Pet Peeves of the PC Gamer Community [Archive] - The Rock, Paper, Shotgun Forums

Nalano

19-12-2011, 04:01 AM

Because we need another thread of lists.

There are moments that it feels like there are still places in the world where one person can call another a "nigger faggot jew" without a hint of conscience or consideration, and those places are called First Person Shooters. I'm sure said folks would use other offensive terms if their vocabulary was larger.
I love this game. I love it so much I tattooed the protagonist on my girlfriend's ass (it's okay, I drugged her first). I love it so much I can't bear to hear a bad word about it, which is why I scour forum after forum for a hint of an untoward opinion. You people can't be trusted with games this good, and I am the defender of its honor.
I hate this game. Its developer is shit. It's downright shitty and has been going downhill like a log ride since as long as I can remember. It has shit DLC (with extra peanuts!) and, like true assholes, the publishers put the shittiest possible DRM to punish any shitheads crazy enough to consider buying this shit. As such, it's with the utmost reluctance and under protest that I purchased my Collector's Edition. I'm playing it right now in fact, but that doesn't mean I like it.

soldant

19-12-2011, 04:55 AM

Games today suck, they're so linear. I mean FPS games from the 90s were superior, and non-linear... with all that needless backtracking, switch-hunting, and key-hunting, they're so superior to today's games. Also games are so dumbed down today! Man, I can't believe that games don't use the whole keyboard and come with a manual the size of a housebrick! Developers are just catering to the idiot console players who can't operate a keyboard, we should have all the keys in use for Call of Duty. And what's with this dumbing down of user interfaces? Dwarf Fortress might be hard to learn, but that just keeps all the kids out, its incomprehensible interface is vastly superior to anything else once you know how to use it, how anybody could possibly hate it is a mystery to me. Obscure key commands? Read the friggin' manual, kid, then go cry over your Xbox 360. I'll be here being incredibly awesome after investing four hours into learning the interface. I mean for crying out loud, they're going to DESTROY the X games with X: Rebirth! All those changes! And they're removing that awesome numbered interface! Come on, don't dumb it down for the kids!

And god, what's with this new RPG? There aren't enough unique dialogue options for every single character! Man, it only costs like, nothing, to get the voice actors to record unique dialogue for every follower, right? What the hell were they thinking? And it's still inferior to that other one released ages ago. Yeah I know it had barely any voice acting and less things to do in the game world, but it's still better. Wait, you disagree? Shut up fanboy! Kid, you don't know what you're talking about!

Actually we should just totally scrap Windows, because it's terrible. We should all go back to the DOS days. Man those days were so much better, developers had to actually DO WORK to make a game, and everything was just so much more playable and the interfaces were so much better! Little icons without words or anything, no handholding back then! Players get things spoon-fed to them these days, back then we had to die hundreds of times and take wild guesses at what the interface was doing! Those were the days. And man we should all be using some version of Linux, if lazy game developers would get off their arse and use OpenGl. What, benefits of DirectX over OpenGl? I don't know about that, I DON'T CARE YOU'RE WRONG. I'd be using Linux right now if all my stuff worked with it, which it doesn't so I won't.

And cover shooters? They suck too. Man who the hell shoots from cover? Nobody. Nobody uses ironsights or shoots from cover, so why the hell is every game using this? It's so unrealistic. If I wanted to take cover I'd just sort of move behind it and hope it covers my hit box. No, I shouldn't have to take cover, I should be able to blaze through! And regenerating health? That's SUCH a dumb idea. Those random, illogical health drops were far better and far more realistic. Where's the fun when they've removed medkits on the roof, medkits in the middle of a canyon, medkits in a grassy field, medkits in a sewer? It should be raining medkits. Always.

And if you disagree with me you are wrong, because I'm a PC gamer and the rest of you are all console peasants and clearly have no idea about gaming and never operated a PC and are too stupid to use a computer and get on the upgrade treadmill and should therefore never ever have an opinion.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 05:03 AM

Soldant, if I didn't believe that your political views are anathema to all that is good and rational in the world, I'd ask you to marry me and have my e-babies.

Actually, screw that. Marry me and have my e-babies. We'll just work it out through angry sex. Anyway, back on topic:

This is the most open game ever. You have so many ways to kill those monsters, it caters to every possible play style! No game will ever come close to the freedom of this open world... what, you want to talk to the monsters? You find looting dungeons as a primary motive boring and trite? Get the hell outta my RPG, queer.

Anthile

19-12-2011, 05:19 AM

"Yeah, I said I want innovations not that I intend to buy any innovative games. I just wish their innovations were more conservative!"
The eternal paradox of game development and the main reason we can't have nice things.

soldant

19-12-2011, 05:26 AM

Actually, screw that. Marry me and have my e-babies. We'll just work it out through angry sex.
I thought you'd never ask.

On topic: Wizardry. I think that sums up everything.

Wulf

19-12-2011, 05:29 AM

- I will defend my entertainment against claims of it being less mature than a clever Saturday Morning cartoon, despite oodles of very clear evidence to the contrary. I won't work toward making games more intelligent, I'm happy with the state of affairs. I want my games to be potentially sexist and misogynistic, xenophobic, black & white, morally simplistic, negative towards ethnic and/or lifestyle minorities, and even reprehensibly violent in instances where the game could offer options other than violence. I want to play the sorts of games that Conan the Barbarian could grasp, and nothing beyond that. The rest of the entertainment industry is moving on and acting less anti-intellectual you say? Bah! Gaming should remain the same forever!

- It doesn't matter that a woman or an ethnic minority has received poor treatment in a game, and has been stereotyped, nor does it matter whether the game encourages negative mindsets towards such people. I'm a straight, white, English speaking male and I've seen loads of persecution. My life has been a living hell because of all of those horrible people who've been mocking me in psychologically scarring ways, or beating the crap out of me, just because I'm normal. Yeah, my life's a shit hole as a straight, caucasian guy. Yeah. Those ethnic minorities, those with non-standard orientations, and those of unorthodox lifestyles have nothing to complain about at all! I've had it so, so hard! They just need to be hard nosed like wot I am.

- I need games to have pretty people in them so that I can 'relate' to them. Preferably pretty women. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with my desire to objectify and fap at videogame characters of the opposite sex. No, not at all. I just want to be able to relate to them. So they can't be ugly, all right? They can't be fat, or scarred, or anything. And even if I do have to play a guy, he has to be handsome and a paragon of manliness which has nothing at all to do with my insecurities and my lack of self awareness, no, it's all to do with how I can only 'relate' to manly men and pretty women. Don't even think of giving me some strange critter to play as either, that's not on. If it's not a manly man, or if it doesn't have boobs, then I'm not playing it.

- If a person creates a mod which makes the boobs of my virtual woman 2x bigger and more jiggly, then I'll be a fan. If they give me naked, large jigglyboobs then I'm going to be their biggest fan and love them forever. But if someone adds something cute to a game, like a My Little Pony skin, then they're the most horribly depraved person ever. And those people who add anthro stuff are just downright sick too. Unlike me, I just want to sexually objectify women and that's not depraved at all. No sir. That's a completely socially acceptable thing which I believe that every straight, white male enjoys. And we have the majority, yeah? Might makes right! Don't argue with the majority, it'll just get you in trouble. You depraved fucks.

An axe to grind? You bet.

---

I will stress that I don't see these attitudes everywhere, but they are far too common. The best sites I've seen that avoid this attitude actually seem to be modding communities, because at least they're even handed with everything. And in more intelligent communities like that of RPS, this is lessened, but it's still prevalent.

And I swear, if I see one more privileged guy tell me about how horrible his life is because he's perfectly normal, healthy, and not of any minority, then I'm going to scream. I will point that one out again.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 05:33 AM

Wulf: More than 1700 replies (http://forums.riftgame.com/rift-general-discussions/general-discussion/13667-female-chars-supposed-flat-chested-55.html#post449376). 'Nuff said.

vinraith

19-12-2011, 05:37 AM

Isn't this new RPG great? There's like 2 dialogue options for every character, and they're all voiced in six voices, because voice acting is totally what makes an RPG. I can't believe people used to play RPG's that only had text dialogue, as if a huge variety of choices and story is better than having people people slowly read me the text on the screen! Reading's totally for losers. This game is clearly superior to every RPG that's ever been made, and I know that because I've played none of them. And look at all these meaningful choices I can make. They all have the same outcome, of course, but the cinematics attached to them are different and so is the wonderful voiced dialogue, and that's what's important. Role playing games are about playing a role, a pre-written role with only one outcome, because that's how you get the best stories. There's never been a better time for RPG's than right now, because games should be as much like movies as possible. Wait, you disagree? Shut up old man!

I'm happy to bend over and accept any DRM the publishers throw at me. It's never been a problem for me, so it clearly will never be a problem for anyone. At least it keeps those filthy pirates from playing the game, somehow, in my imagination. What's important it I can play this game for the next few minutes, and I'm sure the servers will never be shut down and no one will be inappropriately banned because I have total faith in corporations to keep our best interests foremost in their big, bleeding hearts.

Games are too hard, too long, and too complex. If only everything were shorter and easier, I could enjoy it more. I have a right to see every scrap of content in a game I paid for, and that means there should be as little challenge as possible for everyone else, and an amount of content that perfectly fits the amount of time I'm willing to spend on this game.

Every game should be $5, any game that's not is hideously overpriced and the devs deserve to go out of business. A 500 hour RPG that's priced at $10? Total rip-off, who would buy that? Games are for hording, not for playing. Oh, and that super-niche high density strategy game that costs $50? It would make so much more money if it only cost $2.50, because everyone on Earth would buy it. Sure, they'd never play it, but I'm totally sure they'd all buy it. Why don't the devs listen to my brilliant business advice rather than relying on experience and their own business managers? God they're dumb!

gwathdring

19-12-2011, 06:14 AM

-sigh- I miss my text dialog. There was a lot more of it. I do like the voice acting in a lot of Dragon Age (for example), but not at the expense of feeling like I actually having options when talking to people. Although, now that I think about it ... that's a terrible example, because the reason I feel like I don't have any options is becasue of how few things I can say. And my character isn't voiced ... oh well, the point stands.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 06:20 AM

Why don't the devs listen to my brilliant business advice rather than relying on experience and their own business managers? God they're dumb!

People become business managers for the same reason people become politicians: It's easier than actually solving problems and nets them more money.

terryquist91

19-12-2011, 06:42 AM

I said I want innovations not that I intend to buy any innovative games

http://www.jimjam.info/03.jpghttp://www.jimjam.info/13.jpg
http://www.bookunion.org/4.jpghttp://www.jimjam.info/jh3.jpg

Roufuss

19-12-2011, 07:04 AM

There are moments that it feels like there are still places in the world where one person can call another a "nigger faggot jew" without a hint of conscience or consideration, and those places are called First Person Shooters. I'm sure said folks would use other offensive terms if their vocabulary was larger.

I'd peg the DOTA games on the PC to be far, far worse than the FPS genre. I don't know what it is about that genre but it attracts the worst, most caustic community I've ever seen.

Every time I've given any of those games a chance I come across some of the most hateful, bigoted people I've ever seen online. They make the FPS genre folks look saintly by comparison.

Rakysh

19-12-2011, 07:10 AM

So, in this here comment thread on some godforsaken blog, I'm going to address the devs directly and explain to them step by step how to do their jobs. After all, there's no way they can ignore me; I bought one of their games in 2004, so they owe me.

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 07:14 AM

This game is bad. in fact it's so bad I quit playing after 10 minutes. The shooting is awful, the driving is awful, the voice acting is awful, the cut-scenes are awful. Only idiots could like this game. Avoid.

metalangel

19-12-2011, 07:29 AM

Nalano

19-12-2011, 07:30 AM

NecroKnight

19-12-2011, 09:10 AM

Scenario A: The developers hardly change their games and rather stick to the old & proven formula.
Gamers reaction:You're just doing the same crap over and over again. We want something new!

Scenario B: Developers introduce some new things to their games and change the combat mechanics a little.
Gamers reaction:What the fuck is this shit?! This isn't the same game, you completely changed it! You fucked everything up!

Xercies

19-12-2011, 10:32 AM

oh my god this indie platformer is so deep, it has such deep messages in it. You can't see it? your dumb and should be playing COD all the time. Clearly you cannot see the lovely art is telling a message, and that girl your trying to save is a metaphor. No I'm not reading into things to much your so dumb!

thegooseking

19-12-2011, 10:41 AM

As a PC owner, only I have proper games and a working brain. Console owners are all cretins who should be removed from the gene pool because they are inferior and use inferior input methods and also their games never get ported properly.

Also, my entire perception of consoles is based on PC ports of console games. I've never played any console games that didn't make it to PC because they're obviously just not good enough.

soldant

19-12-2011, 10:42 AM

Vexing Vision

19-12-2011, 10:44 AM

Also, my entire perception of consoles is based on PC ports of console games. I've never played any console games that didn't make it to PC because they're obviously just not good enough.

I will steal that line in upcoming conversations with console-fetishist friends.

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 10:55 AM

Indie game > AAA game FACT

Shane

19-12-2011, 11:22 AM

Stop whining about DRM. You wouldn't have had it if you hadn't pirated all those games.

Scumbag

19-12-2011, 11:25 AM

WORST!
GAME!
EVER!
Seriously this thing is utterly shit and really stupid! I'm not going to give any valid reasons or explain myself as its blatantly obvious as to why.
WORST!
GAME!
EVER!
(till the next large release in 2 days)

EDIT: Actually, I'm sure consoles get that just as much.

Dubbill

19-12-2011, 11:50 AM

If you think that this game is sexist or racist or homophobic, you need to man up and grow a pair.

deano2099

19-12-2011, 12:25 PM

And I swear, if I see one more privileged guy tell me about how horrible his life is because he's perfectly normal, healthy, and not of any minority, then I'm going to scream. I will point that one out again.
If you don't already know it, look up the track Rockin' The Suburbs by Ben Folds, you might like it (it is meant to be ironic).

---

Bah, I can have sex in this game. And because of my obsessive-compulsive nature, I therefore feel the need to have sex whenever it is offered. And I'm so very offended by what a womanising dick my character is.

The Tupper

19-12-2011, 12:30 PM

I play manshoots which are rubbish on a gamepad, ergo any PC game that does play better with a gamepad is not really a PC game at all and must be disparaged.

Dariune

19-12-2011, 01:15 PM

Cooper

19-12-2011, 01:21 PM

Skyrim on consoles! Hah! What about mods!?

Graphical glitches, bugs and crashes to desktop are all fine because I have anime costumes for my half-elf custom race and she has high resolution textured and 1,000 polygon modelled areola

Unaco

19-12-2011, 01:30 PM

Pointless, unfounded, prejudiced negativity. That gets me. For example, new TES game is announced... cue cries of "I guarantee it will only have 1 playable race this time!", "I'll believe there'll be mods when I see them, and even then I'll assume my eyes are lying to me!" and "Todd Howard is wearing a Polo shirt! That proves Bethesda are creatively bankrupt!". Or the new Max Payne... 2 minute, cinematic trailer and several people know EVERYTHING about the game all of a sudden, and it's not Max Payne "because he has different hair!!!" or "He's wearing a Hawaiian shirt! Max Payne would never wear a Hawaiian shirt (http://www.3drealms.com/max/images/max_payne_2000_shot_07.jpg)."

