Crispy™ Does a game really "suck" if you spend 100 hours on it?

[Dreaad]

This thread has amused me.

2 cents. I have played many a game that is objectively shit and I'll be honest... main reason was animations and graphics. Sometimes atmosphere, like Alpha Protocol. Sometimes it's other reasons... like Skyrim is pretty shit, but aside from that and mount & blade there is relatively few games that let you be a viking bandit who goes around fighting and killing random things. So if I want to be a viking bandit and have played 500+ hours of mount&blade mods, what options do I have?

It's one of the main problems in game design I find. Too many developers just jump on the hype train and produce 1000's of copies of generic fantasy setting x or CoD 35. The really neat niche stuff you may want to explore, is nowhere to be found. How many cyberpunk RPG's are there? How many pirate games? How many sci fi turn based fleet command games? How many post apocalyptic RPG's? There ain't a huge selection, so often you are forced to scratch the itch with generic crap you hate or play a game you have already played 10 times.

 

[Jools]

How many cyberpunk RPG's are there? How many pirate games?

I agree there's a dry spell in cyberpunk games, especially good ones. Yet, in case you didn't notice, pirates is the new zombies, bro, with such excellent titles such as Risen 2, Risen 3, Raven's Cry to enterrrrrtain you for hours and hours of swashbuckling adventures!

OTOH, Windward is a simplistic, simple and short-lived, but somewhat nice, procedurally-generated-map little indie with some RPG hints here and there.

 

[Dev_Anj]

if jools doesn't get banned for this fucking shit:

Get banned for..... posting a silly list? What?

On topic: I think it really depends on how the game is structured. It's very much possible that a game had a good introduction, or it pulled in people by its concept, good word of mouth, or apparent polish. There's also the whole case of badly made end scenarios leaving a bad taste and making someone think less of the game. Sometimes people can also be interested in some of the plot or in seeing and playing new levels even if the game's currently at a low. People also change their taste over time, and what they played and enjoyed a lot may not be what they like in the future.

But I've never spent a 100 hours in any game, and I would get wary if a game didn't have anything interesting or enjoyable for long.

 

[Kz3r0]

Guys, the answer is simple, games are basically based on something called Coaction to Repeat, add that RPGs players are autistic people with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder et voilà, expecially people registered on this forum.

 

[Kz3r0]

Problem, newfag? Show some balls and share your list of perfect games.

Blade Runner, the videogame that most resemble something akin to perfection.

 

[Cthulhu_is_love]

I've got another question:

Do you guys too have sometimes the need to play a very shitty game (Skyrim, Fallout 3, Morrowind) just to have a reason for calling it shit, even if you know its shit?

So you can bitch about people who like that shitty game without being hypocritical even if youre the greatest hypocrite on the world.

And do you too sometimes have the need to wank on threads like that?

 

[Akratus]

if jools doesn't get banned for this fucking shit:

Get banned for..... posting a silly list? What?

You really think someone would do that? Go on the internet and tell (shitty) jokes?

 

[Jools]

So, once we managed to get past the shitposting edgelords, this thread now officially turned into "Couple Counseling 101". Mods will rename it accordingly.

 

[Jools]

Problem, newfag? Show some balls and share your list of perfect games.

Blade Runner, the videogame that most resemble something akin to perfection.

Good call.

 

[Alfons]

Do you know any flawless game?

CoD4????????????

What the fuck?

 

[Jools]

Do you know any flawless game?

CoD4????????????

What the fuck?

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

The fact that most of you morons don't like it just further proves that:

1.you're newfags;
2.you cannot into FPS because they're too ableist;
3.you're most likely consoletards who prefer halo or BO or whatever you faggots play these days.

Instead of replying, feel free to rant about it on your dumblr accounts, I got you on ignore anyway.

 

[Akratus]

Ignoring is for pussies.

 

[Alfons]

Do you know any flawless game?

CoD4????????????

What the fuck?

