Jank

[Anonymous No.10116263]

Anyone here enjoys at least one good janky game. Yet some seem to prefer jank over quality, finding quality dull. Is this irony poisoning, or do we owe janky games more respect? Discuss.

[Anonymous No.10116269]

>>10116263
Kusoge are kinda fun sometimes

[Anonymous No.10116272]

it's important to see the good qualities within the cloud of jank, it's a way of enjoying more games. it's not a one dimensional thing from not-jank to jank, or even not-shitty to shitty. games have all sorts of axes of quality that can add up to an interesting, even fun experience despite lacking in an axis or two. take Evergrace as a random example, it kind of sucks to control and is suffused with a certain low budget feeling, but it's very atmospheric, the music is extremely odd and great, and the world is strange enough that it's engaging to play. is it jank? yes, but is it worth playing, even rewarding to do so? yes.

[Anonymous No.10116284]

>>10116263
Sometimes jank is not actually jank but a uniqueness in the way every thing works. It's much more about a feel than check listed automation. Lots of times things that may be off or rough become our favorites song, foods, hobbies, books, movies, etc... The unique characteristics that give it charm through it's imperfections. The imperfections often makes things more palatable. My favorite example of jank that makes it work in videogames is Bushido blade 2. It's quite janky, but that gives it the life needed to feel good on the PS1. When you accept the jank, the gameplay gets smooth.

[Anonymous No.10116306]

>>10116263

[Anonymous No.10116323]

If you refer to a game as janky, even if it has unconventional control design, I'm going to assume you're an emotionally unstable impatient manchild incapable of teaching yourself anything beyond the obvious. Most anons on this site refuse to play anything that wasn't already curated and pre-approved by other anons because they cannot possibly imagine spending any time playing a game they're not guaranteed to like. These are the same anons that are better off watching let's plays rather than getting mad that classic games don't play identically to contemporary ones.

[Anonymous No.10116354]

I tend to think of there being two kinds of janky games. The lazy, low quality kind, which have very few endearing elements: the crappy ports, the games with frustratingly poor execution of simple ideas, the games which just feel like completely recycled elements slapped together for the sake of just having something to show the boss. Then there's the more endearing jank, the kind where you get the feeling that they were honestly trying but just fell (sometimes terribly) short. Maybe there's some decent idea there but they couldn't quite execute it, the graphics aren't great but you can tell their artists were at least trying, basically things where it feels like the people involved actually cared and weren't just trying to shit something out quickly to get their paycheck. The former are the ones which are just irritating, the latter might still be irritating, but you can't help but laugh at it, or at least find it endearing.

One game I tend to lump into the second category is Time Killers. Yeah, maybe it was just a cash grab to rip off Mortal Kombat, but the whole thing is so silly looking and intensely over the top that it feels like a game that some little kid would come up with in his bedroom after watching his older brother play Mortal Kombat.

[Anonymous No.10116378]

>>10116263
Tell us your definition of jank first

[Anonymous No.10116396]

no le hidden gem has ever been discovered without the ability to tolerate jank

[Anonymous No.10116419]

I love that this game somehow still makes DBfags rage. Just improve the AI and the input lag and you have a better game.

[Anonymous No.10116441]

>>10116263
>janky
>adjective
> informal
>: of very poor quality : junky
>also : not functioning properly or adequately : faulty

If someone likes a "janky" game it isn't really janky to them, is it? What you're saying is basically:
>I think game bad, but other person think game good
>why they think bad game good?

[Anonymous No.10116452]

>>10116441

[Anonymous No.10116465]

>>10116396
>Le
Well, no. But that's only because even 5 years ago the term "hidden gem" was getting played out. In the actual lifespan of these consoles, hidden gem wasn't a meme phrase, it actually meant something. It usually wasn't associated with videogames, mostly music and books, but I can tell you're to young to remember that.

[Anonymous No.10116482]

>>10116465
what on earth are you even on about? I'm talking about how everyone is always hunting for hitherto undiscovered compelling games on consoles with less exposure in the west, and how this sort of hunt necessitates a certain amount of tolerance for the nebulously defined "jank." I'm aware that the phrase hidden gem predates video games, thank you o worldly wiseman.

[Anonymous No.10116501]

>>10116263
N64 games that run at 1-20 frames per second which is basically all of the ones you see in top ten lists.

[Anonymous No.10116564]

>>10116263
Jank doesn't always equals bad. It's an obstacle between you and enjoyment from the game, if you can overcome it and enjoy janky game for what it is = you'll have fun with it.

Bad games simply hate you. It's like trying to make friends with a bully, you tell yourself that maybe he's just lonely and you can find something good beneath his rhino skin, but then he punches you in the face and gives you a wedgie.

[Anonymous No.10118718]

>>10116441
A game can be qualified as janky regardless of anyone's opinion, but how much that matters in terms of enjoyment depends on the person.

But at least one person ITT attempted to actually define what they mean, so thanks anon.