The idea that Devs or other gamers (or groups, or types of gamer) are 'the bad guys' or our enemies, or in opposition to us in some sort of way... when we should be one large, somewhat happy, gaming family. So what if the new CODMW3 isn't your cup of tea... the people who play it aren't lesser people or lesser gamers... they're the reason that Video Games are THE biggest form of entertainment currently. And that makes me happy.

coldvvvave

19-12-2011, 01:33 PM

Oblivion with guns.

Syndicate was a complex strategy!

Fiyenyaa

19-12-2011, 01:49 PM

Zephro

19-12-2011, 02:39 PM

Well I echo all the feelings regarding sexism, homophobia and general childishness you find in the entire gaming community. Watching them obliviously shout down any criticism is deeply depressing.

My personal one is the automatic response to any DRM (good, bad, working non-working):
"How dare they DRM a product? Even though it doesn't negatively impact on me in any possible way, I have some nebulous principle at stake which I struggle to defend but I really want to moan about it and throw around nonsensical metaphors about theft. Actually Capitalism is just wrong and Steam is a conspiracy to steal my sperm to create a race of super human clones!"

Megagun

19-12-2011, 03:30 PM

GUYS, this new game here is being developed by $DEVELOPER! I love $DEVELOPER$! INSTANT PRE-ORDER! Guaranteed success and fun-times ahead!

GUYS, this new game here is being developed by $DEVELOPER! INSTANT BOYCOTT! They suck and can't possibly ever release a proper product because people and companies have no way of changing, EVER.

No steam, no sale.

Wow, they're using the same engine again? This thing is starting to get outdated. Why don't they invest some money in a completely new engine, written from scratch? We deserve more than this lousy "content pack" built on top of the same engine as we've seen in the previous installation of this specific game!

Wow, look at those graphics. You must be playing on a console. People like you make me glad that I own a $TOP_OF_THE_LINE_GRAPHICS_CARD, as I can play games on max ultra detail with the high-res content package installed!

This game is totally a rip-off of $SIMILAR_GAME! Such unoriginality!

EDIT (how could I forget): This game is a movie, not a game! How dare they call this a game!

Xercies

19-12-2011, 03:42 PM

I'm going to write a whole dissertation post about how this video game affects me. I don't care if people don't really have time to read it and most post after mine will be tldr i will still do it anyway. There is no way I could shorten my assessment so more people would read it.

also, tldreaders. Yes we can all see the post was a bit long and some of us wouldn't be able to get through it because we have busy lives but you don't have to keep posting that. Do you have to keep posting that, its not clever.

(Hi Wulf I like you really don't worry, I just wish I could read your stuff. You do tend to make to big posts for me and you come across quite well I just don't have the time to read your posts. So you know try maybe to cut them down)

This new developer with a downloadable wrapper to put around my games is evil and trying to steal babies souls. I don't mind the firs developer that did it because they are loveble and trustworthy even though the two programs are quite alike. But this new program is evil!

FuriKuri!

19-12-2011, 03:46 PM

vinraith

19-12-2011, 03:46 PM

Forgot one:

Only nerds care about mods. Vanilla games are good enough for real gamers, and mods don't matter at all. Nothing would be lost if future DRM systems excluded the possibility of modding altogether, because it's such a niche interest and never produces anything of value.

Smashbox

19-12-2011, 03:48 PM

Boycot. Boycot. Boycot.

Send a letter to the dev as some sort of protest.

This game doesn't live up to my image of it from my imagination.

I really want the extra guns, so I'll pre-buy the special edition.

Mod tools take away from DLC sales potential.

gundrea

19-12-2011, 03:48 PM

For the love of mad gods who moon by midnight marinas lock this thread. I started reading and knew it was this way but then halfway through my brain flipped and I started thinking I was reading poster opinions and then I got so angry I didn't know what was happening now I don't know whether I'm playing the game or a pawn in it anymore.

Wizardry

19-12-2011, 03:51 PM

*enters thread*
*ctrl+fs "Wizardry"*

On topic: Wizardry. I think that sums up everything.

*chuckles*
*exits thread*

Smashbox

19-12-2011, 03:55 PM

*Seethes*

10char

bwion

19-12-2011, 04:06 PM

There are only two kinds of games.

Type 1: Games exactly like this one game I enjoyed back in 2005, or 1995, or 1985.

Type 2: ABOMINATIONS BEFORE THE LORD.

Wizardry

19-12-2011, 04:17 PM

This is the most open game ever. You have so many ways to kill those monsters, it caters to every possible play style! No game will ever come close to the freedom of this open world... what, you want to talk to the monsters? You find looting dungeons as a primary motive boring and trite? Get the hell outta my RPG, queer.
Who says that?

Zephro

19-12-2011, 04:24 PM

Who says that?

Really? Pretty much every bickering match which ends up Bethesda style games vs Bioware (or Black Isle) style games turns into that.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 04:42 PM

*exits thread*

You still here?

Begone with you, devil

Wulf

19-12-2011, 04:44 PM

Got another one!

- I want a PC Master Race UI! Screw accessibility! Screw this console-ported stuff! I want tiny fonts, barely discernible icons, and I want all this now. I don't give a damn if it makes the lives of people with poor sight miserable, because that's not my problem! And any game that doesn't have a PC Master Race UI is automatically shit, because things are too big, and this obviously means that they've been dumbed down for consoles. I mean, really, who could possibly want a reasonably sized, easily visible UI? Who could want that? I hate my eyes! I hate them! Blasted ocular orbs! If I'm not experiencing eye-strain staring at barely visible text with my nose to my monitor, then it's not a PC game! It's a hateful console game!!!!

The kneejerk reactions I got to the accessibility post I made are becoming increasingly funny to me, because I'm still seeing posts like this. Skyrim is getting picked on for having an accessible UI, and there are those who're hating on it for not having a 5pt font as standard. Because they hate their eyes. What is it with PC gamers and needing fonts that are barely visible to enjoy their game? I actually showed The Witcher 2 to a few people who aren't commonly PC gamers and their take on it was that that sort of UI would make them hate games. So what makes PC gamers so different? What makes them hate accessibility?

Who knows.

Smashbox

19-12-2011, 04:49 PM

Skyrim is getting picked on for having an accessible UI

Not to nit-pick, but Skyrim's UI isn't bad because it's got large fonts and lots of visual space devoted to 3D models. It's bad because nothing's sorted, and I have to manually sort and drop different classes of items into different barrels in my house in order to not go crazy.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 04:52 PM

So what makes PC gamers so different? What makes them hate accessibility?

Who knows.

Enough text adventure games designed to hate every synonym you can think of for properly using items until, thesaurus in hand, you reach the weird one the developer was oddly specific about and feel like you accomplished something.

deano2099

19-12-2011, 05:02 PM

I demand that my games look amazing and require the best possible (liquid cooled) graphics card to run! I can honestly see the difference between 2xAA and 16xMSAA! I spend 2/3rds of my time on any given game staring at walls at point blank range so texture quality must be made to match!

And the flip side, from the same people: OMG this game won't even run maxed out on my machine which has two £300 graphics cards in, it is clearly running on a badly optimised piece of shit engine.

Same person five years later: OMG this retro game looks shit, why do developers never think to have engines that scale up to future hardware.

The kneejerk reactions I got to the accessibility post I made are becoming increasingly funny to me, because I'm still seeing posts like this. Skyrim is getting picked on for having an accessible UI, and there are those who're hating on it for not having a 5pt font as standard.

No, Skyrim is getting picked on for having a shit UI. It might be accessible, but it's not good.

[Also, doesn't dropping the resolution generally make most UI elements bigger? It used to.]

Rauten

19-12-2011, 05:03 PM

Everyone in this game lags so much!! I don't care if everyone else says it's working ok for them, they all LAG! They should get a proper damned connection before they even try to play online, the morons! Now if you'll excuse me, I must go check the status of my million billion zillion torrents, which obviously have no impact whatsoever on my internet connection. LAGGERS.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 05:09 PM

HACKERS! You fucking hackers! Every time I die, every time, it's some cheap fucking bullshit ploy and is imbalanced as fuck, because I know I'm the sole arbiter of skill and nobody should be able to kill me! And if you're all hacking, you fucking pricks, then by all rights I'll hack too, just to even the odds against you no-life limp-dick scrubs! FUCK! Who shot me while I was typing out this long expletive-filled refrain about how much you all suck? HACKERS!
Why won't the devs listen to me? I've made 154 threads on the general forum about why they need to implement my change and haven't even gotten one reply from a dev yet! I'm a paying customer, goddamnit! My $15 went towards your third Ferrari, and you should never forget it! Now I don't care if it's 4am on a Tuesday, this shit is untenable and my time (when not posting these rants on forums all day, every day) is precious! Also: Fuck everybody else who keeps spamming up my threads with their "criticisms" and "concerns" why my idea won't work. They're just noob trolls, certainly not paying customers like me.

thegooseking

19-12-2011, 05:36 PM

I have a high IQ and therefore the only things games are good for is glorified IQ tests. The other qualities of a game are meaningless because my IQ (which did I mention is high?) has nothing to do with them.
This dev/publisher only cares about making money! I don't care that the best way to make money is making something people actually want to buy, I'm being angry here!
Thegooseking is stupid for making the previous point, because clearly making a game a lot of people want to buy means compromising on the things I like to make room for the things other people like. Fucking other people. What do they matter?

Nalano

19-12-2011, 05:40 PM

PC gaming is dying! Every year sees record sales, and the industry's never been bigger, but PC gaming is dying!
It's time to quit WoW. I dropped outta college, broke up with my fiance, and gained 40lbs and a skin condition. Besides, the game's getting kinda boring, too! I'm just burned out. I want something completely different than WoW - just a bit of fresh air, know what I mean? - and, of course, when I say that, I mean I want a new game exactly like WoW.
God, they're dumbing down my MMO! Now any no-skill-having scrub can enter! I liked it better when only the top, best, most elite players could gain any headway in it, like me! I did it for the challenge, even though my elite raid mates include a fat-fingered housewife and her eight year old son. But no, now they're lowering the bar so you don't have to show up at 6pm seven days a week for eight solid hours of braindead macro-mashing. They ruin EVERYTHING. Now who am I going to berate over Ventrilo?

Hensler

19-12-2011, 05:40 PM

- This game/series is amazing and the best thing ever... until it get's popular, then I have to hate it.

vinraith

19-12-2011, 05:47 PM

clearly making a game a lot of people want to buy means compromising on the things I like to make room for the things other people like. Fucking other people. What do they matter?

Well, yeah. It's funny, I see nothing to disagree with there. Whether other people enjoy a game or not has nothing to do with whether I enjoy it, after all.

Rauten

19-12-2011, 06:16 PM

God, they're dumbing down my MMO! Now any no-skill-having scrub can enter! I liked it better when only the top, best, most elite players could gain any headway in it (unlike me)!

With a slight edit, I am guilty as charged. And you guessed it, it's with WoW. Yay for me!

Kaira-

19-12-2011, 06:51 PM

Split-screen multiplayer is for consoles only, not for my glorious PC games. No sirree.

Tikey

19-12-2011, 06:55 PM

Split-screen multiplayer is for consoles only, not for my glorious PC games. No sirree.

I miss split screen in racing games so much

vinraith

19-12-2011, 06:57 PM

Split-screen multiplayer is for consoles only, not for my glorious PC games. No sirree.

I've never seen a gamer say this, in fairness, it seems to be purely a developer line. Then again, developers seem to be trying to do away with splitscreen entirely, even on consoles. I'm with Tikey.

Grizzly

19-12-2011, 07:10 PM

I've never seen a gamer say this, in fairness, it seems to be purely a developer line. Then again, developers seem to be trying to do away with splitscreen entirely, even on consoles. I'm with Tikey.

Splitscreen was actually removed from Left 4 Dead after complaints of PC gamers.
I mean.
The fuck.

thegooseking

19-12-2011, 07:10 PM

Well, yeah. It's funny, I see nothing to disagree with there. Whether other people enjoy a game or not has nothing to do with whether I enjoy it, after all.

I certainly wouldn't go so far as to suggest there's anything wrong with disliking a game that other people like. That would be ridiculous. I was thinking more of people who feel (or at least claim to feel) actually betrayed when someone releases a game that other people like. To put it another way, I'd sure like it a lot if all games were made especially for me, with my tastes in mind, but that's not the same thing as thinking games should be made that way. (Though clearly they should because my tastes are objectively great.)

vinraith

19-12-2011, 07:11 PM

Splitscreen was actually removed from Left 4 Dead after complaints of PC gamers.
I mean.
The fuck.

Who? What? WHY?

vinraith

19-12-2011, 07:12 PM

I certainly wouldn't go so far as to suggest there's anything wrong with disliking a game that other people like. That would be ridiculous. I was thinking more of people who feel (or at least claim to feel) actually betrayed when someone releases a game that other people like. To put it another way, I'd sure like it a lot if all games were made especially for me, with my tastes in mind, but that's not the same thing as thinking games should be made that way. (Though clearly they should because my tastes are objectively great.)

I'd settle for more games being made for people at least vaguely like me, but your point is taken.

Wizardry

19-12-2011, 07:15 PM

"I've played old-school CRPGs like Baldur's Gate and Planescape: Torment. I've also played older-school JRPGs like Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger."

Makes me rage.

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 07:21 PM

Not to nit-pick, but Skyrim's UI isn't bad because it's got large fonts and lots of visual space devoted to 3D models. It's bad because nothing's sorted, and I have to manually sort and drop different classes of items into different barrels in my house in order to not go crazy.

OT but ^this. I've been playing Skyrim using a controller and I find the navigation of the UI great, but storage and sorting is complete ass.

On Topic: -

DLC = is always and without exception cut content.

Lambchops

19-12-2011, 07:33 PM

Old school is relative Wizardy. It'll be far more relaxing if you remember that many people are younger than you! i always used to get irked by radio stations like Kiss or whatever referring to songs from the early 2000s as "old school." Then I realised that if someone was but 5 years younger than me then they wouldn't have the same affection or memories for 90s classics and that to them this was as far back as they can remember and that if someone was 5 years older they'd probably have a hankering for some 80s stuff that I have no memory of. We each had our own reference points for old school which are equally valid for what we've experienced. People only tend to refer to things in their lifetime as old school. When was the last time you heard someone call Bach old school?

Once I realised that I had one less thing to be irritated about. To redress the balance and give me something else to vent my anger on I decided on an irrational dislike of snooker player Mark Allen based solely on the fact he has a face like a penis.

Wizardry

19-12-2011, 07:41 PM

Lambchops

19-12-2011, 07:52 PM

"I just skim read someone's post and then reiterated what they were trying to say in pointless tedious fashion."

Don't you just hate it when idiots do that? I couldn't imagine ever doing such a thing. No sir, indeed, not I!

Grizzly

19-12-2011, 07:54 PM

Who? What? WHY?

Source: Dominic White from the comments on RPS main.
Apperently Split Screen is a pure console thing now.

I have lost faith in humanity.

Smashbox

19-12-2011, 07:58 PM

Apparently you can re-enable (http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=745113). But we're way offtopic. Hmm, something to hate...

