Nu Naughty Dog don't use the word fun, so it's important to understand their design philosophy for what it is. You can say fun, they say it's not fun, and Neil would be correct about that. I take the creator's word over your word.
TLOU2s problem is not the gameplay at all. The core gameplay is genuinely great no matter what nu-Ganker says. Where it falls apart is its abysmal writing and those slow walky talky segments that have been plauging AAA-games for years now.
I have to disagree here, TLOU mechanics are way more fun than Spec Ops, it doesn't rely as much on covers, enemy AI is smarter, zombies add another layer to the gameplay since stealth is encouraged and clickers will frick you up if they catch you, real-time crafting and light resource managements mechanics make the gameplay feel more tense.
TLOU2s problem is not the gameplay at all. The core gameplay is genuinely great no matter what nu-Ganker says. Where it falls apart is its abysmal writing and those slow walky talky segments that have been plauging AAA-games for years now.
>Casualized console cover shooter is... le good
have a nice day
>can't drag bodies >only completely silent ranged weapon is a fricking bow >throwing knives? what's that >can't even get a silencer unless you max out a skill tree
It's a shitty stealth system but if you want to categorize the whole game as that, got for it
I mean tlou 1 was mostly loved for it's story rather than it's incredibly gameplay, the real problem with the sequel wasn't that it disregarded fun for "engagement" it's that it was horribly written
>what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry?
Nitpicking. There are like 3 devs who don't want their games to be fun in the traditional way. And indie game dev generally have a different philosophy than AAA devs.
The real reason AAAs are garbage ? Going further and further on the graphical fidelity aspect to justify to need and price of new hardware.
If they didn't put all their work on making the most realistic, highly detailed texture/model/effect/animation for the most minor thing in their game, we'd still have fun and innovative games.
And appealing to the lowest common denominator (and now arbitrary checkmarks) resulting in increased casualization and an overall diluting of a nuanced direction.
And hiring barely-qualified college interns, Internet warriors, etc. whose skills and timely manner in game development are questionable if not outright inferior (see: list of dev apologies starting from CP2077's).
And needing players to become hopeless addicts by overloading their brains with increasing MTX schemes and skinner box elements to justify increasingly ridiculous profit margin projections set forth by publishers and their investors.
And there's still other little things to probe probably but I'm tired as hell.
Numbers went up. The value of the industry is more than it ever was. That's all that matters. The more valuable an industry becomes, the less risks it takes.
>games should all strive to do exactly the same thing and never try to be anything more than bing bing wahoo
Why does the concept of multiple genres enrage autists so?
>Serious answers only: what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry?
Nothing.
25 years ago, there were games that entirely prioritize narrative over instant gratification, games like Blade Runner, Grim Fandango, or The Last Express. Ten years later it was games Silent Hill, Shadow Of Colossus, or Pathologic.
Nowdays, they are games like TLOU.
This shit is not new. It has always been a major part of the industry, and it has always been a major market. I might dislike TLOU myself, but pretending like this is something new is stupid.
It's just that you don't really know all that much about the industry to begin with.
I once had an English teacher mark me down for putting "and" after a comma. I hope her druggie husband finally shoved razors in her vegana and beat her to death but sadly a fatal car accident already took care of that. Rot in hell Ms Robinson.
Just imagine commas coming before you take a breath if it were normal conversation. Honestly who even cares anymore? As long as your sentences aren't run-on paragraphs.
>freshman year of high school >teacher takes points off my classwork because I put a period before the final quotation mark >start putting them after >sophomore year of high school >teacher takes points off my classwork because I put a period after the final quotation mark >start putting them before
I constantly forget which is the correct place to put a period when finishing a sentence with a quote in Simplified English because of how I had to keep adjusting my grammar to different teachers in high school
>"College will be a lot harder than this!" they tell you >Cut to thesis year of College some 3-6 years later >Essay is riddled with spelling errors >"Yeah there's a few mistakes but we don't grade based on that, we grade on the idea and the execution."
Highschool teachers are a fricking joke and I'll never ever take them seriously.
