Am I a bad gamer?

[Trippy Turtle]

I don't find story all that important. Its good to have but I just need a game to be fun.

 

[Zen Toombs]

-OP Snip-

'Sup Vault! I didn't realize it was you who made this thread.

Anyways, nope you are not a "bad gamer". Much of "games are getting too easy" is players getting better at games, not the games getting easier. Also, videogames are a fantastic interactive medium, and there's nothing wrong with preferring story to pure gameplay.

So have fun your way, and the dullards can have fun their way. Everybody wins!

 

[Flailing Escapist]

I wouldn't call you a bad gamer-

4. cutscenes- I LIKE cutscenes, they are somthing to look forward too (not games that over do it though...*cough*yakuza*cough*) Saints row 2, Red dead redemption, Deus Ex..whatever you would call Mass effect...they all add somthing to the game (for me) and no..I dont get annoyed at them

But maybe watching movies is more for you./snark

Okay, I kid... kinda. But I don't get that. The cutscenes you LIKE are probably the cutscenes where the main character is having more fun than you are and I HATE those cutscenes. Matter of fact- fuck cutscenes, they do nothing but take you out of the game. Imagine if your movie was spliced in with bits of text crawl just because the narrator has a really, really nice voice. I'm not saying there can't be "good" cutscenes but they should only belong at the beginning or ending of the game/level/etc or in transitions. But seriously, fuck cutscenes.

they are somthing to look forward too

Really? Reeeeeeeeeaaaaaallly????

1. most people say that games thease days are too easy..while I can sort of see that...I still dont often breeze through without some difficulty..in fact I know if Im doing well then the game is probably rediculously easy...:/

Okay, play through one game, any game, on the hardest difficult possible. It'll feel like hell and it'll take you much longer to beat than it usually would but you'll get a lot better at "playing" (loosely defined) games on Normal or harder difficulties. Actually, you should probably play through most of your games on the hardest difficulty possible. Then you'll get better at gaming, I promise.

you could argue that there is no "wrong" way to play/enjoy games..as with most things

I'm not going to agree with you because sitting on a cake simply isn't the way it was meant to be enjoyed. Not that you can't still enjoy it but you're kind of missing the point if you do that. If cutscenes really are something "you look forward too" I'd honestly/unironicly/unprovokingly suggest watching some more movies. There are about 1 billion movies out there, watch most of them and then come back to gaming to "game".

 

[Zen Toombs]

Yes. You are a terrible person and the cause of all that is wrong with video games today. You are the type of person that is dragging the industry down into the casual pile of crap that it is today. You are holding games back from their true artistic potential. Games were infinitely better back in the 80's and 90's and if you do not realize that, there is no hope for you to ever be worth something as a person. You are the worst type of person imaginable. You are ruining games for true gamers like myself, and you should be ashamed of yourself. Ashamed. You should just stop playing games now before you ruin them any further.

There, does that make you feel any better? I mean, come on. Is your self worth that low that you care if people think you are a bad gamer or not? If you think that you are a bad gamer... Don't. Because you are not. The only people who would say you are or stuff like the paragraph above are not worth your time or consideration. Because they are joyless assholes fishing for attention. Screw 'em.

Spoiler: Cookie

And I don't give those often.

So yeah, you seem to be a pretty cool person. Keep it up!

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Here's the deal:
You do not like a cheap, ego comparing fest known as multiplayer

That is EXACTLY what multiplayer is. It's not fun at all, it's all about the ego. I lovingly caress my ego at least thrice a day, oh yeah.
[sub]How did you guess?[/sub]

 

[DaHero]

Here's the deal:
You do not like a cheap, ego comparing fest known as multiplayer

That is EXACTLY what multiplayer is. It's not fun at all, it's all about the ego. I lovingly caress my ego at least thrice a day, oh yeah.
[sub]How did you guess?[/sub]

Given that I've seen how the multiplayer scene has developed over the course of around a decade, I think I speak from experience when I say this: Aside from the extremes on the bell curve, I have yet to meet an FPS gamer that wouldn't throw the keyboard and rage out when A) Their team fails, B) They just got dominated, or C) Their ego gets bruised.

Granted, there are exceptions, but those are too few and far between to calculate. FPS gaming always boils down into "my gun is more OP than yours"

Seriously, show me a multiplayer FPS that doesn't boil down to this: Memorize map, grab flavor of the month weapon (generally sniper rifle), dominate, watch kids rage.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Yes.

*actually reads thread now*

1. most people say that games thease days are too easy..while I can sort of see that...I still dont often breeze through without some difficulty..in fact I know if Im doing well then the game is probably rediculously easy...:/

This is sort of an aside, but a lot of people are bitching about Kingdoms of Amalur being too easy and how they cakewalked through it. That's awesome, except for the fact that only 5% of the gamers (as of a couple weeks ago) had beat the game on hard.