Ok this should be uncontroversial: I can't buy most of Ubisoft's games anymore because I can't be sure they'll still work in a couple years due to DRM. (not being sarcastic)

thegooseking

19-12-2011, 08:04 PM

I also kind of think the "lazy console port" accusation is flung around too lightly. Yes, some PC games are lazy console ports, but some people seem to be stuck in 2003 and just lazily (hah) apply the "lazy console port" epithet to any game that happens to have been released on a console.

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 08:11 PM

The fantasy that PC pirates are seemingly all spotty 12 year olds with no money for games (though they have PCs rather than consoles). The average PC gamer is about 30 years old or some such.

I also kind of think the "lazy console port" accusation is flung around too lightly. Yes, some PC games are lazy console ports, but some people seem to be stuck in 2003 and just lazily (hah) apply the "lazy console port" epithet to any game that happens to have been released on a console.

I think there's an argument for 'consolification', but more often it's used as short-hand for labeling a game as 'dumb' or 'dumped down' for the console crowd (who are naturally all cretins as highlighted said in an earlier post) Vs 'consolification' from the perspective of integral design compromises made with regard to the hardware constraints of consoles (consider the infamous level loading lifts of Mass Effect) that simply wouldn't have happened if the game was designed with PC in mind in the first place.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 08:49 PM

Keep

19-12-2011, 09:06 PM

"Pretentious".

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 09:21 PM

The whole Napster/KaZaA P2P phenomenon started some 14 years ago. The people who are pushing 30 now were teens then.

Exactly. People are trading on piracy as they remember it in terms of demographic, not as it now is. You're spotty 12 year old is more likely to have a console than a PC. It's only when people hit college age that they need to start going down the laptop/PC route.

Smashbox

19-12-2011, 09:25 PM

I beg to differ, at least based on anecdotal experience. When Mom and Dad don't buy you a console because it costs a lot of money, you play games on the family computer. Not Crysis, but plenty of games.

thegooseking

19-12-2011, 09:41 PM

I'm sure if it were one or the other, then there actually would be no piracy on console, rather than Ubisoft just implying that.

DaftPunk

19-12-2011, 09:43 PM

Source: Dominic White from the comments on RPS main.
Apperently Split Screen is a pure console thing now.

I have lost faith in humanity.

As far as i know split screen is still there,you just need to get it work from console,which is quite easy thing to do.

Kadayi

19-12-2011, 09:59 PM

I'm sure if it were one or the other, then there actually would be no piracy on console, rather than Ubisoft just implying that.

Oh I'm not saying that there's no spotty 12 year olds out there pirating PC games. I'm just tired of the the promotion that it's exclusively a problem tied to that demographic (IE they have no money, therefore it's kind of ok/acceptable). There are people I know who have plenty of money who pirate simply 'because I can'. There's no notion of it perhaps being detrimental to game development or anything.

Nalano

19-12-2011, 10:21 PM

Exactly. People are trading on piracy as they remember it in terms of demographic, not as it now is. You're spotty 12 year old is more likely to have a console than a PC. It's only when people hit college age that they need to start going down the laptop/PC route.

That was true then, too. But the idea that "pirates are teenagers" still holds up because teenagers don't have terribly much in the way of spending money, but they all have computers nowadays.

Kaira-

19-12-2011, 10:32 PM

As far as i know split screen is still there,you just need to get it work from console,which is quite easy thing to do.

It was toggleable from options in the L4D demo, but then taken away. Console-commands aren't quite convenient.

cjlr

19-12-2011, 10:46 PM

"Pretentious".

That's a wrap, folks.

vinraith

19-12-2011, 11:01 PM

"Pretentious".

And on that note:

"Sense of entitlement"

deano2099

20-12-2011, 12:52 AM

The average PC gamer is about 30 years old or some such.

There's one. "The average age of PC gamers is 30 therefore most PC gamers are around 30."

You reckon there are a lot 42-year old PC gamers? You know, the ones that were in their late 20s when Napster came out 14-years ago? For every one of them, there's feasibly a 12-year-old. As a stat 'average age is meaningless'.

Although.

This report says the average age of gamers across the board is 37:
http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2011.pdf

So if the average PC gamer is 30, that's actually well below the population average, suggesting that it's more likely that there are more 12-year-olds PC gaming than console gaming.

Another report:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23106
"it's 12-17 year old males in households earning $75,000 or more that are the "most active" gamers"

One can twist stats to say what the hell they want really.

jp0249107

20-12-2011, 01:19 AM

-A character in my videogame said "bitch"? This game is now a piece of misogynistic woman-hating piece of sexist crap. It causes the end of the world and makes all guys who play it (besides me of course, I'm too smart for that stuff) automatically treat women like crap. I mean, no one makes videogames (or movies, or music, or books, or television, or theatre) with characters who are intentionally nasty. People who play games like that are awful sexist man-children. (In all seriousness though, nudity/revealing clothing cross the line for me that sexist language doesn't...it's strange I know and I understand if it makes no sense. I'm a WASP, we aren't supposed to make sense!)

-Free-to-play? You mean PLAY-TO-WIN! I demand everything go back to the way it was where only people who paid $150 a year to play MMO's would be in my guild. Fuckin' casuals...

- (This one of for my fellow Americans)This game is Pro-USA? Has a message other than bringing down the man/fighting the system/a strange and roundabout metaphor about how the Bush administration was akin to the revival of the Third Reich bent on world domination through those AWFUL Christian types? It must be propaganda! It's SACRILEGE to support anything other than the Occupy Wall Street mentality that people who make money are EVIL. EA is using Origin like Valve did with Steam in an attempt to build a brand and increase profits? EVIL!

Smashbox

20-12-2011, 01:34 AM

bwion

20-12-2011, 01:51 AM

"I've played old-school CRPGs like Baldur's Gate and Planescape: Torment. I've also played older-school JRPGs like Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger."

Makes me rage.

It doesn't make me rage, but it does make me feel old :/

outoffeelinsobad

20-12-2011, 03:32 AM

I can't put my finger on anything I would label as a pet peeve, but I would like to see less objectivity in games journalism. Even the Wot I Thinks here on RPS are more starkly factual than I prefer. Art is about communicating the human experience, and I find that difficult to observe through anything other than story-telling.

Gentleman Jim Stacey

20-12-2011, 03:35 AM

I hate this game. Its developer is shit. It's downright shitty and has been going downhill like a log ride since as long as I can remember. It has shit DLC (with extra peanuts!) and, like true assholes, the publishers put the shittiest possible DRM to punish any shitheads crazy enough to consider buying this shit. As such, it's with the utmost reluctance and under protest that I purchased my Collector's Edition. I'm playing it right now in fact, but that doesn't mean I like it.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php

Nalano

20-12-2011, 08:09 AM

Less bickering, more examples. Unless your bickering is an example.

Bastards.

thegooseking

20-12-2011, 08:39 AM

This is an irresponsible characterization of the word, and I think you know it. It's a word used to demean women and it is hateful. I'm not talking about "riding bitch" in the back seat, or "life's a bitch" but rather, "you're a fucking bitch." Calling women bitches is contemptible.

I don't get it. 'Bitch' has a perfectly functional male counterpart in 'bastard'. I read on Gamasutra that 'bastard' is supposedly milder, but maybe that's a cultural thing; it sure as hell isn't where I'm from. It makes no sense to complain about a gendered insult when there's another, equivalent insult for the other gender, even if they're not the same insult. And if one must complain about one, then it's hypocrisy not to complain about both.

Like I say, that may just be where I'm from, though.

Nalano

20-12-2011, 08:40 AM

I don't get it. 'Bitch' has a perfectly functional male counterpart in 'bastard'.

'Bitch' is gendered. 'Bastard' is gender-neutral. Male or female, if you are born out of wedlock, you are a bastard. There is no pejorative male counterpart for 'bitch,' as the term's non-pejorative counterpart is 'stud.'

The insult is predicated on the fact that there is a double standard in sexuality between women and men, and aggressively sexual women are not seen in a positive light. Indeed, for most of histo-- why the hell do I even need to explain this?

That's it: Either PC gamers are ignorant, socially-backwards buffoons, or they're inveterate trolls.

Lambchops

20-12-2011, 08:45 AM

There is no pejorative male counterpart for 'bitch,' as the term's non-pejorative counterpart is 'stud.'

I can't remember the last time I referred to a woman as a "knob" a "prick" a "dickhead" or a "pillock."

thegooseking

20-12-2011, 08:46 AM

'Bitch' is gendered. 'Bastard' is gender-neutral. Male or female, if you are born out of wedlock, you are a bastard. There is no pejorative male counterpart for 'bitch,' as the term's non-pejorative counterpart is 'stud.'

By that same logic it's ok to call someone a faggot because it just means "a bundle of sticks". The literal definition doesn't prescribe the culturally-loaded vulgar definition.

Nalano

20-12-2011, 08:48 AM

I can't remember the last time I referred to a woman as a "knob" a "prick" a "dickhead" or a "pillock."

By that same logic it's ok to call someone a faggot because it just means "a bundle of sticks". The literal definition doesn't prescribe the culturally-loaded vulgar definition.

http://images.wikia.com/randomstuffstuff/images/c/c9/Doublefacepalm.jpg

FuriKuri!

20-12-2011, 08:52 AM

You're such a... stud, Nalano.

Spakkenkhrist

20-12-2011, 10:17 AM

Elitism, pointless and all to common.

Lambchops

20-12-2011, 10:26 AM

@ Nalano

I'm really not coping well with this thread I'm afraid.

---

Back to peeves:

I make the same errors repeatedly even when they are pointed out. Not that I know anyone who would do that. No siree, not I!

I make the same crap joke twice when it wasn't funny the first time. Not that . . .

Sigh.

FuriKuri!

20-12-2011, 10:59 AM

Man I hate piracy. It's as much theft as stealing bread from a baby's mouth. I've never pirated anything ever, including stuff like borrowing a copy from a friend or even just watching/playing it round a friend's house. I've always bought every piece of software including my copy of Windows of course. Whenever I need to crop a screenshot or something it's always through my legally acquired copy of Adobe CS (even though I only really use that for photoshop). Oh and the music I listen to while I do that? I totally bought all of it. Pay no heed to that stream I was just viewing either, it was totally legit. Even if it wasn't, games piracy is much more a crime anyway - they showed that episode on TV for free last night anyway (although I'm glad this version has the adverts cut out!).

I refuse to see any societal benefit from piracy. I find the idea that the games industry is essentially fuelled by piracy absurd. I don't believe those eager young men with such a fascination for games have probably only developed such fascination from consuming a quantity of games well out of the price range of any teenager. It doesn't seem even remotely suspicious to me that the multitude of fresh graduate artists, modellers, programmers that are the industry's lifeblood somehow have a close to a decade's worth of experience in their discipline, despite only studying at university for 2-4 years and that their associated software packages are priced in the thousands. I also don't find it unusual that staff are never trained in these packages on the job but will somehow continue to gain skill in it even outside of work (it's more or less expected after all).

I honestly believe that with my purchase, my money goes to the poor sod working 50hrs unpaid overtime a week on an already pathetic hourly wage who will likely quit a broken husk before he's 30. I certainly can't fathom it'll just go to the incumbent producers who turn up to work in whatever sports car takes their fancy that day. And when the studio gets shuttered because of piracy (and certainly not just cause the game wasn't very good), I'm sure the higher ups will be first in line to take the bullet for their staff. I certainly can't conceive that any producer would cheat basic staff out of wages in any such circumstance.

Nalano

20-12-2011, 06:28 PM

Man I hate piracy...

I dunno why I like your posts so much but I suspect it's partly because I keep reading them in the voice of John Goodman.

FuriKuri!

20-12-2011, 06:30 PM

I'm finishing my coffee.

DigitalSignalX

20-12-2011, 07:04 PM

I dunno why I like your posts so much but I suspect it's partly because I keep reading them in the voice of John Goodman.

This. All the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dky_V_3izXI

outoffeelinsobad

20-12-2011, 07:52 PM

Man I hate piracy. I refuse to see... I honestly believe...

Fundamentalism at its finest.

Nalano

20-12-2011, 08:00 PM

Fundamentalism at its finest.

Sometimes I wonder just how hard Stewart's/Colbert's jobs are, considering that satirizing today's pundits is painfully easy. And then I remember that the difficulty of their jobs is in having to read and listen to those pundits every single day for material.

Zetetic

20-12-2011, 11:22 PM

By that same logic it's ok to call someone a faggot because it just means "a bundle of sticks". The literal definition doesn't prescribe the culturally-loaded vulgar definition.
I think that you're right about 'bitch' not really being a gender-loaded epithet over here (by and large), but its use in the United States makes it more problematic; it's precisely because of the actual use ('culturally-loaded definition' if you want).

Edit: Perhaps that's not quite right. I think it's still considerably more offensive over here when used of a woman, so it's still arguably best thought of as an epithet in that use. I don't think it's charged in the same way as most racial epithets though, and I certainly don't think its current usage connotes any kind of particular prejudice concerning women.

Also:

The insult is predicated on the fact that there is a double standard in sexuality between women and men, and aggressively sexual women are not seen in a positive light. Indeed, for most of histo-- why the hell do I even need to explain this?I don't think this true now, possibly since the early 20th Century, at least not in British English.
I don't think there's any connotation at all of promiscuity in the usage I see in truly contemporary usage.

Edit2: I shouldn't get worked up about these things...

Nalano

20-12-2011, 11:42 PM

I don't think this true now, possibly since the early 20th Century, at least not in British English.
I don't think there's any connotation at all of promiscuity in the usage I see in truly contemporary usage

[...]

You should try this thread without an anti-emetic. I didn't realise that sufficiently concentrated self-satisfaction could actually provoke nausea. (Perhaps I've built up a resistance thanks to my own naturally high levels.) There are plenty of interesting points throughout, but it's difficult wading.

1) The societal factor is quite well-documented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna%E2%80%93whore_complex). Slut still ain't exactly a term of endearment.

2) This thread's meant to be self-deprecating. I'm a PC gamer, and PC gamers are known to be racist, sexist, elitist, fickle hypocrites. The reason why everybody can pull up an example nigh-instantaneously is because we live it and have largely used the same arguments we're mocking. But all it takes is a bit of soapboxing to ruin the fun.

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 12:51 AM

Slut still ain't exactly a term of endearment.
Right, but the term under discussion was 'bitch'. Which has shifted in meaning, at least in British English, and certainly no longer denotes a promiscuous woman and I don't think connotes it.

I'm not questioning the ongoing issues with gender-role prejudice, but I am questioning that 'bitch' is deeply involved in that. But I'm more than prepared to accept it might be different in the United States.

I would question titling a link to a Wikipedia page that begins "In Freudian psychoanalyis,", "quite well-documented". ;)

This thread's meant to be self-deprecating At times it does rather come across a just another form of elitism. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with believing that you hold a superior position. But it's a bit much (ok, fucking unpleasant) to struggle through in one go, I've found. I don't think I'd find it so aggravating, if I didn't feel it was worth wading through of course, but it really does rankle.

Nalano

21-12-2011, 12:57 AM

stuff

I find very little to convince me that "bitch" has shifted very far in meaning. I also find it very funny that you're simultaneously trying to argue to me that "bitch" is perfectly fine, but find this joke thread deeply hurtful.

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 01:12 AM

Ok, well, let's have a look at one of the books used in the OED citations for 'bitch'. Sons and Lovers, written in 1913. The dialogues I'll quote presumbly reflect D.H. Lawrence's experiences of its use as a child in Nottinghamshire in the late 19th Century. The word is used only by Walter in the book and only to his wife, which certainly indicates its unpleasantness.

