It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I remember it for my ex wife drowning my Sim in the pool whenever she was mad at me.
Where did the "casual games" conversation come from? It just seems to have popped up out of nowhere. Anyway, the mention of Tetris as a potentially casual game made me remember this decidedly not-casual video of it: link

I've noticed that whether a game is "hardcore" or "casual" tends to be defined by the actual game developer a lot of the time, and barring that, certain genres are considered to belong to one or the other. RPGs are generally hardcore, whereas marble poppers and match-3 games are traditionally considered casual. It's kind of a pointless distinction, though, because having played through the entirety of Sparkle 2, I can say that there are some truly difficult ("hardcore," even) moments. Android and iOS games have blurred the line even further, with many games marrying the casual gameplay that's suited to touch-devices with deeper systems borrowed from hardcore games.

Oh, and I liked The Sims 2. Later entries, not so much, but there was something magical about creating families, only to tear them apart by tragedy (house fires have always been my personal favorite) and force them to move on. Rinse and repeat. This must be what George RR Martin feels like all the time.
avatar
227: Where did the "casual games" conversation come from? It just seems to have popped up out of nowhere. Anyway, the mention of Tetris as a potentially casual game made me remember this decidedly not-casual video of it: link

I've noticed that whether a game is "hardcore" or "casual" tends to be defined by the actual game developer a lot of the time, and barring that, certain genres are considered to belong to one or the other. RPGs are generally hardcore, whereas marble poppers and match-3 games are traditionally considered casual. It's kind of a pointless distinction, though, because having played through the entirety of Sparkle 2, I can say that there are some truly difficult ("hardcore," even) moments. Android and iOS games have blurred the line even further, with many games marrying the casual gameplay that's suited to touch-devices with deeper systems borrowed from hardcore games.

Oh, and I liked The Sims 2. Later entries, not so much, but there was something magical about creating families, only to tear them apart by tragedy (house fires have always been my personal favorite) and force them to move on. Rinse and repeat. This must be what George RR Martin feels like all the time.
I dunno, to me it kind of comes across as "You manipulate bits in ram in an inferior fashion to me."
avatar
keyvin: I dunno, to me it kind of comes across as "You manipulate bits in ram in an inferior fashion to me."
And how much of that is due to insecurity rather than actual offensive intent? Artsy types are stereotypicaly so self-confident right? Not prone to depression at all, for a totally random example of a malady...

Both sides are constantly radicalizing the arguments... both sides. The only thing that somewhat redeems one of the sides to me is its willingness to cede authority to objectivity / reality. The other side is a wonderful reflection of the postmodern cult of the subjective perception trumping reality / objectivity.
low rated
avatar
227: I've noticed that whether a game is "hardcore" or "casual" tends to be defined by the actual game developer a lot of the time, and barring that, certain genres are considered to belong to one or the other. RPGs are generally hardcore, whereas marble poppers and match-3 games are traditionally considered casual. It's kind of a pointless distinction, though, because having played through the entirety of Sparkle 2, I can say that there are some truly difficult ("hardcore," even) moments. Android and iOS games have blurred the line even further, with many games marrying the casual gameplay that's suited to touch-devices with deeper systems borrowed from hardcore games.
Maybe not pertinent to all RPGs, but JRPGs specifically seem to be considered casual by haters and hardcore by fans. It's funny.

Just lends more credence to the idea that the whole casual/hardcore distinction is a load of bollocks.
low rated
avatar
amok: I was speaking about game designers.... all the criticism is from users, not makers. So with the cooks allegory - the cooks like the food but the diners do not. Maybe it means cooks likes gourmet food, while the diners just want BigMac's? Maybe the allegory don't work?

YOU dont like them. YOU think they are boring (and many others too), but dont you actually think that some people have different taste than you and find other things interesting and fun? I liked Gone Home and think it was both fun and very interesting.

Off course it is not. Tolerance can very much be a one way street. it is either something you are or you are not. If the other party is not tolerant, it is not an excuse for you to not be. It just mean you are the 'better' and more adult person.

no - ebb and flows in fashion. Genre follows fashions also.
avatar
LeonardoCornejo: Not all devs like those games. I have not seen non idie devs actually praising those games. The only persons I have seen praising those games are "critics" and indie awards, however those two groups are compromised by corruption.
See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
avatar
babark: Yes, you keep saying that most people don't like that, but when someone points out that is not necessarily true, you exclude that group from your categorisation.