I'm always skeptical about claims that a game is "too easy."

agreed on this, usually the people who brag about it being too easy, are expecting to die 500 times before getting past one level like on battle toads, which i think is complete bullshit personally. Plus i have some friends who do this, most games, especially rpg's in a sense, can be "broken" through stats, either the alchemy+enchantment type combo (like in skyrim and the previous TES series) or the use of all OP weapons (such as one hit kill rockets/snipers) and they'll do those combo's to kingdom come, but then complain about the game being too easy...i mean yeah the developer probably didn't intend for those combo's to be so OP, but using them to full extent also doesn't help your argument on the game being "too easy".

OT: none of that makes you a bad gamer in the slightest. I myself am somewhat similar, i tend to enjoy my games through relaxing and seeing how things play out, rather than grinding my teeth and nearly having a hernia from being overly competitive against my opponent. (partially why i avoid some multiplayers)

I don't see you harming anyone's enjoyment of the games, so don't sweat it.

 

[Vault101]

snip".

anyway the thing about cutscenes is it depends ENITRLY on what kind of cutscenes they are and how they are implemented

dont get wrong....I know when a cutscene drags on and on and Im thinking "why cant I just do this"hence why the best cutscenes are the ones that dont involve overly long action seauqnces that the player should be doing themselvess

take Red dead redemption..most of the cutscnenes are dialouge..charachters talking to each other...(thanks to good writing) I find them enjoyable because its the charachters doing their thing...it could be exactally the same if they were talking and I was in complete controll of the charachter (some might prefer that) but personally I see nothing wrong with directing my attention to a certain facial expression, action or line of dialouge


and who says I dont watch movies?...

 

[arnoldthebird]

That does not make you a bad gamer, there is no definition of a good gamer. People play games for enjoyment, if you enjoy what you are doing nothing should stop you. For me it's the opposite, I can play a game with great gameplay and no story and I will have a blast. But if the game is story heavy and the gameplay is not up to scratch I will get bored and play something else. If you enjoy yourself, then nothing else matters

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Here's the deal:
You do not like a cheap, ego comparing fest known as multiplayer

That is EXACTLY what multiplayer is. It's not fun at all, it's all about the ego. I lovingly caress my ego at least thrice a day, oh yeah.
[sub]How did you guess?[/sub]

Given that I've seen how the multiplayer scene has developed over the course of around a decade, I think I speak from experience when I say this: Aside from the extremes on the bell curve, I have yet to meet an FPS gamer that wouldn't throw the keyboard and rage out when A) Their team fails, B) They just got dominated, or C) Their ego gets bruised.

Granted, there are exceptions, but those are too few and far between to calculate. FPS gaming always boils down into "my gun is more OP than yours"

Seriously, show me a multiplayer FPS that doesn't boil down to this: Memorize map, grab flavor of the month weapon (generally sniper rifle), dominate, watch kids rage.

I'll admit that I haven't played every FPS and I avoid CoD games specifically because the "ego-stroking-rage-fest" is so great but I have gotten into several multiplayer games that are generally very fun. Yes, pretty much all of them have at least a little bit of what you're talking about but multiplayer gaming definitely isn't all bad - that's the point I'm trying to make. I've been playing multiplayer since Halo and CoD were the best on the pc and I wouldn't be still playing multiplayer games if it was just an ego trip.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Yes. You are a terrible person and the cause of all that is wrong with video games today. You are the type of person that is dragging the industry down into the casual pile of crap that it is today. You are holding games back from their true artistic potential. Games were infinitely better back in the 80's and 90's and if you do not realize that, there is no hope for you to ever be worth something as a person. You are the worst type of person imaginable. You are ruining games for true gamers like myself, and you should be ashamed of yourself. Ashamed. You should just stop playing games now before you ruin them any further.

There, does that make you feel any better? I mean, come on. Is your self worth that low that you care if people think you are a bad gamer or not? If you think that you are a bad gamer... Don't. Because you are not. The only people who would say you are or stuff like the paragraph above are not worth your time or consideration. Because they are joyless assholes fishing for attention. Screw 'em.

Spoiler: Cookie

And I don't give those often.

So yeah, you seem to be a pretty cool person. Keep it up!

Oh cookies! I love those! Thank you good sir! I will definetly try to keep being awesome. It is a hard job, but someone has to do it.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

snip".

anyway the thing about cutscenes is it depends ENITRLY on what kind of cutscenes they are and how they are implemented

dont get wrong....I know when a cutscene drags on and on and Im thinking "why cant I just do this"hence why the best cutscenes are the ones that dont involve overly long action seauqnces that the player should be doing themselvess

take Red dead redemption..most of the cutscnenes are dialouge..charachters talking to each other...(thanks to good writing) I find them enjoyable because its the charachters doing their thing...it could be exactally the same if they were talking and I was in complete controll of the charachter (some might prefer that) but personally I see nothing wrong with directing my attention to a certain facial expression, action or line of dialouge


and who says I dont watch movies?...