However I think that the use in each case really doesn't indicate that he intends any slight against her sexual morality or anything at all of that nature. He's simply trying to be unpleasant whilst shifting that unpleasantness onto her.

"Say you're NOT drunk!" she flashed.
She had put down her saucepan, and was stirring the sugar into the beer. He dropped his two hands heavily on the table, and thrust his face forwards at her.
"'Say you're not drunk,'" he repeated. "Why, nobody but a nasty little bitch like you 'ud 'ave such a thought."

"We've had enough for ONE night. And YOU," she said, turning on to her husband, "look at your children!"
Morel glanced at the sofa. "Look at the children, you nasty little bitch!" he sneered. "Why, what have I done to the children, I should like to know? But they're like yourself; you've put 'em up to your own tricks and nasty ways--you've learned 'em in it, you 'ave."(I've ignored the two uses where it's simply used to denote a female dog.)
Edit2: In fact I think that the second one in particular indicates that the kind of accusation built into 'bitch' isn't at all sexual in nature.

Edit: There's a possible interesting similarity with the invention of "bitch-goddess" (of success) in the very early 20th century.

I don't think this thread is hurtful. I don't think it's actually going to offend anyone by slighting their character, it just gets a bit insufferably smug at times. (Yes, yes...)
This may be why it doesn't stand up to being pricked by 'soapboxing' I suppose.

Atarra

21-12-2011, 01:37 AM

However I think that the use in each case really doesn't indicate that he intends any slight against her sexual morality or anything at all of that nature. He's simply trying to be unpleasant whilst shifting that unpleasantness onto her.

How do you suppose it's "unpleasant" while not being a slight against her? I can't even comprehend your logic there.

Edit2: In fact I think that the second one in particular indicates that the kind of accusation built into 'bitch' isn't at all sexual in nature.

...yet you said he only uses it against his wife. But no, there's no nasty connotations here! Next!

I don't think this thread is hurtful. I don't think it's actually going to offend anyone by slighting their character, it just gets a bit insufferably smug at times. (Yes, yes...)
This may be why it doesn't stand up to being pricked by 'soapboxing' I suppose.

Methinks you missed the point of this thread entirely. Then again, I'm speaking to the person who's trying to defend a word that's pretty widely understood as an insult, and your examples didn't counter that one bit.

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 01:40 AM

Atarra, I'm not arguing that it's not an insult, nor that it's not a very unpleasant one, nor even that there are issues surrounding gender in its use. I think there's perhaps a suggestion that unpleasantness is less justifiable in women, but it's very much not concerned specifically with sexual aggression.

Edit: What do you think it connotes in that second passage?

All I am arguing that it's use, by 1900 in Britain, has very little to do with promiscuity (which it did several centuries prior to that) - it's not at all like the modern use of 'slut' for example. (And, interestingly enough, the use of 'slut' has arguably changed to an even greater extent over a similar period.)

Edit2: Perhaps a more convincing example is to Google 'bitches' and to Google 'sluts'. While it's not utterly clear cut, there's a surprisingly (to me) large amount of positive (ish) use of 'bitch' and more widely it simply to seems to take on the idea of forcefulness or power. But again without specifically sexual components, and even where such components are emphasized, they don't form the sum total of the meaning. (Of course there are those that seek by brute force to 'reclaim' 'slut', but clearly this hasn't been achieved going by those results.)

I think that Natano is wrong to believe that he knows the use that thegooseking has encountered of it. To repeat: I am more than prepared to accept that 'bitch' hasn't seen a similar change in use in the United States.

As regards this thread - it felt to me that it got more sneery as it progressed, and less about self-deprecation. Nalano stepping up to a soapbox of his own set me off - which I regretted because it's not going to do any good in this time and place and edited my post accordingly. I realised quickly that my reaction was only going to prickle people, but not quickly enough.

Nalano

21-12-2011, 02:21 AM

I don't think this thread is hurtful. I don't think it's actually going to offend anyone by slighting their character, it just gets a bit insufferably smug at times. (Yes, yes...)
This may be why it doesn't stand up to being pricked by 'soapboxing' I suppose.

It's funny when a comedian's laughing at himself.
It's annoying when a comedian's laughing at otherness.

And now I'm explaining humor...

Atarra

21-12-2011, 02:23 AM

And now I'm explaining humor...

Could be worse. You could be trying to think up how to explain what makes an insult insulting.

Nalano

21-12-2011, 02:24 AM

Could be worse. You could be trying to think up how to explain what makes an insult insulting.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will send my therapist's kids through college.

I think that Natano is wrong

NALANO

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 02:26 AM

I think that's a possibly optimistic but certainly rather narrow, view of humour. I mean there's no shortage of people who do find laughing at otherness funny.

Nevertheless, in the context of this thread, it's the very fact that it increasingly felt like it was shifting quite hard towards people placing themselves above others in the guide of self-deprecation. Perhaps I'm more sensitive to that possibility right now - Life's Too Short will do that to you.

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 02:30 AM

Could be worse. You could be trying to think up how to explain what makes an insult insulting.
I'm genuinely interested what you think Morel is saying to his wife in the second example.

For me, it's quite obvious that the only way to really get at why 'bitch' or 'bastard' is insulting, is because of the situations that we use them in. True, these often carry denotational factors as well, but even that's often not really why they're insulting - calling his wife aggressive is certainly unlikely to be insulting to her, but 'bitch' nevertheless is. 'Bastard' is clearly used frequently when it's not meant to imply very much at all about the referent, although it might be taken to make certain claims about an amorality of character in some cases.

(Ultimately, I'd head towards a sort-of late Wittgenstein account and simply say that they're insulting because we use them to insult people, but I appreciate stated like that it seems rather question-begging.)

Which is why I'm asking: If you think there's a sexual element to the use of 'bitch' in the second quotation, what is it? What makes you think that it's there? If you'd never seen the word before, do you think there's anything in the use in these examples that all betrays a sexual accusation?

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 02:31 AM

NALANO
My apologies.

Atarra

21-12-2011, 02:56 AM

calling his wife aggressive is certainly unlikely to be insulting to her, but 'bitch' nevertheless is [...] If you think there's a sexual element to the use of 'bitch' in the second quotation, what is it?You've missed the point of the word entirely, then. It's not merely aggressiveness -- that alone in a woman is forgiven. It's aggressiveness in a sexual context, which hasn't been acceptable behavior for females in pretty much any society for a vast stretch of history. Those connotations are directly inherited from the original meaning of the word. Even if you don't think that, surely analogizing a human female to a canine female is pretty insulting in itself, no?

Keep

21-12-2011, 03:00 AM

Can we roll this thread back a bit?

Citizen Kane

There needs to be a Godwin's Law for invoking Citizen Kane when discussing videogames.

Nalano

21-12-2011, 03:01 AM

It's not merely aggressiveness -- that alone in a woman is forgiven.

Hardly (http://www.viruscomix.com/page330.html).

Hell, remember what Connie Chung was called (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Lady)?

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 03:04 AM

You've missed the point of the word entirely, then. It's not merely aggressiveness -- that alone in a woman is forgiven.
But is it here? Is that what Morel is saying about his wife? On each occasion, she's simply repudiating him for his drunkness, she's not displaying any sexual aggression.

It's aggressiveness in a sexual context, which hasn't been acceptable behavior for females in pretty much any society for a vast stretch of history.I would not disagree with the second clause, nor have I indicated anywhere that I do.

Those connotations are directly inherited from the original meaning of the word.I'm sure they would be if they were there.

Even if you don't think that, surely analogizing a human female to a canine female is pretty insulting in itself, no? Do you understand what my claim is? I'm not claiming that 'bitch' isn't insulting. (As I've already said.) Nor even that it isn't particularly insulting to women. (As I've already said.) I am saying that it's use no longer indicates specifically sexual aggression. Do you believe that Morel is trying to intimate that his wife is sexually aggressive here?

Look at the quotation. Please. What do you think he's trying to do by using the word 'bitch' in each case?

Edit: To be clear, of course sometimes people use words just to be insulting. But overwhelming 'bitch' is now used, in British English at least, to denote an aggressive woman rather than specifically sexually aggressive woman.

I pick on S&L, beyond it appearing in the OED citations, because I think that DHL is writing these scenes with a great deal of care and because I think they're probably reasonably naturalistic. He doesn't use anything like 'slut' or 'slattern', for example, because Morel means something by 'bitch' here, as well as trying to be insulting. He's trying to put her down for simply trying to have will, and it's not by reference to her sexual behaviour.

I'd refer to the British National Corpus, but I don't have sufficient access to be able to provide proper context to any quotations, and its quite important in this case.

Zetetic

21-12-2011, 03:06 AM

Hardly (http://www.viruscomix.com/page330.html).
! Well, quite.

deano2099

22-12-2011, 11:35 AM

'Bitch' is a deeply, deeply odd word. The sexual connotations vanished for a good while, and basically just meant 'mean girl', but from there it almost flipped in meaning. One of the more common usages of it now is in phrases such as 'frigid bitch' or 'lesbian bitch' - from men that are angry and frustrated that said woman won't sleep with them. Because in such an instance, a man can't use 'slut' as it's contradictory to the very reason he wants to insult her, so he goes to the next gender-specific insult.

The odd thing being is that in that context, used against a genuinely confident woman, it's almost complimentary. Because it's basically the equivalent of going "bahhh, you are so mean!" which is pretty pathetic. Beyond the aggressiveness of the insult, the actual sentiment behind it can be almost positive, in the right circumstances.

Also, as was pointed out, 'bitch' is gender specific while 'bastard' is not. But again, I hear men described as 'bitches' these days but I can't ever remember hearing a woman being called a 'bastard'.

Cooper

22-12-2011, 12:19 PM

Can we lop-off the 'bitch' discussion to somewhere else please?

In anycase, context is all important. The recent huff was simply because of some really shit writing that was lazy (and thus) misogynistic (and it was the writers that came across as misogynistic, not the characters, because the writing was is so dire).
Anyway, my dayjob involves the thankless task of teaching feminism to overly privileged, politically ignorant undergraduates and my energies to deal with 'sexism' on forums has, surprisingly, dissipated somewhat...

So, yeah, back on track.

"The devs created such a shit game. I can't believe that, after building the engine from scratch, filling it with dozens of characters, writing the whole damned story and texturing vast areas and providing a functional game I then have to download 'community patches' which allows me to the 5% of the game that they didn't finish. What crap. Finish the game yourselves idiot devs. I don;t want to have to piss about opening file explorer and play with zip files.."

Smashbox

22-12-2011, 01:29 PM

"The devs created such a shit game. I can't believe that, after building the engine from scratch, filling it with dozens of characters, writing the whole damned story and texturing vast areas and providing a functional game I then have to download 'community patches' which allows me to the 5% of the game that they didn't finish. What crap. Finish the game yourselves idiot devs. I don;t want to have to piss about opening file explorer and play with zip files.."

Good point. It hurts me to hear people say things like that.

Net_Bastard

22-12-2011, 06:35 PM

Games today have no color! Like the Terminal level in Modern Warfare 2! And Bulletstorm! And the Nuketown level in Black Ops!

I love this obscure *insert sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-subgenre here* indie game. You don't like it? GO BACK TO PLAYING COD BECAUSE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY THE ONLY VIDEO GAME BESIDES THIS!

Games today only care about the graphics. Games back then didn't care about graphics, as evidenced by the "Genesis does" commercial line, the Virtua Racing commercials, the Super FX chip, the Jaguar commercials, the Genesis advertising its "blast-processing", old games advertising their graphics right on the boxart, and the fact that CoD still uses id Tech 3.

I don't know what the final boss of this game is doing here, so I'm going to make my own backstory for him!

Games these days are all CoD clones. Never mind that the industry had oversaturated genres before.

This game is so consolized. Invisible walls? Checkpoint system? Clearly those are console-exclusive things. No I don't care that the game is PC-exclusive. It's still made with consoles in mind because of my very scarce information. (This was thrown around a lot concerning Hard Reset.)

This game has ironsights? COD CLONE! (This was thrown around a lot concerning Serious Sam 3. What the fuck.)

thegooseking

23-12-2011, 09:27 AM

This quote is from the comments on a PC Gamer story. If it was someone from here, I'm not sorry; you're an idiot.

It scares me more and more how people defend the humble indie bundles, don't you realize it's just mass relief? it's shit marketed as holy and everybody falls for it because it's "indie", "indie" is not sinonim with puppies or love or what's left of good in mankind, indie just means the people making those games don't want to work for no fucking company and would rather stay independent, it's NOT a fountain of goodness, it's NOT the answer to everything, so stop defending these over glorified platformers for fucks sake they're just using YOU.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/sheeple.png

I see this quite a lot, this assumption that no-one else except the poster is grown-up enough, smart enough, aware enough or informed enough to make their own decisions. That people must be "falling for it" or being 'duped', because they can't possibly be as smart as the poster and capable of thinking for themselves. That people who are 'tricked' into entering into this transaction then claim to enjoy what they've bought are either desperately trying to rationalise their decision or just plain wrong (http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-who-enjoys-thing-informed-he-is-wrong,7057/).

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 10:18 AM

Nalano

23-12-2011, 10:26 AM

I agree that the 'don't you people realise that Halo is shit!! Open your eyes' posts are annoying, however at the same time I do think that there are a crowd out there who seem to believe that 'Indie' is somehow something special/precious and that the introversions of the world are waging some holy war against the EAs & Activisions and deserve our undying support in a Rebels Vs Empire Star Wars way ("I've bought 3 copies of Defcon because I support the developers!!"), Vs in reality just being small game companies. The problem is that this mentality of 'do no wrong' arises and it can be misplaced, and you end up with emperors new clothes syndrome.

Well, it's kind of like an anti-abortion argument that's predicated on the idea that one of the aborted fetuses could have grown up and cured cancer: The whole thing is based on potential, not actuality.

Of course, rabid defenders of indies for the sake of being indie have apparently never heard of Sturgeon's Law. I mean, I don't support Dan Brown or Stephenie Meyer just because I like books...

soldant

23-12-2011, 10:49 AM

I do think that there are a crowd out there who seem to believe that 'Indie' is somehow something special/precious and that the introversions of the world are waging some holy war against the EAs & Activisions and deserve our undying support in a Rebels Vs Empire Star Wars way ("I've bought 3 copies of Defcon because I support the developers!!"), Vs in reality just being small game companies. The problem is that this mentality of 'do no wrong' arises and it can be misplaced, and you end up with emperors new clothes syndrome.
This! This, this, this, plus a thousand times this. And as much as I love RPS, I see this attitude here more than anywhere else. Anything indie is apparently automatically superior to anything mainstream whether it has merit or not. Any criticisms are explained away by "It's an indie game", "It's a small developer", or "That's the whole point of the game!" Sure, we're not expecting AAA status here, but when we criticise something like a gameplay mechanic that's not the fault of being an indie studio, that's a lack of proper planning.