I am a person who's played video games since before I can remember (literally- had a PC from before memory, watched my family play games, joined in soon after), probably played some kind of video game at minimum once a fortnight for most of my life (more often much more), spend the vast majority of my online cash on video games, consider video games to be as important and relevant a medium for our culture as any other, I follow the news about games I'm interested in, aside from some minor issues (I don't care one tiny bit about most sports games, non-crash-your-opponents racing games, don't much care for 4X or MOBAs, or most multiplayers in general, etc.). I think I qualify as a gamer (and I just realised how hilarious it was that I just felt the need to qualify or justify myself to you. Not saying you asked for it, of course, just making an observation).

And I didn't "not like" those games, I certainly don't think games unlike them should be banned, or have ever seen any advocating banning such games.
I'll even go as far as to say that considering that I'm fairly "traditional" in my appearance and styling and clothing and speaking style (not sure how we're defining hipster here), I'd consider quite a large percentage of indie game developers to be "hipsters" (just my impression from following them, watching documentaries released about them, watching them give talks about their games etc.).

Wouldn't it be simpler to say "Most people who think like I do don't like these sort of games"?
avatar
LeonardoCornejo: Your personal background is of little interest to me. My background is rather similar in the gaming sense. You are misinterpreting my words and trying to twist it to make it sound as if I was refusing to acknowledge those who like those games. I am just stating they are a minority. Also stating that their praise and the possitive critiques and awards they got are questionable due to certain issues related to #GamerGate. And no, not all indie devs are hipsters, not all indie devs are Phill Fish, not all indie devs are interested in making "artsy" pretentious games. Some devs actually refuse to accept games as art because they believe art is rpetentious and they don't want video games to become pretentious (too late).
Mr. Fish seems like a strange choice, whatever his personal politics may be, Fez is still very much a 'traditional' metrovania with plenty to please a 'hardcore' gamer, as long as their tastes are a little retro on the graphics front
Sure it has an 'innovative twist on the metrovania formula' but most of them try to bring some new gimmick to the table...
Post edited June 11, 2015 by Fever_Discordia
low rated
Well I guess now that I've stepped into a GamerGate discussion I might as well jump back into it. At least it's contained to this thread apparently.

avatar
Fever_Discordia: See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
Yeah, this was a criticism I've had of GamerGate since a while back. They claim to care so much about ethics in video game journalism, but they focus on indie devs and the alleged influence of feminists/SJWs, and miss the much bigger and longer-running problems of review copy policies and clout, the "eight point eight" phenomenon, the entire enthusiast press and the hype machine...

If they're gonna claim such a moral superiority that they claim, then they ought to be going after the really big issues, rather than simply chasing after pettier issues and making that their reason for being. Alternatively, they could stop pretending to about journalistic ethics and simply state outright that they're an anti-feminist or SJW-hating movement or something -- because, let's be honest, while I can see them arguing against the change of the gradual mainstreaming and maturing of video games as a artistic medium (albeit still a popular one, like movies and TV shows), arguing against change itself is pretty pointless and a waste of time. And it's not like the non-artsy games are going anywhere anyway.
Post edited June 11, 2015 by QuintSakugarne
low rated
avatar
QuintSakugarne: Well I guess now that I've stepped into a GamerGate discussion I might as well jump back into it. At least it's contained to this thread apparently.

avatar
Fever_Discordia: See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
avatar
QuintSakugarne: Yeah, this was a criticism I've had of GamerGate since a while back. They claim to care so much about ethics in video game journalism, but they focus on indie devs and the alleged influence of feminists/SJWs, and miss the much bigger and longer-running problems of review copy policies and clout, the "eight point eight" phenomenon, the entire enthusiast press and the hype machine...

If they're gonna claim such a moral superiority that they claim, then they ought to be going after the really big issues, rather than simply chasing after pettier issues and making that their reason for being. Alternatively, they could stop pretending to about journalistic ethics and simply state outright that they're an anti-feminist or SJW-hating movement or something -- because, let's be honest, while I can see them arguing against the change of the gradual mainstreaming and maturing of video games as a artistic medium (albeit still a popular one, like movies and TV shows), arguing against change itself is pretty pointless and a waste of time. And it's not like the non-artsy games are going anywhere anyway.
Yeah I sometimes wonder if GG is anything other than the natural force of inertia...
avatar
Fever_Discordia: See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
Can you prove this? That'd be huge. The only reason I haven't seen GG focus on the big-name studios and their corruption is because it's way harder to prove apart from the rare Jeff Gerstmann-esque blowups, it being one of those things everyone suspects but no one ever seems to have hard evidence of. I'd love to focus on that if you have anything to contribute in that regard, though.

Still, finding unethical journalists in any way we can is bound to weed out those who would take bribes like that, too. I doubt there are separate divisions of game journalists who receive sexual favors and monetary favors. They're probably all the same group of people.
avatar
Fever_Discordia: See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
avatar
227: Can you prove this? That'd be huge. The only reason I haven't seen GG focus on the big-name studios and their corruption is because it's way harder to prove apart from the rare Jeff Gerstmann-esque blowups, it being one of those things everyone suspects but no one ever seems to have hard evidence of. I'd love to focus on that if you have anything to contribute in that regard, though.

