8 Things Gamers Want

[irishda]

Funny Dorkly article that pretty well sums up one of the more annoying aspects of gamer culture that's the whole basis for me not plunging headlong into geekdom. Especially, ESPECIALLY, the "why aren't we getting more original stories and games? ZOMG! Half-life 3 NEEDS to come out soon!"

For those that can't be bothered to follow links, it's a neat little satire of the indecisiveness/hypocrisy of gamers with a paragraph of something gamers want followed by a paragraph of something else gamers typically ask for directly contradicting the first one.

1. No more Zombie games
2. More Zombie games
3. Better graphics
4. Old school graphics
5. Creative ideas instead of sequels
6. Sequels to games WE liked
7. Video games to be recognized as art
8. Controllable boobs

Really makes me glad I'm not a game developer.

 

[irishda]

Edit: Sorry about the double post. The website did a weird thing when I tried to make the first thread where it told me there was an error and the thread didn't show up on the forum.

 

[King Aragorn]

I have to argue the first point. Not many are out there asking for new zombie games, same with old graphics.
6, 7, 8 are correct though. But, I don't see how boobs = not art, considering movies are considered art and they have a crap ton.

 

[TheCommanders]

Incredibly obvious point, but I'll be the one to point it out. The contradictory points of view are usually held by different people... I would hope that the author of the article realizes that the gamer community is quite a large one, and that there are dissenting opinions on just about everything, as there are on any topic in the world being discusses by more than one person.

If you want my opinions, I would like less zombie games, so that the ones that do get made can be of some sort of quality, a continuing effort to advance graphical fidelity, more original ideas in games (whether these ideas are in sequels or new IPs is irrelevant), and as to the last point, I don't give a flying fuck if games are considered art, because it is just a word. A word which ever since it has become accepted as applying to a broken toilet seat, has completely lost all meaning. I see no contradictions in my opinions.

Last of all, I don't care about Half Life 3, I found Half Life 2 boring and dated.

 

[Rack]

Incredibly obvious point, but I'll be the one to point it out. The contradictory points of view are usually held by different people...

You'd THINK it was incredibly obvious but precious few people seem to understand it at times.

That said I am personally happy to admit to the hypocrisy of wanting the things I like. So that's original ideas to come out, be refined until they shine, complete their story and move on. I'd also point out that sequels and original ideas are not incompossible anyway, Diablo III had enough original ideas to become reviled for them while Dune 2 not only changed genre but invented a whole new one. It was Call of Duty 4 that reinvented the FPS (though not necessarily for the better).

 

[madwarper]

Dorkly has a pretty clever article that nicely sums up one of the most annoying aspects of gamer culture. Namely, they don't know what they want.

It's something that's really kept me at bay with geekdom in general. There's this overwhelming sense of superiority among many gamers/geeks that the movies and games they like is better because they're smarter than the average joe. Then they turn around and make the same damn mistakes the rest of society does.

lolwut?

It's simple; We want more of the stuff we like, and less of the stuff we don't like.

But, since each gamer is an individual, we don't have to all like the same thing.
Also, it's possible that different gamers like or dislike the same game for different reasons.

"Man, how do these stupid bros keep buying the same game over and over. God, Call of Duty is lame."
"Holy shit! Portal 2?! Now with a talking potato??!!! FUCK YEAH THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER!"

Or, "I don't like the Call of Duty franchise and the direction it has been going in, drowning in a sea of mediocre brown/grey shooters. I'll pass."
And, "I liked Portal, and thought it was high quality game, with unique gameplay and was very humorous. I wouldn't mind more of that."

 

[irishda]

Incredibly obvious point, but I'll be the one to point it out. The contradictory points of view are usually held by different people... I would hope that the author of the article realizes that the gamer community is quite a large one, and that there are dissenting opinions on just about everything, as there are on any topic in the world being discusses by more than one person.

Not necessarily. In fact it's something you see all the time on this forum (and probably every forum). People slam the draconian methods of EA's Origin, then wonder why more people don't use Steam. People decry the constant stream of sequels for franchises they don't like, wishing there were more original ideas. Then they wish there were more sequels to games they did like. I'm sure there are plenty of people who are consistent in their opinions, but, if you're a human being, odds are there is at least one thing (not necessarily a gamer thing) you've been hypocritical about. It's just in our nature to give ourselves a pass while being critical of others.

 

[King Aragorn]

Irish, pretty sure Origin ====/==== Steam.
I agree with Mr.Tea here, when people tend to comment on such things, they only view both extremes, yet they never think that maybe people want a happy medium, where a game can spawn a franchise/sequel or two, with a good stream of new IP's here and there.

 

[DoPo]

Dorkly has a pretty clever article that nicely sums up one of the most annoying aspects of gamer culture. Namely, they don't know what they want.

