" @pretender15 said:Diablo 3 isn't even out yet, and all of those games are completely worse than the ones I listed imho. Especially how you said stuff like the new Silent Hill games, SWAT 4, Splinter Cell, and Hitman" @TehFlan said:
" @pretender15: I can't speak for a lot of those games, but there have been plenty of games in the past decade that were at least as good. For example, GoldenEye. I loved it ten years ago, but I played it again over the summer and it feels super clunky. I don't play a lot of FPS's, but even I can see that the genre has evolved. That's true for most genres and franchises. Plenty of other games on your list have been improved upon in the last decade. Starcraft 2 is an awesome game, far better than the original in terms of campaign. Civ V is amazing. MGS3 was my favorite in the series. And while I don't think any action-adventure game in the past decade has been as huge a leap as Ocarina as Time, even Wind Waker and Twilight Princess were just as good as games, not to mention other games in the genre, at least when looked at objectively. Of course, there's no accounting for taste and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but saying gaming as a whole was better in the 90's is way too much of a generalization. And more on-topic: Why Streamers? I'll never understand people's need to label others, but I find it fascinating to see why words are used how they are, and I'm curious as to what inspired you to chose this word in particular. People have already pointed out its flaws, but I'm sure you had your own rationalizations, so what were they? "Everything nowadays is made for the lowest common denominator. Games like dungeon crawlers, survival horror, stealth, tactical shooters, and other such games no longer exist. Everything is created for the lowest common denominator. "The Witcher/ Dragon Age Origins/ or more accurately, Diablo 3. Silent Hill / Amnesia, Splinter Cell / Hitman, ARMA / SWAT 4.
Should I go on?
Edit: Even World of Warcraft could be described as an evolution of the dungeon crawlers of olde.
"
What do you think of this term I coined?
When I hear "streamers" I think of those cheap ribbons sometimes attached to the ends of bike handlebars.
" @pretender15 said:There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years." So long as you people are willing to settle for less (Call of Duty 50), the process of overly standardized bullshit being released on the market will only continue. "But it's not like great games aren't coming out next to these titles. Here's a tip: buy those instead of the mainstream stuff, don't panic so much about feeling the need to label things, and instead focus your attention on playing that rad game you just purchased. Hopefully you'll be too busy having fun to make snarky comments about people who like things that are different to you! "
" "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "No.
It doesn't matter what your "opinions" of the games are. They are still proof that there are good games enjoyed by many people that are being made for all of the genres you seem to think no longer exist. You can't just wish away things you don't like. If we could, this thread would be long gone.
" @buzz_clik said:1 example of each" @pretender15 said:There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years. "" So long as you people are willing to settle for less (Call of Duty 50), the process of overly standardized bullshit being released on the market will only continue. "But it's not like great games aren't coming out next to these titles. Here's a tip: buy those instead of the mainstream stuff, don't panic so much about feeling the need to label things, and instead focus your attention on playing that rad game you just purchased. Hopefully you'll be too busy having fun to make snarky comments about people who like things that are different to you! "
SH=Fatal Frame franchise
Stealth= Assassin's Creed
TS= Modern Warfare.
" @pretender15:It doesn't matter what your "opinions" of the games are. They are still proof that there are good games enjoyed by many people that are being made for all of the genres you seem to think no longer exist. You can't just wish away things you don't like. If we could, this thread would be long gone. "Those genres don't exist anymore.
" There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years. "Dead Space is arguably survival horror, Operation Flashpoint is pretty damn tactical when it comes to shooters, and while stealth isn't my thing I'm sure someone can highlight a title I can't think of.