The qualifications to being an English teacher are seriously "can you speak English?". That's literally it, it's how you get English teacher roles in Asian countries too. So whether they themselves can actually read and write properly is irrelevant to the hiring process since they know English therefore they're on the same level of articulation as a 1930's New York stock broker.
It is grammatically incorrect. Using a comma then 'and' is only intended for independent clauses. "Ganker is shit, and I hate pitbulls."
There should be no comma for connected clauses or (in certain cases) use a semicolon.
>Fell for the college prep meme and chose a "safe" degree instead of the one I was most passionate about but had consistent bad grades
High school teachers aren't human.
>had to write movie review for college writing class >picked birdemic because it had to be environmentally related and I was feeling spiteful
Professor almost marked me down because he thought it was a poor review but when he looked up the movie he couldn't sit through it and gave me the benefit of the doubt
It is grammatically incorrect. Using a comma then 'and' is only intended for independent clauses. "Ganker is shit, and I hate pitbulls."
There should be no comma for connected clauses or (in certain cases) use a semicolon.
It is grammatically incorrect. Using a comma then 'and' is only intended for independent clauses. "Ganker is shit, and I hate pitbulls."
There should be no comma for connected clauses or (in certain cases) use a semicolon.
If you're being literary, it matters more how you want the sentence to feel, or how you want a character to sound, less so about what the rules are. It's about the rhythm or beat of the words. How do you want it to feel and interpret to a reader. And my excuse is, I'm always being literary. Tell Ms. Robinson you were "painting with words", and then piss on her grave.
>Nowdays, they are games like TLOU.
The problem with TLOU is that it does not do that. It is absolutely "fun" in a traditional videogame sense, but it also tried to tell a serious story about how violence is bad. Those two don't mesh.
>but it also tried to tell a serious story about how violence is bad.
I'm not sure that TLOU's point is "violence is bad" (not even in TLOU2).
I will agree with you that TLOU games aren't actually good though. There is so much wrong both about the mechanical, and the narrative design that I'm not sure where to even begin. I don't think the use of violence is as contradictory as you suggest, but I will sure as frick say that the fact that the first game is all about protecting someone, when not a single aspect of the gameplay actually has you protecting that person, in fact trains you to not pay any mind to her because her magical all-immunity is massively immersion-breaking: that is a problem.
I'm really not here to defend TLOU, I very much hate these games. I'm only saying that the trend of games that AIM for trading in gratification for more complex and emotional narrative is almost as old as games are.
>I'm not sure that TLOU's point is "violence is bad"
It's not but you can quite literally trace 98% of every opinion on this board to a couple original posts from years back. See: parroting.
>about how violence is bad.
Maybe next time they should tell a story about how the sky is blue.
A serious GTA game doesn't work either, especially if after the sad cutscene you go around causing a rampage with some pistols and a few cars like a complete lunatic (which the player is).
>It's just that you don't really know all that much about the industry to begin with. >says sotc and silent hill are movie games like last of us
ok buddy.
Vets made games bade on their worldly experiences which were outside the realm of the internet, social media, other games, etc. Millennials can only make bastardizations because they grew up consuming a constant slump of media. Their worldly experiences are whatever Twittergays and RedditBlack folk tell them, the Arab guy they talk to once a week at the convenience store and protesting about not being allowed to rape kids.
This is happening across all media too btw.
i'm tired of "cinematic experiences" and a burden of grind through hours of filler "gameplay" just to push story forward and watch another cutscene as a rewards
What did the below quote mean? Why is the distinction important? Are they saying they want their game to be unfun but keep you addicted? But it's TLoU2, not some gacha game...
>What did the below quote mean?
What they mean is that there is a wider range of emotional engagements than just gratification, which is what most people imagine when they hear the word "fun". And that is what they aim for.
A game can be frustrating, anxiety-inducing, sad, hopeless etc... and still be a satisfying experience.
Now - some people interpret the term "fun" in a broader sense, as "satisfying in general". But a lot of people don't, a lot of people associate it with only possitive emotions, in case of games usually instant gratification, empowerment and so on.
And that is what the quote works with, the latter definition of the word "fun". They are saying they are not afraid to engage player even through negative emotions.
