has this legendary statement stood the test of time? was he right?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
has this legendary statement stood the test of time? was he right?
has this legendary statement stood the test of time? was he right?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
No and no.
He was right. You might as well just say "it's good because I like it". It's a fine blogpost but you aren't explaining why I should agree with you.
>I like bacon
>WTF EXPLAIN
>it's tasty
>NO BUT BE ELABORATE ABOUT IT, EXPLAIN WHY SHOULD I AGREE WITH YOU THAT BACON IS TASTY
>it's just tasty to me lol
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
who are you quoting
t. vegans
>food analogy
>I like surfing
>WTF EXPLAIN
>It's fun
>NO BUT E ELABORATE ABOUT IT, EXPLAIN WHY SHOULD I AGREE WITH YOU THAT SURFING IS FUN
>It's just fun to me lol
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>sports analogy
>surfing analogy
You know who said that? No one.
I like strawman arguments, they're fun. you lost.
"I like" =/= "Is good"
I don't give a frick about what others or lowlife sewage Black folk like you think is good
I like = Is good to the only person whose opinions should matter, me.
I like food analogies.
>NO YOU CAN'T IT'S BAD IT'S NEVER ACCURATE STOP
I dunno man it just makes things easier to understand since everyone eats
>NO YOU'RE FAT YOU'RE AMERICAN YOU CAN'T MAKE A FOOD ANALOGY I WON'T STAND FOR IT
idk lol rofl
>AAAAAAAAFDKJDHF
>everyone eats
source?
>bacon
rent free
Reddit is just a buzzword when you can't actually think of any real reasons as to why a game is bad, don't use it.
does the narwhal bacon my fellow reddit bro
it's perfectly fine just to say, "i liked it because i thought it was fun". but if you're going to get mad that people didn't find it fun you'll look moronic if your only argument is "it's fun you're just a contrarian!"
No its not perfectly fine its the equivalent of saying "works on my machine"
Its a shitpost
in the context of a light conversation of the game it's acceptable to not delve into why you found it fun.
"i just found it fun" is only dumb given that the reply is to a deeper analysis of the game - just as "works on my machine" is a stupid filler reply to an in-depth tech support thread.
>if I say it again with more words he will agree this time
Yes that's what debates are
Actual moron
i elaborated on my point.
what specifically do you disagree with? "works on my machine" would be fine given that - for example - the dev of a game wanted to know where to begin for compatibility.
You restated your point. And now you are being moronic talking about game devs for no reason
in that last reply i did restate my point, yes. and i did so because you clearly did not get it.
"it's fun" is obviously not very helpful when you're looking for a deeper analysis. it's still perfectly valid feedback, however. a game can be good (from a technical standpoint, for example) and not be fun.
i'll agree, though. i was being very moronic in expecting you to understand a basic paragraph. third time's the charm?
>you just don't get it
Stopped reading there
Actual moron
Works on my machine is fine to say as well, the only people who get mad are just upset that their problem isn't being solved for them, it shows that it is an issue on their end and not an inherent flaw with whatever it is
Who the frick thinks their problem is universal and nobody at all can play the game?
Nobody even knows what your machine is or if you have played the game at all since "works on my machine" is a shitpost referencing garbage tech forums
You're not flipping the script when the original post is about some autist getting mad over someone finding a game fun
you just proved him right.
Really? You can't even say it's salty and smoky? Crispy?
For the underage that might see this post, explanations like this don't work. You have to explain in better detail why things are the way that they are using an actual vocabulary.
Don't get angry, just answer the fricking question.
For the underage that might see this post, you will grow out of thinking like this and being an enormous homosexual who huffs their own farts
Don't get angry, just stop being moronic
What's wrong with saying "it's good because I like it"? Because that's basically what all media opinions are in the most rudimentary way possible. Do you not like it because it's too simple?
because it's a discussion forum. saying "it's fun" contributes nothing to the discussion if you don't elaborate on the reasons you find it fun. I do, in fact, not like it because it's too simple, because I want to find something to riff off in other anon's posts, and simply saying "it's fun" results in shitposting like this entire thread.