" @pretender15 said:Lowest common denominator." @buzz_clik said:1 example of each SH=Fatal Frame franchise Stealth= Assassin's Creed TS= Modern Warfare. "" @pretender15 said:There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years. "" So long as you people are willing to settle for less (Call of Duty 50), the process of overly standardized bullshit being released on the market will only continue. "But it's not like great games aren't coming out next to these titles. Here's a tip: buy those instead of the mainstream stuff, don't panic so much about feeling the need to label things, and instead focus your attention on playing that rad game you just purchased. Hopefully you'll be too busy having fun to make snarky comments about people who like things that are different to you! "
" Video games are better now than they were in the 90s. In my opinion, if you think otherwise, it's just nostalgia speaking. Yes, there are a lot of "me too" games out there, but there is also a lot growth and innovation as well. I don't really have a problem with mainstream gamers, so long as they don't profess to know everything about video games simply because they've played Madden, Halo, and Call of Duty. Or, worse, attack smaller, niche games just because they haven't heard of them. The way I see it, I enjoy big, blockbuster movies, and I don't want some film buff turning his nose at me just because I haven't seen the newest indie flick. Just let people enjoy what they enjoy, so long as they don't talk out of their asses or give you shit for enjoying what you enjoy. Mainstream gamers aren't killing the industry, they're making it bigger and bigger which means more games and more chances for innovation. With the development of distribution platforms like Indie Marketplace on Live, it's easier than ever for indie developers to get their games into players' hands, and it's the business from the mainstream that has allowed those frameworks to be built. "Well said, FireBurger. I have to agree with you (and JJWeatherman) on this, for it would be unfair to be catagorized into something derogatory just because you prefer the new generation of games or films over those of the 1990's.
" @SethPhotopoulos said:Explain what you mean by that. You spout it off whenever someone mentions something thats less than 10 years old." @pretender15 said:Lowest common denominator. "" @buzz_clik said:1 example of each SH=Fatal Frame franchise Stealth= Assassin's Creed TS= Modern Warfare. "" @pretender15 said:There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years. "" So long as you people are willing to settle for less (Call of Duty 50), the process of overly standardized bullshit being released on the market will only continue. "But it's not like great games aren't coming out next to these titles. Here's a tip: buy those instead of the mainstream stuff, don't panic so much about feeling the need to label things, and instead focus your attention on playing that rad game you just purchased. Hopefully you'll be too busy having fun to make snarky comments about people who like things that are different to you! "
" @Zimbo said:" @pretender15:It doesn't matter what your "opinions" of the games are. They are still proof that there are good games enjoyed by many people that are being made for all of the genres you seem to think no longer exist. You can't just wish away things you don't like. If we could, this thread would be long gone. "Those genres don't exist anymore. "
The games were made for the lowest common denominator. They dumb things down so "everyone" can play them, while eliminating the fans of the genre. Thus the game becomes just another shooter made for the masses instead of actual fans of the genre." @pretender15 said:
" @SethPhotopoulos said:Explain what you mean by that. You spout it off whenever someone mentions something thats less than 10 years old. "" @pretender15 said:Lowest common denominator. "" @buzz_clik said:1 example of each SH=Fatal Frame franchise Stealth= Assassin's Creed TS= Modern Warfare. "" @pretender15 said:There haven't been any survival horror, stealth, or tactical shooters that have come out in years. "" So long as you people are willing to settle for less (Call of Duty 50), the process of overly standardized bullshit being released on the market will only continue. "But it's not like great games aren't coming out next to these titles. Here's a tip: buy those instead of the mainstream stuff, don't panic so much about feeling the need to label things, and instead focus your attention on playing that rad game you just purchased. Hopefully you'll be too busy having fun to make snarky comments about people who like things that are different to you! "
" @pretender15 said:Haven't played Fatal Frame, but I suggest you look on the Examiner or UGO or somewhere. There was a video explaining how the survival horror genre is dead. And why it's dead." Lowest common denominator. "Fatal Frame is lowest common denominator? Now I know you're trolling. I'd love to hear your shining example of 90's survival horror that eclipses that. Also, your profile pic is Lara Croft. Just saying. "
" "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "Sure. Ok. But why "Streamers"?
" @pretender15 said:main"stream"" "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "Sure. Ok. But why "Streamers"? "
It sounds too nice. Streamers are great at parties." @Ragdrazi said:
" @pretender15 said:main"stream" "" "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "Sure. Ok. But why "Streamers"? "
I prefer "zombies".
Actually, truth is I prefer "video game hipsters."