Overinflated budgets with teams of hundreds of people make it impossible to focus a game's concept towards a specific audience because they need to make back as much money as possible, leading to watered down mass appeal causing the large majority of AAA games to be shallow and samey. Indie is the only place where innovation and niche appeal can consistently thrive.
Modern gaming: on one end you have the muh art no fun allowed devs who make a cinematic engaging experience preaching you how violence is le bad and it's time to grow up and stop being a dudebro or some other dumb shit. And on the other end you get the game designed keep you playing some repetitive loop for 500000000 hours collecting crap and buying dlc content.
It's unironically Sega's fault. They started the whole "games are for adults" movement that led to the shitty edge of the 90s and the current pretension of modern vidya. Never mind that adults had been playing games before then, this fear of seeming like a child and consequent pursuit of faux maturity has led us to this hellhole.
I've seen this meme spread around by morons like you as if what Druckmann said was a cardinal sin against the fundamentals of videogames. If you have more than two functioning neurons and are not engaging in bad-faith arguments, what he is saying is indisputably right.
Fun denies feelings of frustration, tension, fear and anger and so many others. Dying over and over in Souls games is not fun, but you are engaged. Experiencing the fear and uneasiness of the dark corridors in silent hill games is not fun, but you are engaged. Being constantly beaten down and frustrated by pathologic is not fun but you are engaged. These feelings are downright essential for certain games.
Fun was NEVER a good metric for what makes a videogame good
This meme needs to die already and anyone that shares OPs homosexual opinion needs to get its shit pushed in, slapped and spat on the face like their cheap prostitute mothers.
>What did the below quote mean?
What they mean is that there is a wider range of emotional engagements than just gratification, which is what most people imagine when they hear the word "fun". And that is what they aim for.
A game can be frustrating, anxiety-inducing, sad, hopeless etc... and still be a satisfying experience.
Now - some people interpret the term "fun" in a broader sense, as "satisfying in general". But a lot of people don't, a lot of people associate it with only possitive emotions, in case of games usually instant gratification, empowerment and so on.
And that is what the quote works with, the latter definition of the word "fun". They are saying they are not afraid to engage player even through negative emotions.
People understand the concept of fun in different ways. Some see it as a broader category, including any form of satisfying engagement. Others, like you, associate it positive emotions only.
I'm interpreting the concept of fun within the context of OPs moron post. I understand that at the end of the day both quotes are trying to convey the same idea.
Fun has, instinctively, an association with positive feelings, so it only makes sense, when you're in the context of a game developer where you need to clearly define and communicate such ideas, to find a lexicon that better reflects your intentions. That's where Druckmann's "we don't use the word fun" comes from, it's not hard to understand but people here seem to be especially moron when it comes to it.
>Fun denies feelings of frustration, tension, fear and anger and so many others.
I'm afraid I just don't agree with this at all, especially tension. Tension and challenge is very fun to me in games at the risk of sounding like a pretentious hardcore gamer. I'd go as far to say that failing to find the fun in these emotions that video games can bring out in players is to fundamentally misunderstand what makes a good video game. >Fun was NEVER a good metric for what makes a videogame good
Sure. God, you suck ass.
Should horror games be fun? Not talking about TLoU here, but the genre in general. If a horror game is fun then it has failed. You can be immersed and want to keep playing but you shouldn't be having fun when you should be scared, stressed out and wanting to get through the conflict to the more "boring" safety.
I don't know precisely, but the push for better and better graphics making games require obscene amounts of vram is nonsense. Games being over 100gb etc etc. It's almost as if publishers have deals with these hardware companies that they need to have shitty optimization in order to sell newer units. I suspect also devs are no longer intelligent or competent coders to boot.
>Small dev studios who saw success during the early years of the industry became leading corporations. >Product guys get pushed out of these corporations because they no longer grow the company even larger >Soulless marketing israelites who don't give a shit about the product get promoted and take over the company >Soulless asset manager israelites buy up large swathes of stock in these corporations and impose ESG DIE agendas from the top down, further subverting the industry
at least the indie scene has never been better, though lately I see a lot of fake-indie DIE agenda studios popping up releasing woke lgbt pronoun slop. there was quite a lot of it in the recent Next Fest.
Video games used to be aimed at teenagers and young adults, now they are aimed at 40 year old men that were the teenagers and young adults. This is the reality of all the media you used to love, they are now aimed at middle aged people who are embarrassed by tiddies and who gave a midlife crisis if the main character is younger than them.
It was hijacked by graphics gays
Westerners lack an appreciation for beauty
Westerners are racists and cultural terrorists who wouldn't know a good story if it slapped them in the face
this
i don't wanna defend druckmann or tlou, but "fun" is too vague and amorphous, but each of these is a bit more clear and focused
that said there is some kind of visceral enjoyment that can't be covered precisely
submission is shit tier and no game should focus on that
also
discovery > fantasy > challenge > narrative >> expression > sensation >> fellowship > submission
An old friend I cut off recently told that The Last of Us 2 is one of the greatest video games ever made. I wrote the first game off as a "sad dad uncharted" when it first came out and I played a bit of it at someone else's house and am wondering if I never gave these games a fair chance.
It's a cover shooter in a zombie apocalypse. The stories of both games are as up their own ass as a video game story could possibly be. You're not missing out on anything.
Thank you. I felt like I was on the moon listening to that guy talk about that game.
Another amusing anecdote about that guy is that he hated the last Eva rebuild because it "hated him for liking the original series" lol
Clout chasing wannabe artist directors, combined with absolute casual normalgays who enable them by wanting to have an experience without having to do video game things in their video games.
Once it stopped being a haven for smelly nerds, it was only a matter of time before normies became the overwhelming majority & sociopaths moved in & took over to fleece the normies. Seems to happen to every subculture these days (at least any that persists for any length of time) and no-one's figured out how to gatekeep effectively.
are we really still acting surprised that a bunch of gay hoity toity yuppies dont like to use the word fun because they insecurely assume it belittles their "craft"
Unironically alternate forms of income. DLC, microtransactions, mobile games, etc.
They don’t just end up being anti-consumer but also kind of anti-developer in the long run because they’re pressured to push games out WAY faster than they used to because they know they’ll make more money through DLC and preorders and shit than they will working on the game until it’s ready.
Unless you’re an indie dev you literally do not have enough time to make a complete game in today’s market
The games industry is the only software industry that's so horribly organized that delays are not only common but expected. Its not just the publishers fault, game devs need to be taught to plan better.
The gameplay in TLOU2 is unironically fun and significantly better than the first game.
Nu Naughty Dog don't use the word fun, so it's important to understand their design philosophy for what it is. You can say fun, they say it's not fun, and Neil would be correct about that. I take the creator's word over your word.
TLOU2s problem is not the gameplay at all. The core gameplay is genuinely great no matter what nu-Ganker says. Where it falls apart is its abysmal writing and those slow walky talky segments that have been plauging AAA-games for years now.
Wait but... But isn't story a non issue for videogames? That's what everyone here says. Gameplay is king. So if the gameplay is good tlou2 is good.
If it's a "cinematic experience" that puts story above everything else then it will be judged by that metric.
Nobody has ever complimented TLOU for gameplay. You are being played by a common shitpost.
TLOU (1) gameplay is as boring as Spec Ops: The Line but Spec Ops BTFOs TLOU in both story and in using gameplay to serve the story.
I have to disagree here, TLOU mechanics are way more fun than Spec Ops, it doesn't rely as much on covers, enemy AI is smarter, zombies add another layer to the gameplay since stealth is encouraged and clickers will frick you up if they catch you, real-time crafting and light resource managements mechanics make the gameplay feel more tense.
Gameplay IS king. That is why the segments of TLOU that focus ONLY story without gameplay drag it down
>Casualized console cover shooter is... le good
have a nice day
It's a stealth game.
>"stealth"
It's as much a stealth game as MGS 4 and 5 are.
>can't drag bodies
>only completely silent ranged weapon is a fricking bow
>throwing knives? what's that
>can't even get a silencer unless you max out a skill tree
It's a shitty stealth system but if you want to categorize the whole game as that, got for it
>The gameplay in TLOU2 is unironically fun
Brainlet snoy confirmed.
