top 10 arguments I disagree with

[Luthir Fontaine]

Games should NOTx1ooooooooooooooo be considered art by any one.
im not saying people who make games arent artists but that dosent make them art.

if da vinci made a sandwitch it wouldent be art. it would be a sandwitch.
same goes for developers

Ok...define art?

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

10. Agree with this, even if I don't really PC game.

9. I freaking love Fallout 3. Okay I never played Fallout 1+2 but I don't get what was wrong with Fallout 3 besides it not being Fallout 1+2. Maybe all I heard was the fanboys.

8. Not sure if you really meant the dumbing down for ME2, but I'll guess that you are. I don't agree with this. Sure ME was not the next Deus Ex, but what it did it did well, and I actually found it to be a nice jumping on point for someone who liked the concept of RPGs but didn't want to wade through the absurd difficulty of games like Deus Ex. I have since gone on to play those game though, and enjoyed them, but mainly because I started with simpler things like ME and KoToR. I'm in the middle of replaying ME2 right now, and the more I play, the less I enjoy it. It feels less like a ME game, less like a Role-Playing game, and more like a cover based third person shooter with an overly elaborate conversation wheel. Argue that the upgrades and levelling in ME1 was basic, sure, but at least it let you have some control and compromise. If you wanted a stealth based character, you couldn't have a gun toting tank, there weren't enough skill points. Now it is entirely possible in one playthrough to have a stealthy damage absorbing uber hacker sniper, with little or no effort. The dumbing down removed any sense of personality between different playthroughs. You always play Commander Shepard as BioWare intended you to, not as you might want to play him/her. If they keep dumbing down any further ME2 will just be Gears of War 3: IN SPACE!

and I liked the mako dammit.

7. I think it's more, 'realism is so widespread it's corrupting everything.' You can't have a sandbox where cars don't handle like real life, not even in GTA, you can't have a DN or Halo: CE style shooter anymore, they all have to have regenerating health and cover based combat. And even then, the closer we get to realism, the more ridiculous I think it gets. As Yahtzee pointed out, a realistic shooter would involve you getting shot once then spending a year in hospital. And most 'realistic shooters' aren't even that realistic. America's Army is realistic and that game is fucking impossible. If mainstream shooters really were realistic then they wouldn't be mainstream because the average person wouldn't be able to play them.

6. Yeah totally agree with this one. Even made this exact same argument on a forum thread a few weeks ago.

5. Ha.

4. I do like me some sequels. I even like reboots, assuming they do things well. It's that weird situation of idolising the original I find odd. Tomb Raider 1 has not stood the test of time in any way, and although yes there were some quirks in Anniversary it was a much better game that actually bothered to have a story. In other words, it was a much better game. And I'm the biggest TR fanboy you could find.

3. Again, yeah I agree. All good at what they do really, they just do different things. Doesn't make them better or worse.

2. I think what people misunderstand is the difference between a 'blank' character and a 'silent' character. A 'silent' character can still have a lot of storytelling done through their interactions with the world, a 'blank' character would stand in a corner and do nothing.

1. Again, as a gamer, I'd be hard pressed to argue this one positively. I think this one stems from the interpretation of 'childish' things not being right for adults to engage in, and extends to cartoons, comics, animated films, fairytales. It sounds ridiculous but even the fact that Waterstones segregates their books as '5-8, 9-12, teenage, Fiction' fills me with rage. I first read James Bond at age 9, and nowadays I enjoy reading Skulduggery Pleasant at age 21. I understand in part that it's more about letting parents know what's appropriate for their children, but that doesn't stop you from putting Skulduggery Pleasant in fiction as well as in 9-12 does it? And for the love of god get rid of the 'Dark Fantasy' section.

Sorry, this rant had a point.

My current pet peeve I'm most aware of is when people talking about historical events say 'we.' No 'you' did not hold out against the Nazis in the Battle of Britain, 1940s Britain held out, the people of 1940s Britain held out, potentially your grandparents and ancestors held out, but you did not. And don't try and argue that it's about convenience 'they' doesn't take any longer to type or say.

 

[GrimHeaper]

5. everything is dying

no it isnt

Ha, yea I really hate seeing this too. Maybe I should post a thread asking what ISN'T dying.

But everything is dieing even non-living things die.
Our very planet could be sucked up by a random blackhole,smashed by a meteor,etc.

 

[Luthir Fontaine]

Games should NOTx1ooooooooooooooo be considered art by any one.
im not saying people who make games arent artists but that dosent make them art.

if da vinci made a sandwitch it wouldent be art. it would be a sandwitch.
same goes for developers

Ok...define art?

Ok my definitiion of art is a quality and unique expression of creativity which is aestheticaly or emotionaly exeptional created for self indulgence.
a vidio game is not unique. it is mass produced.
a video game is not aestheticaly or emotionaly exeptional. it is made by the same programs as everyone else, and there is a limit to how emotionaly involved we can get
also a vidio game is not created because an artist feals like it, its made because someone is makeing an artist create it. the artist gets very little say as to what goes in the game its self.

games arent art. they are frivolous entertainment. mass produced for the purpose of profit.

With that definition then i guess movies are not art either neither is any music.

 

[Dick Johnson]

So, where did all these arguments come from?

Some of them, like #6, I just find myself staring blankly at aftr reading.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

9. Fallout 3 was a bad game, lets just put certain plot points ASIDE for a moment, I think some people really forget what the game did incredibly well (and that was alot of things)

I just thought that stats were terribly balanced, almost to the point where putting points into anything but small guns was a waste, combat itself was rather dull and that the inventory system could use something of a revamp IMO.

And lockpick, explosives, barter, stealth, speech, medicine, repair, science. Maybe I played a different game to you but I wasn't a tank who went around murdering everything in the wasteland. if I hadn't had a high speech skill to get me out of trouble, a high stealth skill to avoid getting me into trouble, and high medicine and repair for the few times I did, I wouldn't have survived past level 5. And without lockpicking or science you miss a whole bunch of interesting stuff. Again, maybe you played a bullet sponge but I found combat pretty hectic what with no health or endurance. Inventory system was crap, I agree there.

But ignoring all that for a moment. Let's talk about the atmosphere. Or rather, the lack of such. Yes, I'm serious. Fallout 3 has absolutely no atmosphere and that is entirely due to that lack of audio. There's no music, but I could forgive that, they could pull off a wasteland tone without music. But at least add in some environmental sounds! I'd settle for some wind blowing through the jagged rocks!

I had wind playing through my jagged rocks. Maybe it was a glitch in your game or something but when I go and stand between some cliffs I get a nice whooshing sound, and if I'm out in the middle of the plains I can hear all sorts of interesting noises.

I don't care about how good the rest of the game is. I couldn't get into it.
The way I see it is that every game is a box full of goodies, which you have to find a way into. Some games, like IMO Metroid Prime, allow you to jut hop right in a play with the goodies. Fallout 3 on the other hand is a box made of solid steel with no way in.

Immersion's pretty personal I guess. I don't like games that give me everything, I like working for them. In fact, working for them often draws me in more. When I finally manage to limp to the bottom of a Raider cave, bleeding and crippled and poisoned, finding a bed and an awesome gun I will use forever make the conquest all the sweeter. Running over a box or a discarded gun in an FPS is all well and good and fun in its own way but everything feels like a challenge for me in Fallout. You can never just have something, you have to work for it.

I... Pretty much agree with everything you just said (except #2. Example: Gordon Freeman. Gordon talking and having a personality would have really detracted from the game IMO). Especially six. I really have never gotten that line of thinking. Though I would point out that even summer block-busters and your average, over-the-top, AAA shooter are art in there own way. See: Jim's interesting argument on the subject in an old episode of Jimquisition [http://www.youtube.com/user/DTOID#p/c/4C68FCCCD3E13304/25/GqJv68pE_cY].

Gordon Freeman isn't a 'blank' character, he's a silent character. There's a difference. Blank characters have no emotion, no interaction with the story besides killing things or moving things around. Blank charcters could be entirely replaced with a robot armed with a gun in one hand and a winch in the other.

I don't like Gordon Freeman or Half Life personally, but I will admit that the characterisation of Gordon, without even using dialogue, is pretty interesting. The way you interact, and indeed are forced to interact with the world offers you a lot of insights into his life. You can defend yourself against enemies, but you aren't an immortal health regenerating bullet sponge who can take a full clip to the face. Therefore his character is in good shape and used to weapons, but still has weaknesses to him.

Everyone pretty much looks at you as a jumpsuited Jesus. Clearly you have done things which have made you this popular with everyone. Your character is a hero, a face and a personality which people look up to.

You save the world (sort of, maybe) Your quest (which sure you have no input over) is to save the world. The fact that you do this regardless of whether the player wants to or not shows that this character is accepting of his quest and of his destiny. He is going to save the world dammit, because that's what he does. It's not like an RPG where you can choose to take over the world OR save it. Gordon has a character, and that character is going to save the world.

Silent=/= blank. Chell is blank, her role could be replaced (and indeed was) with a robot with a portal gun. Gordon is a person with a role.

 

[Drummie666]

And lockpick, explosives, barter, stealth, speech, medicine, repair, science. Maybe I played a different game to you but I wasn't a tank who went around murdering everything in the wasteland. if I hadn't had a high speech skill to get me out of trouble, a high stealth skill to avoid getting me into trouble, and high medicine and repair for the few times I did, I wouldn't have survived past level 5. And without lockpicking or science you miss a whole bunch of interesting stuff. Again, maybe you played a bullet sponge but I found combat pretty hectic what with no health or endurance. Inventory system was crap, I agree there.

Actually, I wasn't playing as a tank just killing everything. I went for a high stealth skill, lockpicking and a few other things that I can't remember. But then I found out you are in combat for more than doing anything else, seeing as how quests are, for the most part, "go here and kill stuff" missions (At least they were for the couple of hours I was playing) and I was getting my ass royally handed to me at all times during combat, so I had to start putting all my points into small guns.

I had wind playing through my jagged rocks. Maybe it was a glitch in your game or something but when I go and stand between some cliffs I get a nice whooshing sound, and if I'm out in the middle of the plains I can hear all sorts of interesting noises.

I think I heard wind a few times, but I recall the sound of nothing occurring far more.

Immersion's pretty personal I guess. I don't like games that give me everything, I like working for them. In fact, working for them often draws me in more. When I finally manage to limp to the bottom of a Raider cave, bleeding and crippled and poisoned, finding a bed and an awesome gun I will use forever make the conquest all the sweeter. Running over a box or a discarded gun in an FPS is all well and good and fun in its own way but everything feels like a challenge for me in Fallout. You can never just have something, you have to work for it.

I don't really get why you're talking about "earning your rewards" here, my analogy was about immersion, not getting something for nothing. I mean, yeah, I agree with you on what you're saying here, but that's not what I was talking about. I was referring to being inside box, not just having the things inside.

 

[Hyper-space]

7- Realism is a problem for me because if you want to get killed with one bullet, you can go out and do it yourself. Video games are meant to help us live the lives we can't live in reality.

No they're not, that's just one aspect of gaming. Realism is just a matter of preference, as gaming is not meant to do one thing ("help us live the lives we can't live in reality") over the other.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Ok my definitiion of art...

Your point ceased to have meaning right there.
"...my definition of art...".
Because clearly, you alone have the authority to define what others may or may not consider art.

 

[Lukeje]

Ten years ago, the variety of PC games was at least tripe the size of what it is now. Given, a good portion of them were point/click adventure games, but it is substantially smaller. I believe that PC gaming is dying, but it's not damned to do so. A Vampyre Story was an excellent adventure game, and more like it should be made!

Is tripe a measurement now? How does it fit into the metric system. Sorry, had to call it it's not even like p and c are anywhere near each other on a keyboard.

I think the word was supposed to be `triple'. `Trice' isn't actually a word.

Thrice is a word through it is so nice you won't just want it once not twice but Thrice.

Yes, but I was assuming that one error was less likely than two.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Ten years ago, the variety of PC games was at least tripe the size of what it is now. Given, a good portion of them were point/click adventure games, but it is substantially smaller. I believe that PC gaming is dying, but it's not damned to do so. A Vampyre Story was an excellent adventure game, and more like it should be made!

Is tripe a measurement now? How does it fit into the metric system. Sorry, had to call it it's not even like p and c are anywhere near each other on a keyboard.

I think the word was supposed to be `triple'. `Trice' isn't actually a word.

Thrice is a word through it is so nice you won't just want it once not twice but Thrice.

Yes, but I was assuming that one error was less likely than two.

Well I more just pointing it out to try get in that line from Conan O'Brien but yes I see what you mean.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I don't really get why you're talking about "earning your rewards" here, my analogy was about immersion, not getting something for nothing. I mean, yeah, I agree with you on what you're saying here, but that's not what I was talking about. I was referring to being inside box, not just having the things inside.

Sorry, that wasn't explained very well.

For me, immersion comes from how I adjust to thinking about the game, and whether or not the game then upholds my interpretation.

For eg. In Halo you are Master Chief, hero of humanity, super soldier, last hope etc. Therefore I expect to feel like a hero, like a super soldier, and like the last hope. For the hero part, wherever you go everyone treats it like it's the second coming, with the marines spouting lines like 'The Cavalry has arrived', 'Thank God it's you sir,' and so on. For the super soldier. You have a shield, you have access to badass weaponry, you can sprint around the battlefield racking up kills in the thousands, so I deem that supersoldiery. For the Last Hope part, it may be a bit cheap but every other human gets murdered pretty easily, leaving everything up to you, so that seems to define last hope. What I'm saying is that the characterisation of Master Chief fits exactly with how I viewed him, so I got immersed.

In Fallout 3, you've staggered out into the world, armed only with a pistol and your jumpsuit, having spent nineteen years believing you were utterly safe from all harm, and your dad's just gone missing. The world is harsh and cruel and it feels entirely like it would go on completely without you if you died. (until the end) So if you aren't dreading every encounter, hopelessly ineffective in a fight, and pretty much ignored or ridiculed except by the very nicest characters, then the characterisation isn't working right. What i was trying to say and hopefully will say better now is that it feels like the world is out to get you, and you have to fight tooth and nail for everything you get, and when you play, you find yoruself having to fight tooth and nail for everything you get. So for me, the characterisation worked perfectly, and thus I was completely immersed, once I'd gotten out of the Halo mindset of course.

Like I say, it's personal to how you play a game, rather than something you can just judge, at least in my opinion.

 

[gbemery]

Spoiler

9. First of all what did Fallout 3 do that was INCREDIBLE in your eyes? You need to give examples not just "ALOT" I honestly have to disagree I never played it through all the way because it keeps losing my interest. In my opinion there really isn't anything that stands out that another game didn't already do and better, but feel free to tell me what I am missing and maybe I'll try to sit through it.

8. I can't agree with this one either. I hate to be one of those people but I am on the fence. Both were amazing games. I didn't like the ungodly inventory of the first one but I didn't like the lack of one in ME2. I felt I had more customization in the first one as oppose to the second. While I felt my decisions in the second meant more. I liked the combat in the second but not the world layout. The first one felt more open and the second just felt more closed off and not as huge. I honestly liked the MAKO the only thing I didn't like was how damn craggy the freaking planets were. I really don't see where people had problems with it other than the terrain. It was way better then the planet scanning and that piece of crap hammerhead tank they gave us which felt more like a racing game. Then the side quests in both didn't really feel like there was a need for them and the first one's felt just alittle more rewarding to me. I think this argument mainly comes from two groups of people playing the same game. Like say RPG fans loved the first one while FPS/TPS fans didn't so much and that just switched for ME2. In the end you aren't ever going to hear the end of arguments like these as long as companies try to please everyone and get multiple genre fans for one game. There is always going to be something one group likes that the other doesn't and it just comes down to who can ***** the loudest and make the company change pace.



1. what? Im confused on this one.

because of this thing called opnion/induviduality I dont think anything i say could make you like fallout 3 if it didnt spark your interest enough, it happens (like with me and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.)

I put this here because I found people would focus ONLY on the treatment of the Brotherhood and simplifying things (in most cases) to a black and white karma systm

and yes (without broken steel) the main story falls apart at the end

but heres what I love about the game

1. atmosphere, some people says theres none, some people says theres alot, Im in the "omg atmohphere is awsome!" group

I mean the look and feel is fallout through and through, with the classic music and everything

the world really feels like its been brought to life more or less

2. the GOOD parts of the story, growing up in the vault the thing with your dad I felt was very well done and added extra emotional punch

and trainquility lane...that was cool (and the DLC depending on your personal preference I LOVED point lookout, yeah I have a thing for trippy seaquences)

3. exploration, unliek NV FO3 was really the kind of game you wander in a direction and see what you can find and theres alot..from the subtle to the not so subtle (Like a little rube-golderberg trap set up in a store..its like "oh! dominoes! *whack*"

role playing I loved fallotu 3 because I had a real emotional connection to everything my charachter was a charter, she had her own past and her own story

and for those who like to blow things up..yeah you can do that too

is the game perfect? hell no but its a favorite of mine

I would like to first start off and say I hope you didn't think I was attacking your opinion on anything I was just giving mine. After another read through my text does sound a little like it was trying to belittle your opinion but that's not what I was trying to do so I apologize if that's how it came across.

1. Hmm I might have jumped the gun on this part. Probably because the most I remember from Fallout 3 were the tunnels...oh god the tunnels. The main thing about Fallout 3 I didn't like was the constant subway tunnels. I did like the nuke torn environment though. I also did like the treks through the wastelands but thats about it.But after review I would have to say it does bring a nice atmosphere.

2. I didn't feel the opening part with your dad lasted long enough to pull you into it. It did add a nice way of doing your customization though from your birth to your skills...so yeah that much of it was good too.

I can't comment on the DLC because I never got any, so I have nothing to reference. But was trainquility lane the section where you

Spoiler

go to another vault and find them in the computer program?

If it was then I almost forgot about that part. That was rather interesting even if I did get a little turned off from it because it reminded me of the Fade in DA:O at first *shivers*

3. I liked the exploration to a certain extent. It always felt though like if I went out exploring I'd find a part of the game i wasn't suppose to come to yet and I would feel somewhat like the game resented me for it. Like when you uncover the plans for a surprise party a friend of family member was going to give you before it could happen. Then you say "oh but I love it and I'll still act surprised," but they still pout because they didn't get to surprise you the way they had planned it out. Thats how I felt when i found some parts of Fallout3 like I wasn't suppose to have been there yet without the proper story markers.

Maybe my disagreeing was a little premature...I would say that it was more of a meh game for me. It wasn't a "bad" game but it wasn't a good game for me. It seems from my perspective that it did somethings good but what it did bad brings them down and overall makes the game...meh.

4. you still didn't clarify what you meant by the argument "everything related to gameing is sad"? that one really did confuse me.

 

[TheBoulder]

Err, might want to work on that grammar a little more man.

But yeah, I agree with what your saying... I guess. Seriously, its kind of hard to read. Work on the grammar and ill get back to you.

I'm sorry, but I can't watch such a heinous act of hypocrisy and not say anything. I have bolded the offending words

OT: I agree with most of what you say except with everything dying.
Everything's dying. Everything.

 

[Riobux]

There's only two arguments which are gaming related that drive me to tell the person to just shut up: Arguments about games causing violence, and arguments involving gaming fan-boys. They both involve people who wouldn't change their opinion, even if facts were laid out in front of them, and they both involve people who have an "all or nothing" philosophy, in other words they refuse to meet a middle ground and will ram their argument into your face until you agree with them, even if they are completely wrong. Which, 99% of the time, they are.

 

[MattyDienhoff]

But ignoring all that for a moment. Let's talk about the atmosphere. Or rather, the lack of such. Yes, I'm serious. Fallout 3 has absolutely no atmosphere and that is entirely due to that lack of audio. There's no music, but I could forgive that, they could pull off a wasteland tone without music. But at least add in some environmental sounds! I'd settle for some wind blowing through the jagged rocks!

Okay, what the hell? Are we talking about the same game? Fallout 3 has ambient music and environmental sounds, such as wind blowing. No music? What do you call this?


Either your game was severely broken in such a way that the sound didn't work, or you're very confused.