I don't give a frick if you think its good. Chances are you also think bugs bunny fricking a dog is good considering you post here.
>I don't give a frick if you think its good
Clearly you do when you get triggered by people enjoying games they find fun
>ur triggured
You are a mongoloid
QED
Even your reaction image is fricked from being copy pasted so many times
Oh you sweet summer child
Because you become a normie when you're like "VIDYA FUN BECAUSE GAME RUNNING LOL." At least be able to say some things about it you like.
Unironically this. Video games are the only genre of entertainment that has as many children giving reviews than any other, it has the lowest barrier to entry, and even lower than music or movies oddly enough.
So as a result you get moronic statements that are wholly absent in other forms of entertainment that you're forced to suffer here just because of the mental infancy rampant among many that play video games.
>or movies oddly enough
because despite what people believe, movies (on average) are actually more involved and require more brain power, and interaction than the average video game.
Obviously exceptions exist on both ends of the spectrum. Some video games are immensely involved and some movies are completely braindead.
The only involvement you have with a movie is staring at a screen for an hour and a half. Granted, most video games are just glorified movies so I can kind of see your point.
sounds like you're referring to normalgay movies which are made for people who want to "Shut their brains off" so to speak.
Many movies require you to pay attention for the entire length (80 minutes+) which is a feat that most are not capable of, and very few video games require.
Have you never watched a movie with someone who sits there and complains they have no idea what's going on?
>who's that guy
>I thought he was a bad guy?
>wait is this the past now?
>then who was the guy from before?
>Have you never watched a movie with someone who sits there and complains they have no idea what's going on?
Frick, I'm that guy... I see what you mean now, a movie having a more complex story that requires you to puzzle out details is definitely mroe involved than most games, I'll admit.
You can say this same thing about video games considering how many morons on Ganker I've seen miss and not understand the absolute simplest shit that even gets spelled out to you
N and double N.
Fun is quantifiable to a degree, so you should be able to name positive traits. It may be a situation where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, but you should be able to identify some of the parts.
it's true but fun is still valid. thinking it's not is what made this legendarily autistic.
Immersion and entertainment are equally subjective.
>can't understand why people like games they find fun
Autism
>can't understand that people like not liking your moronic homosexual unexplained reasons for liking a shitty game (just saying it's fun), because it's fun for them
autism
>can't understand that people like not liking your moronic homosexual unexplained reasons for liking a shitty game (just saying it's fun), because it's fun for them
having a stroke there, ESL buddy?
>can't understand a basic English sentence
Embarrassing, ESL. Don't you have a school to shoot, you mutt ESL?
>n-n-no you are the ESL
pathetic
you'll always be a subhuman, pablo
Sounds like you need to visit your doctor to check for autism lmao
What?
Sounds like you need to visit your doctor to check for autism lmao
I like shitting in your mouth and you're eating it, because it's fun
He was right, and still is. But the context matters, he was talking about discussing videogames, like we should be doing in a videogame discussion board. He's not saying that Fun doesn't exists, he's saying that using "fun" as an argument in a discussion is useless.
>your fun doesn't matter if it's not backed up by sophistry which can be agreed upon by Ganker consensus
lole
This, Pokemon games are hot fricking dogshit but people will defend them by going "uhh, but its fun xD" as if you couldn't apply the stuff people find fun about it to any other Pokemon game.
damn stop stealing my thoughts. Pokemon was like the first game I thought of. I genuinely do not understand how anybody old enough to post here can go through multiple pokemon games without being bored out of their minds
Post your favorite weezer song bros
Here's mine
Hes half right and half wrong which is why people still talk about this post to this day, its written pretty vaguely.