I'd also like to extend this to "art games" which are bad at being artistic and bad at being games. Case in point: anything from Tale of Tales, and more recently Oiche Mhaith. Anybody who critises these games gets shouted down with "Well it's obvious you're too stupid to get the message" or "We shouldn't discourage art games no matter how bad they are", and even "It's a game if they say it's a game." No matter how ham-fisted the art or how little the interactivity, there's some core component of communities like RPS which pride themselves on intelligence that automatically defends "art games" even if they're bad by the simple fact that they're trying to be artistic. For example in the Oiche Mhaith post on RPS, when some of us commented on how poorly the "game" delivered its message, another commentator decided to tell us that we'd all missed the point of how the girl loved her parents despite the mistreatment, and wouldn't accept it any other way. Yeah, sure, I mean the game had only hammered us with that stupid little minigame to prove that point, along with pretty much every single thing after the shooting. But we're idiots because we didn't like that it had all the finesse of an angry bull in a china shop when it came to presenting is message, and criticised the "game" because of it.

Nalano

23-12-2011, 10:59 AM

"We shouldn't discourage art games no matter how bad they are"

Jesus, I just got massive "participation award" hipster vibes just now.

thegooseking

23-12-2011, 10:59 AM

Well, people support indie gaming not because the games themselves are necessarily better, but because a fertile indie scene provides greater opportunities for risk-taking and innovation. Not all indie developers are going to take those opportunities, and I'd be the first to admit that there are plenty of indie games that are more "hey, I'm a developer too!" than "hey, I have a neat idea", but the ones that do have neat ideas are worth it, and by and large those are the ones you're going to find certainly in the HIBs, maybe in the other bundles.

Big developers are, by necessity, risk-averse, so they rely on indies to try out new ideas, which they can then evaluate and decide that maybe it's not such a big risk after all. Valve famously does that a lot, and I'm all but sure it's the reason EA has its own indie arm (the contradiction of that notwithstanding). I'd even go so far as to say the indies that aren't innovating aren't completely worthless, because if nothing else they're helping to create an environment in which the innovative indies can flourish.

So yeah, I don't think it's some kind of partisan war, or that indies are more worthy than mainstream games, or anything like that. On the contrary, I think indie games are good for mainstream gaming. But it's necessary to support indie gaming, because that's the only way to tell the big developers, "Hey! This idea isn't risky!"

Scumbag

23-12-2011, 11:06 AM

I'd also like to extend this to "art games" which are bad at being artistic and bad at being games. Case in point: anything from Tale of Tales, and more recently Oiche Mhaith. Anybody who critises these games gets shouted down with "Well it's obvious you're too stupid to get the message" or "We shouldn't discourage art games no matter how bad they are", and even "It's a game if they say it's a game." No matter how ham-fisted the art or how little the interactivity, there's some core component of communities like RPS which pride themselves on intelligence that automatically defends "art games" even if they're bad by the simple fact that they're trying to be artistic. For example in the Oiche Mhaith post on RPS, when some of us commented on how poorly the "game" delivered its message, another commentator decided to tell us that we'd all missed the point of how the girl loved her parents despite the mistreatment, and wouldn't accept it any other way. Yeah, sure, I mean the game had only hammered us with that stupid little minigame to prove that point, along with pretty much every single thing after the shooting. But we're idiots because we didn't like that it had all the finesse of an angry bull in a china shop when it came to presenting is message, and criticised the "game" because of it.

The old problem of someone using the old umbrella of themselves being 'art'.
"Its not badly programed, the bugs are there as symbolism against the cold and calculated way that things are made these days. All to sterile."
"The gameplay is not clunkey, its purposefully like that to show how problematic life can be at times!"
"Its not ugly and low res, its minimalist!"
and so on and so on...

deano2099

23-12-2011, 11:40 AM

I don't see that indie obsession on RPS at all. There are a lot of indie games these days. A lot of them are dull, boring and derivative. They don't get covered on RPS. If the devs post about them in the forums, few people pass comment. They're there but no-one is getting excited about them.

What RPS does focus on is games that do interesting things. New things. Different things. They might not be great games. They may have huge flaws. But that's not the point. The point is the one interesting mechanic or presentational aspect that no-one else is doing. And a lot of time it's worth checking out the game for that reason if you are interested in games. There is, however, a huge gulf between being interested in games and just playing games for entertainment. By default, people on forums like this tend to be interested in games. They're not just looking for a buyer's guide. As such, there's stuff that is worth playing, even if parts of it are mediocre or plain bad, because other parts of it are interesting.

Similarly art games - sure, not all of them do it well, but there are so few out there, and again, it's something different.

There's a reason RPS doesn't post about every derivative match-3 puzzler or hidden object game released. In fact, RPS give a hell of a lot less coverage to derivative indie games than they do to derivative mainstream games.

It's not celebrating stuff or letting it off the hook just because it's indie. Just because it's a small team. It's because it's interesting. Hell, look at Alpha Protocol, a heavily flawed game but one that was meant to be a 'mainstream' AAA title. But that has its defenders because of the branching plot being something not really done before.

sabrage

23-12-2011, 12:08 PM

I'd say I see a lot more vocal detractors of indie games than I see stalwart and stubborn defenders. "Bit.Trip Runner is nothing more than a glorified rhythm game." "Super Meat Boy is shit and overrated." "How dare so many people enjoy X game when I don't?" Could just be that these people are the loudest, though. And I think this applies to all genres; you'd think that Bioshock was just another call of Duty knockoff from the treatment it seems to get around here.

Xercies

23-12-2011, 12:12 PM

thegooseking

23-12-2011, 12:17 PM

I think trying is actually really good, and because they fail, we should actually say the criticism. We shouldn't defend it if it fails, but we should say "Bravo for trying" Because even indies are not as risk averse as you think, how many platformers are out there in the inde verse?

While I don't fully disagree with that, I also don't think every innovation has to be an entirely new genre, and I think the best, most informative way to test out new ideas is in the context of established ones. To pluck at an obvious example, Braid. That it was a puzzle platformer didn't diminish the innovations it did make; rather, it highlighted them far more than if those innovations were couched in a more unfamiliar genre.

Nalano

23-12-2011, 01:43 PM

I think there's a substantive difference between the goal of having an industry conducive to independent developers and simply throwing money at any indie that happens by.

Eliminating barriers for entry into the market - something Steam excels at, for instance - is a boon. Indie welfare, however, isn't.

deano2099

23-12-2011, 01:49 PM

I think trying is actually really good, and because they fail, we should actually say the criticism. We shouldn't defend it if it fails, but we should say "Bravo for trying"

It's generally not that straight-forward though. Take Bastion. The core gameplay there is solid. It was a big success. But if the core gameply of Bastion had sucked... it would still be interesting and worth playing to someone interested in games as the whole narration thing was a success.

This does happen with indie titles a fair bit (though I can't think of an example now) - it innovates, gets the innovative part right, but falls down somewhere else.

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 01:51 PM

For example in the Oiche Mhaith post on RPS, when some of us commented on how poorly the "game" delivered its message, another commentator decided to tell us that we'd all missed the point of how the girl loved her parents despite the mistreatment, and wouldn't accept it any other way. Yeah, sure, I mean the game had only hammered us with that stupid little minigame to prove that point, along with pretty much every single thing after the shooting. But we're idiots because we didn't like that it had all the finesse of an angry bull in a china shop when it came to presenting is message, and criticised the "game" because of it.

Which ironically leads straight back to the comic Goose posted earlier on.

So yeah, I don't think it's some kind of partisan war, or that indies are more worthy than mainstream games, or anything like that. On the contrary, I think indie games are good for mainstream gaming. But it's necessary to support indie gaming, because that's the only way to tell the big developers, "Hey! This idea isn't risky!"

I'm not attacking indie games (the honest truth is I don't play that many Vs others these days), more that there's a culture of 'can do no wrong' famboyism that often surrounds them to the extent that any critical discussion is viewed as outright heresy, and that often aggressive 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil' attitude means genuine feedback gets swept under the carpet.

Keep

23-12-2011, 02:19 PM

What RPS does focus on is games that do interesting things. New things. Different things.
[...]
It's not celebrating stuff or letting it off the hook just because it's indie. Just because it's a small team. It's because it's interesting.

Yes. Sometimes 'differentness' alone is a quality worth appreciating.

I'm not attacking indie games (the honest truth is I don't play that many Vs others these days), more that there's a culture of 'can do no wrong' famboyism that often surrounds them to the extent that any critical discussion is viewed as outright heresy, and that often aggressive 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil' attitude means genuine feedback gets swept under the carpet.

I think you're misinterpreting people's delight at playing something innovative with a delight at playing something 'good'.

Most indie games I play, the little artsy things with the weird mechanics or unique angle or upfront message, I don't expect them to be very good. So if they do anything compelling, I like them - even while I mentally acknowledge that yeah it was as I expected and not really very good.

It's like going to see a local band doing a gig, versus going to a big name concert. You don't hold the same expectations.

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 03:32 PM

I think you're misinterpreting people's delight at playing something innovative with a delight at playing something 'good'.

No, I'm attacking the rabid fanboyism that constitutes the sort of communities that revolve around certain indie developers that actually hinder them because they don't countenance criticism of what the developers are upto. Consider the whole introversion 'Subversion' debacle. Over 5 years of development and then the sudden realization that they'd made a game that was simply one of unthinking linear progression (A-B-C-D-E). No one out of their community had remotely raised a concern about what they were doing, though undoubtedly the more committed were involved and tasked with giving feedback for some time.

Zetetic

23-12-2011, 07:26 PM

I'm not convinced that's the case, Kadayi. Introversion put remarkably little out about their work on the game - showing of some interesting systems, but not much more. Why do you believe it to be 'undoubtedly' the case that there was significant feedback from outside the company? (I DOUBT IT DAMN IT.)

I think there's a pretty decent history of Introversion relying pretty heavily on their own intuitions about the actual fun and playability of a game, for better and worse; the suspension press release for Subversion seems to indicate that this was the case here. Having said that, it's worth noting that Chris' change of heat over Subversion did actually occur following the first creation and semi-public showing of a significant 'playable slice' of the game; if there's a problem here, it may well be that Introversion didn't let anyone else see what they were creating. (Indeed, it might be worse than that - they might not have had anything that constituted a game, fun or not, for a huge chunk of that time to demonstrate to each other.)

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 08:01 PM

@Zetetic

Because they've betatested all their previous games through their community (you even get forum badges for them). That it wasn't until they demonstrated the game 'publicly' (Vs to the wholly converted) that doubts started to creep in speaks volumes tbh.

Zetetic

23-12-2011, 08:10 PM

The thing is, I'm not even sure that it got that playable. I'm not really sure that prior to around mid-2010 there was anything that could've really been given to community testers, at least not in the guise of a beta of the game.

If you know otherwise, then please say, because I'm only speculating based on what I've picked up on the IV forums.

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 08:48 PM

@Zetetic

I'm a member of said forums (and have been for some time), but I don't post much there because frankly unless you think Introversion are the mutts nuts you get jumped on by hysterical types like Xander (the resident IW post count whore), whose firmly in the very camp of '(insert developer name) can do no wrong' thinking I consider toxic for any 'indie' gaming community.

Zetetic

23-12-2011, 08:53 PM

I'm not denying that there's a rabid following, perhaps more undeserved than most in Introversion's case. But my suspicion is that Subversion never got as far as any kind of community beta-test. It just seemed an odd example, where the failing (in so far as there was one), was the time taken for IW to step back and kill (or at least cryo-freeze) their darling.

Edit: Perhaps more widely though, IW's a pretty good example. Perhaps Uplink, Defcon and Darwinia all could've done with slightly more critical feedback - because while I think that they're all interesting, they all could've done with a bit more thought towards playability.

Cooper

23-12-2011, 09:23 PM

Subversion was never community beta tested.

And surely any dev can cope with a -few- fans? Also, there's a big difference between a few hardcore fans of a dev (or musician, or director, or any other entertainment producer for that matter) and a general "x can do no wrong" amongst the critical press and the consumers more widely.

A general, widely held attitude that doesn't provide necessary critical response is problematic. Some mouth-foaming fans are just funny to watch.

Kadayi

23-12-2011, 09:39 PM

We seem to be going slightly OT, but yes I think IW are an interesting case. Personally albeit I think that Chris Delay is a talented game designer, I've always been less than convinced that the other two founders are necessarily essential to the equation, given by their own admittance they don't actually code or write the game, but rather provide 'feedback' (and we've seen how effective that is). Their business contribution seems to be a reliance on a Steam IW sale to 'save' them when the shit hits the fan every year or so. I'm fairly sure that Chris could cut them loose and pull a Cliffski and be all the better for it (less yes men for starters, and 2/3rd less of a monthly wage bill). However they've cultivated this 'last of the bedroom coders' mythology which I think has become detrimental in many ways, especially when you've people buying extra copies of games to 'support the developers' as plucky underdogs, rather than recognizing that their 'business' approach is unsustainable.

soldant

24-12-2011, 01:28 AM

Oh wow, seems like I've touched a bit of a nerve. I guess that's why I'm here though!

On the topic of the art games: the irony of sounding like a reverse-hipster isn't lost on me but I'm just doing what the other side does to prove my point. I'd argue that my point of view isn't quite as bad though because I'm willing to determine if the "game" has any actual merit as a proper game, and most of those "art games" don't. I don't go all misty-eyed at every single attempt at being an art game because most of them aren't particularly good by most standards of writing. You don't have to be a high-culture art snob to see that the art games are mostly the realm of pseudo-hipsters intent on describing their work as being of a "higher level" than the rest of the gaming world.

On the indie games: I applaud people trying new things, but that doesn't change the fact that "being different" doesn't automatically equate with "being worthwhile". We can give credit for somebody attempting something, but we can still be critical if the attempt isn't particularly good. Also I'm not really seeing that much innovation from the indie community these days, basing on what I'm seeing with RPS news articles. A lot of them take existing gameplay mechanics from some other successful game, and then try to use some sort of hook to make themselves look different. For every Kerbal Space Program there's an awful lot of 8-bit style platformers looking to include mechanics like portals or physics puzzles.

Keep

24-12-2011, 01:39 AM

I applaud people trying new things, but that doesn't change the fact that "being different" doesn't automatically equate with "being worthwhile". We can give credit for somebody attempting something, but we can still be critical if the attempt isn't particularly good.

I think you're dead-on right.

But I feel the current stage of videogames-as-capital-letter-Art is more "Kid with crayons" than "Picasso with canvas".

Better to praise and encourage and fuel inspiration and desire than be realistic and critical and honest. Games don't yet have the internal vocabulary necessary to realise their potential, so there's no really much value in pointing out "Oh but it's not that good". Of course it isn't! Why would you expect it to be? But give it time, nourish it, before long we'll have amazing things.

O'course, if all the game is trying to do is "Be fun", then yeah: games have a solid vocabulary for expressing that, so it should be totally doable and if it's just not...well out with the knives for sure.

thegooseking

24-12-2011, 03:11 AM

soldant

24-12-2011, 03:43 AM

...but suffice to say today has seen a few choice examples that have made me very pissed off.
What did I do this time?!

Of course it isn't! Why would you expect it to be? But give it time, nourish it, before long we'll have amazing things.
I kind of disagree here, for two reasons. Firstly, a lot of the issues with the art games is that they're either poorly written or poorly represented if they're trying to use symbolism. Bad writing isn't the fault of a fledgling gaming sector, it's simply being a bad writer. Without criticism they'll never improve. A child who is told that crayon drawings of stickmen are flawless and heaped with praise will have a misrepresented view of the value of his work, because let's face it, it's still bad art whether it's developing or not. Compare it with something like Planescape: Torment's outstanding writing. I know it's a slightly unfair comparison because one was from a major studio and the others are from indie startups, but gaming has been able to support strong stories for ages now. I hardly think that the "games are art" movement should be excused from criticism for that point!

