Gamer_152's forum posts

#1 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

I loved the Gamecube. Maybe it's because it was the first home console I got properly invested in and discovered a lot of genres of gaming on for the first time but at some level our appreciation of media is always subjective. I have very fond memories of Super Mario Sunshine, Luigi's Mansion, Wind Waker, Mario Kart, and the Pikmin games. Playing those games on that machine was a big part of my gaming experience, even if Microsoft and Sony were in many ways pulling away from Nintendo in terms of console power.

#2 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

I think people have gone right with Hotline Miami, Saint's Row 3 and 4, and Brutal Legend. They have some great collections of music and are some of my favourites out there. If we're allowed to pick rhythm games though I'd have to go with Rock Band 2 or at least one of the Rock Bands. A huge degree of care went into making sure that those games had a large soundtrack which ranged significantly in genre, time period, tone, and difficulty to play, and that every one of their selections was of a really high quality. Their dedication to that goal showed.

#3 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

It can be frustrating to get beaten back by something like that, but providing the game is properly designed and balanced projectile attacks are just as valid as any other kind of attack. There will be a way to reliably dodge or block them, there will be some kind of disadvantage to using the attack, and anyone who tries to just spam on it over and over will be punished because A. Their attack pattern is predictable, and B. If they're just reliant on one thing it's likely that once their repeated use of that single attack is shut down they can't really do much else. That's how it works in basically all of the popular fighting games out there right now. If there's a problem here I think it's less to do with projectile attacks and more to do with fighting games themselves being bad at teaching newcomers how to play beyond just telling them which buttons do what and what the basic mechanics are.

#4 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

Well, when I'm working on Giant Bomb I delete it and moderate the user. Elsewhere I almost always report it and in the case of hate speech I'll sometimes post something in the thread/comments section/whatever highlighting that what the person has said is fucked up, it really depends on if the person seems like they're just trying to get a reaction or whether on some level they think the bullshit they're spewing is okay. I'd actually like to see people reporting this kind of thing a lot more, especially on Giant Bomb. If anything the amount of trouble we've had with this sort of thing has increased recently, but we seem to be getting less reports of it from users than ever. Maybe people have just stopped wanting to wade into comments sections where a minority of users cause trouble for the majority by throwing around awful language and generally being jerks.

I know the standard internet position on this is to ignore it but I think it's really gross to be complicit in this kind of behaviour and stand by while these kinds of things affect other people. This sort of mindset has led to the toxic internet discussion areas we have now. Even in this thread I feel the need to highlight that if you promote harassment and bigotry, or generally use this site as a platform to hurt other people, you will get moderated. Once again I really feel for Carolyn. She doesn't deserve an ounce of the hate she's getting and it's upsetting to once again see there's such a large and often unchecked voice of transphobia in the gaming community. Best of luck to the mods over at Gamespot.

#5 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

This is oddly impressive. I want it.

#6 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

This seemed like it deserved a spot in the next Spotlight.

#7 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

@praab_nz said:

@gamer_152: the question I would pose to you then is whether or not kickstarter should stop pointless or frivolous ones. Why or why not?

I don't think they have a moral obligation to do either, I think customers should be free to spend their money on whatever they want as long as it's not damaging anyone, but I think which path they take really depends on what kind of service they decide they want to be. If they want to put some seal of quality on their site so that you know whatever you're putting your money into there is what they see as a half-decent product or service then they should stop that stuff, but if they want a site where project creators and potential customers have the most freedom and openness in what they create and what they are able to donate to, free of the subjective opinions of Kickstarter themselves then they choose the latter option.

As it is Kickstarter has some degree of limitation, they stop people just putting "fund my life" projects up, and I think there's room for crowdfunding platforms in the world that take both of those approaches, but Kickstarter have set themselves up as far more the latter than the former, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that as long as it's always made clear to customers what the state of the product or service is going to be.

#8 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

I mean the definition of the word "game" can vary a lot, but I'm really not seeing much argument for the idea that MOBAs are not games. You're even describing them as being a combination of three different games while simultaneously arguing that they may not be games. You state that people think of football as a "sport" instead of a game, but most sports are recognisable as games.

Sure, when you say "video game" a MOBA might not be the first thing that comes to a person's mind, but just because something doesn't resemble a typical example of that thing that doesn't mean it does not meet the definition of it. When you ask someone what to think of "a mammal", their first thought is probably not "dolphins", but dolphins are still mammals. In general things are not defined by public perception of them. 99% of the time even if the public has huge misconceptions about things that doesn't affect what categorisations or definitions those things fall into. I also don't believe that MOBAs are miles and miles deeper than any other kind of game out there, but either way I've never seen a definition of the word "game" that required the activity to be a relatively simple one.

MOBAs have win and loss states, metrics of success, allow player agency, give player feedback, include resource management, are participated in voluntarily for fun, and they have resources, objectives, and a limiting context. I'd say they're pretty firmly games. Really, the thing that bothers me most is your implication that it's dismissive to call them games, as though games can't involve any thinking too intelligent, or any degree of serious depth, or anything too dynamic, and that things like DOTA are some sort of elite exception so far above everything else that they transcend the medium. I don't think that's true and I don't think that's how definition works.

#9 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

They're both good and I'm more likely to have mayo if I'm having fish as part of my meal, but on the whole it's ketchup motherfucker.

#10 Posted by Gamer_152 (14097 posts) -

I just can't get mad over it, I don't see any big injustice here. I noticed you mentioned that you are angry about it because you have a conscience but I don't think the view that anyone not outraged by the potato salad Kickstarter must have a total lack of ethics is justifiable. Okay, you believe this is wrong, but why is it wrong?

A common argument in situations like this is that at least that money could go to charity and while there might be a point there and we do all need to remember that if we can spend $20 on a potato salad Kickstarter we're somewhat economically privileged, that doesn't seem to be where most of this anger is coming from, and people spend that kind of money on frivolous items to make themselves amused without this level of outrage all the time.

I've seen people argue that this project is a clear indicator of exactly what's wrong with the Kickstarter model, and if this were a situation where the project creator was falsely advertising or not delivering on promises I'd agree, but that's not what's going on. People are going to spend money on things you consider worthless or dumb, if you're going to criticise Kickstarter for letting people do that then you might as well criticise money as a concept for enabling people to do that. I'm just not seeing the part where this thing specifically is something that deserves serious criticism or is representative of some larger problem.