Okay, you can have your cutscenes so long as I can say that I don't think you have your priorities straight.

personally I see nothing wrong with directing my attention to a certain facial expression, action or line of dialouge

This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across. If a game has to do that many times maybe the story isn't all that good. Hmm?

and who says I dont watch movies?...

I do, or at least not enough, if you're looking forward to them over gameplay.

Whatever makes you happy. But it rubs me the wrong way; like sitting on a cake. Or like that Bioware writer who wanted to skip all the gameplayz! But if watching videos in games make you happy then by all means, enjoy yourself.

 

[Vault101]

[snip.

did I acutally say I prefered cutscnes OVER gameplay?...no..if that were the case I would like yakuza which I do not (because it doesnt want to be a game..it wants to be a movie..there is a difference)

when you can put the two together and they are BOTH good then youve got somthing awsome

its all on however the game wants to present the story...weather that be through cutscene or scripting..I dont have a preference..whatever works..take the first assasins creed..while they arent "cutscnes" per say they are more "heavyly guided" scripted events which were effective in making you feel that you werent just viewing the action..but a aprt of it...Its a shame they took a more cutscene heavy apraoch in later installments....

anyway, all Im saying is cutscenes are a tool...no tool is bad on its own..its just how its used

[quote/] This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across. If a game has to do that many times maybe the story isn't all that good. Hmm? [/quote]

if they filmed citizen kane with a shaky cam would that make the story worse? NO...it would just make it poorly implemented/directed

[quote/]Whatever makes you happy. But it rubs me the wrong way; like sitting on a cake. Or like that Bioware writer who wanted to skip all the gameplayz! But if watching videos in games make you happy then by all means, enjoy yourself [/quote]

I think your overeacting there

take dragon age origins..its an old school RPG and i absolutly sucked at it...but I perservered..why?

because the story/charachters were good enough for me to do so..if given the option I wouldnt have skipped gameplay...as playing was more or less fun and I was motivated to play BECAUSE of those bits where I would talk to other charachters..and where the story would movie along..I had it on easy so I wouldnt be tearing my hair out

mabye some peopel WOULD like to skip gameplay...it may rub you the wrong way...but the Idea that somone ignores the story completly also rubs me the wrong way...

but each to their own

 

[BreakfastMan]

This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across.

Wow. This line makes no sense. The old "highlight someone's action or expression to convey importance of said action or expression" (of which zooming in is one way it can be used) is pretty much used by every good story-teller ever, from Kubrick, to Moore, to Dickens. I seriously don't understand how you can say that with a straight face. :/

 

[Flailing Escapist]

This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across.

Wow. This line makes no sense. The old "highlight someone's action or expression to convey importance of said action or expression" (of which zooming in is one way it can be used) is pretty much used by every good story-teller ever, from Kubrick, to Moore, to Dickens. I seriously don't understand how you can say that with a straight face. :/

What part of HAVE to did you miss? It CAN. But a good story doesn't HAVE to rely on "highlighting" someone's action or expression to convey the importance of that action ot expression. If a game HAS to break gameplay to highlight a certain expression or action maybe they're doing it wrong. Not that a game CAN'T highlight an expression or action but if they have too - again, maybe they're doing it wrong.

And Kubrick, Moore and Dickens didn't make games they made stories (or movies).

 

[BreakfastMan]

This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across.

Wow. This line makes no sense. The old "highlight someone's action or expression to convey importance of said action or expression" (of which zooming in is one way it can be used) is pretty much used by every good story-teller ever, from Kubrick, to Moore, to Dickens. I seriously don't understand how you can say that with a straight face. :/

What part of HAVE to did you miss? It CAN. But a good story doesn't HAVE to rely on "highlighting" someone's action or expression to convey the importance of that action ot expression. If a game HAS to break gameplay to highlight a certain expression or action maybe they're doing it wrong. Not that a game CAN'T highlight an expression or action but if they have too - again, maybe they're doing it wrong.

In order to tell a good story, one has to convey the importance of a character's actions or expressions. The best way to do that is to highlight them, so the person experiencing the story can understand the importance of that action/expression. Would The Shining have been as powerful without Kubrick using close-ups of Jack Nicholson's facial expressions to properly convey his decent into madness? No. The story could still be conveyed, but it would not nearly be as powerful or well-executed.

And Kubrick, Moore and Dickens didn't make games they made stories (or movies).