" Haven't played Fatal Frame, but I suggest you look on the Examiner or UGO or somewhere. There was a video explaining how the survival horror genre is dead. And why it's dead. "Ohhh, your opinion's based on what other people have said, not on your own self-crafted thoughts - gotcha. And when you don't have a handy ready-made opinion about a topic (such as Fatal Frame) you panic and chuck buzzwords at it to make it look like you know what you're talking about. Not really cool.
Alright, I'm going to give another reasoned, warranted response to your insanity so that you can't just claim that people were only being dicks to you because they were console fanboys or whatever." "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "
Based off of what I read in your first post, and subsequent posts, it seems fair to assume that you're using streamers as a derogatory term therefore it seems the burden on you is to prove why it is that people who play games like MW2 are worse than everyone else.
I have a few responses here.
1) regarding the "sub-culture, or niches" charge.
This attack is nonsensical, even if we can divide games into sub-cultures, then by definition not everyone can be in them. Therefore it's foolish to blame someone for being a necessary product of unnecessary categorization that you engage in. By trying to dissect gaming in this manner you've created what you claim to hate.
2) Not caring about innovation.
I would argue that all of them do, and that you have no evidence to suggest that they don't. People do take notice of changes, maybe they aren't entirely forming their buying decisions off of what is innovating, but the fact is that people still buy new games, and still appreciate changes. You may ask for proof of my point, to which I would respond, where is your proof?
Another response that's important to make here is that you fail to prove the value of innovation in every game. Sure the changes between CoD4 MW2 and Blops weren't massive, but you fail to show why that's on face bad. Obviously some innovation is good, and that is occurring in the industry, but it's just as fine that some games aren't providing constant massive innovation.
3) regarding mainstream/lowest common denominator.
The whole lowest common denominator argument rests on the unfounded assumption that you are smarter or in some way better than the target of the phrase. Which you fail to prove, given that we have no reason to believe that you're better than them (hell you could actually be the lowest common denominator) then we have no reason to apply this term to anyone, as we lack the proper metric to apply it. These kind of value judgement are dumb for reasons like this.
As for "mainstream" being bad. Once again you fail to prove WHY it's bad. Given that game development is still diversified, even more so now in some sense (the internet is really enabling indie devs) how is having games that market themselves for mass appeal bad? It's not like it harms the sales of innovative games, since you said yourself that people who buy mainstream don't like innovation, so therefore they would just be an unused market. (uh oh, contradiction!)
Also regarding the claim that survival horror is dead? Penumbra would beg to differ.
" @pretender15 said:I wasn't saying that. I know the survival horror genre is dead. So do other Resident Evil and survival horror fans. I'm just saying I suggest you look up that video." Haven't played Fatal Frame, but I suggest you look on the Examiner or UGO or somewhere. There was a video explaining how the survival horror genre is dead. And why it's dead. "Ohhh, your opinion's based on what other people have said, not on your own self-crafted thoughts - gotcha. And when you don't have a handy ready-made opinion about a topic (such as Fatal Frame) you panic and chuck buzzwords at it to make it look like you know what you're talking about. Not really cool. "
" @pretender15 said:Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot." "streamers"To refer to all of the mainstream people who are obsessed with Modern Warfare 2 and think that video games are better now than they were in the 90s. You know, people who don't realize that companies purposely make games for the lowest common denominator. And other people who are strictly into mainstream stuff, and don't care about innovation, sub-culture, or niches. Oh and of course, they are all graphics whores. "Alright, I'm going to give another reasoned, warranted response to your insanity so that you can't just claim that people were only being dicks to you because they were console fanboys or whatever. Based off of what I read in your first post, and subsequent posts, it seems fair to assume that you're using streamers as a derogatory term therefore it seems the burden on you is to prove why it is that people who play games like MW2 are worse than everyone else. I have a few responses here. 1) regarding the "sub-culture, or niches" charge. This attack is nonsensical, even if we can divide games into sub-cultures, then by definition not everyone can be in them. Therefore it's foolish to blame someone for being a necessary product of unnecessary categorization that you engage in. By trying to dissect gaming in this manner you've created what you claim to hate. 2) Not caring about innovation. I would argue that all of them do, and that you have no evidence to suggest that they don't. People do take notice of changes, maybe they aren't entirely forming their buying decisions off of what is innovating, but the fact is that people still buy new games, and still appreciate changes. You may ask for proof of my point, to which I would respond, where is your proof? Another response that's important to make here is that you fail to prove the value of innovation in every game. Sure the changes between CoD4 MW2 and Blops weren't massive, but you fail to show why that's on face bad. Obviously some innovation is good, and that is occurring in the industry, but it's just as fine that some games aren't providing constant massive innovation. 