Its fine to describe things as "fun" but fun is the endgoal of many game mechanics, its not something thats magically there or not. You have to explain WHY its fun, which could be a lot of reasons, like
>rewarding progression
>satisfying, deep or flashy combat/movement mechanics
>interesting artstyle
>good soundtrack and SFX
saying "its fun" and not elaborating might as well be the same as saying "its good" and not elaborating.
progression
, deep or flashy combat/movement mechanics
artstyle
>>good soundtrack and SF
literally all of these are subjective standards lol
Nobody said the arguments had to be objective, don't be coy. Truly objective discussion about any fricking topic is virtually impossible. At least with those examples you are opening the discussion towards specific design elements instead of just saying you enjoyed it and not elaborating.
the entire point is that discussion has no relevance or weight whatsoever unless its based strictly upon the topics of technical aspects, bugs, UI accessibility and accessibility in general
otherwise it's just a shitflinging fest of "NO I LIKE THING, FRICK YOU FOR LIKING THING", you know, what Ganker essentially is
This is moronic, thats literally the basis of all argument, is everything was objective thered be no such thing as debate.
nonsense
for example, everyone agrees that Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is a bugged game that is not functioning properly
this conclusion is based in objective, technical facts
Childhood is thinking he means fun doesn't exist, adulthood is understanding that calling something "fun" is vacuous in a discussion with someone else, no matter how true it is for you.
No and no.
If a game is fun, it should be good. Whether a game is fun or not is probably the most important thing regarding a game. But there are reasons why it's (or isn't) fun, and just saying "it's fun" doesn't mean much. In a discussion, why something is fun has to actually be elaborated on.
replace fun with comfy and the statement is correct
>Tasty is just a buzzword when you can't actually think of any real reasons as to why the food is good, don't use it.
That's how moronic that poster is.
Hey I was in that thread
>Holding on to a comment for 10 years
It looks like you're the one who lost anon.
>11 years ago
We're farther away from that post than that post was from the founding of Ganker.
>legendary
You mean moronic
>random post
>legendary
was it reposted in reddit or discord?
>No you can't simply say it's fun or that you like it you have to argue with me until the thread hits bump limit
No, frick off. Fun things are fun.
He was always right but morons never understood the context so it was interpreted as "fun=bad"
still yes
if theyre asking you to qualify why something is good, "fun" is not an answer, its just restating that you like it, nobody is asking whether or not you like it
youre allowed to like bad things
otherwise jrpg fans wouldnt exist
I like it so its good
>its just restating that you like it
>implying I can't hate fun
moron
I don't get why so many people act moronic about it. OP was right from the very beginning. The same is is true for it's shit
He was right, the braindead posters here saw someone saying "don't call something fun as an argument" and took it to mean "games aren't fun, oh that's just like Ganker"
Imagine samegayging just to pretend people agree with you lmao
The response to that post were basically memers having a kneejerk reaction to the "fun is just a buzzword" bit even though it wasn't even the point of the post.
It's safe to say the anon was basically spot on.
I have returned to chan from a long time. Thank you posting this OP.
Why the frickndid we stop saying lel?
Druckmann: "Games shouldn't be fun"
>Le disapproving sojak
Anon: "Games shouldn't be fun"
>Le excited sojak
I hate Black folk.
its fun
it makes my stomach feel good.
I have autism. I follow my stomach for games. It has worked well so far.
So fun is a good concept if you are enlightened in the stomach butterfly feeling.
>he doesn't realize Raph Koster wrote a thesis on and definition of Fun as it pertains to games, and the successful implementation of Fun in Video Games
oh no no
Maybe if he gets a real name I'll give a shit
I have a theory that people with Extroverted Feeling feel like they need to come up with external justifications for liking things, especially INTPs with their Ti driven minds. This leads to the unbearable autism of people who say whatever they like is objectively better than other things.
On the other hand people with introverted feeling have no problem saying they like things just because of how they feel.