Play more games, experience more quality, then come back.
One day you'll grow up.
Being a troony isn’t a personality.
Then why do you flaunt it as yours?
>no u
How embarrassing for you.
calling anyone you disagree with a troony isn't a personality either, cretin.
>This cake has shit on it
>Just eat it. It's good if you ignore the shit.
TLOU and TLOU2 are fun, though. TLOU is the first game I binged since Elden Ring last year.
FPBP
I mean tlou 1 was mostly loved for it's story rather than it's incredibly gameplay, the real problem with the sequel wasn't that it disregarded fun for "engagement" it's that it was horribly written
Druckmann is a pretentious hack. News at 11.
>what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry?
Nitpicking. There are like 3 devs who don't want their games to be fun in the traditional way. And indie game dev generally have a different philosophy than AAA devs.
The real reason AAAs are garbage ? Going further and further on the graphical fidelity aspect to justify to need and price of new hardware.
If they didn't put all their work on making the most realistic, highly detailed texture/model/effect/animation for the most minor thing in their game, we'd still have fun and innovative games.
And appealing to the lowest common denominator (and now arbitrary checkmarks) resulting in increased casualization and an overall diluting of a nuanced direction.
And hiring barely-qualified college interns, Internet warriors, etc. whose skills and timely manner in game development are questionable if not outright inferior (see: list of dev apologies starting from CP2077's).
And needing players to become hopeless addicts by overloading their brains with increasing MTX schemes and skinner box elements to justify increasingly ridiculous profit margin projections set forth by publishers and their investors.
And there's still other little things to probe probably but I'm tired as hell.
there are more reasons to play games than just to have "fun". the stress/release dynamic can be addictive and enjoyable even if no one calls it fun.
A complete lack of gatekeeping both on the corporate front and within the run of the mill workers. This is how you get Druckmanns and Koticks.
Numbers went up. The value of the industry is more than it ever was. That's all that matters. The more valuable an industry becomes, the less risks it takes.
>games should all strive to do exactly the same thing and never try to be anything more than bing bing wahoo
Why does the concept of multiple genres enrage autists so?
Early Life.
final fantasy 7 brought in all the normies and then once iphone came out it was all ogre
>Normies
Are you dumbasses don't get the fricking irony?
Polygons
>Serious answers only: what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry?
Nothing.
25 years ago, there were games that entirely prioritize narrative over instant gratification, games like Blade Runner, Grim Fandango, or The Last Express. Ten years later it was games Silent Hill, Shadow Of Colossus, or Pathologic.
Nowdays, they are games like TLOU.
This shit is not new. It has always been a major part of the industry, and it has always been a major market. I might dislike TLOU myself, but pretending like this is something new is stupid.
It's just that you don't really know all that much about the industry to begin with.
I once had an English teacher mark me down for putting "and" after a comma. I hope her druggie husband finally shoved razors in her vegana and beat her to death but sadly a fatal car accident already took care of that. Rot in hell Ms Robinson.
I'm an ESL and I may abuse the comma a lot. So don't take my grammar is a reliable source.
Just imagine commas coming before you take a breath if it were normal conversation. Honestly who even cares anymore? As long as your sentences aren't run-on paragraphs.
What if, I'm asmatic? That doesn't, seem right
>freshman year of high school
>teacher takes points off my classwork because I put a period before the final quotation mark
>start putting them after
>sophomore year of high school
>teacher takes points off my classwork because I put a period after the final quotation mark
>start putting them before
I constantly forget which is the correct place to put a period when finishing a sentence with a quote in Simplified English because of how I had to keep adjusting my grammar to different teachers in high school
>"College will be a lot harder than this!" they tell you
>Cut to thesis year of College some 3-6 years later
>Essay is riddled with spelling errors
>"Yeah there's a few mistakes but we don't grade based on that, we grade on the idea and the execution."
Highschool teachers are a fricking joke and I'll never ever take them seriously.
I just don't get how an English teacher, of all people, can have and enforce improper grammar. That's worse than not having a teacher at all.
Most adults now structure sentences like they're experiencing a stroke.
The qualifications to being an English teacher are seriously "can you speak English?". That's literally it, it's how you get English teacher roles in Asian countries too. So whether they themselves can actually read and write properly is irrelevant to the hiring process since they know English therefore they're on the same level of articulation as a 1930's New York stock broker.
That's precisely what I was using it for.
Yeah the "college prep" shit they make you take in high school is pure bullshit.
>Fell for the college prep meme and chose a "safe" degree instead of the one I was most passionate about but had consistent bad grades
High school teachers aren't human.
>had to write movie review for college writing class
>picked birdemic because it had to be environmentally related and I was feeling spiteful
Professor almost marked me down because he thought it was a poor review but when he looked up the movie he couldn't sit through it and gave me the benefit of the doubt
It is grammatically incorrect. Using a comma then 'and' is only intended for independent clauses. "Ganker is shit, and I hate pitbulls."
There should be no comma for connected clauses or (in certain cases) use a semicolon.
this is what were were taught in school as well
seems all burgers always use, and like this, no matter the situation
If you're being literary, it matters more how you want the sentence to feel, or how you want a character to sound, less so about what the rules are. It's about the rhythm or beat of the words. How do you want it to feel and interpret to a reader. And my excuse is, I'm always being literary. Tell Ms. Robinson you were "painting with words", and then piss on her grave.
>Nowdays, they are games like TLOU.
The problem with TLOU is that it does not do that. It is absolutely "fun" in a traditional videogame sense, but it also tried to tell a serious story about how violence is bad. Those two don't mesh.
>but it also tried to tell a serious story about how violence is bad.
I'm not sure that TLOU's point is "violence is bad" (not even in TLOU2).
I will agree with you that TLOU games aren't actually good though. There is so much wrong both about the mechanical, and the narrative design that I'm not sure where to even begin. I don't think the use of violence is as contradictory as you suggest, but I will sure as frick say that the fact that the first game is all about protecting someone, when not a single aspect of the gameplay actually has you protecting that person, in fact trains you to not pay any mind to her because her magical all-immunity is massively immersion-breaking: that is a problem.
I'm really not here to defend TLOU, I very much hate these games. I'm only saying that the trend of games that AIM for trading in gratification for more complex and emotional narrative is almost as old as games are.
>I'm not sure that TLOU's point is "violence is bad"
It's not but you can quite literally trace 98% of every opinion on this board to a couple original posts from years back. See: parroting.
>about how violence is bad.
Maybe next time they should tell a story about how the sky is blue.
A serious GTA game doesn't work either, especially if after the sad cutscene you go around causing a rampage with some pistols and a few cars like a complete lunatic (which the player is).
>It's just that you don't really know all that much about the industry to begin with.
>says sotc and silent hill are movie games like last of us
ok buddy.
Nobody said anything about "movie games" child.
Vets made games bade on their worldly experiences which were outside the realm of the internet, social media, other games, etc. Millennials can only make bastardizations because they grew up consuming a constant slump of media. Their worldly experiences are whatever Twittergays and RedditBlack folk tell them, the Arab guy they talk to once a week at the convenience store and protesting about not being allowed to rape kids.
This is happening across all media too btw.
Is the TLOU PC port fixed yet?
I got it for free but I haven't played it yet because of the issues.
i'm tired of "cinematic experiences" and a burden of grind through hours of filler "gameplay" just to push story forward and watch another cutscene as a rewards
Unironically it's the israelites fault
I had fun once.
Newspeak? Never heard of it.
What did the below quote mean? Why is the distinction important? Are they saying they want their game to be unfun but keep you addicted? But it's TLoU2, not some gacha game...
>What did the below quote mean?
What they mean is that there is a wider range of emotional engagements than just gratification, which is what most people imagine when they hear the word "fun". And that is what they aim for.
A game can be frustrating, anxiety-inducing, sad, hopeless etc... and still be a satisfying experience.
Now - some people interpret the term "fun" in a broader sense, as "satisfying in general". But a lot of people don't, a lot of people associate it with only possitive emotions, in case of games usually instant gratification, empowerment and so on.