Right - the gamer hivemind has some decision making issues. Of course. Because we, gamers, cannot think for ourselves but only as a group. Any difference in opinion is down to us not knowing what we want, not because we're different people with different views who some guy decided to overgeneralise. Thank you for enlightening us, now the hivemind must reevaluate its points.

Oh, and by the way, in case you're wandering, anybody can write a similar thing for absolutely any group of humans. Heck. we can do it for the whole population of Earth.

1. Christianity is the right religion, right - it has the one God and everything.
2. But then again, Allah is also a god.
3. Hold on, there are no gods

Conclusion: people don't know what religion they want.

Let's try this again:

1. People want to drive their cars fast - why else get fast cars to begin with? And there are many speeding tickets written every day.
2. But there are speeding tickets, and signs with maximum speed, and speed bumps, and people don't actually like it when you speed into them.
3. People want to eat healthy and to have a good figure.
4. There is McDonalds, KFC, and all the other fast food restaurants which are doing very well.
5. Women shouldn't be treated like sex objects - that's bad.
6. Did you see that half naked beauty in that ad? Awesome titties and ass, I'd definitely tap that.
7. The environment is in slow but steady decline. And we don't like that - we would prefer to save it.
8. We buy lots of non-recyclable products, drive cars and vehicles polluting the air, burn stuff, and dump garbage all over the place.

OMG society doesn't know what it wants.

 

[wooty]

I only have 3 rules I look for with games, they can be all in the one game or even just one of the above.

1. Its entertaining. As long as I enjoy (re)playing it, I'll play it
2. It weird. The quirkier and stranger the game, the more chance is that I'll enjoy it.
3. I get about 1 hour of play to my pound. If I spend £40 on a new title, then I hope to get at least 40 hours of play out of it.

 

[madwarper]

In fact it's something you see all the time on this forum (and probably every forum). People slam the draconian methods of EA's Origin, then wonder why more people don't use Steam.

I don't use Steam, but I know that Valve cares about customer satisfaction, whereas EA is just a bunch of greedy pricks.

People decry the constant stream of sequels for franchises they don't like, wishing there were more original ideas. Then they wish there were more sequels to games they did like.

Wanting more of "good" things and less of "bad" things is NOT contradictory. It's NOT hypocritical.

 

[barbzilla]

Incredibly obvious point, but I'll be the one to point it out. The contradictory points of view are usually held by different people... I would hope that the author of the article realizes that the gamer community is quite a large one, and that there are dissenting opinions on just about everything, as there are on any topic in the world being discusses by more than one person.

If you want my opinions, I would like less zombie games, so that the ones that do get made can be of some sort of quality, a continuing effort to advance graphical fidelity, more original ideas in games (whether these ideas are in sequels or new IPs is irrelevant), and as to the last point, I don't give a flying fuck if games are considered art, because it is just a word. A word which ever since it has become accepted as applying to a broken toilet seat, has completely lost all meaning. I see no contradictions in my opinions.

Last of all, I don't care about Half Life 3, I found Half Life 2 boring and dated.

To your first paragraph, 100% agree. To the first part of your second paragraph, still my sentiments exactly. To the final part of your post, while yes art is a word it can mean different things to different people. All art means is something created to emotionally stir another person (personal interpretation, not a literary definition). So as long as that toilet seat moves someone (and I don't mean when it broke and they fell), then it has accomplished its goal as art.

 

[Phishfood]

Not necessarily. In fact it's something you see all the time on this forum (and probably every forum). People slam the draconian methods of EA's Origin, then wonder why more people don't use Steam. People decry the constant stream of sequels for franchises they don't like, wishing there were more original ideas. Then they wish there were more sequels to games they did like. I'm sure there are plenty of people who are consistent in their opinions, but, if you're a human being, odds are there is at least one thing (not necessarily a gamer thing) you've been hypocritical about. It's just in our nature to give ourselves a pass while being critical of others.

Yes, but it is entirely possible to hold both views at once. We all want a sequel to Half-life because the last one ended on rather a cliffhanger, thus we must know what happens. On the other hand, I'm not particularly geared for the next CoD or the next Saints Row, since I'm struggling to picture anything it will give me that I don't already have. DRM - there is a HUGE difference between Valve openly adding DRM to steam, while providing unlimited installs, free downloads, key storage, server browsers, integrated acievements, chat, friends list and EA taking a single player game, slapping always on DRM that doesn't work and calling it a feature. I sympathise with publishers and devs, I do. It must be heartbreaking to pour your life into something to have pirates just take it for free with not even a thank you. On the other hand, it's pretty obvious that beating pirates round the head won't help.

 

[Terramax]

All gamers don't think alike, obviously they have different and contradictory opinions.

Don't be stupid. It's a well known fact that all gamers are 14yo, male, and only care about breasts whilst dreaming of massacring their neighbourhood.