>horoscope moron shares his opinion
moron uses as many words as possible to say nothing at all
here's a tl:dr for ya
fun is a core aspect to all media, and all of our interactions with media is in one way or another related to fun
I appreciate you not wasting so many words to say nothing =)
Even if mbti was a horoscope that wouldn't make it inaccurate. Take the soience worship to leddit.
are you aware that you have feelings for a reason
>has this legendary statement stood the test of time?
not really. it was a terrible take when it was posted and it's still a terrible take now.
>was he right?
no. fun itself is subjective, but it is an important metric as to why games are being played. the purpose of vidya is primarily enjoyment and entertainment, and even games that are thoroughly obstructive, challenging, or even too auteur and high-concept can still be entertaining. immersion itself contributes to enjoyment and entertainment, as you immerse yourself fully you find more things that you appreciate within that work. even works that force you to face something horrible are still entertaining once you engage with its concept. the act of engaging with this concept itself can be entertaining.
a game that is thoroughly unfun is a game that cannot be played.
If you find something fun you should be able to explain why so
if that is so, explain what you find fun about vidya?
That's a bit of a broad spectrum don't you think, I enjoy a variety of different genres for different reasons, they can be engaging, fast-paced, skill based, have interesting stories and characters, look nice, have good puzzles, a lot of build variety, reward exploration, any number of things that go beyond just "it's fun"
that's the point. 'fun' is a broad spectrum that encompasses a multitude of things. it is the things in the media you actively engage with that you derive enjoyment from, be it from the sheer instinctual satisfaction of basic desires or the satisfaction of contemplating and analyzing concepts and ideas, or even just the satisfaction derived from achieving goals or succeeding in your challenges.
if you didn't derive satisfaction from it, you would not continue engaging with it.
the rebuttal was
>If you find something fun you should be able to explain why so
and so the reasonable response would be
>if that is so, explain what you find fun about vidya?
which challenges the premise of the original rebuttal.
>Are you that arrogant that you honestly believe "fun" is everyone's descriptive limit just because it's yours?
of course not, people are inherently different from each other, which means people inherently find different things fun, and not all people can properly articulate what they find fun within the games they enjoy to begin with.
That's not a reasonable response.
You've been exposed as a moron with a big head
>and not all people can properly articulate what they find fun within the games they enjoy to begin with.
If your too moronic to discuss games then dont
>That's not a reasonable response.
how so?
>You've been exposed as a moron with a big head
ad hominem
>If your too moronic to discuss games then dont
doesn't stop morons from either blindly praising a game or blindly shitting on it
>How so
See
>Ad hom
But still true
>people will just post dumb shit anyway
And you defend it
>See
Are you that arrogant that you honestly believe "fun" is everyone's descriptive limit just because it's yours?
again, i'm challenging the premise of the original rebuttal
>But still true
again, still an adhom that detracts from the original argument
>And you defend it
i just don't care enough about to b***h about it
i am not against people liking the games saying that it's fun or that they don't like it, i'm against people who just say 'it's objectively shit because of my subjective opinion" or "it's objectively fun because of your subjective opinion". i'm also generally just against people who think 'fun' as a concept isn't an important metric for vidya and basically demeaning it
Your rebuttal is moronic for the reason I posted
You are a moron with a big head
And you are still defending it
No one is saying games shouldn't be fun, no one worth talking with at least, I'm certainly not, the point of the thread is about whether simply stating a game is fun is a good argument and my original point is that if you can't explain yourself deeper than that when there are a multitude of attributes for what constitues fun to you then you're not making an argument
People can say a game is fun, I don't give a shit, I don't even care if they can't explain why they find it fun, just don't act like it means anything, a game is meant to be fun
For someone so against people blindly giving their opinions on games you sure are defensive of using a meaningless blanket statement as a description
Lol this is basically "prove you also aren't too stupid to describe why you like something otherwise it's impossible"
Are you that arrogant that you honestly believe "fun" is everyone's descriptive limit just because it's yours?
yes
Yes because saying a video game or a movie is fun is like saying that food satisfied your hunger. It's FOOD. It's a fricking GAME. If it's not fun something is horribly wrong. Being fun is the lowest possible standard you can have for a video game.
the problem with debating/discussing video games is it's all the same. Deep down we know we all like video games because they give you a feeling of accomplishment that real life doesn't and that's basically the one and only reason people like to play them.