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

The fact that most of you morons don't like it just further proves that:

1.you're newfags;
2.you cannot into FPS because they're too ableist;
3.you're most likely consoletards who prefer halo or BO or whatever you faggots play these days.

Instead of replying, feel free to rant about it on your dumblr accounts, I got you on ignore anyway.

Hey faggot, I think CoD4 is pretty good. The assertion that it's flawless is fucking retarded and you have to be a dumb motherfucker to make it.

 

[Kz3r0]

Ignoring is for pussies.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Don't care for CoD4 but that list is pretty damn good. Lacks Thief 1 and 2 (have to stress vanilla Thief 1, not Gold), SC: Chaos Theory, Knights of Chalice, Blood and Duke3D for the FPS genre, maybe a few platformers/puzzle games like Flashback and Abbe's Oddysey/Exodus (Exodus fits the bill more, great sequel) etc.

The way I see it, "Perfect" games don't neccesarilly mean the best (most of my favourite games err on the flawed gems side) but rather games that succeed very well at achieving what they set out to do without being boggled down by bad/mediocre/underdeveloped gameplay elements and boring sections.

 

[Dev_Anj]

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

You know, all this stuff refers to the multiplayer part of the game, and often what does get criticized is the single player campaign. I'll confess: I haven't actually played it, and in general I like playing games in first person that have something more besides shooting people, but some years ago I checked the campaign on Youtube and liked it, but after growing up, and seeing the problems people have pointed out with it, I can understand why it's disliked.

It's not like the multiplayer is considered flawless too anyway, many people say bad things about the community, and unless you play your multiplayer with friends, having a good community is important for that.

 

[Alfons]

You know, all this stuff refers to the multiplayer part of the game, and often what does get criticized is the single player campaign. I'll confess: I haven't actually played it, and in general I like playing games in first person that have something more besides shooting people, but some years ago I checked the campaign on Youtube and liked it, but after growing up, and seeing the problems people have pointed out with it, I can understand why it's disliked.

It's not like the multiplayer is considered flawless too anyway, many people say bad things about the community, and unless you play your multiplayer with friends, having a good community is important for that.

People usually criticize the plot of the single-player, they note that it's not particularly unique. It's a retarded criticism, it's a simple story about hard men, there is no need to make everything Shakespeare.

As far as the multi is concerned there are flaws beyond the community.

 

[Lord Azlan]

I don't think so, and I think most people who play a game for 100's of hours then turn around and calls it shit is either trolling or just being edgy. That or they are mentally handicapped. I mean, if I hate tuna fish I'm not going to stuff my face with tuna fish day in and day out...I'd have to be a crazy person to subject myself to something I strongly dislike for so long.

Same kind of over-emotional liars who join a boycott CoD steam group, only to buy it day 1.

Just my opinion, of course :D

I must be mental then. Maybe I was stressed out about real life things at the time and just wanted to sit infront of a PC and veg my brain out.

I agree - 100 hours is a long time.

Maybe someone joins the Codex and sees the all time list and notes some games. Let's say this person had played Witcher 1 for about 20+ hours a long time ago and then deleted it as they thought it was crap. Maybe they then try again as the Codex says it's good and they want to talk about it in an informed manner and also day "Witcher was Good". They play it again for 30+ hours. After now 50 hours they still think it's crap. 50 hours is not 100 hours though.

I am the sort of person that says the league position does not lie. As I played Football Manager, Skyrim or Torchlight 2 for ONE HUNDRED HOURS at least - normally I won't be a hypocrite and say they are bad games. In one sense FM and Skyrim become more like a hobby than playing a game. Diablo clones - well some of them like Titan Quest can be addictive as hell - then you have the twenty thousand various builds.

Then I look at Kings Bounty Warriors of the North and I feel all dirty and ashamed. If I could wipe that of my Steam account maybe I would. The first two games were fresh and new and fun. WoTN was not fun. So why did I play it for 100+ hours?

As others have said, many people start games and want to finish them. They pride themselves on that. In the end on WoTN it was a hard slog and I just wanted to finish it as I did the other two - but in the end my brain regained it's voice and told me to kick that crap out of my life and I did.

It's psychology innit. Why do people stay in abusive relationships, why do people find it hard to stop a destructive habit.

Can you spend 100 hours on something and say that was crap use of your time? Yes you can!

 

[Jools]

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

You know, all this stuff refers to the multiplayer part of the game, and often what does get criticized is the single player campaign. I'll confess: I haven't actually played it, and in general I like playing games in first person that have something more besides shooting people, but some years ago I checked the campaign on Youtube and liked it, but after growing up, and seeing the problems people have pointed out with it, I can understand why it's disliked.

It's not like the multiplayer is considered flawless too anyway, many people say bad things about the community, and unless you play your multiplayer with friends, having a good community is important for that.

About the community, I don't think it can't be rightfully considered a "flaw" per se because 1.it's not a specific game feature and 2.it applies uniformly to every game/life situation (read: "fucking morons are everywhere").

 

[GrainWetski]

How many cyberpunk RPG's are there? How many pirate games? How many sci fi turn based fleet command games? How many post apocalyptic RPG's?

Well, if you consider Skyrim a viking game, there's about 6 billion of those 4 genres.

 

[Leitz]

Do you know any flawless game?

CoD4????????????

What the fuck?

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

The fact that most of you morons don't like it just further proves that:

1.you're newfags;
2.you cannot into FPS because they're too ableist;
3.you're most likely consoletards who prefer halo or BO or whatever you faggots play these days.

Instead of replying, feel free to rant about it on your dumblr accounts, I got you on ignore anyway.

What about the singleplayer, f-flawless?

 

[Jools]

Do you know any flawless game?

CoD4????????????

What the fuck?

I'm seriously not getting the hatred for CoD4. It's been, for years, the only valid alternative to CS/CS:S, it delivered a simple yet brilliant gameplay style, it introduced a handful of perks and killstreak rewards without going full-retard like MW2 or BO did, and dropped onto the community some epic multiplayer maps (crash, strike), which FPS aficionados still remember (and play) with fondness. furthermore, additional maps were FREE, and it did feature PunkBuster, which was far from perfect or 100% effective, but whose dismissal opened the gate of hell to cheaters. Weapon, skill and class balance was also top-notch (unlike, I dunno, CS:S and especially CS:GO). On top of it, it's still got a fairly decent player and server base.

The fact that most of you morons don't like it just further proves that:

1.you're newfags;
2.you cannot into FPS because they're too ableist;
3.you're most likely consoletards who prefer halo or BO or whatever you faggots play these days.

Instead of replying, feel free to rant about it on your dumblr accounts, I got you on ignore anyway.

What about the singleplayer, f-flawless?

Pointless, really. Not even considering it.

 

[DwarvenFood]

It is stupid to waste so much time on an activity you do not really enjoy, but something being stupid rarely stops people from doing it - often they think they do not have anything better to do. In reality they are just too lazy to look for something more interesting.

So true.

I spend 40 hours a week like that.

 

[Sykar]

Reply to the OP: welcome to the Codex.

OTOH, after 100+ hours even a seemingly enjoyable game starts to show its flaws, so one is "more entitled" and has more knowledge to base their shit-tossing on.

For all the people who prefer cats to tits, I hope your tiny cocks rot and fall off. Especially you, Ulminati , I had you down for a cool guy.

Spoiler

8/10, would fap again.

 

[theSavant]

Why do people stay in abusive relationships, why do people find it hard to stop a destructive habit.
Can you spend 100 hours on something and say that was crap use of your time? Yes you can!

If all these things are optional and not because of existential(!) reasons the only explanation is: they are retarded. Fully and utterly retarded. Their opinions means nothing. If they say "it sucks", you can't take them seriously at all.