PDA

View Full Version : Why the community can matter



jordan_a
11th May 2009, 14:54
From Bioshock's artbook.

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/4192/bioshock.jpg

René
11th May 2009, 16:08
Heck yeah! We will do good things!

gamer0004
11th May 2009, 17:23
What do you mean with "the community can matter"? All they're saying is "thank you for buying our [crappy] product".

Jerion
11th May 2009, 17:25
What do you mean with "the community can matter"? All they're saying is "thank you for buying our [crappy] product".

I think he's saying that a strong community can make things happen sometimes. :)

Bluey71
11th May 2009, 17:40
What's the book like - worth getting if its available?

LatwPIAT
11th May 2009, 18:29
So, we should make an online petition to remove Auto-regenerative health? Should we make a petition to include Skills? Should we have a petiton to have them remake their design philosophy so it isn't centered around four seemingly linear paths but rather a wide variety of options based on a number of possibilities?

...or should we have a petitio to get an artbook with all this neo-renassiance artwork and removed features that modders will unquestionably include?

Spyhopping
11th May 2009, 18:51
Ah, but in our little DX3 domain we don't do petitions, we do polls. Many many many polls ;)


I'd say that just because EM aren't overly vocal about it doesn't mean that they don't often take community opinions to heart. In early interviews they make a point of mentioning that the community is important.

One important thing is that we are on a smaller scale here with DX3 than a lot of gaming communities, and so one person alone here has a louder voice. The bigger the community, the more pressing need for things like petitions in order to get points across with any clarity

WhatsHisFace
11th May 2009, 19:31
In early interviews they make a point of mentioning that the community is important.
That's just rhetoric.

Jerion
11th May 2009, 20:13
Should we have a petiton to have them remake their design philosophy so it isn't centered around four seemingly linear paths but rather a wide variety of options based on a number of possibilities?


Say what? Where did you get that impression? Four approaches giving you a wide variety of options for mix 'n' match as you progress. Not four separate linear paths.

imported_van_HellSing
11th May 2009, 20:24
With how the game turned out, I can't even appreciate the artbook :/

LatwPIAT
11th May 2009, 21:42
Say what? Where did you get that impression? Four approaches giving you a wide variety of options for mix 'n' match as you progress. Not four separate linear paths.

The concept of augs being split into four distinct categories of Combat, Stealth, Hacking and Diplomacy (Those were the ones, right? Or was one "Exploring"?) is to me a clear sign of a very "limited," if I may use that word, understanding of the concept of "open-ended gameplay." In Deus Ex, augs weren't categorized in such a way, and a single aug would often have multiple purposes that diversified gameplay. The Flashlight aug, to take an example, aided primarily in exploration. (Disregard this argument if I got the four categories wrong...) The Speed Aug, an ever better example, gave the player a wide variety of options for its use. Use the extra speed to more effectively fight enemies in melee combat. Use the powerful jump to explore the landscape or bypass obstacles, or use the falling damage proofing to unleash suprise assults through skylights! The Strength Aug expands the player's posibilities to lift objects, which wasn't a significant gameplay element but nontheless useful. The Enviromental Protection Aug could be usefull in combat against Gas Grenades and Flamethrowers, but it would also benefit the player in exploring radiated areas. The Aqualung has extremely limited use, but nontheless fills a very special category, making it somewhat usefull.

I fear that the DX3 design team, by trying to make augs fit into the set four approaches, are going to end up with a number of augs streamlined for one of those four approaches, but with none of the wide possibities that the DX augs accomplished. Where'd an Aqualung fit in DX3? Combat? Stealth? Where does a Power Recitculator go? Comabt? Stealth? Diplomacy? Exploration? Hacking? I don't think the path to open-ended gameplay is through rigidly defined (though interchangeable) paths, but rather through wide, open possibilities. Design the character customization around what the player might need, not after what the game needs him to have. You don't make a number of set paths and design augs for those, you desing augs and make a number of paths based off the augs. That's how you get the freedom-wise brilliance of the Aqualung.
[/RANT]

Ninjerk
11th May 2009, 21:53
That's just rhetoric.

I disagree. Who doesn't want a good hype machine?

Spyhopping
11th May 2009, 22:17
Persuasive rhetoric or not- at the end of the day what would they have to lose by having a listen to the community? (when we aren't re-hashing the same points over and over of course.)

