Poll: Can you play a game wrong? [Please read before voting]

[mjc0961]

But if you're playing it and having fun, then no one can really get mad at you for playing it how you want.

Sure I can. If you're joining ranked matches (which are meant to be serious) and you're doing crap like team killing or driving backwards to screw everyone else up, I have every right to get pissed off at you. There are unranked and private matches for dicking around in, so go use them. But screwing up other people's ranked matches makes you nothing more than a troll who needs a good whack with the banhammer (or rather, the suspension hammer, because a ban is a bit extreme unless you're a repeat offender).

Somebody will obviously come off with that lame-ass "they paid their $60 and they deserve to have their fun" garbage. Guess what: I paid my $60 too and I deserve to have my fun just as much as they do. The difference is, I'm playing properly and they're being disruptive. They need to take their dicking around to the appropriate place just as I have taken my serious playing to the appropriate place.

 

[BreakfastMan]

I really do not think there is any "wrong" way to play a game. It is like saying there is a "right" way to watch a film, read a book, or listen to music. It really does not make much sense to me. Seriously, it is your game, you can play it how you want too. Yes, it might be harder to play if you do it that way, but that is your choice.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

yes, on multitudes of games, there are certain things a developer puts into game, and there are ways to play things wrong, especially in multiplayer (see: trolls and glitchers)


also i will admit i do play bethesda games wrong, i used to shoot right for the mainquest, level up the wrong abilities, and would ignore any kind of running if at all possible.

well finally this past year, i played them right, and i have come to really adore F3 and oblivion (hell even morrowind)

 

[Ladette]

After going through dozens of PUG raids in WoW I can say with certainty that yes, you can indeed play a game wrong.

Between the Warriors trying to DPS in Paladin tank gear and the Hunters who go AFK and autoshot the boss, there is an obscene amount of people who play WoW wrong.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Only read all that because it was about Vanquish, one of my favs from 2010.

Actually, the assault rifle is mad useful, but ONLY when maxed out. The ammo is plentiful, damage is adequate, yada yada yada.

The game actually PENALIZES you for using too much cover, so obviously Jim played it wrong yeah.

The LFE gun is useful only as a last resort, as damage is minimal, and thus it shouldn't take up a weapons slot, especially when you only have 3 precious slots in the first place.

The disc launcher is a joke.

Shotgun, machine gun and assault rifle is your best loadout.

I know I'm not even answering the thread, but hey, it's about Vanquish, gotta talk about Vanquish.

No Problem, I love Vanquish too.

The heavy machine gun is far better than the assault rifle because you'll never run out of ammo for it after a few upgrades and it does more damage than the assault rifle.

The LFE gun is just plain awesome, I think it does pretty decent damage when right in an enemy's face. But yeah, if you are just a few feet away, the gun's damage is pretty low. The LFE gun, IMO, is basically your crowd control gun; if you get in a tough spot, you can almost always LFE your way out of it, which is why I used it as one of my main guns.

The disc launcher is the anti-Romanov gun in the game. Have you played Challenge 6? In round 3, 4 Romanovs spawn at the start and 3 of them spawn right in a row. Just as they spawn, you can go one after another and cut their heads off using the disc launcher; basically, slow-mo Romanov 1's head off as he spawns, roll a couple times to the right, slow-mo Romanov 2's head off, roll a couple more times to the right, slow-mo Romanov 3's head off, and then shoot the tank on Romanov 4 to kill him. You got all 4 Romanovs out in less than 30 seconds. Lastly, you can melee with the disc launcher without using the suit's energy, it's extremely useful.

I never rolled out with both the assault rifle and heavy machine gun because to me, it was wasting 2 slots on basically the same gun.

In defense of his review, Jim is right on the money.

I completely disagree with you on that, I think Jim's review of Vanquish is just plain unprofessional. I've said pretty much everything in my initial post. It's clear he played Vanquish as a cover shooter, which is not how the game was meant to be played.

 

[Biosophilogical]

cant be arsed to read all that.

Yes, a game can be played wrong. Particularly multi-player games. I'm thinking of people who join objective based team games and then fart around doing stupid things for the sake of their planned "sick youtube montage" and impinge upon the enjoyment of other players who are there to actually play the game.

That's playing wrong.

Agreed. For example, someone bringing a longsword or sword'n'shield with a useless element (like fire against a fire-breathing dragon), or going off and mining ore while you fight a lightning-spitting sea-dragon that looks like a war-scarred lapras combined with a Goanna.

OT: I guess the only way to play a game wrong is to not play the actual game (not as in the 'game' but as in, to not 'play the game'). So as long as you are conforming to the purpose of the game (kill monsters, beat the gym leaders, etc) it doesn't matter 'how' you play it. So 'playing the game wrong' isn't a way that you play, it is what you play.

 

[Katana314]

I completely agree with you, but this is why developers need to learn that the teaching elements are THE most important part of the game. Obviously, the GTA-style "WALK HERE. NOW DO THIS." system is not enjoyed by many, and you need a subtle yet effective guiding hand towards things. But if that hand doesn't work and your player doesn't play things right, you can't blame them.

I had a problem with GTA IV doing this, but not because of the thinly veiled tutorial... it was because two or three of the tutorials were functionally useless. One mission demanded I learn how to fist-fight multiple opponents, chase another car, then disarm an armed opponent (without giving me the opportunity to heal up)... and only one of those skills was in any way required during the rest of the game. Another mission had me learning how to throw a brick, which the game never required me to do again, nor do I think it had any real impact on gameplay.

The over-long six hour tutorial was just a case of bad editing. The core game-play mechanics can be introduced in one or two missions. No need to show me how to drive a car by driving Roman home, then showing me how to pick up and drop off someone in another mission. Then showing me how to outrun cops in yet another mission. Yadda yadda yadda.

See, people called Portal one long tutorial. It made sense because mechanics kept tying into each other, and the only thing you ever really do is make and use portals. GTA never makes sense because it always puts you at square one doing some random thing they thought up. They never expand on ideas, just go from one to the next. Furthermore, things are too fast-paced in that game for them to ever give you a learning environment of something meaningful, ie rather than "Hide from the cops here" have you learn over several chases where best to hide from cops.

A lot of games have a lot of things to learn in terms of learning.

 

[Altorin]

you certainly CAN play a game incorrectly. However, it is the developer's job to present the game in the most rewarding light.

I think Oblivion for me is the king of this. If I don't go into this game with the right mindset (Basically "Go out into the world and explore") then I don't have any fun with it. The game isn't very good with directing you in an entertaining way. Following quests or just finding quests can be irritating. I'm not sure exactly what my problem with it is, but I always feel like I'm missing something.

Also, Jim Sterling seems much more entertaining on Youtube. I've hated his Escapist Videos, but this video was pretty good actually.

 

[MightyMole]

Games are meant to be enjoyed. As a gamer, you want to play a game the way you enjoy it. As a developer, your job is to make the game enjoyable. Sometimes I think developers focus too much on their gimmicks and restrict the player to playing a few number of ways that people may not enjoy.

So do I think someone can play the game wrong? No.

Do I think someone can play the game a way the developer didn't intend? Absolutely.

It's the truly great games that allow the player freedom to choose how they want to play. It doesn't even have to be drastic choices, just small details that will make the game enjoyable to everyone. If you're gonna bother putting a weapon in your game, make it just as important as anything else you have in your game.

Ex: If Portal, for some ungodly reason, had a stick or a hand gun or something, I would expect Valve to make the game just as enjoyable playing with only a pistol as it would be playing with just the portal gun. Of course, I would vomit if Valve actually did this to a future Portal game, but you get the point.

If he wasn't supposed to play the game only running around with an assault rifle, why put it in there? I understand weapon balance, but if it detracts from the experience just don't put it in there.

In this situation, yeah it sounds like Jim may not have experimented enough with the game mechanics and found the one that was right for him, or maybe he did find the best way to enjoy it for himself and he still found it lacking, but that doesn't excuse a developer demanding him replay and review the game again "the right way". People put waaaay too much weight into game reviews. Reviews are a persons opinion and not everyone is going to share yours. Get over it.

 

[Altorin]

actually, looking at another Youtube Jimquisition episode made me laugh. Wow, watching these actually will make me pay more attention to him here.

The video's about a bunch of people getting up in arms about games copying other games, and one game in particular, Majin and the whatever kingdom being accused of being a rip off of The Last Guardian (a game which hasn't even come out yet).

This part made me laugh "And that's just what I think, and I think you should piss into an icecream cone, freeze it overnight, peel away the wafer and stab yourself in the kidney with it in the morning because... fuck you."

Yeah, definitely going to pay more attention to this guy cause that's brilliant.

sorry for the derail

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

If he wasn't supposed to play the game only running around with an assault rifle, why put it in there? I understand weapon balance, but if it detracts from the experience just don't put it in there.

In this situation, yeah it sounds like Jim may not have experimented enough with the game mechanics and found the one that was right for him, or maybe he did find the best way to enjoy it for himself and he still found it lacking, but that doesn't excuse a developer demanding him replay and review the game again "the right way". People put waaaay too much weight into game reviews. Reviews are a persons opinion and not everyone is going to share yours. Get over it.

With the same logic, why would the game give you more guns if it wanted you to just use the assault rifle?

I only brought up Jim's Vanquish review because when I came across the Jimquisition video about playing a game wrong, I immediately was like, "ok, I agree with your points but you did play Vanquish wrong." I wasn't upset at the score he gave the game, but his reasons for the score. Vanquish is an action game not a cover shooter. As a professional reviewer, Jim should've known what type of game it is just from watching one of the trailers for the game; it's obvious Vanquish is an action game that just so happens to allow you to take cover. The game puts you in a suit that has all these abilities so you don't have to constantly be in cover. I wouldn't review a racing sim and say it sucks because it's a bad arcade racer and that's what I felt Jim basically did with his Vanquish review. I edited my first post saying Jim didn't play it wrong, but he reviewed it wrong. Just as long as your enjoying yourself, you're playing the game right. Maybe Jim doesn't enjoy action games like Vanquish, that's fine, but then score the game on how good a job it does a being an action game not a cover shooter.

I do think you can play online games wrong as many people have mentioned that if you are not playing the game in way to help your team win, then you are playing it wrong because you are then causing other players' enjoyment of the game to be lowered. There's a time and place to dick around and a time and place to play serious.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If a game has a reasonable expectation that it shows the player how it's supposed to be played (reasonable as in, the average human being able to comprehend it) then yes, it obviously can be played wrong.


If not, not really.



The difference is in the intent of the game you see. If it's meant to give you a certain experience and it builds everything it has around delivering it in the best way possible, you're doing both yourself and the game a disservice by not experiencing it in a way that both you will like (assuming you bought the game based on what it promoted itself as being) and that the game was crafted to deliver.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Here's my opinion, as I still lack one on him. You can play a game wrong. For my own example, I bring up Angry Joe's (who also uses the whole scale, with 5 as average) review of ODST. He said it's too short. Now, I know that ODST can be short, and I might give it too much credit as a Firefly fanboy, but I think the problem is he played it to beat it.

I'm a huge Firefly fan as well, I didn't play ODST but watched a friend play most of it and it was cool hearing the Captain, Wash, and Jayne all together in a game. Anyways, I think it's wrong to have game length affect the score. The game is either good or not, maybe it's not worth $60 due to the length but that doesn't affect game quality. However, saying a campaign is too short because it's not fully fleshed out or ended abruptly is different than saying it's too short because it's say 5 hours. One game could be 5 hours and be the perfect length while another game can be 5 hours and feel short.

 

[Steppin Razor]

Agreed. For example, someone bringing a longsword or sword'n'shield with a useless element (like fire against a fire-breathing dragon), or going off and mining ore while you fight a lightning-spitting sea-dragon that looks like a war-scarred lapras combined with a Goanna.

That sounds really familiar. Game?

On topic

What other people have said.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

Jim is an idiot who panders to stupidity by saying controversial stuff on purpose just to get hits on his videos. I hope he goes the way of game dogs and disappears off the escapist. We're better than his cheap tactics for views on this site and don't need his kind of videos in my opinion.

OT: can you play a game wrong? Not if you are having fun. In terms of multiplayer, I would argue as long as the fun is not at everyone's expense (ie-being a troll).