logo Sign In

Video Games - a general discussion thread — Page 114

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Originally posted by: TheCassidy

you're trying to prove your point with games that are either twitch reflex or Sports games.


The key word there being games. Are they not video games? Are they now somehow classified as another form of entertainment simply because you have said so.


This post made me laugh. That would be fine but I was drinking milk and now my nose burns. Why does this bother you so much ghost? You think video games don't need a story, fair enough, several of us happen to disagree with you. Why do you feel the necessity to fight it out? Do you really have something to prove? Your above quoted "games" argument is funny, because you are skirting the comment Cassidy made. You listed all the kind of games that don't need extra back story, sports games come with a story built in, John Madden is a real man, as are the players in the game. There is your story, pretty automatic. And like Cassidy said, tetris is in the reflex/puzzle genre, most games are putting you into another world, tetris is just a game plain and simple. There is a big difference between checkers and Halo. Halo wouldn't make any sense without a story line, and checker would be retarded if you tried to make a story line. You are using fool's logic to try to prove your point. You don't have to defend your point of view, you have every right to it. Why are you being so antagonistic? Every time somebody post a point of view that disagrees with yours you start littering your posts with antagonistic remarks. I know you are going to say that you were not being antagonistic so I will just give a few quotes:

"Give me a break, were discussing video games you might wanna get that checked out if your being even slightly serious."

"if people get emotional over video games IMO thats a little nutty" (If IMO means "in my humble opinion", it sure as hell doesn't seem humble to me.)

Just to list a couple.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
Another point to ponder, Online gaming, a very prominent and used way to play newer games anymore, and the most popular ones involve one pointing at another and firing, yet people do it for endless hours, because its great fun and the mode of game play is interesting. I guess all those people missed the part when a game doesn't have a story it no longer can be consider a game.



That's one of the main reasons why I DON'T play online games, because they have no story. Without one, it's just kinda boring.

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Post link
My favorite system of all time is the Atari 2600, and you would be hard pressed to find a game made for it that had any sort of story in it, besides those based on pre-existing stories, such as movies or something similar. Two of my favorite games of all time are Space Invaders and Pac-Man, and these have little to no story. Perhaps today people think these games are repetitive and dull, but I still like them. But most of the modern games need stories, with some exceptions.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: C3PX
Why does this bother you so much ghost?

Do I seem overly bothered or do you like to make assumptions with no basis. It’s called Human discourse it happens all the time and very often.


Originally posted by: C3PX
You think video games don't need a story, fair enough, several of us happen to disagree with you.

See right there you show you understand people having different opinions however its seems you fail to realize these differences in opinions cause people to discuss and debate, which is what is going on

Originally posted by: C3PX
Why do you feel the necessity to fight it out?


There would actually be no need to "fight" anything out unless there was another party with a different opinion, so you are a just as much a part of this too.


Originally posted by: C3PX
Do you really have something to prove?

The same question could be asked to you, you are continuing this as much as me.


Originally posted by: C3PX
You listed all the kind of games that don't need extra back story, sports games come with a story built in, John Madden is a real man, as are the players in the game. There is your story, pretty automatic.


I have to say that is one silliest things I have ever heard. There is still no story to the game. Simply stating John Madden is a Man and so are the players does not suddenly create a story, the game, itself, is telling no story.

Here’s a piece of your “airtight” logic, you explain one aspect of sports (which failed to go anywhere), now how does that encompass racing games, the cars now have stories, the faceless drivers suddenly have back stories?


Originally posted by: C3PX
And like Cassidy said, tetris is in the reflex/puzzle genre, most games are putting you into another world, tetris is just a game plain and simple. There is a big difference between checkers and Halo. Halo wouldn't make any sense without a story line, and checker would be retarded if you tried to make a story line.


Again it’s really simple it’s still a video game, there’s no reason to try and use semantics to classify games, plain and simple it’s a video game.