And that is what the quote works with, the latter definition of the word "fun". They are saying they are not afraid to engage player even through negative emotions.
Watching a man frick Laura Bailey with the body of a man does engage a wide array of negative emotions.
Thanks for the explanation.
The talented western devs left for Japan to hide in Japanese studios.
Overinflated budgets with teams of hundreds of people make it impossible to focus a game's concept towards a specific audience because they need to make back as much money as possible, leading to watered down mass appeal causing the large majority of AAA games to be shallow and samey. Indie is the only place where innovation and niche appeal can consistently thrive.
Video games were invaded by people who don't actually want to develop video games, but rather movies. They don't care for mechanics or such.
That’s what happens when you have to depend on your message because you don’t have any actual talent.
People not cut out for the movie industry moved to videogames where people's standards were lower. It's like being a trans athlete.
Modern gaming: on one end you have the muh art no fun allowed devs who make a cinematic engaging experience preaching you how violence is le bad and it's time to grow up and stop being a dudebro or some other dumb shit. And on the other end you get the game designed keep you playing some repetitive loop for 500000000 hours collecting crap and buying dlc content.
Obesity.
it starts with j, followed by e and ends with w.
It's unironically Sega's fault. They started the whole "games are for adults" movement that led to the shitty edge of the 90s and the current pretension of modern vidya. Never mind that adults had been playing games before then, this fear of seeming like a child and consequent pursuit of faux maturity has led us to this hellhole.
Different game, different developers, different intention, you can't compare them
I've seen this meme spread around by morons like you as if what Druckmann said was a cardinal sin against the fundamentals of videogames. If you have more than two functioning neurons and are not engaging in bad-faith arguments, what he is saying is indisputably right.
Fun denies feelings of frustration, tension, fear and anger and so many others. Dying over and over in Souls games is not fun, but you are engaged. Experiencing the fear and uneasiness of the dark corridors in silent hill games is not fun, but you are engaged. Being constantly beaten down and frustrated by pathologic is not fun but you are engaged. These feelings are downright essential for certain games.
Fun was NEVER a good metric for what makes a videogame good
This meme needs to die already and anyone that shares OPs homosexual opinion needs to get its shit pushed in, slapped and spat on the face like their cheap prostitute mothers.
Nah.
You should read
People understand the concept of fun in different ways. Some see it as a broader category, including any form of satisfying engagement. Others, like you, associate it positive emotions only.
I'm interpreting the concept of fun within the context of OPs moron post. I understand that at the end of the day both quotes are trying to convey the same idea.
Fun has, instinctively, an association with positive feelings, so it only makes sense, when you're in the context of a game developer where you need to clearly define and communicate such ideas, to find a lexicon that better reflects your intentions. That's where Druckmann's "we don't use the word fun" comes from, it's not hard to understand but people here seem to be especially moron when it comes to it.
You're moronic.
have a nice day
>Fun denies feelings of frustration, tension, fear and anger and so many others.
I'm afraid I just don't agree with this at all, especially tension. Tension and challenge is very fun to me in games at the risk of sounding like a pretentious hardcore gamer. I'd go as far to say that failing to find the fun in these emotions that video games can bring out in players is to fundamentally misunderstand what makes a good video game.
>Fun was NEVER a good metric for what makes a videogame good
Sure. God, you suck ass.
gamers voted with their wallets and bought more crap than good games
Should horror games be fun? Not talking about TLoU here, but the genre in general. If a horror game is fun then it has failed. You can be immersed and want to keep playing but you shouldn't be having fun when you should be scared, stressed out and wanting to get through the conflict to the more "boring" safety.
>you should be scared, stressed out and wanting to get through the conflict
Sounds fun.
I don't know precisely, but the push for better and better graphics making games require obscene amounts of vram is nonsense. Games being over 100gb etc etc. It's almost as if publishers have deals with these hardware companies that they need to have shitty optimization in order to sell newer units. I suspect also devs are no longer intelligent or competent coders to boot.
Top is a product, bottom is a propaganda piece.