I'm not really sure what there is to discuss here other than the possibility that this is just some free advertisement to, what appears to be, an obscure site, and a very boring and unimaginative article.

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

II don't give a flying fuck if games are considered art, because it is just a word. A word which ever since it has become accepted as applying to a broken toilet seat, has completely lost all meaning. I see no contradictions in my opinions.

To the first part of your second paragraph, still my sentiments exactly. To the final part of your post, while yes art is a word it can mean different things to different people. All art means is something created to emotionally stir another person (personal interpretation, not a literary definition). So as long as that toilet seat moves someone (and I don't mean when it broke and they fell), then it has accomplished its goal as art.

Which I think is exactly what was trying to be expressed, art today is such a broad definition that it can be applied to anything. There's over 7 billion people on the planet with some many peculiar variations in taste's and culture, who's to say a dog shit bin on fire won't move someone somewhere or a used plaster, to me it's not really right tying that in with sculpture works over 2000 years old made by hand so accurate that most people could not do better using modern machinery.

Art can be defined as "The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture,...: "the art of the Renaissance".
or
Works produced by such skill and imagination."

I think the key word for me there is "skill" again it's open to interpretation, but to me art should be something that takes many 1000's of hours of honing a skill to be able to accomplish and that not everyone would be able to achieve.

For me I really don't want games to become an "art form" I think it could carry games down a route that they are not intended to go and add allot of unnecessary pomp to their production (I mean look at films, how many times have you heard "blank blank is directing blank blank as his assault on Oscar season this year"). Games have a functionality to them an I'd say for 95% of games the intended purpose is to make the user have fun and everything else it inspires is secondary. Not to say that I am against a significant piece of work being pointed out and recognized as a piece of art but I don;t want that moniker forced upon the industry. There's also the fact that the industry has oppened up so much to a broader spectrum in the last 20 odd years of casual gamers etc, an think if people start going "hey come have a go on this it's such a piece of art" rather than " you have got to play this! crazy fun, look at this jet pack thing" you will be met by derision and mockery by the casual gamer an put a wall around the inner circle.

 

[WoW Killer]

Proposition: everybody is bisexual.

"Proof": straight women like men. Hence all people like men. Straight men like women. Hence all people like women. Thus all people like both men and women. Therefore, everybody is bisexual.

Do I really need to point out the error of this logic?

 

[WanderingFool]

1. No more Zombie games
2. More Zombie games
3. Better graphics
4. Old school graphics
5. Creative ideas instead of sequels
6. Sequels to games WE liked
7. Video games to be recognized as art
8. Controllable boobs

Really makes me glad I'm not a game developer.

1.Yes
2.Yes
3.No
4.No
5.Meh (I find creative ideas overrated, but that only applies if they are done poorly.)
6.Fuck Yes
7.Meh
8.

 

[ThriKreen]

Really makes me glad I'm not a game developer.

Pretty much spot on. You won't believe some of the comments I've seen, and it's much like that list - it's pretty balanced between want more of, and less of each item, despite them sometimes being mutually exclusive:

i.e. Dragon Age: Origins:
- "OMG I love the fallback to tactical combat like Baldur's Gate!"
- "This slow based combat is stupid, I want more hack'n'flash action!"

Dragon Age 2 (other issues with it non-withstanding):
- "This Press A for awesome action-based combat is, well, awesome!"
- "This sucks, I want it to go back to the more cerebral strategy play!"

The whole point of that article is pointing out how diverse our likes and dislikes are, and that there's no one game that can cater to everyone. So people need to stop thinking everyone is like them and accept there will be some games that just won't appeal to them, and let it go.

Like, real sim racing games or sports games don't appeal to me, so I just ignore that market and focus on the ones I do like.

Can't cater to every audience all the time, it just means a game designed by committee and well, those are rarely fun. And of course, diminishes any input and experience the game designer has to make the game fun, as some aspects people want really aren't feasible when actually implemented.

Heck, seriously, pay me $50k/y and I will make a game for you, exactly to your specs. I cannot guarantee it will be fun though. And might take 2-3 years.

Anyone?

 

[EHKOS]

6 neglects the fact that when they do make sequels to beloved games, they need to not change anything. I'm still bitter over Activision's handling of Crash Bandicoot. It keeps me up at night.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I just want to see the industry avoid becoming a homogenised mass of cover-based shooting, QTEs and shooting the latest shipment of genero-goons. Not every game needs to be CoD/Gears of War, but the features are slowly seeping through.

The list is kind of funny though, I'm of the flavour that asks for more original IPs whilst also wanting sequels. But I want to see sequels of decent franchises that are handled well and not just brought up to churn out a few titles before it dies off for good at the hands of faceless executives. And originality can still come in sequel form. Probably maybe.