3) regarding mainstream/lowest common denominator. The whole lowest common denominator argument rests on the unfounded assumption that you are smarter or in some way better than the target of the phrase. Which you fail to prove, given that we have no reason to believe that you're better than them (hell you could actually be the lowest common denominator) then we have no reason to apply this term to anyone, as we lack the proper metric to apply it. These kind of value judgement are dumb for reasons like this. As for "mainstream" being bad. Once again you fail to prove WHY it's bad. Given that game development is still diversified, even more so now in some sense (the internet is really enabling indie devs) how is having games that market themselves for mass appeal bad? It's not like it harms the sales of innovative games, since you said yourself that people who buy mainstream don't like innovation, so therefore they would just be an unused market. (uh oh, contradiction!) "
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action?
And yet, it is rightly called a golden age." @pretender15 said:
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "
There is this hilariously Trolling 101 quality to this thread. When do people get upset. When they secretly know that at least some element of what you are saying is true. Truth is a painful thing, and people don't like it.
" @buzz_clik said:No, I get upset because someone is trying to use an argument that is not only fallacious, but contains an internal contradiction, in order to try and feel better than someone else. That was the whole point of my post.And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. There is this hilariously Trolling 101 quality to this thread. When do people get upset. When they secretly know that at least some element of what you are saying is true. Truth is a painful thing, and people don't like it. "" @pretender15 said:
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "
" @buzz_clik: Probably not, he was 8 when the 90's ended, so he's only gone back and played the good games. So no duh the generation looks great that way. "Exactly. I lived through the entire 90s. There were plenty of shitty games I remember playing. That generation really is no different than this one. Albeit there's slightly more shovelware on the Wii.
@pwnasaurus said:
" @PrivateIronTFU: yes the prisoner is awesome! and yea hipsters are unfortunate part of our world. "Like cancer.
" @buzz_clik said:I don't disagree that it was a great time to be a gamer, but it's rot to portray it like it was a time of pure innovation with every cart and disc giving us a shiny new mindblowing idea." Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. "
" @Ragdrazi said:That's funny. I thought they presented a term to define a sort of person. Seems to me, the arguments are being presented by the other side, to show why they don't think this person should use this term. And then also rwarg." @buzz_clik said:No, I get upset because someone is trying to use an argument that is not only fallacious, but contains an internal contradiction, in order to try and feel better than someone else. That was the whole point of my post. "And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. There is this hilariously Trolling 101 quality to this thread. When do people get upset. When they secretly know that at least some element of what you are saying is true. Truth is a painful thing, and people don't like it. "" @pretender15 said:
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "
The nineties is correctly thought of as a golden age. A time of great innovation. Currently, it is well observed that designers are turning against innovation in pursuit of profit. There are going to be those happy with that situational, and those unhappy. And that's the end of that thread.
" @buzz_clik said:The only reason your saying that is because YOU haven't played one since the "olden" days. Penumbra, Amnesia, Siren, Fatal Frame, Shattered Memories, etc are surival horror games. Like within the past 5 years too." @pretender15 said:I wasn't saying that. I know the survival horror genre is dead. So do other Resident Evil and survival horror fans. I'm just saying I suggest you look up that video. "" Haven't played Fatal Frame, but I suggest you look on the Examiner or UGO or somewhere. There was a video explaining how the survival horror genre is dead. And why it's dead. "Ohhh, your opinion's based on what other people have said, not on your own self-crafted thoughts - gotcha. And when you don't have a handy ready-made opinion about a topic (such as Fatal Frame) you panic and chuck buzzwords at it to make it look like you know what you're talking about. Not really cool. "
Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "And I'm surprised your still here or this thread is still going when the only real fanboy in this thread is you.
