/games/ - Games

weak

Get good and stop dying then

>>30120
I am getting good, that is the problem. Process of getting good is removed from games timeline, because you always have to succeed. Game over - reload process effectively makes it impossible to fail, because failure is deleted with no consequence.

>>30124
>with no consequence.
except the time and progression you lost ? sometimes it can be multiple hours of progression.
Not every game needs to be rogue you know

This post reminds me of that Joseph Anderson video where he said he couldn't get scared by horror because he knew that nothing he saw on screen could affect him personally. "A pause buttons break up the pace of gameplay and ruins the tension. Immersion ruined." The desire for immersion itself leads to its own ruin as the one seeking it falls into the inevitable trappings of believing the confines of the medium itself shatters it.

"My mistake was thinking that video games are art. I wanted to make a game about a guy who’s a piece of shit unlikable character, who by the end of the game has to transform. But too many gamers, when they look at this, they immediately get triggered by it. So, the thing is, games aren’t art, they’re toys for children and it’s considered in bad form to talk about anything meaningful, impactful or thought provoking…The problem is that when you make an unlikable character people expect Sherlock Holmes or Doctor House. They want flawed heroes and only to the extent that they're beautiful and intelligent and slightly aspergery. They manage to be dicks to everyone, but they get away with it because they bring some sort of avantism that saves the world. So if you make a character who's some hipster obsessed with the paranormal ,who hasn't grown up yet and treats his friends like shit, people immediately feel…they don't know how to process this."

Andrew Allanson was 100% right on this one. Gamers are unable to separate their own identity from that of the player character. Any criticism of the protagonist is somehow an attack on the player for "simply enjoying the game". The type that thinks Spec Ops is calling you a shit person because the game explicitly calls out Walker's actions. The fact people mocked this because he made YiiK shows the immaturity of games as a medium.

Xenoblade Chronicles X on the Wii U is an extremely underrated when it comes to open-world design. Most open-world games have a dissonance between following the main questline and exploring/engaging in side content. Xenoblade X avoids this issue by treating the side content and exploration as a whole along with the main storyline. Your created character and the rest of BLADE wants to find the lifehold, but you're also stranded on a strange planet. The remainder of humanity's only threat isn't the lifehold not being found: there's a need for resources, understanding of the planet itself, and forming relations with the other alien species that live on Mira. When you're planting probes in the ground, discovering new locations, or giving food to some aliens it's selfless rather than selfish. Everyone is benefiting from your actions and ultimately is better fit to find the lifehold.

Fighting game rosters are a contentious thing. Long lived series have to strike a balance between bringing back old fan favorites, giving obscure characters time to shine, and allowing a newcomer time to shine. In Street Fighter 3: New Generation the

>>30126
"My mistake was thinking that food-making art. I wanted to make an unhealthy dish that tastes like a piece of shit. But too many foodies, when they look at this, they immediately get triggered by it. So, the thing is, dishes aren't art, they’re toys for children and it’s considered in bad form to talk about anything meaningful, impactful or thought provoking… The problem is that when you make unlikable food people expect something healthy. They want flawed food only to the extent that it's tasteless and healthy or unhealthy and tasty. So if you make an unhealthy dish that tastes like shit, people immediately feel… they don't know how to process this."
-Sir Reginald Brownpill

>>30133
>all media must be muh power fantasy where fat unfuckable retards like me get to be the hero!!!
angloid manchild

>>30134
What does it even have to do with anglos?

>>30134
In a game the audience controls something; else it isn't a game, genius. People don't take responsibility for choices they don't make. So making a game with hard-wired bad behavior and then telling the players they are bad people for "doing" what is presented to them in a cutscene is not going to invoke any other response than an eye-roll.

>>30136
>telling the players they are bad people for "doing" what is presented to them
You are indeed a manchild. Normal people don't feel like the game is attacking them personally, when the player character gets depicted as a bad person.

>>30137
>Normal people don't feel like the game is attacking them personally
Not what I'm about you autistic hipster. I'm saying they have no empathic connection with the character then. You can have empathy with NPCs. You steer your character. If you don't steer moral choices the character makes this is not a big problem as long as these predetermined choices roughly align with what you want to do anyway. Otherwise you get promised to play a person, but in the end you only play as the legs of a person. And this makes for an underwhelming experience.

>>30138
>but in the end you only play as the legs of a person
Not every story has to allow your self insert autism, in order to be worth playing.

>>30137
Except Spec Ops: The Line pretty much tells off Cawadooty shitkids and calls you a piece of shit for wanting to play those kinds of games. Which the manchild obviously got burned by.

Game Over as a mechanic is unavoidable for most types of games, and for the types of games that don't need one they have a sort of equivalent "bad ending" or else no real alternative ways for things to play out (like a walking simulator). It's just an inevitable result of allowing the player to have agency. They can and will do things they're "not supposed to" do.

>>30142
As I mentioned, I am not against game over in general, my problem is that lots of games are designed in a way that makes them functionally inevitable. Figuring out mechanics, learning to play, is a process that every player has to go through. But way too often, the game expects you to know already be familiar with it before you start playing, or more precisely, you are supposed to learn through save scumming. For example, an RPG game that does not communicate difficulty of an enemy, making starting a fight and immediately getting murdered by something way too high level the only way you can progress through the game.
Mind you, this is all in context of games that have some sort of narrative going on, in Angry Birds or something its just whatever, learning by restarting is completely fine, because reloading there does not break it. And of course then you have games like Undertale or Dark Souls that have reloading/respawing as part of their narrative.

>>30138
>You can have empathy with NPCs.
>>30139
>Not every story has to allow your self insert blahblahblah
What does this have to do with comment no. 30138? Are you self-inserting with NPCs? And who said that games need to have a good story or any story in order to be good? You either have lost track of the conversation or just throw whatever negative comment in order to "win". It started with >>30126 about some guy trying to make "art" by having an annoying main character and being disappointed with the reaction from players: They don't want to play it. (Because they find a character annoying, perhaps? A character that they cannot avoid because it is the main character.) And that makes them immature or something.

>>30150
No you just don't get it, man. You see the very best game design is when there are scripted events where you are destined to get your ass beat in a battle with overpowered enemies, that you still have a very slim chance of winning against because of some programming oversight and then you win the battle and the cutscene of you losing starts playing anyway. This is tied with cinematic framerates for the best game idea ever. Low framerates are art and the lower the framerate, the arter the game is. Consider the framerate of the Mona Lisa!

>>30126
the stupidest thing about that post is calling things "not art" after they actually did create emotional reactions from the public.
Should just admit he wanted to write a bad person and be acclaimed for it instead of the expected reaction (the character is disliked for being a shit person),so he got butthurt.

>>30126
>"My mistake was thinking that video games are art. I wanted to make a game about a guy who’s a piece of shit unlikable character, who by the end of the game has to transform. But too many gamers, when they look at this, they immediately get triggered by it. So, the thing is, games aren’t art, they’re toys for children and it’s considered in bad form to talk about anything meaningful, impactful or thought provoking…The problem is that when you make an unlikable character people expect Sherlock Holmes or Doctor House. They want flawed heroes and only to the extent that they're beautiful and intelligent and slightly aspergery. They manage to be dicks to everyone, but they get away with it because they bring some sort of avantism that saves the world. So if you make a character who's some hipster obsessed with the paranormal ,who hasn't grown up yet and treats his friends like shit, people immediately feel…they don't know how to process this."

lmao, what a dickhead

>>30126
You uyghas were supposed to read this and boot up Xenoblade X on cemu not argue about my yiik shitpost quote (but the part about a lot of people being unable to separate themselves from a PC is unironic). Also, play YiiK. You can't have a concrete view of indie rpgs without playing it yourself. And OP should play Fear & Hunger. I think they'd enjoy the game letting stuff like you getting your legs chopped off or jumping down a hole with no way up and the game not giving you a game over even if it's virtually unwinnable at that point barring a few things.

>>30161
Food analogies are the ultimate thought terminating cliche. Nothing comes close.

>>30158
>And OP should play Fear & Hunger
Thanks for recommendation, but I hate dungeon crawlers.
Anyway, to report on my Battlefleet Gothic 2 progress, outside of that one stumble, that didnt happen because reloading, I am breezing through with no challenge. On top of that the campaign is way too grindy. I am really disappointed, there arent that many Warhammer games that let me play as Chaos, but the campaign mechanics do not feel fleshed out, and it badly affects balance of battles as well. Admiral getting blown up is the only way I could realistically loose, because of virtually infinite resources.

>but the part about a lot of people being unable to separate themselves from a PC is unironic
He is just like me fr fr

i think theyre funny

>>30150
Dying in Dark Souls is literally part of the story though.

I have officially given up on Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2. The presentation of a game is 10/10, story missions are fun, interesting and varied, but there is so much repetitive skirmishes in between its just not worth my time.

In fact, I get the vibe that the part of developer team that worked on the grand strategy sections of the game, where you move fleets around, upgrade planets and manage resources, did not properly communicate with story and battles team. Its just not integrated properly. Annoying game overs are part of it, where loosing story missions ends your game, but with no justification why this one is any more important than all the dozens of generic battles you fought before. Or contradictions between what is happening in the story and in gameplay. In one mission you lure an inquisitor to investigate traitor activity, but to get to that mission, you conquer the system. In fact you can conquer entire subsector beforehand, so at that point he is coming to investigate presence of Chaos deep within official Chaos territory. In another cutscene characters mention how Imperial forces have been avoiding direct confrontation and retreating, even thought they are been constantly throwing hundreds of ships against you.

So my recommendation to anyone who wants to play it is, either tweak custom difficulty setting in a way that lets you ignore as many skirmish battles as possible, or just watch cutscene compilation on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkoHQmqnZo4 for the story. First one is pretty good though, definitely worth giving that a try.

>>30151
>And that makes them immature or something
Not all media needs to make you feel good. Keep coping consumer cuck.

>>30194
THIS.

So what if the product is shit. Not all products need to be good. Actually if you refuse to consume product because product is shit, you are a consumer whore or a cuck. A consumer cuck who is cucked by consumer whores. You are getting cucked. And by cucked I mean refusing to spend time or money on a bad product. Which is really immature of you. This is prime cuck behavior. People like you are maintaining the hegemony of oppression by doing a capitalism. And for what? Only so you can get cucked. Cucked right in your cuckhole.

>>30198
/v/irgin rage lmao

Guys I have problem:

I played a game about a guy who’s a piece of shit unlikable character. Now me, being a cool intellectual, I understand perfectly fine that art doesn't have to be likeable. An artist can create unlikable main characters in order to make a point. I enjoyed it ironically. But later I read an interview and the dude who wrote the story for the game actually thinks the douche main character is actually cool. So it turns out I wasn't playing a good game at all! I feel violated.

Can you help me out here. I need some donations so I can buy the copyright to the game IP and as the owner of the IP I can then declare that it is official canon that the character is a douche and NOT cool and so my own coolness hymen will be restored. Thnx.

>I can make him write multiple paragraphs
secretly you know that I am right and you are wrong

>>30183
I watched Mandalores video and read some steam reviews, and apparently its only Chaos campaign that is like this, and others are better. Suck so much, Chaos barely ever gets presence in games as anything other than antagonist, and even those couple times it does ends up poorly implemented. Total War Warhammer had similar issue, where Chaos campaign was generally considered to be borderline unplayable until the 3th game came out.

>>30150
I know it is not what you are saying exactly but also from a decent story writing perspective it is important to let the consumer experience failure as a part of the story, these kind of game over systems, progress only when winning, often only encourage the same old stale power fantasies hat honestly should be grown out of before one hits 19 years old.
In my opinion at least.