148 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

Also, am I the only person that cannot watch playthroughs on Youtube? I'd fall asleep.

Not at all; I don't see the appeal of watching other people's video game playthroughs either.

Laaaammmee

[Rusty Sandusky]

AresKeith wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

Also, am I the only person that cannot watch playthroughs on Youtube? I'd fall asleep.

Not at all; I don't see the appeal of watching other people's video game playthroughs either.

Laaaammmee

NO U!

[spirosz]

ThisOnesUsername wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

Also, am I the only person that cannot watch playthroughs on Youtube? I'd fall asleep.

Not at all; I don't see the appeal of watching other people's video game playthroughs either.

Laaaammmee

NO U!

[Ravensword]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

Also, am I the only person that cannot watch playthroughs on Youtube? I'd fall asleep.

Not at all; I don't see the appeal of watching other people's video game playthroughs either.

Unless of course it's B:TS, which I'm pretty sure was trying to be more of a movie than a video game.

Modifié par Ravensword, 27 décembre 2013 - 12:44 .

[Liamv2]

I mostly do it for games with good story but disgustingly bad gameplay (see the witcher 1 and 2 , FF13 etc) or the occasional exclusive. Some DLC as well.

[Isichar]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Ehh, I feel like there's a little bit of a misconception in this thread that I don't want any challenge in my games at all. This isn't necessarily true. I just don't want to die over and over and over and over again on a game, no matter the circumstance. Nothing about that is fun to me, not even when I get past it. I feel like I wasted my time more than I feel like I accomplished something.

I am not really fond of dying repeatedly either, infact I feel that ruins the point of a challenge. Corpse pushing typically relies more on luck then skill. But if you are dying repeatedly then either you are doing something wrong, or the game is just really poorly designed, sometimes both.

[Fast Jimmy]

So I was searching for stuff, but that didn't feel like a break or a reward - it felt like a chore. But thinking on it, I dislike exploration because it's really just searching and wandering. If it was exploring in the sense of being like research - having to read different books and puzzle out a solution to some, well, puzzle, I think that would be fun. But wander from A to B to find trinket X? The wandering isn't fun, and the trinket I care about only becuse of whatever incidental purpose.

Hmmmm. Interesting. And if, instead, there wasn't the quest markers pointing exactly where to go, but you had to reason it out, would that help alleviate the feeling of making it a chore and, instead, feel like an engaging bit of exploration? That you would be on the lookout for clues, or landmarks, or other cues to point you towards your goal instead of having a marker on your mini map?

I'm just trying to address the underlying psychology involved, I guess.

by the time I'm actually ready to be challenged by a game like DA:O (or X:COM, or BG, or Fallout) I know how the leveling mechanics work so leveling up is automatic.

Hmmmm. This is one reason I've always loved systems like Fallout's Perk system, which left parts of the skill set and leveling capabilities a bit hidden from the player, so mapping out the best possible leveling path can't be worked out ahead of time. I'm as guilty of planning in advance as much as the next grognard, but it does help to leave things as a surprise when the level is actually hit.

But that is a bit outside the topic, I suppose.

[TheChris92]

The Mad Hanar wrote...


It's sort of tough to do because I don't even know what people consider a difficult game.

God Hand is what I'd consider a difficult game - Even on easy it is unforgiving but not impossible. It's the kind of game that requires the strongest patience and complete mastery of the mechanics, and its customizable combos, by the time one has progressed half way through it. The idea is to constantly build your own fighting style of various combos, to prepare for every new enemy encounter. I've played Dark Souls and I find it ridiculous that the game doesn't even have a pause menu, which isn't making the game hard. Just annoying.

Modifié par TheChris92, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:03 .

[Isichar]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Yeah, there are some games I used to be terrible at that I now enjoy. It's usually a matter of figuring our th mechanics. Though, I will say that I have much more enjoyment of these games when played right than I did while I was learning. I suppose failure frustrates me more than most posters in this thread, at least as far as games are concerned.

Some games do a terrible job at difficulty pacing or making sure the player understands the mechanics well. Baldurs Gate is a good example of a game that kind of just assumes the player will understand how the mechanics work, so make almost no attempt to explain them to you... but will punish you horribly if you don't.

Theres also a lot of games I never play so I doubt I could handle high difficulties. I never play sports or racing games so I doubt I would turn the difficulty up very high for those types. But for genres like RPG's, RTS, shooters, action adventures and such I have played so much that I just typically know what to expect, I get how the mechanics work well enough that I know I can handle much more.

Modifié par Isichar, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:07 .

[spirosz]

I like the idea of not having a pause menu, I loved it in Dead Space because it just added even more immersion to the game.

Modifié par spirosz, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:25 .