Originally posted by: C3PX
You are using fool's logic to try to prove your point. You don't have to defend your point of view, you have every right to it. Why are you being so antagonistic? Every time somebody post a point of view that disagrees with yours you start littering your posts with antagonistic remarks. I know you are going to say that you were not being antagonistic so I will just give a few quotes:


And your being an antagonist (an integral part of a good story), you may have known about that if you watched good story’s instead of video game story’s

If I'm not always politically correct, oh well. You actually stated you were doing the same thing as me with the grandfather thing, but now you want point fingers. “Whose the more foolish the fool or the fool who follows him?”

"The Empire can't stop us now..now its our turn" -Luke-

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup

I'm sorry, I didn't intend to "perch" to you and "cruse" at you.

You called me nutty, and if I can't make a lighthearted reply to that then you're the one who clearly has issues.


Wait you get emotional over video games HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Let me catch my breath...

See the problem lies in the whole "I told You , you were nutty." Never was said, indirectly I called you nutty. Your fallacies were two fold, directly telling me "Fuck you" and believing "fuck you" is a lighthearted reply to someone you don't know, these are fairly obvious differences for someone who has completed 8th grade

.....emotional over games hahahah, that's too much

"The Empire can't stop us now..now its our turn" -Luke-

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26


And your being an antagonist (an integral part of a good story), you may have known about that if you watched good story’s instead of video game story’s


The above sentence makes very little sense, I said you are being antagonistic, which is true enough. And with the whole "you may have known about that if you watched good stories instead of video game stories" you seem to be continuing the trend. This has shit to do with political correctness, I have no idea why you even bring up the issue of PC. Also I know people like to debate, I happen to enjoy it within reason. But when the other person is being a total dick all the fun drains out quickly. You're just insulting everyone. There is no debate here anyway, we think story is an essential part of most games (with some exceptions like checkers or tetris) and you think we are a bunch of stupid gits for liking any story that is part of a video game. Are we going to convince you to agree with us? Yeah right! And there is not a chance of you convincing us to believe all video game stories are crap. So I see no point in debating this. The only thing it would accomplish is allowing you to continue acting like a dick and insulting us some more.




"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
Is it over? Can we talk about gaming stuff in peace now?

Please?

Anybody heard that Capcom's Clover Studio, which was disbanned late last year, has had some of it's major designers reorganize as a new company called "Seeds"? I hope good things come of this.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Nanner Split


That's one of the main reasons why I DON'T play online games, because they have no story. Without one, it's just kinda boring.


Eh, that's a pretty retarded reason if you ask me, games can still be pretty fun without a story and I know for a fact that you are a fan of Raving Rabbids and the Wario-Ware games and neither of those have stories. So you, good sir have obviously lost possession of your Yiddish Cup!

Plus, Battletoads (the best game ever) didn't have much of a story...

"Who am I supposed to build ramps for? Who am I supposed to build ramps for now?!"
Author
Time
Post link
Okay, I'm briefly weighing in:

Do all video games have or require a story? No.
Can video game narratives be compelling and integral to certain games? I certainly believe so.

That's all I have to say.

And Chalts, tell me more. I haven't really kept up with Capcom in several years, so I don't even know about Clover Studio to begin with.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape

And Chalts, tell me more. I haven't really kept up with Capcom in several years, so I don't even know about Clover Studio to begin with.


Clover Studio was created earlier this century. They're responsible for the Viewtiful Joe series and IGN's Game of the Year 2006 Okami. Basically, they're known for making great unconventional games whereas Capcom as a whole is known for a few good games and a bunch of crappy Megaman Sequels. And of course, it's Clover that gets the axe.

Anyway, three of Clover's major developers reformed a new studio not affiliated with Capcom called Seeds. Gamespot has an article here

4

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: C3PX

The above sentence makes very little sense, I said you are being antagonistic, which is true enough. And with the whole "you may have known about that if you watched good stories instead of video game stories" you seem to be continuing the trend. This has shit to do with political correctness, I have no idea why you even bring up the issue of PC. Also I know people like to debate, I happen to enjoy it within reason. But when the other person is being a total dick all the fun drains out quickly. You're just insulting everyone. There is no debate here anyway, we think story is an essential part of most games (with some exceptions like checkers or tetris) and you think we are a bunch of stupid gits for liking any story that is part of a video game. Are we going to convince you to agree with us? Yeah right! And there is not a chance of you convincing us to believe all video game stories are crap. So I see no point in debating this.



It was a joke, the obvious tongue smiley apparently didn't give that away. You seem to be the one who needs to calm down now. If you didn't get up in arms over it you would realize I was using a term that explains the opposition in a story (attempting to keep with the whole story issue) and used it in our trivial debate, you would be the antagonist for me. I didn't now that bringing up something about being politically correct would get you that flustered, its really not that huge a deal. Well... take care





"The Empire can't stop us now..now its our turn" -Luke-

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Didn't the Sword Quest games have a story?


I guess they did, sort of. They each came with a comic book that had a story. The actual game was a puzzle with tasks to perform. Once you performed a task, and left the right items in the right rooms, the game would give you a clue that would tie back to the comic book, and finally you were to come up with a sentence that was the 'solution' to the game. So I don't know if that counts or not. I don't think about Sword Quest much because the games themselves were truly awful and some of the worst games ever made.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Wait you get emotional over video games HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Let me catch my breath...

See the problem lies in the whole "I told You , you were nutty." Never was said, indirectly I called you nutty. Your fallacies were two fold, directly telling me "Fuck you" and believing "fuck you" is a lighthearted reply to someone you don't know, these are fairly obvious differences for someone who has completed 8th grade

.....emotional over games hahahah, that's too much


Strange. On the one hand you act as if your fragile mind cannot withstand the barrage of a single strong word (because it clearly offends your oversensitive, womanly understanding of propriety), but then on the other hand you insult people's intelligence and emotional sanity at the merest drop of a hat. You're curiously hypocritical and, as a result, I still don't feel sorry for you. The naughty word may have hurt your feelings, but I think you need to grow thicker skin.

As for what you said about "getting emotional over video games" and being "nutty," I stated no logical fallacies in response to that. With the normal, logical understanding of your statement, you clearly communicated that people who "get" emotions about a games are being "nutty" in your "opinion." As you said, you "indirectly" called me nutty. Nowhere did I discuss the "direct" or "indirect" nature of your words; therefore, you make a clear logical fallacy when you accuse me of such. (Is this making sense to you?)

I didn't say "fuck you" by itself, nor do I believe "fuck you" to be lighthearted on its own (in general). In fact, you're the one making another logical fallacy by stating that I believed or said that. If you actually go back and look, you will see that I said, "Fuck you too." This can easily be understood as lighthearted by virtue of the fact that you never said "fuck you" first (and thus my reply was silly), and because I was simultaneously admitting that I got emotional when Aeris died with the same statement (which is, as you have noted, quite humorous all by itself). I suppose that I'm sorry that you're currently plagued with irrational anger and sensitivity (going through your period?), but I believe that if you had been thinking clearly you would not have misunderstood me in the way that you did.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
All right kids, those that like games for their stories on one side of the gym, and those that like to pick-up-and-play twitch reflex on the other.

What we get out of them may be different, but ultimately we're gamers and we have enough people in the World trying to bring us down without being at each others' throats. We should be sticking together and respecting each others' opinions.

Fair enough?
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: TheCassidy
All right kids, those that like games for their stories on one side of the gym, and those that like to pick-up-and-play twitch reflex on the other.

What we get out of them may be different, but ultimately we're gamers and we have enough people in the World trying to bring us down without being at each others' throats. We should be sticking together and respecting each others' opinions.

Fair enough?


I gueeess . . . .



In all seriousness, you do seem like a generally okay guy, GhostAlpha, so I'll just say that I honestly had no intention to offend you with the word "fuck" (at least not too much).

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup



In all seriousness, you do seem like a generally okay guy, GhostAlpha, so I'll just say that I honestly had no intention to offend you with the word "fuck" (at least not too much).


