Thread replies: 8
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: Ultros-ffvi-ios.png (6KB, 128x94px) Image search:
[Google]
6KB, 128x94px
I created a checklist to help me decide if a game is worth playing. A game doesn't need to get a yes for everything on the list, but it sure helps. It's surprising what games actually suck when I've reviewed games like this, but I'm glad I analyzed them.
Anyway, I'm looking for feedback. What could be done to improve this list? Should I even use a checklist to determine if I should bother with a game? I feel like I should avoid games that aren't challenging (most modern games) because they don't stand the test of time, and I feel like I've wasted my money. And I HATE that feeling.
>What were the opportunities and constraints durings its development?
>What words and images do you associate this game with?
>What kind of claims does this game make about itself?
>Do you know WHAT to do?
>Do you know HOW to play?
>Does it give you feedback about your performance?
>Does it have a fail state? If not, it probably sucks.
>Before the challenge, can you prepare?
>Can you succeed if you prepare in different ways?
>Does it REQUIRE you use more than one action?
>Do you have to analyze how actions work and behave?
>Do you have to discriminate when and how you use an action?
>Does the play environment affect the challenge?
>Does it have multiple types of challenges?
>Does anything distract from the core challenge?
>Does it acknowledge influence over your thought patterns?
>Did the game make good on what it claimed to be?
>What could refine this game?
>>
>>3839263
You can't quantify fun, Anon.
Some of the most enjoyment I've had came from games that were total dogshit but which managed to charm me anyhow.
>>
>>3839312
I don't see how that's the case when games are closed systems based on programming.
>>
>>3839312
Also, yeah, you can enjoy shit games, but it's for the wrong reasons. For example, Half Life 1 is supposed to be an action game, but there are a lot of places I ran into where it took me a while to figure out where to go. For this reason, my first couple playthroughs I treated it like a puzzle game.
>>
>>3839328
A game isn't exactly equal to the sum of its parts, though.
There are very few metrics that you can objectively measure here. In the same way that trying to discern which books or movies are 'the best' by using a checklist is futile.
I mean, outside of obvious stuff like "is this game a totally busted glitchy mess". But then again, Ultros' own game has its fair share of bugs and the most braindead combat in a video game... but most of us still love it. I know I do.
>>
>>3839263
>surprising what games actually suck
You mean that you no longer enjoy games that you used to enjoy because they don't meet your ridiculous guidelines? I think you might be on the spectrum.
>>
>>3839263
Are you a Vulcan? Tuvok, is that you? This list seems designed bar you from playing nearly all games, and suck the fun out of the few games it will allow.
>>
Special Snowflake (ID: !!/BFXlBKfzlK)
2017-03-05 04:31:05
Post No.3840175
[Report] Image search: [Google]
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: 718GNVed8FL._SL1500_.jpg (168KB, 1500x844px) Image search:
[Google]
168KB, 1500x844px
>>3839263
Rationalising if something should make you enjoy it or not:
>"Yeah... ok.... uhuh... check this... nope..."
>2 days later
>"THERE! Finished the analysis, game gets 87.3% playability"
>Should definately be fun
>Play 2 hours, not fun at all
>"B...but my list though..."
>Still keep playing, cause list said so
It looks like you have more fun doing lists and comparisons than actually playing. Which is ok i guess, but it sounds like one would start enjoying games less and less because everything has to be structured and logical, efficient and worth the time (isn't every game a waste of time?).
Furthermore, don't you need to play shitty games in between to get a feeling to appreciate the better ones? Can you really formulate shittiness and is it constant? Have you never experienced playing the same game in two seperate instances of you life, and one time it sucks and next time it's amazing? or vice versa?
Personally I'd say use the time analysing a game rather to play it, even a shitty experience is an experience.
...On a sidenote, how can you analyse it correctly anyway if you don't play it? You can't say how a sandwich tastes by looking at it
Thread posts: 8
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2