" @Ragdrazi said:Nothing can be without its flaws. To point to cracks in the Mona Lisa and call it trash would be idiotic. Not saying it's a comparable situation, but you get my point." @buzz_clik said:I don't disagree that it was a great time to be a gamer, but it's rot to portray it like it was a time of pure innovation with every cart and disc giving us a shiny new mindblowing idea. "" Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. "
" @beej said:And my whole first post was about how you 1) can't do that really. and 2) it's not being done properly here." @Ragdrazi said:That's funny. I thought they presented a term to define a sort of person. Seems to me, the arguments are being presented by the other side, to show why they don't think this person should use this term. And then also rwarg. The nineties is correctly thought of as a golden age. A time of great innovation. Currently, it is well observed that designers are turning against innovation in pursuit of profit. There are going to be those happy with that situational, and those unhappy. And that's the end of that thread. "" @buzz_clik said:No, I get upset because someone is trying to use an argument that is not only fallacious, but contains an internal contradiction, in order to try and feel better than someone else. That was the whole point of my post. "And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. There is this hilariously Trolling 101 quality to this thread. When do people get upset. When they secretly know that at least some element of what you are saying is true. Truth is a painful thing, and people don't like it. "" @pretender15 said:
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "
" @Ragdrazi said:I'm sorry. Your reply doesn't seem to have had any meaningful correlation with mine. 1. Cannot do what really? 2. Cannot do what properly here?" @beej said:And my whole first post was about how you 1) can't do that really. and 2) it's not being done properly here. "" @Ragdrazi said:That's funny. I thought they presented a term to define a sort of person. Seems to me, the arguments are being presented by the other side, to show why they don't think this person should use this term. And then also rwarg. The nineties is correctly thought of as a golden age. A time of great innovation. Currently, it is well observed that designers are turning against innovation in pursuit of profit. There are going to be those happy with that situational, and those unhappy. And that's the end of that thread. "" @buzz_clik said:No, I get upset because someone is trying to use an argument that is not only fallacious, but contains an internal contradiction, in order to try and feel better than someone else. That was the whole point of my post. "And yet, it is rightly called a golden age. There is this hilariously Trolling 101 quality to this thread. When do people get upset. When they secretly know that at least some element of what you are saying is true. Truth is a painful thing, and people don't like it. "" @pretender15 said:
" Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. "Do you know how many also-ran, 4th-rate, me-too, bandwagon-jumping products came out in the 90s? How many mascot-driven cutesy platformers were shat out? How many shonky 3D romps made by companies out for a slice of the action? "
Cannot make a term? Sure you can. Cannot do that properly here? Sure you can.
" Nothing can be without its flaws. To point to cracks in the Mona Lisa and call it trash would be idiotic. Not saying it's a comparable situation, but you get my point. "The flaws of the 90s are the same flaws of today: there are some truly great and inspiring games and ideas, and there's also a glut of product that is simply out to make money.
Gaming isn't being diversified. It's being anti-diversified. Every real gamer can see it, I'm not sure why the console fan boys cannot. ""Real gamers". Goddammit.
Look, I know you don't understand this now, but maybe, in time, you can get your head away from this nonsense, and if you look back, you'll realize how stupid even using a term like that is.
Get over yourself, get out of the fake subculture you think you're part of, and stop acting like a fool.
Constantly saying 'Lowest Common Denominator' to people who disagree with you doesn't seem to be getting any sort of point across. Shocker.
I just made up a term: "Post-Higinbotham-tards"
It applies to people who have enjoyed any video game since 1958's Tennis for Two.
I think you should separate yourself from us. We lowest common denominator folk do not deserve to have our dumb lowest common denominator minds in the presence of your superior intellect. Our mass of console kiddie sheeple is causing trouble for you real gamers. We should not be wasting your time forcing you to yell at us, because we are being so dumb and lowest common denominator that you must attempt to reach us through condescending insults. Lowest common denominator.
And if you act like this elsewhere, well, you'll isolate yourself soon enough.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment