but what is match 3? I always knew family/farm sims were popular amongst females but match 3? what be that?

Think Candy Crush...

Bejeweled, Candy Crush etc

And HuniePop

 

[GermanZepp]

Painfull reading. Reminds me (in a sense) of Roe Rogan ( i like some of his interviews) talking about Fortnite, it was painfull to listen dat podcast, it made me want to interrupt him to explain how the things are. And make me think about what others may feel when someone who as no fucking clue of what is talking about get the mic and ramble away.

 

[Airola]

Columns, and everything thereafter:

I think the "Match 3" genre is its own distinctive subgenre of block puzzles. Columns belong to the Tetris type of games but these Match 3 games are different from that just like games like Zuma are. A Tetris lover might like Columns more than a Zuma game. And a Zuma-lover might not be into Columns or Tetris at all.

The Match 3 genre is about screen being completely filled with blocks and then you moving or matching in other ways the existing tiles with each other. Blocks that are left on empty places will drop down and the screen fills with blocks again. This might cause an avalanche of subsequent matches, but when there are no more matches the screen is full again and you repeat what you previously did. The gameplay of Columns is, I think, as far from a game like that than a game like Zuma is, and Columns is much closer to Tetris than a Zuma game or a Match 3 game.

 

[ROMhack]

The quotes here are just weird, it really does seem like someone angry at other things like their job and taking it out on gaming. How does "meaningless work" relate to gaming? Some people want stimulating experiences where they push themselves and are rewarded with a sense of accomplishment. Gaming is a great medium for that. It's not gaming's fault if the author doesn't want to learn or understand the appeal of these type of games.

And then we get mad at them. It's the circle of internet life.

 

[Raven117]

That would be a useful topic though likely not so good for clickbait. Tbh online gaming communities are a mixed bag. Forums can be quite helpful, due to their old-school nature (yes you get dickbags, but because they lend themselves to long-form discussion you end up with a lot of useful discussion around game mechanics etc which can help a newcomer immensely). Social media and online chat (especially voice chat during the game) tend to be less useful, but as you say this depends on the community. If you're playing COD for instance some 14 year old is going to call you the N-word regardless of whether you fit the description, because it's so edgy. On the other hand, play iRacing and the voice chat in practice sessions can be really useful with drivers giving advice on how to approach a particular corner, car setup discussion, advice on how much fuel you'll need, discussion of optimal gaming hardware etc being commonplace on the road side, less so on the oval side which tends to be a bit less friendly. I will admit that the sweary 14-year-olds rather put me off playing Team Fortress for instance, and the welcoming nature of drivers on iRacing helped me to become really quite decent at racing, so the nature of the community absolutely does impact upon take-up and retention of new players (I will add that iRacing does have its issues - the rookie classes where you start until you prove yourself worthy are an absolute shitshow and can put people off at the start).

Yup, it absolutely depends on the community. The next question would be why the online community of CoD is different from iRacing (there are obvious answers to this, but the stark difference is ask why some communities are toxic shit holes, while others aren't.)

But people is bored, and people wanna talk about things : /

You know, fair enough.

Online gaming is a separate issue from challenge itself. It is one way to find a challenge, yes, and it is also an outlet for competition, but that's not challenge itself. I think the issue at hand is deeper than the problems caused by an onling gaming community.


That would be interesting. What do you think?
Quantic Foundry did the work of grabbing the data for us, at least. I find myself citing this article every so often.

The #1 and #3 are essentially "puzzle" (I'm not certain why there's a distinction, since there is no "hardcore puzzle" option, so I'm guessing it's all puzzle).

A friend of mine is superb at Vs puzzle games. She stomps me (and her husband) at games like Baku Baku Animal, Magical Drop (though I can hold my own), Landmaker, and Octomania (Puzzle Takoron). She's one of the best IRL opponents I've ever played. And -- if I may be allowed to brag to serve the point -- I'm pretty darn good at Vs puzzle games.

The genres that women enjoy doesn't seem to put any sort of cap or limitation on their desire or their ability to grapple with challenge. Those games can be plenty difficult in their own way.

Interesting point there. It has less to do with challenge more so than genre specifics. There is a lot here to discuss. If you are feeling froggy (and we think the board can handle it) maybe make a thread and see if we can get a real discussion going. (and not drive by shitposts, that it will surely have some of).

Since when do you have to discuss something with the author to validate discussing it at all? We discuss the works by dead people all the time. People write entire books on the works of dead people. Forums exist to allow discussion between opposing views. And we don't even need to change the mind of the person we are actually talking with to make it worthwhile, sometimes a listener will learn, sometimes it's worthwhile just to exercise our own mind by putting our position into words.

It's not outrage culture to disagree with someone. It's not outrage culture to discuss something. It is outrage culture to attempt to shut discussion down, which ultimately is what you are advocating.

If someone is going to publish ill considered trash as their opinion on gaming, other people have every right to shred them for their stupidity. Not all opinions have actual merit, not all opinions are equal. It is not outrage culture to tell them why you think they are wrong, it is outrage culture to scream in their face that they don't have the right to say it in the first place, which no one seems to be doing here. The author of the article has every right to make their stupidity public. Anyone who writes that they enjoy doing something but actively don't want to be good at it deserves to be lambasted.

And the act of telling people to let a published article slide when you can't let a forum post slide is comical.

Yes, but re-read the OP. The OP was taking issue with the author as much as the work itself.

As for outrage culture. Im not talking about outrage culture per se (especially not in the way you are describing).

You are missing my point completely as for posting about this on a forum (I still don't have an answer from the OP). Why did this move him so that he had to write the post he did. That was way more about someone pissing in his cherios than any sort of deeper discussion.

Quite frankly, my post is more positioned as someone talking to a kid who let something get to him more than it should have. Yes, its paternal.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

I think the "Match 3" genre is its own distinctive subgenre of block puzzles. Columns belong to the Tetris type of games but these Match 3 games are different from that just like games like Zuma are. A Tetris lover might like Columns more than a Zuma game. And a Zuma-lover might not be into Columns or Tetris at all.

The Match 3 genre is about screen being completely filled with blocks and then you moving or matching in other ways the existing tiles with each other. Blocks that are left on empty places will drop down and the screen fills with blocks again. This might cause an avalanche of subsequent matches, but when there are no more matches the screen is full again and you repeat what you previously did. The gameplay of Columns is, I think, as far from a game like that than a game like Zuma is, and Columns is much closer to Tetris than a Zuma game or a Match 3 game.

So it is similar to Bejeweled, not necessarily Columns. That's fair. I've played such a broad variety of puzzle games that it still comes across as a meaningless distinction, though.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Interesting point there. It has less to do with challenge more so than genre specifics. There is a lot here to discuss. If you are feeling froggy (and we think the board can handle it) maybe make a thread and see if we can get a real discussion going. (and not drive by shitposts, that it will surely have some of). .

25% engagement with "survival roguelike" also seems like an indication that it isn't the challenge itself that may put women off but the source of the challenge. If the challenge comes from an unthinking CPU opponent (which is the case in all the top genres except MMO listed by Quantic Foundry) then it seems to be "okay", but if a game incorporates a competitive multiplayer focus it seems that women engage with those genres less frequently.

I don't know if the topic warrants a whole thread, but if you have more thoughts please share. Post up a standalone thread if you think it would be better.

 

[Grinchy]

"I don't ever want to get good at golf or learn the intricacies of the game. It's unfair that anyone thinks I should have to just because I review golf equipment for a living."

Why do people think they should review video games when they don't know how to play them. Is any other industry this filled with reviews created by people who have no idea how to use the things they review?

 

[Fbh]

I just took the time to actually read the whole article, and the core of it to me just seems to fall into the "everything needs to be made to appeal to everyone" line of thinking that I just can't agree with.