If I were a game designer I would want to comprehend things outside of my dev team bubble. The community provides a highly sensitive and completely free way to do this, especially with a prequel where the scene is already set.

OuttaZyme
12th May 2009, 07:00
Persuasive rhetoric or not- at the end of the day what would they have to lose by having a listen to the community? (when we aren't re-hashing the same points over and over of course.)

If I were a game designer I would want to comprehend things outside of my dev team bubble. The community provides a highly sensitive and completely free way to do this, especially with a prequel where the scene is already set.

Well, to start, listening to the community could get you a game like BioShock; a watered-down rehash of a ten-year-old masterpiece, a game that really, really wanted to be an RPG, but which had its cojones stunted by the amyl-nitrate-sniffing practice of kowtowing to focus groups and market studies.

You make good points, from a gamer's perspective. But if I were a developer, or a publisher, my primary concern would be my own survival. Meaning, "how can I put as many copies of my game into as many hands as possible, so that I might keep making/selling games?" I'd also keep in mind that there are roughly 66,000 registered users on this forum; if not a single one of them bought DX3, the impact on sales would be almost negligible. Not insignificant, but recoverable, if you reach enough brain-dead mainstreamers to make up the difference. And that would be much easier than convincing any of us that regenerating health is a good idea, so who do you think is going to get the short end of the Dragon's Tooth, here?

When BioShock came out, I had people come into the Gamestop that I was managing at the time and tell me that it was too complex. Seriously. BioShock. These are the folks who will make or break your sales -- not the 66,000 die-hard devotees on a publisher's message board, but the eight million drooling goobers who think Halo 3 is high art.

Is it right? Well, no. I'd love a game like the one LatwPIAT described. In fact, I DID love a game like that, about nine years ago. Times have changed, so what do you do? Grit your teeth, think of England, and play crap like F.E.A.R. 2 and CoD4. Or take up spelunking.

Irate_Iguana
12th May 2009, 07:38
Times have changed, so what do you do? Grit your teeth, think of England, and play crap like F.E.A.R. 2 and CoD4. Or take up spelunking.

Spelunking is a way better alternative than paying for crap. If I wanted to be miserable when trying to relax I'd take up belly sliding on sandpaper. Gamers need to get out of this mindset that crap is better than nothing. We need to stop buying crap. Even when it is on sale. Hell, people need to even stop pirating crap. It is easy to pretend that you are just the minority and that what you do doesn't matter. As long as you put up with crap it won't change.

I do know that the brain-dead morons you so accurately describe are the people that will buy without thinking. They are the ones that generate sales nowadays. However I think that even they can be conditioned into buying better stuff than what we currently get. Hell, if you can teach a goldfish to swim through a maze you should be able to get the most moronic of the console gamers to appreciate better games.

Bluey71
12th May 2009, 11:52
Spelunking is a way better alternative than paying for crap. If I wanted to be miserable when trying to relax I'd take up belly sliding on sandpaper. Gamers need to get out of this mindset that crap is better than nothing. We need to stop buying crap. Even when it is on sale. Hell, people need to even stop pirating crap. It is easy to pretend that you are just the minority and that what you do doesn't matter. As long as you put up with crap it won't change.

I do know that the brain-dead morons you so accurately describe are the people that will buy without thinking. They are the ones that generate sales nowadays. However I think that even they can be conditioned into buying better stuff than what we currently get. Hell, if you can teach a goldfish to swim through a maze you should be able to get the most moronic of the console gamers to appreciate better games.

Well said.

Jerion
12th May 2009, 15:17
I do know that the brain-dead morons you so accurately describe are the people that will buy without thinking. They are the ones that generate sales nowadays. However I think that even they can be conditioned into buying better stuff than what we currently get. Hell, if you can teach a goldfish to swim through a maze you should be able to get the most moronic of the console gamers to appreciate better games.

http://www.clipartof.com/images/thumbnail/1233.gif

Expose them to a few really spectacular, smart games, and they'll see the difference. Most of them are used to a low SoG (Standard of Gaming). That needs to change. :)

