Page 4 of 5

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:41 am
by INFINITE561
LukeDude759 wrote:From a forum topic to the whole universe? That escalated quickly.
The universe is full of boring old stupid shits, the human race makes a good example, only a select few are not fucking dumb

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:48 am
by LukeDude759
Image
I think we all know what this implies. Now let's get back on topic, shall we?

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:21 am
by INFINITE561
"Notices it's a cargo train" I hope the prize I won off a contest is OK

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 3:16 pm
by Mestiar
For the people who have played The Binding of Isaac: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BPUdGNqCEAAQxtQ.jpg:large

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:06 pm
by CristianHG
What about Half Life?

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 8:36 am
by INFINITE561
Games these days are getting so repetitive and boring, there is NO creativity in games anymore, it's all realism and life like graphics with realistic physics, games don't need to be almost like real life to be enjoyable, little big planet is the last creative game to ever get released

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 9:16 am
by Ketercheat
asasasa wrote:Games these days are getting so repetitive and boring, there is NO creativity in games anymore, it's all realism and life like graphics with realistic physics, games don't need to be almost like real life to be enjoyable, little big planet is the last creative game to ever get released
Creativity is not fun by itself.

Games don't have to be 100% fun and joy and good times. Hear me out.

A game is an art form. A modicium of communication from the author to you. It can be fun. It can be heartrending. The author can make a game realistic. He can give the game it's own art style. He can do whatever with it.

Creativity by itself isn't fun. It's basically the company giving you the game engine. Games like Mother, Pikmin, and Mario defined an era because of how endearing their stories were. And sure, Littlebigplanet is a thrill, but it is a cheap one.

Spec Ops: The Line made you think about your choices. It wasn't an amazing TPS, but it endeared in the hearts of many gamers not because it was fun, but because it was an experience. Realistic games like Red Dead Redemption and The Last of Us endeared because they were emotional roller coasters and explored many different themes.

The train ride is fun, but without the tracks, the train can't exist. A game can't go anywhere without plot. And while a train can be a cheap wooden train, an uber-realistic iron horse, or a crazy "creative" train powered by chocolate cake, a trackless train won't stay with anyone.

A trackless train says we fucking derailed.

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 3:17 pm
by INFINITE561
Ketercheat wrote:
asasasa wrote:Games these days are getting so repetitive and boring, there is NO creativity in games anymore, it's all realism and life like graphics with realistic physics, games don't need to be almost like real life to be enjoyable, little big planet is the last creative game to ever get released
Creativity is not fun by itself.

Games don't have to be 100% fun and joy and good times. Hear me out.

A game is an art form. A modicium of communication from the author to you. It can be fun. It can be heartrending. The author can make a game realistic. He can give the game it's own art style. He can do whatever with it.

Creativity by itself isn't fun. It's basically the company giving you the game engine. Games like Mother, Pikmin, and Mario defined an era because of how endearing their stories were. And sure, Littlebigplanet is a thrill, but it is a cheap one.

Spec Ops: The Line made you think about your choices. It wasn't an amazing TPS, but it endeared in the hearts of many gamers not because it was fun, but because it was an experience. Realistic games like Red Dead Redemption and The Last of Us endeared because they were emotional roller coasters and explored many different themes.

The train ride is fun, but without the tracks, the train can't exist. A game can't go anywhere without plot. And while a train can be a cheap wooden train, an uber-realistic iron horse, or a crazy "creative" train powered by chocolate cake, a trackless train won't stay with anyone.

A trackless train says we fucking derailed.
I only said games needs creativity again, I wans't implying games need to be creative and not have a plot..."cough" minecraft "cough"

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 3:55 pm
by Mestiar
INFINITE561 wrote:Games these days are getting so repetitive and boring, there is NO creativity in games anymore, it's all realism and life like graphics with realistic physics, games don't need to be almost like real life to be enjoyable, little big planet is the last creative game to ever get released
Yeah right, because games like Dont Starve, Thomas Was Alone, Fez, Go Home, Spelunky, Super Hexagon are not creative at all.

Re: Gaming theories and science

Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 4:23 pm
by INFINITE561
Mestiar wrote:
INFINITE561 wrote:Games these days are getting so repetitive and boring, there is NO creativity in games anymore, it's all realism and life like graphics with realistic physics, games don't need to be almost like real life to be enjoyable, little big planet is the last creative game to ever get released
Yeah right, because games like Dont Starve, Thomas Was Alone, Fez, Go Home, Spelunky, Super Hexagon are not creative at all.
I was talking about main stream games not indie games, and don't starve bored me half to death