>hey bro you like this song?
>NO IT'S NOT FUN
>uh what do you mean
>I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN, THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH
so this is all just an exercise about people being unable/unwilling to articulate why they like/find things fun?
>I like game
Now, that's just bad rigor. You see, if you want me to take your opinion seriously, you need to write a 3 point essay explaining your point of view, your biases, your academic background in vidya, with references. My time is very valuable and I only spend my time on the most erudite of posts
>game is shit
lol tru
To be fair people complimenting a game are usually willing to go into more depth about it and are more likely to give some good discussion out of it, you're always going to have people who hate something on an extremely weak basis that they won't bother to explain
I think the worst is people that hate a game and are more than willing to share why, but their logic is so fricktardedly stupid, you regret ever laying eyes on this god forsaken website.
At least you can easily ignore them, I find the most annoying to be people who refuse to acknowledge even the slightest flaw in their favourite game and who fall back on calling you a homosexual or a moron instead of explaining anything
>that's the point. 'fun' is a broad spectrum that encompasses a multitude of things
Well I believe if you concede that you have missed the point of the thread
All games that I like are good
All games that I don't like are bad
I will not elaborate. If you don't immediately agree and understand my logic, then I'm sorry for your shitty opinions and I will pray for you.
Simple as.
He was wrong and the main issue was that he called it a buzzword because that was what was cool to call things back in that era. A modern day reimagining of that post would call fun troony / soi.
All "fun" defenders itt
Prove you aren't coping nintendies or forever live in the shame of playing games for 5 year olds without being able to explain why
The phrase "fun is just a buzzword" is a moronic take, but the post is correct in spirit.
Games are "fun" for reasons, they aren't just made hoping the Fun Fairy will wave their magic wand on them. If you're arguing about video games on the internet, you should be able to explain *why* a game is fun.
> Super Mario Bros is good because it's fun
vs
> Super Mario Bros is good because of its simplistic, yet creative & varied mechanics and level design
I mean the main thing is that not everyone is willing to debate about what makes a game good just because you demand them to. Let's not kid ourselves, this interaction doesn't come up in a "Defend your POV" thread, it comes up from some shitposter entering a dedicated game thread and just blasting feces in a post like "this game sucks and if you like it you rape under age boys" and now suddenly the onus is on everyone else to argue in good faith.
Ganker agrees with this because Ganker doesn't play video games for enjoyment, Ganker plays them for e-peen clout bullshit. go into almost any thread on this board and theres not any kind of discussion born out of genuine interest or love its just morons trying to temporarily get one over other anonymous users and prove the superiority of their "taste", as if anyone gives a frick. so pointless.
It’s not often I can identify reasons for liking something, I just do. Feelings are a beast that flies above the strappings of information
He sounds like a total homosexual
That train of thought comes from leftarded idiots who think fun gets in the way of them using games as their soapbox, sure enough not long after Ganker started parroting that shit because it made them feel smart walking simulators started becoming a thing. Onions milk drinking homosexuals had been here all along infecting moronic minds with their antifun phylosophy.
A game should be fun. That much is understood by everyone. But the fun you have playing Dark Souls is not the same as the fun you have playing Stardew Valley (not that normal people can have fun in that game). Therefore when describing what is good about a game, more is needed.
Problem solved.
"fun" on its own isn't descriptive enough to recommend a game to others, because what counts as "fun" for one person is a chore for another.
replace fun with "comfy" or "soul" and he's exactly right
Soul in games is real. You and I both know that and can recognise it, don't pretend otherwise.
Both comfy and soul are better descriptors than fun
Especially since soul is used in conjunction with a comparison photo most of the time