Still, finding unethical journalists in any way we can is bound to weed out those who would take bribes like that, too. I doubt there are separate divisions of game journalists who receive sexual favors and monetary favors. They're probably all the same group of people.
Which is far harder to find and prove since AAA cover their tracks damn well.

Deepfreeze would if it could, but that kind of info can hardly be accessed without hacking. Relationships are far easier to track.

And have you forgotten how hard gamers in general have been shitting on sites for accepting money? They have so for quite a while. Proof /v/ the musical 1 dates from a year before GG and yet both musicals have as a focus the corruption and shitty practices of AAA Developers that milk their gamers.
Showing that the issues of #gamergate date back long before august 28. People who say it has ever only been about hating Zoe are wrong. She is just the Archduke Franz-Ferdinand of this whole case. The final straw.

It's sad the financial corruptions of AAA are hard to find and expose, as we'd need to somehow review every transaction made (which isn't as easy as seeing who supports who on patreon) but if you have them, send that info to bonegolem, i'm sure he'll love that.

Hell where is the time where journalists exposed corruption instead of partaking in it? Where are those comic/cartoon journos who go to the extremes to find who is corrupt, even when there boss tells them to stop.
(hilarity on this may be the best reply Anita got on one of her newer vids)
Attachments:
Post edited June 11, 2015 by dragonbeast
low rated
avatar
227: Can you prove this? That'd be huge. The only reason I haven't seen GG focus on the big-name studios and their corruption is because it's way harder to prove apart from the rare Jeff Gerstmann-esque blowups, it being one of those things everyone suspects but no one ever seems to have hard evidence of. I'd love to focus on that if you have anything to contribute in that regard, though.

Still, finding unethical journalists in any way we can is bound to weed out those who would take bribes like that, too. I doubt there are separate divisions of game journalists who receive sexual favors and monetary favors. They're probably all the same group of people.
avatar
dragonbeast: Which is far harder to find and prove since AAA cover their tracks damn well.

Deepfreeze would if it could, but that kind of info can hardly be accessed without hacking. Relationships are far easier to track.

And have you forgotten how hard gamers in general have been shitting on sites for accepting money? They have so for quite a while. Proof /v/ the musical 1 dates from a year before GG and yet both musicals have as a focus the corruption and shitty practices of AAA Developers that milk their gamers.
Showing that the issues of #gamergate date back long before august 28. People who say it has ever only been about hating Zoe are wrong. She is just the Archduke Franz-Ferdinand of this whole case. The final straw.

It's sad the financial corruptions of AAA are hard to find and expose, as we'd need to somehow review every transaction made (which isn't as easy as seeing who supports who on patreon) but if you have them, send that info to bonegolem, i'm sure he'll love that.