Neil is just curazy
capitalism
funny thing about both capitalism and communism/socialism is that they both eventually fail due to unchecked israeli subversion.
>Small dev studios who saw success during the early years of the industry became leading corporations.
>Product guys get pushed out of these corporations because they no longer grow the company even larger
>Soulless marketing israelites who don't give a shit about the product get promoted and take over the company
>Soulless asset manager israelites buy up large swathes of stock in these corporations and impose ESG DIE agendas from the top down, further subverting the industry
at least the indie scene has never been better, though lately I see a lot of fake-indie DIE agenda studios popping up releasing woke lgbt pronoun slop. there was quite a lot of it in the recent Next Fest.
Video games used to be aimed at teenagers and young adults, now they are aimed at 40 year old men that were the teenagers and young adults. This is the reality of all the media you used to love, they are now aimed at middle aged people who are embarrassed by tiddies and who gave a midlife crisis if the main character is younger than them.
It was hijacked by graphics gays
Westerners lack an appreciation for beauty
Westerners are racists and cultural terrorists who wouldn't know a good story if it slapped them in the face
The second you have opinions on design decisions you are done enjoying video games.
this
i don't wanna defend druckmann or tlou, but "fun" is too vague and amorphous, but each of these is a bit more clear and focused
that said there is some kind of visceral enjoyment that can't be covered precisely
submission is shit tier and no game should focus on that
also
discovery > fantasy > challenge > narrative >> expression > sensation >> fellowship > submission
lol exactly how I'd imagine a pseud like this to look.
We already have the answer, you dumb FRICKS.
It's always suits. Corporatism, capitalism, greed, profit. We don't need another thread to talk about it again.
They changed from
>We want the player to have fun
Which is giving the player something
to
>We want the game to be engaging.
Which is having a desire the *developers* want, so they're making the game for themselves.
>what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry
jews
>nooooo don't have mature and interesting themes instead of being fun i need my bing bing wahoo marvel funko pops
you can have both moron
>what the frick went wrong with
Jews
the serious answer is israelites
It became an industry instead of a craft.
Fun is unironically a buzzword.
only used by itself in defense of quality. as an aim it's perfectly valid.
An old friend I cut off recently told that The Last of Us 2 is one of the greatest video games ever made. I wrote the first game off as a "sad dad uncharted" when it first came out and I played a bit of it at someone else's house and am wondering if I never gave these games a fair chance.
It's a cover shooter in a zombie apocalypse. The stories of both games are as up their own ass as a video game story could possibly be. You're not missing out on anything.
Thank you. I felt like I was on the moon listening to that guy talk about that game.
Another amusing anecdote about that guy is that he hated the last Eva rebuild because it "hated him for liking the original series" lol
Clout chasing wannabe artist directors, combined with absolute casual normalgays who enable them by wanting to have an experience without having to do video game things in their video games.
Status happened.
Once it stopped being a haven for smelly nerds, it was only a matter of time before normies became the overwhelming majority & sociopaths moved in & took over to fleece the normies. Seems to happen to every subculture these days (at least any that persists for any length of time) and no-one's figured out how to gatekeep effectively.
>Serious answers only: what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry?
Games got more complex and people have higher standards. Simple as.
Wokeness
please explain whats 'woke' about returnal? right now all you're doing is parroting what Fox news says
are we really still acting surprised that a bunch of gay hoity toity yuppies dont like to use the word fun because they insecurely assume it belittles their "craft"
Unironically alternate forms of income. DLC, microtransactions, mobile games, etc.
They don’t just end up being anti-consumer but also kind of anti-developer in the long run because they’re pressured to push games out WAY faster than they used to because they know they’ll make more money through DLC and preorders and shit than they will working on the game until it’s ready.
Unless you’re an indie dev you literally do not have enough time to make a complete game in today’s market
The games industry is the only software industry that's so horribly organized that delays are not only common but expected. Its not just the publishers fault, game devs need to be taught to plan better.
>what the frick went wrong with the videogame industry
It became too profitable
morons kept buying.
>its ok for pathologic devs to say a game can be good without being 'fun'
>it woke and troony and liberal when a western dev does it