(07-14-2023, 11:47 AM)Guest Wrote: [ -> ]I have many opinions to share, but little time to elaborate on them.
Okay I wanted to get back to this.
Quote:Thus, I will share some short aphorisms, and hopefully they will be elaborated on. 2000sfag btw, so this will mostly speak about 00s-20s releases.
I am also of the 2000s so this shouldn't be a factor in any disagreements.
Quote:Indie now is in the state that triple-A was in the 2000s; producing exceptional games but without ideological vision (likely due to the concentration of devs into "indie companies" and negritization of internet)
I disagree very strongly. Triple-A in the 2000s was a frontier. When not conceptually still technically. There was the "consoles holding gaming back" meme playing in a bit but new console games were still these forward leaping beasts trying to impress you by pushing what was possible. What you call "ideological vision" I would call "conceptual", but I think we mean the same thing.
Why I bring up the pushing of
new technical possibilities is that that is itself a kind of conceptual vision. They believed in
something still. If you want to talk about a period that truly had no vision where what passed for
high technical standards were all that mattered, look a bit further. Around 2010 or so. Every game being an ugly, muddy, weightless third person shooter with multiplayer.
And despite the fact I made a thread speaking ill of the era we had a lot of genuinely cool games coming out then, even in the west. Things weren't too far gone yet. Getting worse, sure, but not disastrous.
Contemporary indie gaming tends to have poor craft, while also lacking vision. These games are practically defined by ideas which never quite come together, complex interconnected systems that never quite start simulating what they're supposed to, promises that can't be delivered on, etc. Maybe "Shovel Knight" is "exceptional" in that everything it does works, but it's basically a flash game. It would be very damn weird if they managed to fuck up a game which runs on a jump button and an attack button. This is not exceptional. I would say it's rather lacking in vision though.
Quote:while indie in the late 00s and early 10s was in the state that triple-A was in the 90s; creating monumental sculptures that defined genres and showed vision beyond their years. Compare Cave Story to Hollow Knight and weep.
What the hell are you saying? For one you're acting like western and eastern games are the same scene, AAA or Indie. Indie especially I'd say there's the widest distance between them. Cave Story is a doujin game. Japanese PC games didn't come into being when the western internet learned about them. It's a very rich tradition which has frankly blown western "indies" out of the water from the very start.
If you mean the western indies of the late 000s and early 10s, that was a hellish time. What could you possibly like from the period? I only remember Hotline Miami and Cry of Fear, because that's Europeans just about doing the doujin game thing. The solidified and self identifying "indie scene" was always a disgusting dumpster fire fueled by pure racism ("we want games that aren't about bald space marines no we will not play those chink yellow monkey fuck japanese games you fucking bastard, fuck your mother. Zoe Quinn invented games which aren't about shooting.")
Quote:Developers nowadays are focusing on game-as-cinema, which implicitly weakens the form they are utilizing in their works. Game-as-mechanism and game-as-experience will always rule, and will always be the "true" gaming experience. Sony wants to be like Sony, rather than being like Sony.
This has been a meme for the longest time but I don't think it ever actually held too much weight. That games are becoming movies. More recently they've started becoming multimedia prestige tv. Kind of similar. The Last of Us. God of Soy. Etc. The "cutscenes" are as vapid as the "gameplay", both are visual experiences. And even then they aren't vapid
because of that. Again it's a conceptual drought. These things are boring and retarded. Turning the dial to "100% gameplay" does not fix either example. Might be better just because the voices of Neil Druckmann and Anthony Burch get drowned out by meaningless violence. But frankly I hate both options.
If you don't define what it means for media to be "cinema" or explain how that "implicitly weakens the form" this is mostly a meaningless statement.
Why do games as mechanism rule? What exactly does that even mean? I feel like you're trying to say something along the lines of "gameplay" purism there, but then "game as experience", I have no idea what that can mean which aligns with "game as mechanism". What are you saying? And the Sony part is obviously some kind of error in writing so I won't try to decipher it.
Quote:The only true artistic game that fits the definition of an art game is Yume Nikki, and in fact Yume Nikki is the greatest game ever made. Retards claim that it's too devoid of content, and are incapable of understanding it. The later "walking sim" niggermind exposition games are effectively political propaganda, and are indicative of a infection underlying Western storytelling that will be near impossible to remove from the minds of even good storytellers in the (hopefully Aryanized) future.
...
Quote:The campaign against random crits in TF2 is the continuation of it's murder at the hands of spiritually Chinese individuals, starting with the Make Your Match update. Almost every change that is being argued for is involved in this attempted assassination, and it revolves essentially around mindfucked esportsfags not wanting games to be fun. This contingent, once noticed, will be seen in almost every discussion around video games, and understanding them is essential to understanding video game "discourse".
This part I more or less agree with entirely as written.
Quote:Videogames without dedicated cunny characters or manly characters that aren't father figures are entirely worthless in the modern era.
Liquid Snake is not a father figure and that is why he is
my father figure.