Extra Credits talks about gender sterotypes in game mechanics.

[inmunitas]

Gone Home is not a game. Portal is not a FPS. Those are facts. There is nothing to be discussed there. Games are not an artistic medium, video/computer games do however fall under electronic art, but it's not the "game part" that makes them art.

Virtually everything you've said is not in any way a "fact", while the subject of games-as-art (including gameplay) is VERY MUCH under discussion due to a lack in consensus.

But if you insist on pressing the issue as a factual matter: *citation needed*
Burden of proof is on you. Good luck.

A game is competitive activity or challenge played according to a set of rules [sup][1][/sup]. Gone Home contains neither, even listing as such under "Key Features" on the Steam page "No Combat, No Puzzles: Gone Home is a nonviolent and puzzle-free experience, inviting you to play at your own pace without getting attacked, stuck, or frustrated. This house wants you to explore it." [sup][2][/sup]

Translation: No Competition ("No Combat") + No Challenges ("No Puzzles") = Not a Game

[sup][1][/sup] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/game
[sup][2][/sup] http://store.steampowered.com/app/232430/

----

Portal is a Puzzle game, not a Shooter, so it can't be a First-Person Shooter.

----

Now convince me otherwise.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Translation: No Competition (No Combat) + No Challenges (No Puzzles) = Not a Game

Now convince me otherwise.

Puzzles aren't challenges now?
How delightfully arbitrary.

Also, your own source:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/puzzle

1) puz·zle
(pŭz′əl)
n.
1. Something, such as a game, toy, or problem, that requires ingenuity and often persistence in solving or assembling.

...Slightly conflicts with your proof.
Care to try again?

 

[inmunitas]

*snip*

Puzzles aren't challenges now?

I'm not sure I follow. Would adding "i.e." within the brackets make it clearer?

 

[Atmos Duality]

I'm not sure I follow. Would adding "i.e." within the brackets make it clearer?

Well as I understand it: Your criteria for "Not a Game" states "No Challenges", and you forbid puzzles as part of that definition, supported by a source.

However, I found a definition from your own source (or authority) that contradicts that.

 

[inmunitas]

I'm not sure I follow. Would adding "i.e." within the brackets make it clearer?

Well as I understand it: Your criteria for "Not a Game" states "No Challenges", and you forbid puzzles as part of that definition, supported by a source.

However, I found a definition from your own source (or authority) that contradicts that.

I was trying to imply that puzzles equate to challenges, in reference to my second source.

 

[Atmos Duality]

No, he was equating puzzles and challenges.
Did you notice the quotation marks in his post?

He wasn't saying "No challenge (Puzzles arent challenge)," he was saying "No challenge (Or as this person states, no puzzles.)"

I have his original post quoted (unedited) and those quotation marks you mention weren't there originally.

However, I see what his point was regardless, thanks for the clarification.

Gone Home isn't a "game" by that definition, but I still call into question whether that definition holds true since Gone Home requires the player to locate hidden objects and locations to complete (which is a form of a puzzle).

Also, the rest of his claims about Portal, Games, etc, are still very suspect and very much NOT factual.

 

[Karadalis]

No, he was equating puzzles and challenges.
Did you notice the quotation marks in his post?

He wasn't saying "No challenge (Puzzles arent challenge)," he was saying "No challenge (Or as this person states, no puzzles.)"

I have his original post quoted (unedited) and those quotation marks you mention weren't there originally.

However, I see what his point was regardless, thanks for the clarification.

Gone Home isn't a "game" by that definition, but I still call into question whether that definition holds true since Gone Home requires the player to locate hidden objects and locations to complete (which is a form of a puzzle).

Also, the rest of his claims about Portal, Games, etc, are still very suspect and very much NOT factual.

His statement about Portal not being a FPS is a fact thought.

Its a First person puzzle game and just because the portals are created by using a gun like device does not make the game suddenly a FPS. It completly lacks any combat whatsoever, and pushing over some turrets is not really combat. Its simply a puzzle game using the first person perspective.

If the game was in 2D would you call it a side scrolling shooter? Not really i guess...

Ask 10 People to list their top ten FPSes and none of them will list portal amongst them.

Heck look online at top ten FPS lists and none of them will contain portal.

The thing is: Most call of duty players will infact not enjoy portal because they both have first perspective view. Heck i dont enjoy portal and im not a call of duty player but otherwise like to play me some FPSes.

Extra credits notions that because one game has one aspect in common with another game makes people interested in both is completly wrong.

If someone does not enjoy match 3 games no amount of zombies/blood and gore/big breasted girls is gonna change that.

For example:

According to Extra credits logic you would think that a game like Honey Bee... where your sole purpose is to get girls into bed by using match 3 mechanics (unlocking some raunchy pictures)... would attract alot of guys.. cause guys love boobs right?

WRONG

It has actually a very small male following... wich is completly dwarfed by the female following wich are the majority of the players for these type of games (visual novel style or "dating sims")... and once again shows that this whole sexism in video games debate is completly batshit bonkers.

 

[Atmos Duality]

His statement about Portal not being a FPS is a fact thought.

No, it isn't. The meanings of colloquial terms (like FPS) are determined by consensus, not explicit meaning.

Like how a "Turkey" in bowling is rolling three strikes in a row in the same series (rather than a tasty bird).
That term didn't come into being as explicit fact, it was slang that eventually became common use within the sport.

Its a First person puzzle game and just because the portals are created by using a gun like device does not make the game suddenly a FPS.

Personally, I don't see why.
But I'd just be engaging in the same ancedotal juggling everyone else is so I'll just politely disagree.

Ask 10 People to list their top ten FPSes and none of them will list portal amongst them.

Heck look online at top ten FPS lists and none of them will contain portal.

Well, if you're going to go the vox-populi route, I suggest you conduct the requisite polls and tabulate the results.
Until then, nothing stated is really established as "fact" here; it's just one series of anecdotes against others.

Extra credits notions that because one game has one aspect in common with another game makes people interested in both is completly wrong.

Extra Credits tends to espouse a lot of things that have more strut in ideology than reality (or experience).
I don't think they're entirely "wrong" here, but rather that they cannot ever be completely right.

Here, it's because gauging 'Appeal' (or 'Potential Interest', more accurately as it applies to their argument) is very, very difficult.
And it's kinda hard to craft a solid argument about associative appeal when you don't have the basics down pat.

At best, we (the market) can estimate 'Interest' empirically via stuff like straw polls, sales results and the occasional demographic profile (which is why marketers are CONSTANTLY trying to snoop on you in every way they can), but those don't tell the whole tale.

Contrary to what marketers like to pretend, appeal and interest aren't Boolean themselves; they vary. A LOT.
They vary with exposure, mood, investment, or even just coincidence and personal opportunity.

(Hypothetically, if we had all this down, there would be no more "fads" (or "ADD audiences") and a very finite selection of things would start popular and stay popular.)

A good deal of what Extra Credits says (and part of why I stopped watching them) SOUNDS sensible until you parse through their claims and realize just how much of it relies upon appeals to ideology. In their ideal world, associative appeal is consistent and predictable. Or at least enough to make claims based upon it.

SUMMARY (for this part): I agree with you.

 

[Megamatics]

Pretty sure portal was a First Person Puzzle game... It had a gun, but it was just to shoot portals to solve puzzles. Beyond that I think the video is all well meaning, but it doesn't touch on the fact that Publishers want to make money, and they often do that by copying elements from already successful games. Resident Evil went full on "Bro'd Up" when Call of Duty started to kill the market, and you had games already taking inspiration from the highly successful Grand Theft Auto Series. Sure they can make games attempting to grow the market, but you've got to have money to be able to take those kinds of risks. I think a lot of Publishers are just happy with making a lot of money, over creating the next Another World or Lost Odyssey.

 

[DynastyStar]

Personally, i can't really deal with Extra Credits after he suggested that Yuna from FFX was a boring character and that characters are more interesting because they have different sexual preferences, it's too subjective.

which episode did they say/imply that?

 

[Strazdas]

Disclaimer: have not watched the video because i no longer watch anything made by them.

Different games sell to different genders for one simple reason: brain chemistry. you see, different genres enjoy different type of challenges. this leads them to enjoy different type of games, hence certain games sell better for some audience while others for other. Interestingly enough, the most "fair" genre seems to be RPGs.

 

[Lightknight]

But notice, none of the categories are 0% female. They're just mostly female. However, that's what studios and publishers are saying when they say that Shooters are for men. The ratio is so heavily stilted towards males that from their perspective that's what matters. They're not wrong. I would hardly consider a game like Portal to be a FPS though.

That's the first complain in the video: oversimplification from the industry's point of view. I think they (the people in the industry) simply generalize things and tend to omit niche markets (at least the AAA side). However, if AAA publishers and studios don't want to do it (experiment with the genres), but people still want it, it will come from another source (like it happened with Minecraft).

Well sure, but the video's complaint was about people saying that "FPS" games are for men. In complaining about the industry being overly generic the video itself fell into the same trap. FPS games as grouped so generically are for men by and large.

However, a non-violent first person puzzler? Maybe not. Then again, I don't know what the gender composition of consumers for a game like Portal was. The video seems to think that they did well amongst females but I know of no such data.

We do need to have more analysis in this area amongst subcategories to ensure the stereotypes are founded in valid statistics so they can create smarter games but beyond that, when people are talking about FPS titles they are traditionally talking about violent shooters from the first person perspective. If Extra Credits can't handle the nuances of conversation and common vernacular then they ought to do more research before chiming in on something like this. Creating and then tearing down a strawman does no one any favors.

 

[Lightknight]

Really? Your sole reference so far has been to Wikipedia.

Can you just let this go.

It takes little effort to realize that FPS are there own thing within FP games. Call of Duty and Half-life are not the same genre of game as Skyrim or Far Cry.

You are arguing semantics and dragging on a non-point.

Don't know who you are, but I owe you a drink should we ever meet in person (and assuming you're of the legal drinking age of course, otherwise a soda will have to suffice).

Games like Alien Isolation have a gun in them and are first person but are not called FPS games. They're called something like First Person Survival Horror. Portal would be a FP Puzzler.

The issue is that FPS means more money and companies want to be thought of as FPS titles even when they're not. But FPS is almost always going to be something where you're shooting the enemy. The only exception I could think about would be if it were a game designed around mechanics of shooting like an archery or shooting range sim of some sort. Would that be an FPS or would that instead be something like an FP marksman sim? not sure.