Secondly, I think the other issue is that "games as art" often are very poor games. A great many of them are simply slideshows or blatantly linear click-fests. The term "game" implies that there are goals, challenges, and rules. A PowerPoint presentation is not a game. A jigsaw puzzle on the other hand is a game, since there's a challenge to reassemble the pieces. Most of the "art" games have goals in some ways (i.e. reach the end) but don't have challenges, gameplay rules, and very little interaction. I think a lot of the examples ultimately don't do so well because they try to shoehorn their art into a "game" when it doesn't really fit, and detracts from the whole experience. Tale of Tales I think are the absolute worst at doing this because it's blatantly obvious they do it to make money since nobody else would pay for their "art", and I think their attempts suffer for it. The Path or The Graveyard could easily have been short animated films (The Graveyard more-so since The Path lets you skip content, namely because everything is so friggin' far away at such stunted walking speeds) but they instead chose to push them into "games" when they're not really games.

Kadayi

24-12-2011, 08:27 AM

I don't even want to add a new category here, because I don't think I can without going on a sweary rant (an impulse I've spent the past few hours trying to rein in), but suffice to say today has seen a few choice examples that have made me very pissed off.

Spit it out Goose. I'm fascinated as to what we've said that's put you on the boil.

@Soldant, Keep

The key advantage of computer games over other mediums like literature or film is interactivity in the form of choice & consequence when it comes to the players actions. If you truly want to make an 'art' computer game then I'd say you really need to work with that unique aspect of the medium Vs the others. There's a lot of ponderousness to games like Limbo or Braid, but much of that comes down to interpretation that is extrinsic to the actual playing experience. Braid would be no lesser a gaming experience for lack of Tim's book opening sequences and similarly Limbo would be no worse for a narrative explanation as to what's going on. The 'Art' of each is simply obscuration as to the narrative intent. Devoid of that they are both linear puzzlers.

Nalano

24-12-2011, 08:43 AM

Secondly, I think the other issue is that "games as art" often are very poor games. A great many of them are simply slideshows or blatantly linear click-fests.

I think part of that problem is that those who are making "art" games tend to define "art" as something we don't already infuse in just about everything we do, stylistically. Art is everywhere, and tends if nothing else to make a statement, however ephemeral or banal. Nothing is too "low" for me; a studio musician isn't not making music, after all. As such, when I think "art" game, I don't think Limbo, I think Interstate 76 or No One Lives Forever: You can't deny that they have their own styles, and such is in direct service to a cohesive whole. That isn't to say Limbo doesn't have a stylistic influence, but art for the sake of art is by definition bereft of meaning, which is probably why it's held in contempt by many.

Nevertheless, I still say supporting bad indie developers is nothing more nor less than hipster welfare, but having an industry where indie developers, good or bad, can easily get their stuff out to the masses is a net positive.

Flint

24-12-2011, 09:10 AM

I think it's all good and such to say that the indie scene is a great alternative to the mainstream stagnation, but to me that's only true once the indie companies begin to tackle mainstream genres as well and revitalise/innovate the genres that everyone rolls eyes at these days (in addition to creating all these off-the-cuff games from less promiment genres for surprise excitement) while stopping the oversaturation of the 'market' with gimmick platformers and yet more puzzle games. It's started to get a bit in that direction during the past year or so, so hopefully it's not too far off now that things like Unity are becoming more widespread and games like EYE show that even small teams can easily do something in a slightly grander scale (even if they're wonky and flawed in aspects, but small steps...).

Xercies

24-12-2011, 09:19 AM

I think to be honest we should be infusing the message we want to say into the gameplay, and thats not what I think art games tend to do very well. They basically are trying to put a Triangle into the Square hole. They try and try to fit a message onto a game without thinking whether it fits or not.

Kadayi

24-12-2011, 09:19 AM

I can't say that 'art' is misused (it's too big a term that covers a multitude of sins) but I think it's been overused as term to the extent that it's become kind of meaningless through (in a similar way to 'fascist' has lost it's true intent). From a historical perspective 'Art as statement' is a relatively new phenomena Vs 'Art as aesthetic experience'. Does that shift automatically mean that all 'Statements are Art'? I'm still out on that tbh, but I can't help but think that there's a devaluation taking place in some form. We're not helped by the fact that we don't have a separator between 'statement' and 'Aesthetic experience' when it comes to terminology. Ballet is as much 'art' as Tracy Emins tent is 'art' from a cultural perspective. It's kind of like trying to define what is a 'game'.

I think to be honest we should be infusing the message we want to say into the gameplay, and thats not what I think art games tend to do very well. They basically are trying to put a Triangle into the Square hole. They try and try to fit a message onto a game without thinking whether it fits or not.

Complete agreement. I spent more time weighing up whether to support the humanoids or the humans in the Witcher (whom both had their positives and negatives) than I ever did worrying about who the Princess represented in Braid (although I enjoyed Braid as a puzzler).

soldant

24-12-2011, 09:29 AM

As such, when I think "art" game, I don't think Limbo, I think Interstate 76 or No One Lives Forever: You can't deny that they have their own styles, and such is in direct service to a cohesive whole.
Oh man, Tale of Tales would crucify you if they heard you using the term "art game" to describe something so "common" as NOLF. I agree, art can be found in plenty of other games, even mainstream ones. Perhaps those seeking to label the games "art games" are deliberately trying to draw a line in the sand to separate themselves from the "lesser" games for more attention, or to be judged by different standards?

Nalano

24-12-2011, 10:09 AM

Perhaps those seeking to label the games "art games" are deliberately trying to draw a line in the sand to separate themselves from the "lesser" games for more attention, or to be judged by different standards?

Well, duh.

Does that shift automatically mean that all 'Statements are Art'?

In my opinion, anything not directly applicable to survival can be lumped as art, though you could probably limit that by only referring to conscious attempts. But then, I define culture as "the collective habits of how we cope with life," which is, admittedly, a functional if not evocative reference to the confluence of art, music, language, fashion and ritual that it represents.

So yeah, all statements are art, though the medium is part and parcel of the message. I don't think that such devalues art because I don't think art can intrinsically be devalued. Arguably, our cavalier attitude towards war "devalues" life, but life's just as important as ever it was.

Rakysh

24-12-2011, 11:27 AM

My favourite definition of art is "that which is made".

soldant

24-12-2011, 11:35 AM

In my opinion, anything not directly applicable to survival can be lumped as art, though you could probably limit that by only referring to conscious attempts.
Honest query: would you classify Duchamp's Fountain as art?

Keep

24-12-2011, 12:25 PM

Braid would be a better gaming experience for lack of Tim's book opening sequences

FTFY

Art is

My favourite definition of art is

Duchamp's Fountain

Oh yay! This conversation!

Was it my fault I think it was my fault sorry guys.

thegooseking

24-12-2011, 12:58 PM

Oh, if anyone didn't read the Penny Arcade blog the other week (http://penny-arcade.com/2011/12/12), Tycho had this to say:-

I don’t think I’ve ever read a definition for art that wasn’t stupid. Generally speaking, when a person constructs a thought-machine of this kind, what they’re actually trying to do is determine what isn’t art. I have always been white trash, and will never cease to be so; what that means is that I was raised with an inherent distrust in the Hoity and a base and brutal urge to dismantle the Toity. This is sometimes termed anti-intellectualism, usually by intellectuals, when what it is in truth is an opposition to intellect for intellect’s sake. The reality is that what “is” and “isn’t art” is something we can determine with a slider in our prefrontal cortex.

If this thought-machine had any purpose other than to create a world with less art, I could cut it some slack. But it doesn’t. Its entire purpose is to rarify art, controlling expression thereby. The aperture must be cinched, and quickly, before someone creates a cultural product without elite imprimatur. Its effete and its fucking disgusting.

I'm not sure I fully agree with it. In fact, I'm pretty sure I have some serious reservations about it ("I know it when I see it" isn't good enough for distinguishing art from pornography, for example). But I thought it was interesting.

Rakysh

24-12-2011, 01:03 PM

Hence, made thing?

thegooseking

24-12-2011, 01:44 PM

Hence, made thing?

The trouble with using 'made' as a definition of 'art' is that you then have to define 'made' itself. If something is procedurally generated, then it was made by a machine, but someone had to set up the rules for the generation. And that generation can be as tightly or loosely controlled as you like. There's a continuum between using very specific, carefully crafted rules for generation, and just using complete randomness. Where do you draw the line? Where do you say the rules are specific enough to say the rule-writer made that, or non-specific enough to say they didn't? Or is switching on a random number machine 'art' in itself?

Keep

24-12-2011, 01:59 PM

I'm not sure I fully agree with it. In fact, I'm pretty sure I have some serious reservations about it ("I know it when I see it" isn't good enough for distinguishing art from pornography, for example). But I thought it was interesting.

I like it in one sense - it is good to open the doors as wide as you can; on the other hand there are a lot of people preying on the confusion over what art is to self-servingly draw attention to themselves. That seems just as obnoxious to me as the ivory tower elitist trying to limit those he regards as unworthy.

Hence, made thing?

Does that include hammers and toothpicks and paper bags?

How about Found Art, or the kasina - natural objects such as stones or gnarled logs - used by Buddhists to focus their meditations upon?

Or turds or boogers - aren't they 'made' too?

Rakysh

24-12-2011, 02:26 PM

I think there is art in hammers and toothpicks and paper bags, yeah. I'd describe Kasina as artefacts, probably- similar but slightly different. Although actually their selection placement in a sense makes them art, I suppose, and could qualify them as "made". And turds and boogers can count as well- I'm not going to tell anyone their stuff isn't art.

Keep

24-12-2011, 02:38 PM

Xercies

24-12-2011, 03:16 PM

than I ever did worrying about who the Princess represented in Braid (although I enjoyed Braid as a puzzler).

Braid is an interesting one because it has a good way of putting a message into the game and a bad way of doing it. the good way is finding out the Spoilers you were stalking the princess in that final mission by rewinding time. Thats really clever and I think more games should try that. The bad way is of course the storybooks at the end which tell you the princess is a nuclear bomb, basically it does not fit with the game you were playing and clearly felt tacked on.

hamster

24-12-2011, 03:23 PM

Definition of Art:

How 'bout anything that (by design) evokes a strong emotion? Applies to recognized categories of art such as paintings, pictures, movies, games.

Keep

24-12-2011, 03:35 PM

Definition of Art:

How 'bout anything that (by design) evokes a strong emotion? Applies to recognized categories of art such as paintings, pictures, movies, games.

Tolstoy's view! (Here (http://www.archive.org/stream/whatisart00tolsuoft#page/n5/mode/2up), if you wanna check it out) It leads him to claim a child recounting his escape from a scary wolf is better Art than Beethoven.

More extremely it also means Mills & Boon is better than Tolstoy?

Or you could even take it so that horror movies are better than Macbeth. (Unless "scared" doesn't count as an proper emotion...but then what does and how do you justify that?)

hamster

24-12-2011, 03:38 PM

... (Unless "scared" doesn't count as an proper emotion...but then what does and how do you justify that?)

How much did you enjoy the resultant emotion?

Zetetic

24-12-2011, 03:52 PM

Tolstoy's view! (Here (http://www.archive.org/stream/whatisart00tolsuoft#page/n5/mode/2up), if you wanna check it out) It leads him to claim a child recounting his escape from a scary wolf is better Art than Beethoven.

More extremely it also means Mills & Boon is better than Tolstoy?

Or you could even take it so that horror movies are better than Macbeth. (Unless "scared" doesn't count as an proper emotion...but then what does and how do you justify that?)
You don't have to take your method for determining "is this art?" and end up at Tolstoy's position of using it as a method of comparing works of art in any way.

I would suggest a much bigger problem with hamster's suggestion is that the use of the term 'emotion' is very widely misunderstood (at best). I think it's also problematic for excluding any work that produces an absence of emotion - although a suitably competent analysis of emotion might render such an absence an emotion of sorts.

Edit:
For me the closest simple analogy is 'humorous'. "This is humorous" is really telling the listener about how something stands in relation to you - you find it humorous. Similarly, "This is not humorous" says that you don't.

"This is art" is saying that such-and-such stands in relation to you to in some way or another. On this reading 'This is art' still an objective claim about the relationship between you and the object, but it's truth is clearly dependent on how the speaker reacts to the object.

We probably can work to analyse "This is art" towards something else, but I'm not really sure under what circumstances such an analysis is worth it. We generally have very little trouble when we're not in utterly unworldly discussions about 'art' as to whether we're prepared to say that 'this is art' or not.

I think this can be justified by a remarkably similar usage, once we're into this kind of discussion, of 'is humorous' and 'is art'. If we're seeking out an predicate that isn't sensitive to the speaker, then we can choose (outside of such discussion) to treat "x is art" as "someone is prepared to say that 'x is art'". Which seems sensible to me also, simply on the basis that you're as likely to convince someone that such-and-such isn't art as you are to convince them that such-and-such isn't funny.

Nalano

24-12-2011, 03:58 PM

Honest query: would you classify Duchamp's Fountain as art?

Sure, why not?

soldant

24-12-2011, 07:18 PM

Sure, why not?
Just curious. I personally can't decide whether it's art or not. On the one hand it clearly makes a statement about art, so I think it has artistic merit in that way. On the other hand, he literally took a urinal and wrote a name on it, which doesn't take much effort and the value was mainly in provoking discussion, which I don't think is artistic.

Rakysh

24-12-2011, 07:29 PM

Art requires effort? So the work of a genius who can write a play in twenty minutes with no effort at all isn't art?

Nalano

24-12-2011, 07:34 PM

Just curious. I personally can't decide whether it's art or not. On the one hand it clearly makes a statement about art, so I think it has artistic merit in that way. On the other hand, he literally took a urinal and wrote a name on it, which doesn't take much effort and the value was mainly in provoking discussion, which I don't think is artistic.

I dismiss the "s/he worked on it this hard, therefore it's art" silliness. I'd rather a two minute doodle by Rembrandt than a four month production effort by Josh in the 'Shwick.

Gentleman Jim Stacey

24-12-2011, 08:27 PM

"Since the game runs fine on my 16-core gaming rig with a 10 meg pipe, I'm going to believe everything is fine and the developers are faultless when you post a thread about the game being unplayable on minimum graphics and reduced resolution, even though your specs are comfortably beyond the minimum."

----------------------------------------

*post problem in tech support forum*

"Is directx up to date? Is dot net FX up to date? Are your mouse drivers up to date? Is windows up to date? Did you try reinstalling the game? Did you try running it in compatibility mode?

Oh, you're not an idiot? Well, I'm out of ideas.

SORRY NO REFUNDS."

soldant

24-12-2011, 08:28 PM

Art requires effort? So the work of a genius who can write a play in twenty minutes with no effort at all isn't art?
That's clearly not what I meant, and you know that. What I'm saying is that Duchamp just picked up a utility item and entered it deliberately to cause debate. I didn't say that all art requires a great deal of effort, but the urinal itself was produced by somebody else, and without Duchamp's gall at entering it into an art exhibition, it would have just been a urinal and not art at all.

A genius writing a play in 20 minutes, or a 4 minute scribble from Rembrandt is not the same as picking a toilet up off the floor, shoving it in an art exhibition, and saying "Behold! Art!" But as I said, I think that in itself does have some artistic value in that it generated debate on what was art.

Gentleman Jim Stacey

24-12-2011, 08:36 PM

"Improved/Realistic Gun Sounds Mod." Translation: loud gun sounds mod using "real" gunfire sounds ripped from Real Audio 6 quality 240p YouTube videos.

"Improved/Realistic Weapon Textures Mod." Translation: I've taken all the default textures and darkened them. Or: I've taken the atmospheric dirty weapon texture that fits the game world perfectly and reskinned it to look like a 2011 H&K assault carbine that just rolled off the assembly line. 32x thermo-nightvision-motiondetecting scope included.

Rakysh

24-12-2011, 09:04 PM

That's clearly not what I meant, and you know that. What I'm saying is that Duchamp just picked up a utility item and entered it deliberately to cause debate. I didn't say that all art requires a great deal of effort, but the urinal itself was produced by somebody else, and without Duchamp's gall at entering it into an art exhibition, it would have just been a urinal and not art at all.

A genius writing a play in 20 minutes, or a 4 minute scribble from Rembrandt is not the same as picking a toilet up off the floor, shoving it in an art exhibition, and saying "Behold! Art!" But as I said, I think that in itself does have some artistic value in that it generated debate on what was art.
But seeing that toilet in its natural environment so to speak could be seen as art; perhaps it's a metaphor for modern society or its curves are particularly pleasing. It's been designed, to some extent, to appeal to the senses and thus the emotions. That's why I'd argue for a broad definition of art. What's yours, by the way?

Nalano

24-12-2011, 09:13 PM

But as I said, I think that in itself does have some artistic value in that it generated debate on what was art.

Well, I concede that it isn't good art, at least by those standards, but it's art nonetheless.

soldant

24-12-2011, 10:06 PM

But seeing that toilet in its natural environment so to speak could be seen as art; perhaps it's a metaphor for modern society or its curves are particularly pleasing. It's been designed, to some extent, to appeal to the senses and thus the emotions. That's why I'd argue for a broad definition of art. What's yours, by the way?
It's a urinal. It's a very functional, conventional urinal. It's a good urinal, and no doubt did an admiral job of handling urine, but not a particularly remarkable one by anyone's standards. When I stop to take a leak at similar urinals, I don't marvel at the curves or consider it a metaphor for anything.

As for my definition of art, I think art is a subjective topic with no useful formal definition. I think that at some base level pretty much all art was made to have meaning to it and reflects a person's interpretation of the world around them, or their imagination, whether descriptive or abstract. Thus utility items (a hammer, a keyboard, a chair) by default aren't art unless designed specifically for that purpose. This means that a game like Planescape: Torment is in my books art as well as being a game, and the crap that Tale of Tales doles out is art, but it's crappy art.

The problem I have with Fountain is that it's a simple statement, a challenge. Duchamp didn't really make anything and as part of the anti-art movement it was just a demand to challenge what people considered art. It has value for doing that, but Fountain itself in my opinion either isn't art, or barely qualifies only because it has an artistic value in that it promotes debate.

Xercies

24-12-2011, 10:07 PM

Yes I think we should be rid of is this art argument and say whether its good art. The first one is meaningless and thousands of people will have different opinions. The second one is less nebelous, people will have different opinions sure, but they will actually be good for debate.

Nalano

24-12-2011, 10:19 PM

Thus utility items (a hammer, a keyboard, a chair) by default aren't art unless designed specifically for that purpose.

I'd argue that all form follows function, whether an efficient device to drive in a nail or an efficient device to make us re-think our relationship to our environment. As such, 'art' isn't a useless term just because there's no formal protocol or ranking. You have to admit that our relentless pursuit of changing our environment is worthy of a word to describe the physical results.

DzX

24-12-2011, 11:18 PM

"Game X is a bad game, not because of the flaws found within the game, but because it doesn't conform to my specific vision for the game.'

also:

"Game Y should focus on emotional connection to the characters / story over gameplay."

Skyrim is a good example of this, Portal 2 for the opposite reasons [length and puzzle difficulty complained about despite the game being story-orientated].

[Regarding Skyrim: A large number of posts criticizing the games narrative appear to completely miss what the game is attempting to pull off, and instead demand various, often pointless, additions. Clearly Skyrim is ultimately attempting to give the player a large open-world environment that allows them to fight monsters, take on quests and so on and so forth. What it isn't, and this should be clear both from the series history and the style of the game, is a game set on telling you a emotional, weaving narrative.

There is a story. It is there to force the player to explore the game-world and provide various challenges. It is not attempting to weave an emotional connection between you and the characters. It is not trying to be Lord of the Rings, or A Song of Fire and Ice, it's trying to create a sandbox that gives the player as much flexibility as possible in their style of play. Stop criticizing the game for something it's not trying to be, wouldn't work in that gameplay style [because Skyrim has about 10 seconds, if that, to get you emotionally invested in a character] and very clearly wasn't the focus of the team behind the game. There're plenty of games [such as The Witcher 2] that do put more emphasis on that area. Go play them.]

Nalano

24-12-2011, 11:52 PM

Skyrim is a good example of this, Portal 2 for the opposite reasons [length and puzzle difficulty complained about despite the game being story-orientated].

Two things:

1) The criticism of Portal 2 was that, for a puzzle game, the puzzles were always easy and the solutions telegraphed, unlike the original. There's absolutely nothing in the storyline that forces them to be so.

2) FONV is a prime example that you can have both involving narrative and an open environment. Skyrim has a story and characters, and the criticism about it is the fact that it's half-done: Not not done, half done. If you don't want that aspect in your game, why do it at all? Are we simply to assume that Bethesda simply prefers hiring all those voice actors just so they can add bad stories to all their games?

soldant

25-12-2011, 01:57 AM

You have to admit that our relentless pursuit of changing our environment is worthy of a word to describe the physical results.
You mean "Progress"? :P

"Game X is a bad game, not because of the flaws found within the game, but because it doesn't conform to my specific vision for the game.'I agree with this to some extent. I've seen a lot of people getting really upset because Skyrim doesn't have every single companion and character explored in great detail, like they're asking for characters around the same depth as Mass Effect for every companion and major NPC. None of the games in the series have had this. As for the story, I think it's okay, it's not award-winning but it gives the game-world context. I didn't play an awful lot of FONV but I can't see what the thing is with the big compelling story, to me it felt like the others except that I had a choice at the end of where the story should go. Which I guess is an improvement but for me FONV (and F3 for that matter) never really encouraged me to explore and didn't have an interesting gameworld. Skyrim at least achieved that.

Nalano

25-12-2011, 02:44 AM

You mean "Progress"? :P

Not everything we do is progress.

soldant

25-12-2011, 03:07 AM

Not everything we do is progress.
Not everything we do is art.

Nalano

25-12-2011, 04:20 AM

/facepalm

/10char

soldant

25-12-2011, 05:58 AM

Ah Nalano, you're too easy to disturb ;)

Rakysh

25-12-2011, 06:14 AM

When I stop to take a leak at similar urinals, I don't marvel at the curves or consider it a metaphor for anything.
Other people do though.

I think that at some base level pretty much all art was made to have meaning to it and reflects a person's interpretation of the world around them, or their imagination, whether descriptive or abstract. Thus utility items (a hammer, a keyboard, a chair) by default aren't art unless designed specifically for that purpos
But the hammer etc needn't look exactly the way they do. They've been designed to appeal to the senses, even if it's just a very subtle way. At what stage does a table become art if you start carving designs in to it? And if the table with designs in it is art, then the way the grain of the wood and the texture is selected- don't they make your basic table art as well?

soldant

25-12-2011, 07:11 AM

But the hammer etc needn't look exactly the way they do. They've been designed to appeal to the senses, even if it's just a very subtle way. At what stage does a table become art if you start carving designs in to it? And if the table with designs in it is art, then the way the grain of the wood and the texture is selected- don't they make your basic table art as well?
To an extent they do need to look how they look because they have to fulfill a useful purpose, unless they're made specifically for art. For example a ceremonial helmet might be art but absolutely useless as a combat helmet, while the utilitarian version isn't but is infinitely more useful. By following the train of thought you're on, absolutely everything is "art". But clearly everything isn't art, because not everything is in an art gallery. Something may be aesthetically pleasing, but that alone apparently isn't enough for something to really be considered art. I mean an iPhone looks good but it's not hanging in an art gallery somewhere. I don't think something is "art" simply because it's aesthetically pleasing.

As for the table analogy: an ornately carved table, like an ornately carved coffin, can be art, but there's an express purpose and meaning behind the carving. The choice of wood grain isn't always artistic, it can be utilitarian, or just for looks. That doesn't mean that a stock standard table is art. Again if you follow that line of thought everything is art, and clearly everything is not art.

EDIT: Question right back at you. Is my post art?

Nalano

25-12-2011, 07:40 AM

Ah Nalano, you're too easy to disturb ;)

I blame my consternation on a misguided faith in humanity.

EDIT: Question right back at you. Is my post art?

Our tete-a-tete (or tit-for-tat) is certainly a form of performance art.

Rakysh

25-12-2011, 07:47 AM

See, I sort of think everything is art, to some extent or another. Your post is definitely art- it's a crafted expression of emotion and thought intended to provoke similar. Which is something that can be said of almost anything. Ergo, everything is art. Hanging in an art gallery has nothing to do with it.

soldant

25-12-2011, 07:51 AM

So if I murder somebody, is that also artistic expression? Let's assume it's just a straight knife to the heart, nothing fancy.

(Yes, I'm getting increasingly absurd with these questions.)

Nalano

25-12-2011, 08:07 AM

soldant

25-12-2011, 08:46 AM

I have a list of people, if you're interested.
Sure, send it through!

Rakysh

25-12-2011, 08:54 AM

So if I murder somebody, is that also artistic expression? Let's assume it's just a straight knife to the heart, nothing fancy.

(Yes, I'm getting increasingly absurd with these questions.)
Why not? By saying it's just a straight knife to the heart you're passing comment on the complexity of life in the culture of the present, perhaps also showing the nihilistic tendencies of today's society at its most horrible. By choosing the heart you're reflecting the cultural fixation with the heart, rather than choosing the perhaps more effective jugular region. And even if you chose the jugular, you'd be making a statement about efficiency over poetry, which is in itself slightly poetic.

The problem with coming up with examples is that art is wherever you find it, and I choose to find it everywhere because I don't see the point in not finding it everywhere. Sure, some people can say "so and so is not art" and perhaps for them at that moment it stops being art, but what's the point in that? They definitely can't stop me from seeing it as art.

soldant

25-12-2011, 09:13 AM

OH RIGHT, now I get it! You're taking the piss. Man, I'm thick today.
Sorry, I'll stop now.

Rakysh

25-12-2011, 10:53 AM

I was being silly in the first paragraph, but I'm serious in the second; I do think that anything can be seen as a piece of art, and that you only gain from seeing it as such. Otherwise you're missing out on a lot of possible meaning and profundity.

soldant

25-12-2011, 11:03 AM

You're right in that if you think it's art, then to you it's art. Like I said somewhere above art is entirely subjective, which is what separates it from the objectivity of science. But people will still argue over what is and what isn't art simply because it's subjective. And I'm trying to work in another jab at Tale of Tales here because I haven't brought it up in a few posts... um... they're art-hipsters, the worst kind of hipsters.

Steering the thread back on topic: I flipped my rice today trying to play X3 and ARMA2. While playing X3 I took a mission to assassinate some guy, spent the next 15 minutes in SETA to get to a distant station only to be told to turn around to get the target, and brought the shields and hull down to almost nothing. Then a random shot from an NPC comes and finishes off the ship. Mission ends, I get nothing for it because I didn't fire the final shot. Given that most of the gameplay up to that point had been doing nothing while travelling under SETA I got fed up and gave up. ARMA2 infuriated me by having the same idiotic AI that's been kicking around since Operation Flashpoint, and despite being a huge fan of the series I can't help but be disappointed that the "drastic changes" I've seen haven't really amounted to much except to fix the most obviously broken things.

The point of this is that I've had enough of games like ARMA2 and X3 with flawed elements which are endemic in a series and never get resolved. Every initial release of an ARMA game is abysmal, not to mention that engine performance is never satisfactory. The X series have consistently had terrible interfaces and outdated gameplay mechanics like "Oh you didn't fire that very last shot, YOU GET NOTHING GET OUT" and pointlessly long travel times that add nothing to gameplay. I'm sure you can think of your own series. I've forced myself to playing and loving them but after doing it for so long I see the value in games with more focused (and arguably "simpler") gameplay mechanics which are a hell of a lot more fun to play. I still love complex sims like the DCS series but that's because they focus on one thing and do it exceptionally well. Why is it that we blind ourselves to glaring issues with these kinds of series, and react with such hostility when someone dares suggest they need to change?

I hope X: Rebirth redeems the X series for me. I really do. I just can't put up with these issues anymore! Or is this just a "sense of entitlement" showing through?

Net_Bastard

25-12-2011, 05:40 PM

Just shut the hell up and get back on topic...

Xercies

25-12-2011, 07:31 PM

"Oh lets have a conversation about Art when we know its going to devolve into 5 pages of back and forth on something that is not really going to get anywhere"

Nalano

25-12-2011, 09:32 PM

"Oh lets have a conversation about RPGs when we know its going to devolve into 5 pages of back and forth on something that is not really going to get anywhere"

Fixed your post for you.

sabrage

25-12-2011, 10:00 PM

I like being an outsider on these grotesque arguments over semantic bullshit. It's amazing the lengths people go through to tell other people how to think. I think it'd be even more hilarious to come in as a complete outsider to this forum; I'm sure that we're the butt end of a lot of jokes over this kind of thing. Probably the only site I can think of where the comments on the articles themselves often end up being more interesting than the actual forum posts (which is more a statement about the general intelligence of RPS's userbase than an insult towards its character as a whole.)

Heliocentric

25-12-2011, 10:51 PM

Probably the only site I can think of where the comments on the articles themselves often end up being more interesting than the actual forum posts (which is more a statement about the general intelligence of RPS's userbase than an insult towards its character as a whole.)
Eh, user content>user content rather than user content<user content? Sorry what?

Kadayi

25-12-2011, 10:59 PM

Seek the approval of others and you'll forever be their slave.

Nalano

25-12-2011, 11:03 PM

I like being an outsider on these grotesque arguments over semantic bullshit.

Having a common lexicon is central to being able to discuss anything.

Kadayi

25-12-2011, 11:26 PM

Having a common lexicon is central to being able to discuss anything.

Exactly. It might seem like 'semantic bullshit', but it's about trying to reach some form of consensus from which to build upon, so everyone is on the same page.

soldant

25-12-2011, 11:39 PM

Just shut the hell up and get back on topic...
I just did. Weren't you reading? Clearly not.

I just love posts that amount to "I don't like this discussion therefore it should never happen and everybody in it is stupid." If this was any other community we'd just be sitting here calling each other various homophobic names and posting image macros every 2nd post, along with excessive use of acronyms.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 12:13 AM

We do have a common lexicon; it's called the English language. Getting bogged down in whether or not a game is art/an RPG(CRPG, SRPG)/a roguelike never really amounts or contributes to anything. These arguments always end up with everybody agreeing to disagree, in a slightly more antagonistic mood than when they started. I'd like to note that Wizardry has purposely distanced himself from these conversations, while others keep bringing them up.