Its cool man, No hard feelings

.....Game On ya Fuck

"The Empire can't stop us now..now its our turn" -Luke-

Author
Time
Post link
Alright this is just for fun now, I couldn't pass this up. Sorry to prolong this guys, maybe you'll learn something, that I'm nuts hahah. You already know that though
I made it like it should have been from the start, no personal attacks, I tired to, sorry if there are any Tip.

Originally posted by: Tiptup

As for what you said about "getting emotional over video games" and being "nutty," I stated no logical fallacies in response to that. With the normal, logical understanding of your statement, you clearly communicated that people who "get" emotions about a games are being "nutty" in your "opinion." As you said, you "indirectly" called me nutty. Nowhere did I discuss the "direct" or "indirect" nature of your words; therefore, you make a clear logical fallacy when you accuse me of such. (Is this making sense to you?)


Direct and Indirect statements are implied.

Originally posted by: Tiptup

I didn't say "fuck you" by itself, nor do I believe "fuck you" to be lighthearted on its own


You stated that “if I cant make a lighthearted reply” which was “Fuck you too”

The “too” at the end does not make it any less of a direct statement to the person you replied to. The “too,” simply says I am saying Fuck you, to you (me) since something you (I) said got to me (you).

Originally posted by: Tiptup

(in general). In fact, you're the one making another logical fallacy by stating that I believed or said that.



You did say that though, its right there (above). By stating so, this also implies you believe it as well. You believe a response of “Fuck you too” to be lighthearted otherwise you would not have said it and then tagged it as a lighthearted response.

Originally posted by: Tiptup

If you actually go back and look, you will see that I said, "Fuck you too." This can easily be understood as lighthearted by virtue of the fact that you never said "fuck you" first (and thus my reply was silly),

This may be debated but something gets lost in the translation when done online, its not real life. Say someone was giving a speech and said something that these people are crazy for one reason or another and someone in the crowd raised their hand and said I have a question “your crazy,” that’s silly. Now using that same situation replace “your crazy” with “fuck you,” two clearly different situations and possible outcomes.




To wrap up, if we wanted to get really technical you committed the fallacy of ad hominem (against the person). Which is ultimately the biggest logical fallacy and there is no way of getting around that your reply was totally flawed from the beginning with the initial response of “Fuck you too.”

"The Empire can't stop us now..now its our turn" -Luke-

Author
Time
Post link
Please SHUT UP already.

Story in games is fine. You're Darth Revan and Sephiroth killed Aeiris while Tidus awoke to find it was all a dream--including himself.

Story in, say, Tetris or Metal Slug is pointless. You're matching blocks or killing a guy that looks like Hitler, and that's all we need to know. This shouldn't be something we have to argue about.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Urrgh . . . must reply to blatant illogic . . . .

Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Originally posted by: Tiptup
As for what you said about "getting emotional over video games" and being "nutty," I stated no logical fallacies in response to that. With the normal, logical understanding of your statement, you clearly communicated that people who "get" emotions about a games are being "nutty" in your "opinion." As you said, you "indirectly" called me nutty. Nowhere did I discuss the "direct" or "indirect" nature of your words; therefore, you make a clear logical fallacy when you accuse me of such. (Is this making sense to you?)

Direct and Indirect statements are implied.

Uhh, by who and where exactly?

I only said the following:

"You called me nutty, and if I can't make a lighthearted reply to that then you're the one who clearly has issues."

At no point in that sentence did I ever imply the notion that you communicated your words to me in a "direct" or "indirect" fashion. I simply said that you "called me nutty." If you disagree with my assessment of that sentence, then you must argue from that sentence alone.


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Originally posted by: Tiptup

I didn't say "fuck you" by itself, nor do I believe "fuck you" to be lighthearted on its own

You stated that “if I cant make a lighthearted reply” which was “Fuck you too”

The “too” at the end does not make it any less of a direct statement to the person you replied to. The “too,” simply says I am saying Fuck you, to you (me) since something you (I) said got to me (you).

lol So, let me get this straight: You believe that the "too" says that you are saying "fuck you" to yourself since something you said got to me? lol

Good Lord.

Are you even following the logical progression of your own arguments in this thread, Ghost? I never said anything about the directness or indirectness of "fuck you too." That was obviously very direct and I clearly meant it to be direct. You're arguing nothing of substance at this point. If you wish to stick to the argument then go back to what you were originally arguing.


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Originally posted by: Tiptup
(in general). In fact, you're the one making another logical fallacy by stating that I believed or said that.

You did say that though, its right there (above). By stating so, this also implies you believe it as well. You believe a response of “Fuck you too” to be lighthearted otherwise you would not have said it and then tagged it as a lighthearted response.


lol, you didn't even read everything that I actually said. It would be nice if you tried to comprehend my words before immediately replying to them. This is getting very brilliant.

I said that "fuck you too" was lighthearted in the context that it was given. I never said that "fuck you," by itself is lighthearted. Therefore, I never said or believed that "fuck you" was lighthearted. It's not that complicated. Just use a little brainpower, please.


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Originally posted by: Tiptup
If you actually go back and look, you will see that I said, "Fuck you too." This can easily be understood as lighthearted by virtue of the fact that you never said "fuck you" first (and thus my reply was silly),


This may be debated but something gets lost in the translation when done online, its not real life.


Anything may be debated, but I contend that the context should have been clear to you. Maybe you were having a bad day, or you just wanted to be antagonistic, but you clearly misread what I was saying. Hell, you even devoted an entire post to admitting that you didn't realize the humor in my statement. That's not my fault.


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Say someone was giving a speech and said something that these people are crazy for one reason or another and someone in the crowd raised their hand and said I have a question “your crazy,” that’s silly.


That sentence is great. It truly displays your precise logical skills.


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
Now using that same situation replace “your crazy” with “fuck you,” two clearly different situations and possible outcomes.


Yes, but you're now making the clear logical mistake of turning a very specific situation, with a specific context, into a more generic situation, with a generic context, and the two are not equivalent by any means. The generic conversation could potentially be lighthearted (especially considering how "fuck you" might have been said). For instance, let's imagine that the person giving the speech said, "In my opinion, people who oppose the violent torture and dismemberment of innocent puppies are insane!" Then let's say I respectfully raised my hand and gained permission to ask a question, stood up, said "fuck you" (with a big smile on my face), and then walked away. That would be a very lighthearted response on my part. So, as you can see, specific contexts are very important to people when we try to analyze something with logic. Does this make sense?

Uhg, and let me clarify yet again: I said "fuck you too." I didn't say "fuck you" by itself (as the person in your generic example did). In case you aren't noticing, I'm trying to use precise logic here and it would be nice if you could do the same. You can use precise logic, correct?


Originally posted by: GhostAlpha26
To wrap up, if we wanted to get really technical you committed the fallacy of ad hominem (against the person). Which is ultimately the biggest logical fallacy and there is no way of getting around that your reply was totally flawed from the beginning with the initial response of “Fuck you too.”


Wait . . . .

"Against the person"? Are you somehow saying that I made an ad hominem attack on you? . . . by saying "fuck you too"?

I suppose that the phrase "fuck you too" can be considered an attack in a very loose sense (it's technically a curse), but if you actually believe that it somehow was an ad hominem attack on you (a confusion of your personal character with the logical discussion of the issue), then I am made speechless. That really takes some sloppy thinking on your part (and some incredibly wild assumptions). I'm afraid that you clearly don't know what ad hominem means.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Enough is enough.

Do this back and forth via PM, wouldja?

You guys are like those kids at camp who sit there and keep poking the fire with a stick, and despite being told not too, you poke and you poke until the whole camp burns down and you make Baby Jesus cry. GAAAWWWW!
Author
Time
Post link
In a blackout I once urinated on my buddy's PS2, supposedly I was aiming for his cat's litter box.

I have all sorts of accidents sometimes.

Harrison Ford Has Pretty Much Given Up on His Son. Here's Why