@geraltitude said:
VGCW should be in the wiki, for the record.
No, it really shouldn't be. If we added something like VGCW to the wiki, we'd essentially be opening it up to anything loosely associated with one or more games (Salty Bet, Starcraft Leagues, Youtube machinima channels, etc.)
Well, I disagree. I think it's a shame VGCW, Salty Bet and more aren't in the wiki. Those aren't really loose "things". But I also think that some total conversion mods deserve to be added to. I always thought the Wiki was for all things games, not some idea of the Objective List of True Video Game Information. Fair enough though. It's not my website. I guess I'm just fundamentally thinking of the wiki in an incorrect way. Which maybe explains why I constantly look at it wondering Why isn't X or Y concept here?
@geraltitude said:
@demoskinos: @fredchuckdave: @mb: I know subjectivity is the main problem with this concept but please bear in mind:
This concept is not to list and name games/mechanics/moments where something is objectively Cheap/Cheesy. What is cheap is subjective. That there is such a thing as cheapness is inarguable.
So about the wiki FAQ: it says the concept should not be open to subjectivity, which means to deny this concept you would be saying there is literally no such thing as game design ever being cheap, imbalanced or exploitable.And like MB pointed out, the SNK page already has factual, "scientific" examples of cheapness.
I struggle to follow your logic here, and you seem to be contradicting yourself. We aren't saying that games can't be cheap or poorly balanced, but rather that it isn't a discrete and objective property of a game. It's open to a ton of subjectivity, and there is far too much room to debate what games would be associated with this concept. As it states in the wiki rules, that means it isn't appropriate for a concept page.
I still feel y'all aren't understanding me. Could be my fault though. Here, I will try again.
The concept of Cheapness and Cheese exists in videogame culture and has been used by gamers to describe many situations, abilities, game environments, etc. Specific examples that come up often include Cheese Tactics in StarCraft II (see above link), Auto-Scrolling Levels, and the SNK Boss Syndrome. While it's near impossible to factually point out what is and isn't cheap due to the subjective nature of games and competition, many gamers use this term to describe their feelings towards certain game mechanics. In games development, designers often work to patch out cheap solutions to enemies and situations. Examples of patches that significantly changed games to correct cheapness include: Star Command's removal of the Coin System, the debuffing of Sagat's uppercut in SFIV and examples, examples, examples.
Is it difficult to say which games are Cheap? Yes. And which elements of the game are cheap? Yes. Does the concept of Cheapnesss exist? Yes.
If you were going to explain everything about videogame culture, you would at one point need to stop to explain the idea of cheapness and cheesing. I can't see how you can argue that. And if you have to explain the idea of cheapness to talk about games... seems important enough to be a three sentence concept on Giant Bomb.
Log in to comment