Hell where is the time where journalists exposed corruption instead of partaking in it? Where are those comic/cartoon journos who go to the extremes to find who is corrupt, even when there boss tells them to stop.
(hilarity on this may be the best reply Anita got on one of her newer vids)
Whoa, crap, Anita actually made a video about stuff she LIKES? Finally - I've been saying she should do that, to balance out all the criticism she makes all the time since the start...
avatar
Fever_Discordia:
and at least the positive aspect was not "the character is nothing. 0 development both visual and character. We know nothing and don't see sh!t. It's basically few big pixels with no personality. This is the perfect female." this time around. But then she started shitting on how every woman in the witcher 3 has super revealing clothes, which they don't, and are all the same body type, which they aren't. One would nearly suspect she hasn't touched it.
avatar
LeonardoCornejo: Am I being intolerant? I just said they are not considered fun to play or even enjoyable.
avatar
babark: By who? Certainly not the consensus. I didn't think Gone Home was the best thing ever in the universe, but I enjoyed it enough while I was playing it.
I just recently finished playing Qora, which seems to fit what you are saying very well. It could conceivable be labelled a "non-game" or whatever people use to denigrate this type of stuff, and I actually loved it. It took me about 2 hours to complete, the didn't really have any serious "challenge" to speak of (unless you're an achievement or multiple endings completionist). The entire game consisted of pressing either the forward key, the up key or the down key, and occasionally tapping the spacebar for whatever contextual interaction was on screen- there was no possibility to miss a jump or hit the wrong thing or such.
And it was great! Great music, great art, involving and humourous story, and I certainly enjoyed it, and enjoyed it in a way I know I wouldn't enjoy if I was watching a movie. I may not have bought it at full price, but then again, I never buy a game at full price anyhow.
Is somehow it worth less because it doesn't focus so heavily on mechanics? Should I care that developers (allegedly) don't like those sort of games? Is it less deserving of praise or notice? Is my liking it somehow proof that I want to ban games not like it? Who wants to ban games not like it? Nobody I've ever read or seen has ever said "Gone Home/Depression Quest/Qora is great, other types of games shouldn't exist!".
As long as it is clearly communicated what sort of game a game is, none of this should be any issue at all. I SO much more prefer games like this rather than games that pretend to be "REAL" games but turn out to be boring linear button-mashing (supposedly requiring skill) inbetween pre-built kill animations moving from cutscene to cutscene (Metal Gear Rising Revengeance comes to mind).
The way I see it, gone home requires more patience in state of mind to play through. If the player is not in the right mindset; ie wanting to skip the story and get the gameplay, gone home will fail to impress the player. For someone to enjoy it, IMO, there needs to be certain conditions that must be satisfied. They shouldn't be looking for a complex mechanical puzzle like Dark Souls or the like. Enjoying it proves you can immerse yourself easier basically, or that you can feel immersed without needing too much gameplay, and the game's writing is enough to do that. So people who are really used to being mechanically and narratively immersed and require both factors to be immersed won't feel immersed. So no right or wrong; just taste with this one. Some people may have the opposite. They may not feel immersed in the Souls-like narrative style because the narrative element is mostly hidden and can only be found through exploration. So mechanically and narrative are basically two parts of the whole game; and most people have particular tastes into how much they want of each. So its subjective is what I'm sayin :D
avatar
LeonardoCornejo: Not all devs like those games. I have not seen non idie devs actually praising those games. The only persons I have seen praising those games are "critics" and indie awards, however those two groups are compromised by corruption. Most of the individuals that praised Depression Quest were in fact financially or emotionally involved with Quinn. The validity of their praise is into question.

And it is not only that I don't like those games. MANY gamers, specially hardcore non hpster gamers don't like it. It is a common consesnsus that they are not fun, that even led FullMcIntosh to say games should not be fun to play.
avatar
amok: well, if enjoying what I like to enjoy and let other people enjoy what they like to enjoy, makes me not a gamer, then I would more than happily say I am not a gamer. I will then just play the games I like to play, be it Psychonauts, Duke Nukem or Gone Home... but if this is the "common consesnsus", then please do not also say games should have "much more tolerant spaces", because what you are describing is the opposite of this - intolerance towards things you do not like.

So I guess this gamer is dead, long live doing what I like and playing what I find fun :)
You do realize me saying that back then was a joke right? And you taking it seriously meant you have belief the proGG can support tolerance. So kudos for being a castle-gate more openminded than Vain.

Do you not see that antiGG has been shaming and hating from the start? Gamers are dead? Gaming=intolerance?? What kind of mainstream media slob would believe playing a game would cause someone to change their behavior to the delicious media fantasy of ''exclusion''? AntiGG and SJ in general suffers from HUGE intolerance complex. They don't just express their dissatisfaction on twitter, and get called intolerant. They try to remove the thing they don't tolerate. So yes, if AntiGG wants mechanically-focused gamers to stop insulting antigames, stop the stupid intolerance to any game which offends you [ie; them, not actually you].
Post edited June 11, 2015 by Shadowstalker16
Chairman Pao has mutated Reddit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBmScggN-dc
avatar
Fever_Discordia: See, this is where the one-sided witch hunt of sites like DeepFreeze comes in - I'm not saying that indie press, awards and devs are free from nepotism and corruption, I'm saying - what's on the other side?
AAA with pockets deeps enough to buy reviews and critics with good ol' cold, hard cash rather than personal relationships and sexual favours, and they've been doing it since the start, since the 80's!
avatar
227: Can you prove this? That'd be huge. The only reason I haven't seen GG focus on the big-name studios and their corruption is because it's way harder to prove apart from the rare Jeff Gerstmann-esque blowups, it being one of those things everyone suspects but no one ever seems to have hard evidence of. I'd love to focus on that if you have anything to contribute in that regard, though.

Still, finding unethical journalists in any way we can is bound to weed out those who would take bribes like that, too. I doubt there are separate divisions of game journalists who receive sexual favors and monetary favors. They're probably all the same group of people.
i don't about you, but REAL journalists and old-media mostly believe accepting free games and party invites as "corruption". and that's an open secret (game reviewer accepting free stuff) for the longest time.

the supposedly evil old-media and and some of their journalists have spelled it out pretty clearly . professional gaming media and reviewers are fundamentally corrupted... and the GG reaction is overt and rabid.

if any old-media corp behaved like gaming media, they would at least be mocked endlessly like foxnews. but death threats? that's crazy.
Post edited June 11, 2015 by dick1982