[spirosz]

Well, if the game has a good checkpoint system, then the idea of saving whenever wouldn't become such an issue - though, I agree. Depending on the game though, like an open world, I'll probably save every time I open a door into a house, cause you never know... lol.

[Hey]

it's fun to get through something that is challenging after hours of aggravation, i guess. it's a good feeling to figure something out - that is worth figuring out- sometimes. other times i just want to collect things and then dominate.

[Isichar]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

That's funny, actually. Sports games and racing games are actually the types of games that I can handle quite well on high difficulties.

Yeah its kind of like how I know top league LoL players that cannot play SC2 or other online games worth a damn and vice versa. Online play really shows you how large a vareity in player skill that can exist in a game.

The Mad Hanar wrote...

You know what really bugs me? Games
that don't let the players save whenever they want to. I shouldn't lose
a bunch of progress because I suddenly had something come up
IRL.

I agree, saving should mostly be a user prefrence. Games that don't space the checkpoints from each other properly
are the worse. I think this will become less of an issue with the newer console generation, hopefully.

Modifié par Isichar, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:40 .

[slimgrin]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

You know what really bugs me? Games that don't let the players save whenever they want to. I shouldn't lose a bunch of progress because I suddenly had something come up IRL.

Both Hard Reset and the Arkham games use checkpoints, and they work quite well. Sometimes it's integral to game design.

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Hmmmm. Interesting. And if, instead, there wasn't the quest markers pointing exactly where to go, but you had to reason it out, would that help alleviate the feeling of making it a chore and, instead, feel like an engaging bit of exploration? That you would be on the lookout for clues, or landmarks, or other cues to point you towards your goal instead of having a marker on your mini map?

I'm just trying to address the underlying psychology involved, I guess.

Oh, the first thing I do is disable quest markers. The only exception I make is if it's a delivery quest and the in-game instructions are poor, like "Give X to Joe at the Maltese Falcon" and there's no way to find out where beside scouring every inch of the place since you can't, like IRL, just ask someone to point him out. 

But yes, actually having a problem to solve versus having to wanter makes a big difference. I'm a very patient person when I'm working out a problem, but the second I kno where I'm going, absolutely any effort at all to get there becomes automaticallly very aggravating. 

Hmmmm. This is one reason I've always loved systems like Fallout's Perk system, which left parts of the skill set and leveling capabilities a bit hidden from the player, so mapping out the best possible leveling path can't be worked out ahead of time. I'm as guilty of planning in advance as much as the next grognard, but it does help to leave things as a surprise when the level is actually hit.

But that is a bit outside the topic, I suppose.

I don't think there's anything wrong with not giving every bit of information up front, unless the game is just punishing because of it. BG is an example of a very bad way of not giving information upfront since the mechanics are just straight up non-ingame (though there was apparently a tome of a manual that came with an old paper copy). 

[frustratemyself]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

You know what really bugs me? Games that don't let the players save whenever they want to. I shouldn't lose a bunch of progress because I suddenly had something come up IRL.

Yes, this drove me insane when I was playing Lost Odyssey cause the save points were so far apart. I had a couple of times where I'd lose an hour or more of progress in a dungeon cause it was a work night and I was too tired to stay up and keep playing long enough to reach the save point so I'd just switch off the game 

Modifié par frustratemyself, 27 décembre 2013 - 09:20 .

[Mr.House]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

Also, am I the only person that cannot watch playthroughs on Youtube? I'd fall asleep.

Not at all; I don't see the appeal of watching other people's video game playthroughs either.

You just have to find the right streamer/let's player really. All hasa to do with the person playing it that can make it really fun.

[Isichar]

[quote]Mr.House wrote...

[/quote]You just have to find the right streamer/let's player really. All hasa to do with the person playing it that can make it really fun.
[/quote]


I agree, you need to find good lets players, and certain games are going to be better then others.... I use to watch Totalbiscuit and Jesse Cox do Terraria and it was freaking hilarious.

Modifié par Isichar, 27 décembre 2013 - 10:39 .

[mybudgee]

spirosz wrote...

I like the idea of not having a pause menu, I loved it in Dead Space because it just added even more immersion to the game.

WAT!?!

[naughty99]

frustratemyself wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

You know what really bugs me? Games that don't let the players save whenever they want to. I shouldn't lose a bunch of progress because I suddenly had something come up IRL.

Yes, this drove me insane when I was playing Lost Odyssey cause the save points were so far apart. I had a couple of times where I'd lose an hour or more of progress in a dungeon cause it was a work night and I was too tired to stay up and keep playing long enough to reach the save point so I'd just switch off the game 

I'd agree, in a lot of titles that rely on this, the checkpoint save system seems like a cheap way to extend the playing time of a short linear game you would otherwise beat in a few hours.