>it's fun is this a decent argument to explain why

>fun
It's about the FPSs fag

>>385007285
Yes, because everything about games is subjective.
Why the fuck do you care? I doubt anybody would bother to make a thread to discuss this.

>>385007285
I guess, but it's not really useful to just say "it's fun." People with brain cells are able to identify specific reasons why they're having fun.

>>385007285
Yes and the inverse is true. a game that has good aspects but has shit gameplay is a bad game.

>>385007769
>everything about games is subjective
this is wrong

>>385008039
a game can have shit gameplay and still be fun though

It's the only argument that matters.

>>385007285
yes

Yes, fun is important, but fun can be different for everyone.

Fun isn't neccesarily bing bing wahoo

File: 1497503088336.png (12KB, 243x243px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 243x243px

It's not an argument for why the game's good but it's a feeling the player had when playing the game that's being reviewed.

>>385007285
Yeah. Games are and always will be, entertainment, some can transcend as an art form, some can't. Although fun is relative. But his statement is absolutely right.

>>385008093
But then it would be like watching a bad movie. It isn't necessarily fun to watch, just fun to make fun of.

>>385007285
It's thonly actual argument for a good game. It it's:
>frustrating
>time-wasting
>lazy difficulty
>graphics whoring

Then it's not a good game. And using any of those as "arguments" towards what they believe is a good game is just degeneracy at it's finest.

>>385007285
the problem is that "fun" can be achieved with flappy bird, so a game can be fun by doing pretty much nothing impressive and using what already works
new, interesting, thoughtful, creative game mechanics are more notable than fun
but if your game is boring to play, is not fun, people will drop it

>>385007285
shit taste people can find a lot of shitty things fun

so no , describe why its fun, build your opinion with your experience ... saying its "fun" tell me as much as "cool experience"

>>385007285
Fun doesnt always equal a good game. You can have fun with a shitty game like bad rats but it doesnt mean its good

>>385007285
It's a decent argument as to why you enjoyed a game. Remember, calling something "fun" isn't an explanation even on subjective merits. Even if the explanation is subjective, you can always describe -why- you found something fun.

>>385007285
>video games are art
>art is subjective

yes

>>385007285
It's not a good argument on if a game is good or not, but it's a fine reason for playing a game. A game can be fun, but not that good, yet still worth playing for a little bit. Alternatively, a game can be polished and well made with a good story, but if it's not fun at all, is it really worth playing?

>>385007285
Well, he said fun AND challenging.

>>385011417
Flappy Bird is repetitive, thus not fun.
It's that simple.

>>385007285

Sure.
But not the artificial nu-fun Nintendo delivers.

"Fun" is literally the only reason you need to enjoy a game. It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks if you have fun with it. On the other hand, it by itself is not extremely useful for explaining why a game is good, or why someone else might enjoy it.

>>385007285

Its a good reason to explain why someone likes a game. Games can have shitty graphics, poor story, bad voice acting, suffer from slowdown or run at sub optimal resolutions/frame rates but still be enjoyable because they are simply fun to play. I fucking loved playing Grandia Xtreme and Chaos Legion for example, and had tons of fun, but I wouldn't really call them "good" games.

Fun is just a buzzword when you can't actually think of any real reasons as to why the game is good, don't use it.

>>385007285
Saying something is 'fun' isn't bad per se, but it's meaningless in discussing the merits of a thing if you can't then explain what makes it fun. "It's fun because" always leads to a better discussion than "but it's fun."

File: 1499676777973.png (525KB, 1040x1040px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 1040x1040px

>>385011951
Art is objective on the realization, artstye, materials etc
Art is a middle ground on reception: the artist wants to express the struggle of middle eastern fighters and you see just a fucking apple
Arti is subjective on the pleasure: you can enjoy art (music, picture, statues) without culture or cultural background.

Tldr: reggie is right and has said something really toughtful.

File: this.png (12KB, 924x744px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 924x744px

>>385012685
This. Sometimes a game is fun, but you don't really know why. However, this is due to more you not realizing/finding out the reasons you find it fun rather than some magical intangible quality that makes it fun.

>>385007769
>Game crashes every other time you load it, uses 105% of your CPU and chugs along at 5 frames per minute
>"But it's all subjective!"

>>385007285
>is this a decent argument to explain why a game is good?
No, unless you either had in the past, or will directly after establish some form of definition of fun that has validity or relevance to others.

Otherwise, "it's fun" is only informing your audience that YOU ENJOYED it.
It does not actually tell them anything about the game, or give them meaningful reasoning why they would enjoy it, or why it should be held in high regard.

People really need to differenciate between reports on YOURSELF and how you feel after playing the game, and actual commentary on the GAME ITSELF.
"It's fun" is not only basically meaningless and completely uninformative all together, but it also falls firmly in former category, and says nothing about the latter.
If you just want to let other people know how you feel about the game - maybe because they know you already and know your taste and maybe shared it, maybe because they are your friends and are curious about you, maybe because you are a delusion moron and think strangers care about what you think - you can say "it's fun" just fine.

But if you actually want to make any kind of claim that would hold any kind of relevance to people who don't really care about you personally, it's a completely worthless statement.

>>385007769
>everything about games is subjective.
shut up brainlet

>>385007285
You have to explain why you think the game is fun.

File: Kevin Bayliss - Creator of Krystal.jpg (20KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 210x240px

>furbait
is this a decent argument to explain why a female character should be excluded from an animal-based series?

>>385014067
why yes, of course.

Star Fox should be only about gay tensions and a love triangle with Wolf, Falco, and Fox.

hence why the dogfight banter should be regarded highly in the games.

>>385007285

People can enjoy a bad game if the bad game in question is enjoyable. It's why people like things like Mass Effect.

>>385007285
>>it's fun

This is a statement, not an argument.

>>385014067
kev, hurry up and do your dream project to salvage Dinosaur Planet.

>>385014321
or Sonic 06
or Brawl
or any Fire Emblem game

>>385007285
NO because it's not fun if you're not playing it at 60fps on a massive desktop "gayming rig" that looks like an autistic spaceship with glowing neon lights everywhere

>>385015220
Wow. Where the fuck did that come from?

>>385007285
If a game entertains you it has fulfilled its purpose. So yeah, its a decent argument

>>385008069
The only objective fact about video games is that they're toys for children.

>>385007285
It's an important criteria for a successful game
Measurement of "fun" is highly subjective though, so it's only good to explain to yourself why it is good, not to others.

>>385007285
>why a game is good?
No, but it is a valid argument as to why you play the game.

>>385012685
>"It's fun because" always leads to a better discussion than "but it's fun."
The most constructive sentence I've read on /v/ all all month

File: james franco.gif (4MB, 415x272px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 415x272px

Good gameplay = Good Game