|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 4:21 am |
  |
|
| Corinth wrote: |
| I'm sure that if Jade Raymond were doing this series there would be absolutely no misogynist blowback and all of these dudes would be happy hearing about sexism in their videogames from an "insider." |
Considering the sexist shitstorm that occurred around the release of the first Assassin's Creed, I'm not so sure about that.
(EDIT: and that post was sarcastic. whoops.)
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
 |
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:07 pm |
|
|
The twitter account for The Best Gamers, a parody games review site/program, broke kayfabe a little while ago. Whoever's behind it poured their heart out for hours upon hours. It's a pretty honest rant, and represents a disillusionment with the hobby that I can totally understand.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:10 pm |
|
|
| Adilegian wrote: |
And this is the most alien sentiment I've encountered when sincere. I haven't found a single concrete statement about what, if anything, about the hobby itself is being suddenly injured. I see successful social engineering on behalf of people saying that the hobby is being burned to the ground, but that's it. |
I think it's just the amount of feeling behind the words that's causing them to use such strong imagery. Looking through his comments - and admittedly, there are quite a few - the main thing I see is a sense of disappointment with the amount of effort being put into making games. The idea that people can simply approach the hobby with all the good intent in the world, push out an end product that would barely make a passing grade in a game development course, then charge a $15 entry fee for it. This tweet, perhaps, might have been a better one to quote.
I'd say it just boils down to people attempting to enter a community and try to shape it to their own needs and wants, rather than approach it from a position of mutual interest and appreciation.
| mauve wrote: |
| there is so much identity politicing going on here. |
Not surprising, given that peoples' identities appear to be at the forefront of this entire disgusting mess.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 6:07 pm |
|
|
Thinking on it a bit more, another possibility is that people feel so threatened by this huge event/discussion/clusterfuck because it talks about games - moreso, the direction that games should develop in - as an absolute. The idea that games, as a medium, should "evolve" in a certain way that would leave recent and long-time enthusiasts out in the cold. The idea that a few prominent developers dislike games as they are and have been for a long time, and as "gatekeepers" (that's the buzzword of the month, right?) are duty-bound to guide the sovereign vessel of gaming as a whole away from such primitive, archaic genres as the "shmup," or the "first-person shooter."
Of course, games should be free to develop in whatever way they like. There's nothing wrong with more narrative-based games that value emotional and story-based content over reaction and skill-based content. Let them come; let them develop alongside long-standing genres and tropes, and let audiences differ and segregate as they would in any other medium. Don't leave anyone out. There's a game for everyone.
Though I say again, I completely understand where THEBESTGAMERS' is coming from when they voice dissatisfaction with full-priced "experiences" that, say, consist entirely of walking around and picking up pieces of paper. Coming off of years' worth of games released and countless developers working tooth and nail to make things happen, we already have a name for that. It's not "game." It's "filler."
| mauve wrote: |
| people have no idea how much work it is to make a game. it's raw, hard, work and it will grind you to the bone |
True. But that doesn't mean that those who have offered the bare minimum amount of effort should be rewarded as much as those who do grind themselves to the bone.
| mauve wrote: |
| if someone wants to make something and shove a $15 price tag on it why not. if people are willing to pay it, that's fine too. |
I'll agree with that. It's up to the market to decide, in the end.
| mauve wrote: |
i actually sort of take offense to the idea that games have value and that like "random crap people make shouldn't be sold for this price i think it should." that's not how economics work.
in fact a lot of smaller devs are better off overcharging for their work, because they will not sell much to begin with... |
I can't agree with this. There's definitely something to be said for standards. A developer should not be rewarded simply because they chose to develop a game. While it's quite possible for "random crap" to turn into something amazing, it takes talent and effort to make that happen. These are the things that should be rewarded - not just the fact that someone made it period.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 6:53 pm |
|
|
| Brooks wrote: |
| Thing is if a given audience is a mire of backward-ass attitudes re: minorities they probably should be left out in the cold |
Granted, if we were talking about genres like "Jew-person shooters" or "apartheid management simulators," yes. Admittedly I was focusing more on the technical reasons for abandoning a genre or audience, rather than the political side of it.
| mauve wrote: |
| It's still better than it was in years past. Overpriced LJN tie-in games from the NES era, fuck yeah |
I'm afraid I disagree with this, too. If anything, it's all just a little bit of history repeating, except with polygons.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 2:20 pm |
|
|
Well sheesh, that post certainly stirred up the shit.
Just wanted to follow up with a personal clarification, as I noticed the major definition of "value" going forward appears to be how much money something is worth. Straight up, I'm coming from a pretty privileged position financially. I'm not going to be buying a house or rocking the stock market any time soon, but I am in a position where I can live comfortably, and have enough to buy a game or two on a regular basis. analogos made mention of "Attempts at [objectively] determining the price-to-value of a thing you personally have zero interest in." Thing is, I do have interest in said thing. It is a video game. I like video games - all sorts. I am willing to part with my money to receive a license to interact with said video games. Given that, I think it's understandable that one of my foremost thoughts when I look at media concerning a game is "Does this measure up to my standards? Is the effort that I can see has been put into this game equal or more to the amount of money they are asking of me?"
That said, when I talk about a game's value to me, I'm not sure I mean the monetary value. I think, right now, the value I see in games is not whether the content matches some arbitrary, market-set price-per-hour. It's whether it is worth my time - my attention (ohhhh time is money, hyuk hyuk). Cuba, you said it: "more games for cheaper in every mainstream genre and tiny niche than ever before." But there's no mention of quality in that statement; hell, in that paragraph. Coming off of over twenty years of games, I know what my standards are. Also given that time, I like to think I can tell when real effort has been put into a game, even from looking at footage, screenshots, or elaborate walls of words. After 20+ years, I expect a certain level of competency from games. It's not even a matter of price any more. It's a matter of whether they're worth the effort. Most aren't.
| analogos wrote: |
| I'm also not sure why you'd lump shmups and FPS together as the latter is probably the most responsible for the growing irrelevance of the former than anything, and small/indie devs are the only folks who kept them alive for the past decade+. |
Once upon a time, shoot-'em-ups were the most common form of game. There were hundreds of the things. They were easy to make and had a sizable audience. There were good ones, there were great ones. Unfortunately, it was also very easy to make a bad one and still have it make money.
Then, platformers were the most common form of game. There were hundreds of the things. They were easy to make and had a sizable audience. There were good ones, there were great ones. Unfortunately, it was also very easy to make a bad one and still have it make money.
Later on, first-person shooters were the most common form of game. There were hundreds of the things. They were easy to make and had a sizable audience. There were good ones, there were great ones. Unfortunately, it was also very easy to make a bad one and still have it make money.
Same Gene, Different Scene. Wonder what's next in line? |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:16 am |
|
|
| CubaLibre wrote: |
| So the thesis is that games overall have dropped in quality over the last 20 years. So what's the hypothesis? Are games worse because some of them are about minorities now? Or are they worse because of the calcification of genre into formula, the adherence to Hollywood storytelling and special effects standards, the achievement culture, and the intervention of marketing in design - i.e., the business practices of the traditional AAA game-creation powerhouses, the very same ones the #gamergate types are trying to protect from this alleged quality decline? |
I'll be clear on the first point there - diversity in characters and subject matter sounds good to me, but for the most part it isn't on my radar. Make games about quasi-pan-dimension-sexual-gender-queer transforming pirate internet refrigerators - whatever, go for it. I don't care as long as the game underneath all that dressing is solid and made with passion.
I keep using vague terms like "effort," I know, but I'm still trying to figure it out myself. I just look at the majority of games coming out, and there is just...less than before. Most games appear to be better, but when it comes down to what I'm actually doing in the game, in most cases, I am leaving disappointed.
Perhaps I can illustrate: these are two of my favorite games, Thunder Force IV and Gundam Extreme Versus - 1992 and 2013, respectively (I'd have embedded the videos, but YouTube is cracking the shits at me as of this posting). Subject matter aside, I can keep coming back to these games and enjoy them. As games, systems, programs - whatever you want to call them, they are pleasing to interact with. I feel something when I play them. Emotions! Just by interacting with them! I think this is the sign of quality, of effort. That such simple systems can shine brighter than any multi-million dollar lens flare storm, given the people making it have the passion and talent to put in the effort to make it shine.
And now, yes, I can still find games like that (thankfully). Strike Vector, for example. But for the most part, I'm seeing a lot of stuff like this, and this. I feel nothing from these. There may as well be nothing there. It's like they're hollow - there's a framework for a game in each of those, but it's like whoever made them just sort of stopped building upon it early on. Half-baked, I guess?
All the factors you listed off worry me, but I think mainly I'm concerned that I'm being encouraged to settle for less from the actual meat of the games. I've had a sex analogy on call for a while to describe it, but that would probably put noses out of joint here, so I'll try a food-related one even if it doesn't work too well. Up until recently, I've been having nice, big t-bone steaks (interchange with your favourite satisfying food) with all the trimmings, cooked to near perfection. I feel satisfied, even happy after eating it. Going forward, I feel like all this noise is part of an effort to give me a steak a quarter of the size that's been given barely enough time to cook properly, and leaves me disappointed. Yet I'm supposed to appreciate it and pay even more for it because it has a lot of extra salad featuring ingredients I don't see every day, free water refills, extra seasonings are provided for a nominal fee, and there's a sweaty teenager standing next to me occasionally telling me how good I am at eating lunch.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:27 am |
|
|
| mauve wrote: |
| if you are basically insinuating that developers do not care much about the work they do, you are so far off in wrongtown that i'm not even sure how many wrong turns you took to get there. |
I'm not making a blanket statement about all developers. There are plenty of developers that care, very much. It's the ones that don't - or even worse, pretend to - that I'm concerned about.
| Quote: |
| though, yeah, everyone made fun of ryse. it was obviously a commercially driven project that didn't work as expected. not sure what the problem there is with thomas there though? you are aware that developers can't always do everything by themselves right? This is pretty highly a case of 'a game not for you' and very much part of the diversity thing, not just "we have all kinds of people in our games". more exploration of games as a medium is good, not bad. |
I have a problem with it because it's literally the bare minimum requirements for a platforming game, and yet it is priced the same as a game like Dustforce (TWA, Dustforce). I played games years and years ago that showed more ambition than TWA. Sure, it's not a game for me. It's only just barely one - I expect more.
| Quote: |
you are not being encouraged to settle for less. but the number of people capable of making things that is both up to standards and tailored for you is not many. I have very few games I appreciate as well; and while I would definitely like more of them I'm not going to go "gaming is shitty now" because they are not being made frequently. it's simply that it is really that hard to make creative works that appeal consistently. (...and i'm the person who has a tendency of loving games that almost invariably get extremely unfaithful sequels. just accept the ones that work for you.)
creating works is far more complex than it is given credit for from the consumer side of things |
Gaming is not shitty, it's wonderful. I never meant to imply otherwise. I love games and I want to see more of them. They don't need to be tailored to me - if there's really something special in a game, I'm confident I can find it. But I can not excuse something that tries to stand alongside something else when it simply does not measure up. Encourage effort, fuel passion, reward quality - but always be honest.
It's hard. Excruciatingly so. Please don't doubt that I understand that. It's been the common reoccurring theme to everything I've seen, read and heard about games, never mind played. Have I worked on a game? No, I have not. But that doesn't disqualify me from pointing out when something isn't as good as it could be. Feedback matters, and I feel a big part of the issue over the past month-and-a-bit is that so many people are trying their damnedest to find easy excuses not to listen to each other. That goes for everyone.
This one will probably be stilted too, but here goes: Both the residents and the carpenter know what makes a sturdy house. Only by working together can the house be as good as it can be. I want games to be as good as they can be.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Schwere Viper
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Location: Western Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 6:14 am |
|
|
| Talbain wrote: |
| I don't really think making statements about the developers is terribly productive if we're talking about a game's quality, except to the extent which other games made by the same developer give context to the work. Stating a developer or studio is not working hard enough is just an obfuscated personal attack, in my mind. It demeans them and their work without actually commenting on the work itself. Michael Bay's films are lazy and formulaic, but I don't know if Michael Bay himself is lazy nor am I going to comment about all the the people who made the film specifically or vaguely as being lazy. |
The developers are the game; years of sweat and work in the form of code, sound, graphics and a certain je ne sais quoi. The game can not be criticized without considering the people that caused it to exist at all. What is so holy about the development studio that shields it from the criticisms of the "gamer plebes?" They're all just people, no different from their audience.
| CubaLibre wrote: |
| Anyway, that's essentially a subjective determination and you're free to disagree with it. I guess what I mean to say is this: there are many, many ways I could diagnose the decline in game quality, especially from AAA developers, over the past 20 years, but none of them have to do with whatever the heck #gamergate is talking about. So I'm wondering specifically how you connect the two phenomena. |
I'm not sure I have an answer for you. Perhaps this is the wrong thread for me to be in. I've felt a disconnect with the scene for quite a while, and I don't know, I guess this entire mess has given me pause to think about what games mean to me. What my stake in this is. If I have one at all. This GamerGate thing is a very personal matter for all involved because it is centered around something that they all care about quite deeply. Yet there are so many extraneous factors - and obviously, agendas - at work at the same time. It's chaotic, and from a personal standpoint, I find it incredibly disheartening to see so many people embrace exclusionary behavior as a solution. I've seen it happen in other places, and it's happened to me. It strikes a chord.
To see the mouthpiece of something so many people have followed for so long just rear up and scream "fuck off" at the top of its collective lungs, for such shaky reasons...I'll be honest. I've never identified with the term "gamer," but I think it's far broader than the media is painting it to be.
I guess I'm being selfish, yes. I guess my posts were more for my sake more than anything else. Just...trying to figure it out for myself.
I'm not interested in the money. I'm not interested in the circle-jerks. I'm not interested in the agendas of any of the sides involved in this giant mess.
I just want to see great games. I want to see peoples' souls in them; their fire. I guess I just want to chase that certain I don't know what.
| mauve wrote: |
And yet, he put it out at that price, and it sells, and that is literally all that matters.
You are asking for effort to have some sort of intrinsic value to it. You know what? You know why large studios keep closing? Because, economically, work itself has no inherent value. None. Zero. Zip. It's all in how it's sold, how the transaction is. If you make something that is of value to people, they will buy it, regardless of the 'effort' done.
Stop expecting economics to match up with a meaning of value which does not exist.
This is entertainment. A luxury. Not a service. The value is in how much it entertains people. The end. There is no other metric. |
So you say.
I don't like the way these posts are starting to make me feel. I'm going to drop it here/agree-to-disagree - we're going nowhere. No point in grinding gears.
_________________
HeavyViper@Twitter ~~~ HeavyViper@Soundcloud
Blog: Machines That Sing |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