Armenia4ever
12th May 2009, 15:29
The concept of augs being split into four distinct categories of Combat, Stealth, Hacking and Diplomacy (Those were the ones, right? Or was one "Exploring"?) is to me a clear sign of a very "limited," if I may use that word, understanding of the concept of "open-ended gameplay." In Deus Ex, augs weren't categorized in such a way, and a single aug would often have multiple purposes that diversified gameplay. The Flashlight aug, to take an example, aided primarily in exploration. (Disregard this argument if I got the four categories wrong...) The Speed Aug, an ever better example, gave the player a wide variety of options for its use. Use the extra speed to more effectively fight enemies in melee combat. Use the powerful jump to explore the landscape or bypass obstacles, or use the falling damage proofing to unleash suprise assults through skylights! The Strength Aug expands the player's posibilities to lift objects, which wasn't a significant gameplay element but nontheless useful. The Enviromental Protection Aug could be usefull in combat against Gas Grenades and Flamethrowers, but it would also benefit the player in exploring radiated areas. The Aqualung has extremely limited use, but nontheless fills a very special category, making it somewhat usefull.

I fear that the DX3 design team, by trying to make augs fit into the set four approaches, are going to end up with a number of augs streamlined for one of those four approaches, but with none of the wide possibities that the DX augs accomplished. Where'd an Aqualung fit in DX3? Combat? Stealth? Where does a Power Recitculator go? Comabt? Stealth? Diplomacy? Exploration? Hacking? I don't think the path to open-ended gameplay is through rigidly defined (though interchangeable) paths, but rather through wide, open possibilities. Design the character customization around what the player might need, not after what the game needs him to have. You don't make a number of set paths and design augs for those, you desing augs and make a number of paths based off the augs. That's how you get the freedom-wise brilliance of the Aqualung.
[/RANT]

I couldn't agree more with this post. The augs served so many different and diverse purposes. Augs could be used in various different ways that suited whatever playing style you chose when you went through the game. I've played Deus Ex through over 10 times, and the thing that made every play through a delight was my choice of augs for that particular play through and the skills i chose to invest my points into.


The initial interview that was given by Eidos Montreal concerning DX3 back in 07 really smashed my hopes that this could be another terrific first person/ action rpg.

The thing that made the first deus ex so great was all the possible ways you could accomplish a certain objective or get to that objective building. Take Liberty Island for example when you had to get into the statue building itself. You could sneak your way down to the docks or gun your way down there and get a key for the building from Harley Filben. If you dont want to do that you can sneak around the statue and take out the guards in manner you wish. My favorite was sneaking around with a crowbar and biding my time. If you wanted to use the direct force approach to the statue you could simply blow the door down with a gep gun if you had it, or drag an explosive crate over there. Multitools or lockpicks were other options. One time, i got the alarm activated and all the guards rushed out of that building. I ran all the way back to the beginning of the level, and then came back when all the guards were wandering around. I killed one of them, took the key off them and was set. ( even though they had left the door open.)

Deus ex allows for so many different possibility to accomplish a certain goal or objective. Any way you could think of playing you could just about do. That was the strength of this incredible game, which in my opinion is much better than half life 2 ever was.


I hope to god that those key rpg features from the first game are kept in deus ex 3. I know it was a pain to have a really limited supply of skill points to use, but it made it to where you had to chose, plan, and strategize.


I realize Eidos Montreal needs to take into account how well a game will sell by who they chose to market it to, but I guarantee that if this game is like the first one and better, I wont only buy a copy for myself, ill also buy one for any friend of mine who has a pc good enough to play it. (I would love to see this game on the 360, but I dont want the rpg elements of the game to be sacrificed. The ps2 version of deus ex managed to retain the rpg elements and still be somewhat like the pc game. )

thomasaquinas
12th May 2009, 23:06
Here Here. Agree with everything said about the very corporate, clinical and strictly defined Aug system. Art is not meant to be so sectioned. Deus Ex was so believable because the world, and the HUD, even (a point they mention in the post-mortem) were realistically untidy, with redunancies. It very well reflected the world in Deus Ex.

It's almost like they're anticipating gamers to be confused by Augs - this game is being released on consoles, right? - Like Invisible War? Just a thought.

hem dazon 90
13th May 2009, 01:13
Here Here. Agree with everything said about the very corporate, clinical and strictly defined Aug system. Art is not meant to be so sectioned. Deus Ex was so believable because the world, and the HUD, even (a point they mention in the post-mortem) were realistically untidy, with redunancies. It very well reflected the world in Deus Ex.

It's almost like they're anticipating gamers to be confused by Augs - this game is being released on consoles, right? - Like Invisible War? Just a thought.

so was deus ex


also what is so wrong with cod4 it wasnt complicated but it was enjoyable

OuttaZyme
13th May 2009, 03:45
I do know that the brain-dead morons you so accurately describe are the people that will buy without thinking. They are the ones that generate sales nowadays. However I think that even they can be conditioned into buying better stuff than what we currently get. Hell, if you can teach a goldfish to swim through a maze you should be able to get the most moronic of the console gamers to appreciate better games.

Yes, you'd think so, wouldn't you. And I generally agree with you.

But I don't think you've considered one particularly vital aspect of the Idiot Gamer Theory, which is the standard by which the average Idiot chooses what to play. Unlike nearly everyone on this forum, the Idiot Gamer will select his games, and indeed all of his entertainment, not through a standard of intellectual appeal, but one of intellectual evasion. That is, they'll choose the movie, television show, book (reaching, I know) or game that places the smallest number of demands on them, and thoroughly, soundly reject anything else. I've seen it happen, over and over and over again.

Believe me, it's quite easy to assume the best of people, which is that if they could simply be shown something better, they'd fall in love with it as you did. This is because it's easy to assume that everyone is motivated by a standard of rationality and intelligence, when quite the opposite is true; most people choose to turn off their intellect and pander to the lowest common denominator within themselves, because the very thing that they seek from their entertainment is not intellectual stimulation or thought-provoking discourse, but titillation, and the destruction of the thing which is responsible for the majority of their misery; their minds.

I made this same mistake when I was a corporate wage-slave at EB and later Gamestop, and would recommend games that I loved over the flavor-of-the-month dross that they wanted us to push on people. Very, very rarely did anyone ever return (even regulars) to tell me how much they loved Deus Ex, SS2, Thief, Bloodlines, even Invisible War (which is still a better game than anything released in the last few years); it took me a long time to realize what was going on, which is that you cannot force someone whose primary motivation is the suspension of his intellect to value thought over non-thought. Either the seed for the appreciation of complex, intelligent games is there, and you can reach them (as I did with perhaps .5% of the people I spoke to), or they're doomed to a life of Gears, MoH, and F.E.A.R.

My point about playing crap is that you can either play bad games, or don't play games at all. For the large part, I opt for the latter, but to think that you can somehow socially engineer or "condition" people into liking better games (which would require them to completely reorder their hierarchy of values), is to set yourself up for great disappointment. Again, it's not because they simply don't know any better. They do know better.

They just don't like it.

GmanPro
13th May 2009, 04:18
Ahh man. You're so right. I've seen it too. I couldn't fathom it until now, but you've put it in perspective. And I have just lost massive amounts of respect for half the people I know

Unstoppable
13th May 2009, 07:35
Deus Ex is a niche franchise and investing in a collector's edition wouldn't be profitable. Deus Ex 3 needs to be profitable because of all the money spent on Invisible War. I really don't see a collector's edition as something in high demand. The forums are but a small % of people who would buy the game. A Thief collector's edition would be more interesting for me.

IOOI
13th May 2009, 13:44
Yes, you'd think so, wouldn't you. And I generally agree with you.

But I don't think you've considered one particularly vital aspect of the Idiot Gamer Theory, which is the standard by which the average Idiot chooses what to play. Unlike nearly everyone on this forum, the Idiot Gamer will select his games, and indeed all of his entertainment, not through a standard of intellectual appeal, but one of intellectual evasion. That is, they'll choose the movie, television show, book (reaching, I know) or game that places the smallest number of demands on them, and thoroughly, soundly reject anything else. I've seen it happen, over and over and over again.

Believe me, it's quite easy to assume the best of people, which is that if they could simply be shown something better, they'd fall in love with it as you did. This is because it's easy to assume that everyone is motivated by a standard of rationality and intelligence, when quite the opposite is true; most people choose to turn off their intellect and pander to the lowest common denominator within themselves, because the very thing that they seek from their entertainment is not intellectual stimulation or thought-provoking discourse, but titillation, and the destruction of the thing which is responsible for the majority of their misery; their minds.

I made this same mistake when I was a corporate wage-slave at EB and later Gamestop, and would recommend games that I loved over the flavor-of-the-month dross that they wanted us to push on people. Very, very rarely did anyone ever return (even regulars) to tell me how much they loved Deus Ex, SS2, Thief, Bloodlines, even Invisible War (which is still a better game than anything released in the last few years); it took me a long time to realize what was going on, which is that you cannot force someone whose primary motivation is the suspension of his intellect to value thought over non-thought. Either the seed for the appreciation of complex, intelligent games is there, and you can reach them (as I did with perhaps .5% of the people I spoke to), or they're doomed to a life of Gears, MoH, and F.E.A.R.

My point about playing crap is that you can either play bad games, or don't play games at all. For the large part, I opt for the latter, but to think that you can somehow socially engineer or "condition" people into liking better games (which would require them to completely reorder their hierarchy of values), is to set yourself up for great disappointment. Again, it's not because they simply don't know any better. They do know better.

They just don't like it.

You're nailing it. I agree with this (except the naming, but nothing is perfect).
It's just like a piece of Art. You can like it or not.

Anyone that has some experience in Sales, Marketing or Design knows that, essentially (or generally), this is true.

WhatsHisFace
13th May 2009, 16:37
I disagree. Who doesn't want a good hype machine?
The eh, boards here... in their natural state... tend to be "anti-hype" and cynical.

But perhaps when there's a media blow-out, people will get more positive and ecstatic.

hem dazon 90
13th May 2009, 20:08
yes otto zyme people are stupid because they play games that are fun.


seriously whats wrong with you? people are dumb because they want to have fun playing there games what sense does that make.


in conclusion its called a Game for a reason

GmanPro
13th May 2009, 20:34
No. He's right. I've seen it. Some people just aren't interested in playing intellectually stimulating games. They just want to shut off their brains for twenty minutes and do something mindless. Though, in the back of their minds, they know that there are better things they could be doing. Smarter games they could be playing etc. They just don't want to be challenged during their relaxation time

Jerion
13th May 2009, 20:55
They just don't want to be challenged during their relaxation time

And for some people that's a good thing. Games are their unwinding time when they just want to go "blaaaaaaaaaaaaargh".

Irate_Iguana
13th May 2009, 21:05
And for some people that's a good thing. Games are their unwinding time when they just want to go "blaaaaaaaaaaaaargh".

It certainly can be a good thing. It becomes a bad thing when the type of game they prefer is all that is being made.

FrankCSIS
13th May 2009, 21:13
I still believe you can get an acceptable portion of gamers to appreciate a certain level of complexity, at least in some of their games. Just don't expect it to magically happen. Instead of sitting around and waiting for your public to suddenly enjoy it, you'll have to introduce them to it in a sensible, logical and natural way. I still maintain, in true broken record fashion, the simplest way to do so would be to increase mechanical complexity along with the game difficulty. The percentage of so-called casual who replay their games on a harder difficulty is high enough to at least convert a few of them in the passage, without alienating them on their first playthrough.

WhatsHisFace
13th May 2009, 21:34
And for some people that's a good thing. Games are their unwinding time when they just want to go "blaaaaaaaaaaaaargh".

And Deus Ex is not ever supposed to be one of those games.

Spyhopping
13th May 2009, 22:10
Non-gamer friends tend to think I play video games just to run around killing aliens, and I've fleetingly met about three people in my life who enjoy them the way that I do. The image of gaming needs to change before people will appreciate it's potential. Though this kind of stage is understandable as it is such a young form of media, so it is probably just a matter of time. :)

I do love the occasional stupid game though. I choose a brainless book or dumb movie if overworked because it's just easy escapism and fun.

WhatsHisFace
14th May 2009, 00:33
I think, thanks in part to the Wii, that image is here to stay. Gaming came to a cross-roads in the early 2000s... and publishers sold out horrifically.

GmanPro
14th May 2009, 00:39
And Deus Ex is not ever supposed to be one of those games.

Yes. And neither is Thief. And I thought the same was true about RTS games, but apparently I was wrong. :(


And for some people that's a good thing. Games are their unwinding time when they just want to go "blaaaaaaaaaaaaargh".

That mentality is spilling over into my style of gaming. Fallout 3 was a disgrace.

jordan_a
14th May 2009, 00:49
And I thought the same was true about RTS games, but apparently I was wrong. :(RTS changed? I used to play this genre long ago.

GmanPro
14th May 2009, 00:52
I'm just so bitter about DoW2. I keep telling myself that it technically isn't even an RTS anymore, but the devs still label it as such. "We want to revolutionize the genre!" Yeah right. Second worst sequel I've ever played (behind Fallout 3. And IW comes in at third).

Ninjerk
14th May 2009, 01:18
I think, thanks in part to the Wii, that image is here to stay. Gaming came to a cross-roads in the early 2000s... and publishers sold out horrifically.

I think X-Box chic had more to do with it than an intuitive control scheme.

WhatsHisFace
14th May 2009, 01:40
I think X-Box chic had more to do with it than an intuitive control scheme.

Look at all the software that has come out because of the Wii. It's really obvious that the Wii had a more negative impact on gaming than anything that came before it.

Unstoppable
14th May 2009, 01:45
I'm just so bitter about DoW2. I keep telling myself that it technically isn't even an RTS anymore, but the devs still label it as such. "We want to revolutionize the genre!" Yeah right. Second worst sequel I've ever played (behind Fallout 3. And IW comes in at third).

Well it's basically using the Company of Heroes engine and way smaller battles. Gotta admire em at least I do for trying something new instead of the same old base building model. I kinda like that you don't have to be worrying about a base. I haven't bought DoW 2 myself however.

GmanPro
14th May 2009, 01:47
I enjoy managing my base and an economy. I mean, that's like saying you kinda like regenerating health in FPS games because you don't want to worry about managing your health. Its the worst kind of design philosophy.

Ninjerk
14th May 2009, 02:08
Look at all the software that has come out because of the Wii. It's really obvious that the Wii had a more negative impact on gaming than anything that came before it.

Could you be more specific? I've scarcely interacted with that generation of consoles. The image I had in mind was the "brainless alien killer" idea, and I don't remember the Wii exactly catering to that type of crowd.

GmanPro
14th May 2009, 02:21
Every single game made for the Wii has been incredibly casual. And they sell. Which broadcasts the message to the rest of the industry that more casual = more money. Haven't you noticed the 360 trying to emulate the Wii recently?

lumpi
14th May 2009, 02:29
I agree that the community matters, but it isn't really surprising that a company is happy and willing to THROW MORE EXPENSIVE MERCHANDISE AT ITS CUSTOMERS. I bet if we asked for DX3 figurines, Rene would burst in within the hour to tell us that production had already started because of this very post...

The part of the community that thought that the spiritual successor to SS2 should be an RPG rather than a simplified console shooter was apparently ignored. :/

Ninjerk
14th May 2009, 23:00
Every single game made for the Wii has been incredibly casual. And they sell. Which broadcasts the message to the rest of the industry that more casual = more money. Haven't you noticed the 360 trying to emulate the Wii recently?

No, because I don't pay attention to either of them. That's why I'm asking.

ZippyDSMlee
16th May 2009, 18:18
Look at Unreal 2004 its almost more popular than UT3, why it has a strong mod community, the trouble is its cheaper all around to spam out games every few years than putting to much effort into one title.... most gamers...consumers are sheep that are more interested in brands than qaulity.....

Jester_Grout
19th May 2009, 00:05
No. He's right. I've seen it. Some people just aren't interested in playing intellectually stimulating games. They just want to shut off their brains for twenty minutes and do something mindless. Though, in the back of their minds, they know that there are better things they could be doing. Smarter games they could be playing etc. They just don't want to be challenged during their relaxation time

on the general approach I'd say I agree, it's well writen and to the point

he didn't explore the reasons behind the establishment of such a mentality in people, but still its elevated status as a problem in the more active game communities, will diverge the discussion and render it a pointless one, where people will try to reach the desired definiton (in our case the gamer-after-refined-sense-stimulation) by "drawing" a distinction between these two behaviours, and maybe spicing it up in the process

the short time I've been part of this community, namely since today, I've seen enough for a lifetime arbitrarily derived percentages whenever social differentiation is sought, where one instead of trying to disprove this logic, is merely trying to substantiate, in him and in his choice of words, his actual association

so, we've reached the invaluable conclusion that most of the gamers are in fact idiots after temporary excitement
no argue here, now what?

again, in my point of view, there's a certain fault in just stating the problem, not being concerned on how this certain attitude was given birth and maintained its stardom, and attempting to attribute it's nature in, what we perceive as constant, characteristics (naming one, mental capacity) of certain social groups

the fault being that it lacks social perspective and just draws attention away from actually realising the roots of the problem and doing something about it

in our case a good example towards it, would be exactly the content that sparked his response, by the way one chooses to behave in the various communities, discarding the savorless and keeping the flavour, thus consisting the quintessential link (that its power on us is widely neglected), the paradigm

it can hardly do any change where this realisation would also invovle the policies of major international companies, which their interest in profit (the way we all know that this is defined) is protected by legislation, but it can sure help one to steadily become conscious about it and snap out of this "entertainment" confusion

consider how free enterprise in this particular case is actually formating, instead of providing the means for everyone to "sate" every individual need (that emerges naturally from society), pit two blockheads with one another in spewing a bile mediocrity aimed to satisfy everybody, which will eventually lead into one succeeding and rising to omnipotence, one failing and sending him towards other fertile fields for exploitation, and some gross vomit laying waste on the rests' standards

in conclusion, I'd have to repeat that I am not trying to contradict any major points that OuttaZyme is making, but rather relocate the "hate" away from the fellow gamers that choose to entertain themselves in a more superficial level




tl;dr

presenting counter-argumentative,
serious mother!@#$ing sam

ZippyDSMlee
19th May 2009, 01:50
on the general approach I'd say I agree, it's well writen and to the point

he didn't explore the reasons behind the establishment of such a mentality in people, but still its elevated status as a problem in the more active game communities, will diverge the discussion and render it a pointless one, where people will try to reach the desired definiton (in our case the gamer-after-refined-sense-stimulation) by "drawing" a distinction between these two behaviours, and maybe spicing it up in the process

the short time I've been part of this community, namely since today, I've seen enough for a lifetime arbitrarily derived percentages whenever social differentiation is sought, where one instead of trying to disprove this logic, is merely trying to substantiate, in him and in his choice of words, his actual association

so, we've reached the invaluable conclusion that most of the gamers are in fact idiots after temporary excitement
no argue here, now what?

again, in my point of view, there's a certain fault in just stating the problem, not being concerned on how this certain attitude was given birth and maintained its stardom, and attempting to attribute it's nature in, what we perceive as constant, characteristics (naming one, mental capacity) of certain social groups

the fault being that it lacks social perspective and just draws attention away from actually realising the roots of the problem and doing something about it

in our case a good example towards it, would be exactly the content that sparked his response, by the way one chooses to behave in the various communities, discarding the savorless and keeping the flavour, thus consisting the quintessential link (that its power on us is widely neglected), the paradigm

it can hardly do any change where this realisation would also invovle the policies of major international companies, which their interest in profit (the way we all know that this is defined) is protected by legislation, but it can sure help one to steadily become conscious about it and snap out of this "entertainment" confusion

consider how free enterprise in this particular case is actually formating, instead of providing the means for everyone to "sate" every individual need (that emerges naturally from society), pit two blockheads with one another in spewing a bile mediocrity aimed to satisfy everybody, which will eventually lead into one succeeding and rising to omnipotence, one failing and sending him towards other fertile fields for exploitation, and some gross vomit laying waste on the rests' standards

in conclusion, I'd have to repeat that I am not trying to contradict any major points that OuttaZyme is making, but rather relocate the "hate" away from the fellow gamers that choose to entertain themselves in a more superficial level




tl;dr

presenting counter-argumentative,
serious mother!@#$ing sam

Consuemrs are sheep to concerned with their won little worlds to worry abotu qaulity in media, and emdia is to busy ensure upper management and above stay in cocaine to do any better.

Serious sam is a simple horde shooter with above average level design, hell its even better built than most simplified modern corridor shooters D3,Q4,Halo 2 and 3,Haze,Jericho,COD,Res,ect,ect,ect .
Hell even Half life 2 is rather lulzy in level layouts....

Daedalus Ciarán
5th Jun 2009, 13:42
You have to be aware that the gaming industry isn't the first to go through a position like this; where all people think of games is mindless fun. Take a look at comic books. For years comic books were seen as nothing but childish fun, and that was all that was produced (I'm talking about the 1960s-70s). It was after that that there was a renaissance of sorts where comic books came to be more close to literature.

In the beginning, before the 50s, comic books tended to be very hard hitting, very mature and a very well told; you can draw the same logic to DX1/SS2 era gaming. After that there was the light, fluffy, fun and frivolous stage of the 60s and 70s (today's gaming ideology) and, if gaming follows comic books, there will be a turn around in a few years when more serious and detailed games are produced matching the comic book trend where works like Watchmen, Maus, Persepolis, The Dark Knight Returns etc were produced.