My point about the article discussions vs. the forums was that the blog comments tend to be more concise and direct by nature of its structure. More people are able to voice their opinion because every new post is treated as a seperate "thread," and if it gets dominated by this pattern of three people arguing in circles you can easily skip over it (whereas in the forums it's impossible to take a temperature check without actually clicking on the thread and reading through several pages.) This is really spiraling into "pet peeves of the internet user" though.

soldant

26-12-2011, 12:51 AM

Getting bogged down in whether or not a game is art/an RPG(CRPG, SRPG)/a roguelike never really amounts or contributes to anything.
So basically: "I don't like this argument therefore it should never happen and everyone in it is stupid." It never occurred to you that maybe some of us enjoy talking about topics like these, and (gods forbid) discuss it? It is off track from the original topic but it did have a logical link (indie/art games and auto-adoration attitudes), and this kind of tangential discussion isn't uncommon on forums. There's lots of discussions on RPS that I don't find particularly interesting or have no opinion on, and plenty of them have spiraled off track from the original topic. In that case, I just don't post about them.

This is really spiraling into "pet peeves of the internet user" though.
I hardly think it matters. A lot of the sarcasm-buried criticism is directed at people's attitudes towards various gaming issues, which isn't always specific to PC gaming.

Nalano

26-12-2011, 01:25 AM

My point about the article discussions vs. the forums was that the blog comments tend to be more concise and direct by nature of its structure. More people are able to voice their opinion because every new post is treated as a seperate "thread," and if it gets dominated by this pattern of three people arguing in circles you can easily skip over it (whereas in the forums it's impossible to take a temperature check without actually clicking on the thread and reading through several pages.) This is really spiraling into "pet peeves of the internet user" though.

I tend to look at threads not as "OP and discussion about OP" but far more flowing and malleable, like a conversation. Conversations don't always stay on topic - at least, without heavy moderation - but they are linear and progressive. Now, I, too, would probably like to keep the original thread "pure," but I'd also like to discuss the new topic, and since I'm not a mod and can't just port over the tangent into a new thread, it's clearly my attitude towards the thread that has to change.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 01:33 AM

So basically: "I don't like this argument therefore it should never happen and everyone in it is stupid."
See, I never said that. You did.

It never occurred to you that maybe some of us enjoy talking about topics like these, and (gods forbid) discuss it? I never even entertained remotest possibility that at you enjoyed this, no. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?2226-Obsidian-s-Next-RPG-Revealed&p=64284&viewfull=1#post64284) If anything, I'd say that most people are more openly hostile to it than I. (Edit: whoops, I said "most." I meant "the loudest.")

soldant

26-12-2011, 01:42 AM

See, I never said that. You did.
Apparently online nobody can hear you paraphrase with heavy sarcasm. That's essentially what your post boils down to.

If anything, I'd say that most people are more openly hostile to it than I. (Edit: whoops, I said "most." I meant "the loudest.")
There's no open hostility here. That thread has absolutely nothing to do with me nor is it indicative of what happened here.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 01:52 AM

soldant

26-12-2011, 02:49 AM

It's not "paraphrasing" if you change the intent and meaning of my original words. As for your second statement, I was criticizing the general atmosphere this type of conversation encourages rather than this one specific thread, but do continue to prove me right.
Nice attempt but that's obvious it's what you think, especially with lines like "
grotesque arguments over semantic bullshit". The only hostility I've seen so far in this thread has come from you, because you seem to have taken offence to an argument which you seem to claim you have no interest in. Given that this thread has no similarities to the Wizardry-led one you linked, there's nothing here to "prove you right".

Nalano

26-12-2011, 03:00 AM

There's no open hostility here. That thread has absolutely nothing to do with me nor is it indicative of what happened here.

I don't agree with Soldant on very many things, but I can talk with Soldant. Sometimes I even enjoy doing so.

By contrast, there's no talking with certain people (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?466-Your-Less-Conventional-Views-on-Games-and-Gaming&p=22882&viewfull=1#post22882).

sabrage

26-12-2011, 03:49 AM

Nice attempt but that's obvious it's what you think, especially with lines like "
grotesque arguments over semantic bullshit". The only hostility I've seen so far in this thread has come from you, because you seem to have taken offence to an argument which you seem to claim you have no interest in.

Again, that's not what I said. I find these arguments fascinating, in the same way I find arguments about the intent of a David Lynch film fascinating: these words only have the meaning that you give them, as they are an abstract form of communication only used out of convenience and tradition. If you don't think a game or an object is "art," give it a new name. Arguing over the definition of anything is such an absurd concept to me that I truly cam not talk about the subject without coming off as condescending. Take 5 pages of these circular arguments that - by the very nature of language itself - can not be settled and...

soldant

26-12-2011, 03:56 AM

Again, that's not what I said.
Really? You didn't say that this argument was "grotesque" and "over semantic bullshit"? Direct quote, friend.

You're entirely free to think that it's pointless of course, but to suggest that we shouldn't discuss it or that it's some sort of hostile Wizardry-style hate rally is obviously incorrect. As Nalano said, we can (and often do) disagree on lots of different topics, but that doesn't mean we're going to spit venom and spew hatred with every line. I post on RPS because it's one of the communities where people can discuss topics like this without image macros and "ur a fag" being posted every second post.

Again, we're not Wizardry.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 04:00 AM

you seem to claim you have no interest in.

Referring to this

soldant

26-12-2011, 04:03 AM

Referring to this
You have no interest in contribution to the topic, just to laugh at the people participating in it, or to tell us that it's pointless. It's only just now that you've bothered to post anything constructive.

Nalano

26-12-2011, 04:08 AM

Back on topic:

I don't like this game, therefore nobody can possibly like this game. And if they do, they're clearly mental deficients because my personal opinion is the standard by which the world is judged. That's right, the world revolves around me! Science is wrong! I AM THE SUN GOD. BOW TO YOUR SUN GOD. Ahem.

jquinn914

26-12-2011, 04:25 AM

I don't see much of a reason to be pestered by others' opinions unless they directly target you in a negative way. As someone that was far too young to have played the likes of PsT and Arcanum when they came out, I ,honest to God, enjoy these old titles more than ANY game I've played in the past few years. Voice and character animation can be a huge improvement over text, sure, just look at VtM: B that's about half of why this flawed game is so awesome but when has any game ever came mildly close to VtM: B in that aspect. When reading the text, you're free to imagine the voice and animation of the characters, which IMO is better than most of the terrible voice-acting and animations we see today. When I tried Skyrim for a few days, I thought how could anyone in their right minds think this game is good with it's meaningless, robotic companions, super arbitrary, cliche plot, and repetitive combat with next to no metagame BUT in the end I accept that everyone's different and what they value in games varies. Some people care little about story, characters, or tactics in combat; you give them a big open world to roam around in a pretty first person view with some enemies to hack away at and they're happy. It doesn't automatically make them stupid, and if one thing does pester me, it's how people think things like preference in games/movies/etc and GPA automatically make them more intelligent than others especially since chances are if they had an above average IQ they'd understand the ridiculous amount of factors that go into entertainment preference and GPA.

Nalano

26-12-2011, 04:56 AM

A genius writing a play in 20 minutes, or a 4 minute scribble from Rembrandt is not the same as picking a toilet up off the floor, shoving it in an art exhibition, and saying "Behold! Art!" But as I said, I think that in itself does have some artistic value in that it generated debate on what was art.

I can't believe it took me this long to remember, but are you aware of John Cage's 4'33''?

soldant

26-12-2011, 05:25 AM

I can't believe it took me this long to remember, but are you aware of John Cage's 4'33''?
Actually I haven't. Saw a Youtube video of one "performance"... chuckled to myself for a while about that and wanted to cough for some reason. But we'd better stop, don't want sabrage to get upset.

When reading the text, you're free to imagine the voice and animation of the characters, which IMO is better than most of the terrible voice-acting and animations we see today.
I somewhat agree with you there in that imagination is useful and can be very entertaining, but this often leads to "wall of text" syndrome which goes on and on forever and often about things which aren't very interesting. A well voice-acted game is more interesting to most people and it builds the characters and promotes a better understanding of how the developer intends for the character to act, which I think is better for character development. Particularly if there's an abstract or alien aspect to the game, it helps improve understanding of the intent.

But I totally agree that crappy voice acting just shouldn't be used, it's cringeworthy and nobody likes to listen to it. Whenever I hear terrible voice acting, I switch off.

Nalano

26-12-2011, 05:27 AM

A well voice-acted game is more interesting to most people and it builds the characters and promotes a better understanding of how the developer intends for the character to act, which I think is better for character development.

Shepard.

Wrex.

soldant

26-12-2011, 06:15 AM

I used to Shepard my Wrex, but then I took a Virmire to the knee?

Nalano

26-12-2011, 06:49 AM

I used to Shepard my Wrex, but then I took a Virmire to the knee?

Who the fuck is promoting that meme, so that we may beat the shit outta him?

Roufuss

26-12-2011, 06:58 AM

Who the fuck is promoting that meme, so that we may beat the shit outta him?

Reddit, I believe.

You know I even saw that meme on a Gamestop ad?

"The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Collector's Edition used to be $149.99, but then it took an arrow to the knee! Get it now for only $99.99"

soldant

26-12-2011, 08:05 AM

Reddit, I believe
More like everyone. It's friggin' everywhere. Every 2nd top Youtube comment is "I used to [something], but then I took an arrow to the knee." So many memes.

Rakysh

26-12-2011, 08:30 AM

We do have a common lexicon; it's called the English language.
After all, everyone has exactly the same understanding of the English language, what with it being so notoriously simple and unsubtle. That's why defining your terms is such a small and unimportant part of academia.

these words only have the meaning that you give them, as they are an abstract form of communication only used out of convenience and tradition. If you don't think a game or an object is "art," give it a new name. Arguing over the definition of anything is such an absurd concept to me that I truly can not talk about the subject without coming off as condescending.
Ah, so words only have the meaning you give them. That's why it's acceptable to call black people the n-word and say we should kill all the muslims cos of the islamic ray guns. Oh wait, neither of those things are ok. Words have a weight and meaning given to them by society as a whole, and trying to understand what that means to everyone is quite important and not really useless in the slightest. Also, it's quite fun, and if the worst comes to the worst, no-one is making you read this.

Kadayi

26-12-2011, 08:48 AM

Caleb367

26-12-2011, 10:00 AM

We do? If that's the case care to define 'Game' for me?

*gets popcorn*

I'd like to, but I'm in the middle of some calibrations.

Ok, sorry.

Xercies

26-12-2011, 10:34 AM

"Oh my god this game is ten years old and has really blocky graphics, I will never touch this game with a barge pole even if its probably one of the gretest games in existence, it has to be pretty graphics or GTFO"

DzX

26-12-2011, 04:05 PM

Two things:

1) The criticism of Portal 2 was that, for a puzzle game, the puzzles were always easy and the solutions telegraphed, unlike the original. There's absolutely nothing in the storyline that forces them to be so.

Depends how Valve want to tell a story, if they want to control the pacing, keep the game fast-paced and energetic [as they clearly did, in the storyline Chell is seen as a master puzzle-solver] then they can't be so taxing the player has to stop for a very long time and think. Furthermore, in what way were the originals puzzles not telegraphed, in comparison to Portal 2's?

The only way I can see is the fact some surfaces in the sequel did not allow the player to place portals [usually designed to force them to use the gels].

2) FONV is a prime example that you can have both involving narrative and an open environment.

Well that depends if you consider FONV's narrative 'involved'. I don't really see the difference beyond FONV's narrative and Skyrims in terms of quality, beyond the fact Skyrim's quests encouraged the player to explore the world.

Skyrim has a story and characters, and the criticism about it is the fact that it's half-done: Not not done, half done. If you don't want that aspect in your game, why do it at all?

Games need story to add context. It draws players in and makes the game-world more immersive. Adding emotion is not automatic 'good' story-telling, whilst Skyrim may have flaws in its narrative, there's nothing wrong with the way Bethesda approach these quests - they're each stand-alone distractions for the player designed to give them a slightly more structured mission set-up than the random quests found else-where. Some are badly written, and some are boring. That's not the point I'm trying to make - I'm stating that critics of the game need to look closely at the reasons behind the narrative, and why suggestions such as 'quests need to be more emotional and engaging' don't work with the reason quests exist within the game in the first place.

Are we simply to assume that Bethesda simply prefers hiring all those voice actors just so they can add bad stories to all their games?

It's all about immersion.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 08:24 PM

We do? If that's the case care to define 'Game' for me?

*gets popcorn*
Truth be told, I don't care.

thegooseking

26-12-2011, 08:45 PM

I can't believe it took me this long to remember, but are you aware of John Cage's 4'33''?

It's worse than that. 4'33" is protected under copyright, which led to John Cage successfully suing Mike Batt over his One Minute Silence (well, Batt settled out of court "out of respect for John Cage" -- but for a six-figure sum). Though to be fair, Batt did list Cage as a co-writer, which I guess is why Cage could sue Batt but couldn't sue Sigur Rós for 17 Sekúndur Fyrir Sólarupprás. Sigur Rós were clearly using a different silence, while Mike Batt was using extracts from the same silence. Or something.

I don't like this game, therefore nobody can possibly like this game. And if they do, they're clearly mental deficients because my personal opinion is the standard by which the world is judged. That's right, the world revolves around me! Science is wrong! I AM THE SUN GOD. BOW TO YOUR SUN GOD. Ahem.

So much that. I know it's just a figure of speech, so it shouldn't bother me too much, but I really hate the phrase "no-one cares" or "no-one will care". Stop trying to speak on my behalf.

Kadayi

26-12-2011, 09:07 PM

Yeah sorry, I got nothin

Fixed that for you. Please though feel free to bitch people out in future for having discussions on a discussion forum though, we always appreciate that.

sabrage

26-12-2011, 09:43 PM

God forbid someone disagree with you.

PeopleLikeFrank

26-12-2011, 09:50 PM

This game has insufficient quantity of plot, I therefore declare it to have a poor story. Talk to me when they've added a few hours of exposition.

Kadayi

26-12-2011, 09:55 PM

I like being an outsider on these grotesque arguments over semantic bullshit. It's amazing the lengths people go through to tell other people how to think. I think it'd be even more hilarious to come in as a complete outsider to this forum; I'm sure that we're the butt end of a lot of jokes over this kind of thing.

That's not disagreeing, that's disparaging. That you see no worth in what other people have to say about a subject is not a stance. If you don't care for the discussions, don't post.

This game has insufficient quantity of plot, I therefore declare it to have a poor story. Talk to me when they've added a few hours of exposition.

I approve of this post.

Nalano

26-12-2011, 10:19 PM

Though to be fair, Batt did list Cage as a co-writer

...which makes a great deal of difference when it comes to copyright law. As for the piece, 4'33'' was about formally taking note of the ambient sound (and one of Cage's later pieces involved putting the sound system to as receptive as it could be without feedback, and then recording the audience). One Minute of Silence was Batt admittedly taking the piss (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2133426.stm) out of Cage. In fact, had he not listed Cage, he'd probably have gotten away with it as satire.

Tho I'd like to point out, just for clarification, that John Cage did not sue Mike Batt. John Cage was dead for ten years when Batt's piece came out.