You do know that many people, including myself, think that most games are stories, right?

 

[Flailing Escapist]

In order to tell a good story, one has to convey the importance of a character's actions or expressions. The best way to do that is to highlight them, so the person experiencing the story can understand the importance of that action/expression. Would The Shining have been as powerful without Kubrick using close-ups of Jack Nicholson's facial expressions to properly convey his decent into madness? No. The story could still be conveyed, but it would not nearly be as powerful or well-executed.

And Kubrick, Moore and Dickens didn't make games they made stories (or movies).

You do know that many people, including myself, think that most games are stories, right?

You're missing the point (and you're using movies again). I'm not going to argue with you.

Also games have stories. They aren't stories. They're games.

 

[BreakfastMan]

In order to tell a good story, one has to convey the importance of a character's actions or expressions. The best way to do that is to highlight them, so the person experiencing the story can understand the importance of that action/expression. Would The Shining have been as powerful without Kubrick using close-ups of Jack Nicholson's facial expressions to properly convey his decent into madness? No. The story could still be conveyed, but it would not nearly be as powerful or well-executed.

And Kubrick, Moore and Dickens didn't make games they made stories (or movies).

You do know that many people, including myself, think that most games are stories, right?

You're missing the point (and you're using movies again). I'm not going to argue with you.

Okay, if I am missing the point, explain it to me so I do understand. Because I obviously don't know what point you are trying to make.

EDIT: Also, using movies because I do not know which games you think have good stories. You seemed to accept my bringing up of Kubrick, so I was trying to find a common frame of reference to talk about it.

Also games have stories. They aren't stories. They're games.

Films can have stories as well. So can books. Yet they are also considered stories. Funny that.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Okay, if I am missing the point, explain it to me so I do understand. Because I obviously don't know what point you are trying to make.

Also games have stories. They aren't stories. They're games.

Films can have stories as well. So can books. Yet they are also considered stories. Funny that.

My point is that games or anything else now that you dragged us into that doesn't HAVE to rely on zooming into something to make sure the rest of us get it. It helps convey a message or a point in movies because movies require almost no interaction or participation beyond looking at it. Movies don't NEED to do that either, though. No good story NEEDS that. It can help but in a game a cutscene that NEEDS to highlight something is breaking flow, immersion and is poorly represention that story if it NEEDS to do that. It can help but it shouldn't NEED to do that.

Films can have stories as well. So can books. Yet they are also considered stories. Funny that.

Films and books have stories. They are still films and books. The scar on my thumb has a STORY it doesn't mean it's story belongs in the same place as films, books or even games.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

[snip.

did I acutally say I prefered cutscnes OVER gameplay?...no..if that were the case I would like yakuza which I do not (because it doesnt want to be a game..it wants to be a movie..there is a difference)

when you can put the two together and they are BOTH good then youve got somthing awsome

its all on however the game wants to present the story...weather that be through cutscene or scripting..I dont have a preference..whatever works..take the first assasins creed..while they arent "cutscnes" per say they are more "heavyly guided" scripted events which were effective in making you feel that you werent just viewing the action..but a aprt of it...Its a shame they took a more cutscene heavy apraoch in later installments....

anyway, all Im saying is cutscenes are a tool...no tool is bad on its own..its just how its used

[quote/] This is what I'm talking about. A good story (you said you like story, right) doesn't have to zoom in on expressions or actions to get the story across. If a game has to do that many times maybe the story isn't all that good. Hmm?

if they filmed citizen kane with a shaky cam would that make the story worse? NO...it would just make it poorly implemented/directed

[quote/]Whatever makes you happy. But it rubs me the wrong way; like sitting on a cake. Or like that Bioware writer who wanted to skip all the gameplayz! But if watching videos in games make you happy then by all means, enjoy yourself [/quote]

I think your overeacting there

take dragon age origins..its an old school RPG and i absolutly sucked at it...but I perservered..why?

because the story/charachters were good enough for me to do so..if given the option I wouldnt have skipped gameplay...as playing was more or less fun and I was motivated to play BECAUSE of those bits where I would talk to other charachters..and where the story would movie along..I had it on easy so I wouldnt be tearing my hair out

mabye some peopel WOULD like to skip gameplay...it may rub you the wrong way...but the Idea that somone ignores the story completly also rubs me the wrong way...

but each to their own[/quote]

You said "they [cutscenes] are somthing to look forward too" and I extrapolated that meant you were looking forward to cutscenes more than you were looking forward to gameplay (in your GAME). I addressed this in my last post. I also stated that I said that if you're overlooking gameplay for the cutscenes maybe you shouldn't be playing a game. If that's not how you feel that I don't know why you're so upset.

You are overreacting. I come in peace.