Her problem doesn't seem to be as much the git gud messages as it is the concept that some games requiere you to invest time into getting better to overcome some obstacles. And then she goes into some condescending remarks about mostly negative reasons why people might find the challenge in games to be fun.

The thing is, there are games for her. There's a whole genre (kinda) of narrative heavy games with basic gameplay where there's little to no skillbased challenge involved, and there's also plenty of games that offer a "I just want to see the story option" which also makes them extremely easy. But instead of finding and playing the games that match up with her taste she seems to play the ones that don't and then complain about it.


Although ultimately, it just sounds like she wants to watch a movie

 

[guggnichso]

Here's my "half-serious" reply to the Guardian's "opinion piece", based upon this excerpt:



A game of chess is considered... a "game", yet some people are really, really better than others. Some people also play it at a highly competitive world class level. Rules must also be learned & respected. Yet it's also considered escapism & entertainment. Until someone can be plugged into a super-computer & learn an activity whilst sleeping, this "journalist" will be forever barking up the wrong tree via demanding route one towards winning without effort. BTW, The Guardian doesn't just release stuff without a reason, i.e. they post this sort of shit to get under peoples' skin & change the industry itself to suit their own wants.

No, they don’t. Most reputable newspapers and news magazines publish a variety of opinion pieces containing various opinions. They are just that. Opinion pieces. Nothing more. They are meant to be discussion pieces for your lunch break or when you have a beer with your mates after work. They are not some devious plot to change life itself as we know it.

Stop being such whiny snowflakes, y‘all.

 

[strange headache]

Yes, but re-read the OP. The OP was taking issue with the author as much as the work itself.

Dude(tte), go and reread what I posted before and then maybe take a look at my edit of the OP. I think to have made it quite clear that I intent to discuss the merit of the article itself and not the author.

You are missing my point completely as for posting about this on a forum (I still don't have an answer from the OP).

What are you on about? I gave you an answer, twice. No need to have us run around in circles, we got you the first time.

Why did this move him so that he had to write the post he did. That was way more about someone pissing in his cherios than any sort of deeper discussion.

Yeah, hop into the philosophy topic or take a look at my post history. I'm sure you'll find that I'm very well capable of having a meaningful discussion. I see no reason why I should engage with an article on a deeper level that is clearly intended as clickbait, that would be elevating that article to something it doesn't deserve. I don't vilify whole demographics like that and neither should a journalist that's being paid to write for the Guardian.

You agreed with me that the article is trash, yet here you are trying to argue with me for exposing it as such. Criticizing the clickbaity nature of an article is not the same as giving in to clickbait. I'm certainly not going to be afraid of speaking my mind because people like you might deem it problematic. I read the Guardian article, had some time to spare and created a topic. Nothing more, nothing less. Deal with it.

Quite frankly, my post is more positioned as someone talking to a kid who let something get to him more than it should have. Yes, its paternal.

Your patronizing attitude is based on a preconception of me as a person that's just way out there. I did not make baseless assumptions about you, so how about you return the favor and cut it with the ad hominems. DunDunDunpachi tried to foster the meaningful debate that you so desire, but instead of expanding on what he said you keep harking on about how the tone of my OP is not to your liking.

And yes, you're right, I don't react kindly to bullsh*t articles that blindly vilify whole demographics for the personal gain of the author. I think to have sufficiently demonstrated why the content of the article in question is utter and complete insanity. So how about you take it up with the author who formulated this needlessly vitriolic smear attempt in the first place?

If you seek to discuss the competitive and/or challenging nature of the gaming community, I'm all ears and happy to oblige. Until then, don't expect another reply from my part.

 

[Yoshi]

I could write a long rebuttal on how great well-designed challenges in video games are and how ignorant her position is. But then again, she won't read, so I'll just leave this fitting short version here for everyone to enjoy: