I'm tired of the "it's just a game" line

[Mechanix]

I get enraged if someone says "it's just a game" to me. I don't get overly mad at games often, but when they say that, they might as well be saying "get over it, no one cares". Makes me want to attack them personally, like "Oh yeah bill, stop complaining about your job, after all, it's just life, get over it bro!".

 

[timeadept]

So by the logic you're presenting, everyone should critically analyze every game they come across and anyone who defends it should have to conform to realistic standards to defend said game, even if in the games reality things do not work the same?

How would you answer this then

Q-In Bad Company 2, how do you revive someone who just got hit by a 100 bullets to the mouth with a defibrillator?

The only POSSIBLE answer is "it's a game, and that's how the game mechanics work". Because seriously there's no realistic explanation, the man wouldn't have a face never the less a heartbeat after any amount of voltage through him.

No the point is that when a game lays down some rules, like "we're going to be a realistic shooter" they had better PLAY by those rules. And btw, in BC2 i think it's completely RIDICULOUS that defibrillators work that way. I understand that it's used as a game mechanic to make the game more fun, but i don't even think it does that right. I remember being a sniper once and i shot this guy in the head 5 TIMES having him be revived each time, only to have him escape when i had to reloaded. I think the mechanic is broken and ON TOP OF THAT unrealistic. I would be more accepting of the defibrillator if the game wasn't TRYING to be realistic but was maybe stylized to look more like TF2.

 

[timeadept]

''It's just a movie'' is used far more often.

It's just a way of saying ''it's fiction, don't worry about it''
We can still take it serious as a medium but find the content lacking to immerse us.
Or we just get mad at the game and you need to remind yourself that ''it's just a game''.

I get annoyed as hell at movies too, especially if "it's just a movie" was thrown in there.
Like a lot of people have said already, the "it's just a _______)" only devalues the thing you just did. "It's just a movie? so why the hell did I just pay 10$ for this waste of time anyways???".

 

[The Sandvich]

Yes, yes they are.

I hope you're just joking. It's really difficult to interpret tones over the internet

 

[Snotnarok]

So by the logic you're presenting, everyone should critically analyze every game they come across and anyone who defends it should have to conform to realistic standards to defend said game, even if in the games reality things do not work the same?

How would you answer this then

Q-In Bad Company 2, how do you revive someone who just got hit by a 100 bullets to the mouth with a defibrillator?

The only POSSIBLE answer is "it's a game, and that's how the game mechanics work". Because seriously there's no realistic explanation, the man wouldn't have a face never the less a heartbeat after any amount of voltage through him.

No the point is that when a game lays down some rules, like "we're going to be a realistic shooter" they had better PLAY by those rules. And btw, in BC2 i think it's completely RIDICULOUS that defibrillators work that way. I understand that it's used as a game mechanic to make the game more fun, but i don't even think it does that right. I remember being a sniper once and i shot this guy in the head 5 TIMES having him be revived each time, only to have him escape when i had to reloaded. I think the mechanic is broken and ON TOP OF THAT unrealistic. I would be more accepting of the defibrillator if the game wasn't TRYING to be realistic but was maybe stylized to look more like TF2.

Okay let's change it to a medic kit where you have to sit there for 2 minutes and revive your friend nice and slowly, this way it's both realistic and you have the real chance of being shot and killed while preforming this kind act to help your team keep going. No one will ever bother playing medic in this case or using his function to it being effective.

BC2 is realistic in the way of gunplay, the rest is game mechanics. Regardless of what you think it should be, realism has to be dropped for game mechanics because otherwise it wouldn't be a fun game. Because by your logic, the game should immediately kick you from the game when you get killed and ban you from the server because effectively you've died in that gameworld, because there's no second chances in reality and we want real right!

It's not a realistic life simulator, it's a tactical shooter with somewhat realistic gun mechanics. There is not ONE word on the box or website that says "realistic" anything annnd there's no sniper class in bad company 2 so I'm not sure what you're basing your facts on, but that's not what Bad Company 2 is. Sure you can pick a sniper rifle as a recon but recon is about as much a sniper as the assault is a baker.

 

[Korolev]

Well, sure - "Just" because it's a game doesn't mean it shouldn't have a good story or great artwork. However, a game is an interactive medium - it has to be, because if you can't interact with it (play it), then... is it any different from a film? And because it's interactive, it can't do the same things a film can, it can't pull the same tricks. None of that suggests that a game can't be deep or serious, but that it cannot follow the same path as a film - you have to design a whole new slew of tricks and techniques to make a great game - a great game developer usually can't make a good film and a good film director almost always fails at making a good game - games and films are very different, and have to be designed differently. And because games are a fairly new medium, the technology to create a deep, meaningful game has only just come about in the last 6 years or so. I'm sorry, but graphics matters to immersion - it was hard to really develop a deep bond with characters that were rendered in the original Quake Engine after all. So the reason why most games aren't "deep" is due to the fact that relatively realistic human characters have only been possible recently.

The only excuse to use the "it's just a game" line is when someone flips out over the price or what direction the franchise is headed in. For example, when people were up in arms over the L4D2 "fiasco", or when you had morons getting angry over which was better - Forza or GT. Or when someone sees that a developer is charging X amount of dollars, and acts like their civil rights are under threat (to those people: Grow up. If you think your "rights" are being trampled because a LUXURY item (and games are luxury items jimmy) is expensive, then you know NOTHING of real suffering, and you're immature to boot). In those circumstances, it's just a game. No game is worth getting worked up over. If you don't like the price or the direction a game is going in, you can be disappointed and refuse to purchase it. But to act as if your "liberties" were under threat from a VIDEO GAME PUBLISHER.... that's just stupid.

I say the same thing about Film, TV and comics - for example, when Star Trek fans argue angrily over what is "canon" or over minor mistakes and inconsistencies, you can't help but laugh - dudes, it's a FICTIONAL TV show. It doesn't REALLY matter. Sure, fans will be fans and it's nice to have something to care about, but to care about it so much that you treat it as a real thing is ludicrous.

Same thing with games - at the end of the day, it's a leisure activity. Games, like film and TV shows, are entertainment. None of that is to say that they can't be thought provoking, but unless you actually work on the show or game or film, your livelihood and life isn't really connected with the product.

 

[cgmetallica1981]

Same, bro. I'm also sick of the "its my opinion" line. That is such an awful thing to say, it shows you're weak, bad at debating, and have no arguments left.

 

[electric method]

Games, like books, movies and other forms of entertainment are subjective experiences. Personally I walked away from reading "Stranger in a Strange Land" with lots of thoughts and questions. I believe it's an incredible piece of fiction that is also deeply thought provoking. However, someone else may not share that opinion, despite it being one the most lauded pieces of science fiction ever written.

The problem games run into is that all to often the stories or plots read like simple action books or movies. And for every Bioshock etc there are literally 100's of games made that are interchangeable trainwrecks with almost no point made. In order to get past this the industry will have to collectively step up and stop creating such mindless drivel. Sure, the occasional bit of amusing drek is well, fun. But oversaturating the market with it just perpetuates "it's just a game" mentality and further degrades the credibility of the medium to produce worthwile entertainment. Entertainment that surpasses the sum of the term "game" and crosses over into art.

 

[starkiller212]

I use "it's just a movie" at least as often, usually when someone is over-analyzing it until it becomes annoying. Also, not all games are meant to be taken seriously, but they can still be great regardless (i.e. Castle Crashers). If someone refuses to acknowledge the validity of interactive entertainment as a serious form of expression for something as minor as that phrase, then they might not be worth convincing anyway (i.e. Roger Ebert). Just my 2 cents anyway

 

[timeadept]

So by the logic you're presenting, everyone should critically analyze every game they come across and anyone who defends it should have to conform to realistic standards to defend said game, even if in the games reality things do not work the same?

How would you answer this then

Q-In Bad Company 2, how do you revive someone who just got hit by a 100 bullets to the mouth with a defibrillator?

The only POSSIBLE answer is "it's a game, and that's how the game mechanics work". Because seriously there's no realistic explanation, the man wouldn't have a face never the less a heartbeat after any amount of voltage through him.

No the point is that when a game lays down some rules, like "we're going to be a realistic shooter" they had better PLAY by those rules. And btw, in BC2 i think it's completely RIDICULOUS that defibrillators work that way. I understand that it's used as a game mechanic to make the game more fun, but i don't even think it does that right. I remember being a sniper once and i shot this guy in the head 5 TIMES having him be revived each time, only to have him escape when i had to reloaded. I think the mechanic is broken and ON TOP OF THAT unrealistic. I would be more accepting of the defibrillator if the game wasn't TRYING to be realistic but was maybe stylized to look more like TF2.

Okay let's change it to a medic kit where you have to sit there for 2 minutes and revive your friend nice and slowly, this way it's both realistic and you have the real chance of being shot and killed while preforming this kind act to help your team keep going. No one will ever bother playing medic in this case or using his function to it being effective.

BC2 is realistic in the way of gunplay, the rest is game mechanics. Regardless of what you think it should be, realism has to be dropped for game mechanics because otherwise it wouldn't be a fun game. Because by your logic, the game should immediately kick you from the game when you get killed and ban you from the server because effectively you've died in that gameworld, because there's no second chances in reality and we want real right!

It's not a realistic life simulator, it's a tactical shooter with somewhat realistic gun mechanics. There is not ONE word on the box or website that says "realistic" anything annnd there's no sniper class in bad company 2 so I'm not sure what you're basing your facts on, but that's not what Bad Company 2 is. Sure you can pick a sniper rifle as a recon but recon is about as much a sniper as the assault is a baker.

Okay let's change it to a medic kit where you have to sit there for 2 minutes and revive your friend nice and slowly, this way it's both realistic and you have the real chance of being shot and killed while preforming this kind act to help your team keep going. No one will ever bother playing medic in this case or using his function to it being effective.

That's funny, i don't remember suggesting replacing the defibrillator with a med kit that requires 2 min to use. But maybe if using the defibrillator required say 5 seconds then it would be better balanced. Or maybe this thing can't be properly balanced in the context of this game at all and should just be removed?

Because by your logic, the game should immediately kick you from the game when you get killed and ban you from the server because effectively you've died in that gameworld, because there's no second chances in reality and we want real right!

You don't seem to understand my logic at all. Didn't I admit that a line must be drawn at some point for the sake of making the game fun? My issue is where the line WAS drawn. The developers drew it too far on the fun mechanics side and not on the realistic mechanics side in the case of the defibrillator. And as for not respawning, America's Army did not allow it at all. If you died then you sat out the rest of the round until one team won. As for your idea of kicking and banning the player from the server, you have simply drawn the line in a very inappropriate place. It's completely arbitrary that you would be kicked and baned from the server when you die, why not have the actual player killed for death? THAT would certainly be realistic wouldn't it? Any place you draw the line it will always be completely ARBITRARY. the trick is to draw it in a place that is appropriate for the kind of game you're playing.

There is not ONE word on the box or website that says "realistic" anything annnd there's no sniper class in bad company 2 so I'm not sure what you're basing your facts on, but that's not what Bad Company 2 is. Sure you can pick a sniper rifle as a recon but recon is about as much a sniper as the assault is a baker.

uh... what? You're honestly arguing that i'm not a sniper because the class is called "recon"?
A baker is more like the assault class than recon is like a sniper...?
yeah...
well when you learn the difference between an egg beater and an assault rifle maybe you'll be able to accept that the recon class is obviously the closest thing to a real sniper that the game has, if you want to get REALLY nitpicky.

one last thing though, this is why, as a SNIPER, that i think the defibrillator is unbalanced.
Basically, the instant kill of a head shot is not an easy thing to pull off, and if you miss and only wound the target, it's even harder to get a kill when they panic and start looking for cover. Now when you add a medic into the mix with his defibrillator, he just essentially stole the kill that i worked so hard to get. Not only that but he dove in and INSTANTLY revived him and now they're both running and looking for cover. It makes being a SNIPER feel really pointless and unrewarding.

 

[timeadept]

I use "it's just a movie" at least as often, usually when someone is over-analyzing it until it becomes annoying. Also, not all games are meant to be taken seriously, but they can still be great regardless (i.e. Castle Crashers). If someone refuses to acknowledge the validity of interactive entertainment as a serious form of expression for something as minor as that phrase, then they might not be worth convincing anyway (i.e. Roger Ebert). Just my 2 cents anyway

I suppose you analyze something more if you care about it more, and if you think i'm "over" analyzing it then maybe i care about it more than you do and you should stop and think before saying "it's just a ______". I like what a couple people have said before in that by saying "it's just a ______" you are saying that it doesn't matter, you are devaluing the thing. The thing is that it mattered to ME and now you're saying that the things i like do not have or deserve value.

True though that not all games are meant to be taken seriously, the problem is when the game WANTS to be taken seriously but still pulls stupid stunts, that is where the unforgivingness stems from.

I don't know i guess i'm just saying that it's pretty rude and unthoughtful towards the person in question if you find your self saying "it's just a _______"

 

[KiKiweaky]

I generally say 'It's just a game' when I get all upset at being face rolled or guild politics.... the latter is probably the worst one out there. You play the game to relax/ have a laugh with some like minded people etc. Yet people always, always find a way to get into arguments fights and such.

On another note some games can provide alot of real money for you should you be into the whole gold selling/power leveling business.

 

[Snotnarok]

So by the logic you're presenting, everyone should critically analyze every game they come across and anyone who defends it should have to conform to realistic standards to defend said game, even if in the games reality things do not work the same?

How would you answer this then

Q-In Bad Company 2, how do you revive someone who just got hit by a 100 bullets to the mouth with a defibrillator?

The only POSSIBLE answer is "it's a game, and that's how the game mechanics work". Because seriously there's no realistic explanation, the man wouldn't have a face never the less a heartbeat after any amount of voltage through him.

No the point is that when a game lays down some rules, like "we're going to be a realistic shooter" they had better PLAY by those rules. And btw, in BC2 i think it's completely RIDICULOUS that defibrillators work that way. I understand that it's used as a game mechanic to make the game more fun, but i don't even think it does that right. I remember being a sniper once and i shot this guy in the head 5 TIMES having him be revived each time, only to have him escape when i had to reloaded. I think the mechanic is broken and ON TOP OF THAT unrealistic. I would be more accepting of the defibrillator if the game wasn't TRYING to be realistic but was maybe stylized to look more like TF2.

Okay let's change it to a medic kit where you have to sit there for 2 minutes and revive your friend nice and slowly, this way it's both realistic and you have the real chance of being shot and killed while preforming this kind act to help your team keep going. No one will ever bother playing medic in this case or using his function to it being effective.

BC2 is realistic in the way of gunplay, the rest is game mechanics. Regardless of what you think it should be, realism has to be dropped for game mechanics because otherwise it wouldn't be a fun game. Because by your logic, the game should immediately kick you from the game when you get killed and ban you from the server because effectively you've died in that gameworld, because there's no second chances in reality and we want real right!

It's not a realistic life simulator, it's a tactical shooter with somewhat realistic gun mechanics. There is not ONE word on the box or website that says "realistic" anything annnd there's no sniper class in bad company 2 so I'm not sure what you're basing your facts on, but that's not what Bad Company 2 is. Sure you can pick a sniper rifle as a recon but recon is about as much a sniper as the assault is a baker.

Okay let's change it to a medic kit where you have to sit there for 2 minutes and revive your friend nice and slowly, this way it's both realistic and you have the real chance of being shot and killed while preforming this kind act to help your team keep going. No one will ever bother playing medic in this case or using his function to it being effective.

That's funny, i don't remember suggesting replacing the defibrillator with a med kit that requires 2 min to use. But maybe if using the defibrillator required say 5 seconds then it would be better balanced. Or maybe this thing can't be properly balanced in the context of this game at all and should just be removed?

Because by your logic, the game should immediately kick you from the game when you get killed and ban you from the server because effectively you've died in that gameworld, because there's no second chances in reality and we want real right!

You don't seem to understand my logic at all. Didn't I admit that a line must be drawn at some point for the sake of making the game fun? My issue is where the line WAS drawn. The developers drew it too far on the fun mechanics side and not on the realistic mechanics side in the case of the defibrillator. And as for not respawning, America's Army did not allow it at all. If you died then you sat out the rest of the round until one team won. As for your idea of kicking and banning the player from the server, you have simply drawn the line in a very inappropriate place. It's completely arbitrary that you would be kicked and baned from the server when you die, why not have the actual player killed for death? THAT would certainly be realistic wouldn't it? Any place you draw the line it will always be completely ARBITRARY. the trick is to draw it in a place that is appropriate for the kind of game you're playing.

There is not ONE word on the box or website that says "realistic" anything annnd there's no sniper class in bad company 2 so I'm not sure what you're basing your facts on, but that's not what Bad Company 2 is. Sure you can pick a sniper rifle as a recon but recon is about as much a sniper as the assault is a baker.

uh... what? You're honestly arguing that i'm not a sniper because the class is called "recon"?
A baker is more like the assault class than recon is like a sniper...?
yeah...
well when you learn the difference between an egg beater and an assault rifle maybe you'll be able to accept that the recon class is obviously the closest thing to a real sniper that the game has, if you want to get REALLY nitpicky.

one last thing though, this is why, as a SNIPER, that i think the defibrillator is unbalanced.
Basically, the instant kill of a head shot is not an easy thing to pull off, and if you miss and only wound the target, it's even harder to get a kill when they panic and start looking for cover. Now when you add a medic into the mix with his defibrillator, he just essentially stole the kill that i worked so hard to get. Not only that but he dove in and INSTANTLY revived him and now they're both running and looking for cover. It makes being a SNIPER feel really pointless and unrewarding.

I'm being nitpicky because that's my main point, you're not a sniper. You're recon, you snipe those who are hanging around but the recons MAIN PURPOSE is to point out targets to your allies,. The hint being your motion balls and a scope that spots for you and if you want to get technical that's what they do in realistically which you were just saying the game lacked before. That's why it's called recon and not sniper, it's part of the whole tactical teamwork the game boasts vs the realistic shooter you said it was.

It's the same reason the medic isn't called "Rambo" with his LMG, his job is to provide support fire and revive and heal hurt teamates. Recons job as I said is to point out enemies, that's why when I play Recon I'm not behind my team 500 miles and trying to pick off defending players who have infinite respawns, I slap on a shotgun, toss motion mines and now I'm both helping my team and gunning down people and arming objectives.

Not to sound boastful here but this is the exact reason why teams lose in bad company 2 because they look at recon and see sniper and then you have a cliff with 8 'snipers' and no one arms the objective. Then you will snipe not helping the team out, the medic will do his job and revive to get the ticket back and then you'll feel unfulfilled.

If you want to snipe in that kind of role, put on a mid range sniper rifle that has no bolt action and shoot him, an the medic while tossing motion balls for your team.

 

[Xanadu84]

I agree to a point. When a person brings negative, real life consequences into play from a game, you need to tell them it's just a game. And when a person enjoys a game less because they are taking something seriously that shouldn't, then you need to tell them it is just a game. But that is more like a matter of, "Its just a game that focuses on straightforward, funny, or over the top fun". If you think that a game has potential to be better at expressing an idea, then "It's just a game" doesn't cut mustard. In many situations, thinking of it as, "Just a game" robs the player of the opportunity to experience something wonderful.

 

[0mn1p0t3ntg6y]

Video games are already a medium. It's just that people who haven't had a lot of time in gaming will continue to use the line, as they don't know how it feels.