[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-05-12: Maintenance has concluded successfully. 2022-05-12: Ghost posting is now globally disabled.
2022: Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 59 KB, 615x347, Difficulty.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
3527635 No.3527635 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

In Defense of Difficulty

(Note: This applies to action oriented games, number and point system games like pure RPGs have their own issues but they're not the purpose of this rant.)

I often see retro games being disparaged by people these days. I read things that talk about how the lives and game over systems were flawed, that the character movement sucks just to make games harder, and that one can “build a good difficult game without those archaic systems.”

Fuck that.

Let me start off; just because you pirated or bought a game, just because you handed over $240 for the special edition with the titty figurine and the hat you'll never wear, just because you love everything that developer has ever made--YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO GAME COMPLETION. You do not deserve to see the ending, you do not have the unalienable right to unlock everything 100%, and you especially do not have the right to complain when a game is too difficult.

Games are only worthwhile because of the potential for failure. I'd even go so far as to say that these current gen games like Yoshi's Wooly World, or the Arkham Batman games are hardly games at all and just storybook experiences that guide the player along to the end. When is the last time you've heard of someone competent at games saying that they've had to drop a current gen title due to it being too hard to beat? Even Dark Souls and Bayonetta—while spectacular games—suffer from this casualization.

Now there's a good business reason for casualization, it leads to more sales for the developer. This is completely fine if the game has a high difficulty ceiling like the prior two mentioned. But in so many, so so many games these days it's outright impossible to fail--Nintendo games are particularly guilty of this.

>> No.3527638
File: 54 KB, 600x375, Difficulty 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What then is the point of playing something you KNOW you'll succeed in? There's an old Twilight Zone episode where a criminal goes to the afterlife thinking it's heaven. He is given anything and everything he wants and he cannot fail at anything—especially his favorite pastime, gambling.. Clearly he's not in heaven—after months upon years of nothing but success he spirals into ennui and depression; there's no challenge in anything, his own personal hell is immense boredom.

This is how I feel about the state of the current games market.

Retro games demanded of the player to be better. They demanded the player not only travel through the game's levels but to master the controls as well. You didn't just need to know what buttons to push to jump or run, but you have to be able to feel every aspect of your character and their world; know their speed, the timing of their attacks, their hitbox size and location, the weight of their jumps, and much more. You had to “git gud.”

A common old game I see people shitting on is Ice Climber with the most common issue being the character not landing on platform edges. This is something one learns from putting in time with controlling the character. There's a definite landing zone but it exists a few pixels into a platform instead of right at the edges as one would expect. After getting used to the feel of this, Ice Climber becomes very playable and pretty enjoyable once the difficulty ramps up.

Another series of games is the old Castlevania titles. People call the movement limiting, the attacks slow, and the deaths cheap. I won't bother describing how wrong these beliefs are because at this point these games have a following big enough that someone else can explain it.

>> No.3527643
File: 162 KB, 640x480, Difficulty 3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Now you don't have to love every old title. But at least give them your time before you pass judgment; especially if you feel like you want to like it. Shmups are a genre I often see people wanting to love but they feel they can't handle. Just play the game, play it and remember that failures as much a part of why you're enjoying the game as succeeding. You'll get better once you truly start feeling the game and it becomes natural to you.


an autist.

>> No.3527657

>This is how I feel about the state of the current games market.

Oh, there are a few games here and there, and sometimes in AAA productions too. Ryse: Son of Rome for example: on max difficulty it's almost God Hand hard.

>> No.3527663

actally a depending on the game
the call of series is just tedious to do in the top difficulties because of the instant hitscan
but otherwise the challenge is still here if you want it

i always play my games on hard because i'm experienced with fps but i don't find any of it easier compared to the doom or old call of duty or medal of honor

plus you complain about easy mode it always has been here
for arcade games because well if you need to pay to play making the games really difficult is a way to make more money

i don't usually post here but your whole post looks like a pasta

>> No.3527679

i would just had that just because you bought the game you have the right to full completion
that what easy mode are here for
you just can't brag about betting the game in nightmare or something
plus the thing you describe for ice climber is exactly what happens in darks souls you just get used to the unusual mechanics of the game even if darks souls is not a good exemple because death isn't really punitive
you can play in hard mode in batman games problem is i would be really disappointed to see batman gets kick twice and die probably why i would avoid hard

>> No.3527764

I've been a gamer since the early 80s and I am torn on this. I have always had a temper when it came to games.

I like a challenge but I absolutely cannot stand artificial difficulty or AI "Cheating" to win. It is the methods they use to make games hard that piss me off, not the difficulty itself.

Memorizing a tough pattern is fair (hard but fair) like battletoad bikes or solving solomon key puzzles. Requiring fast reactions and perfect timing is fair. As long as the game gives you every opportunity to succeed without blatant cheating it is fine.

I cannot handle early mortal kombat AI on hard mode. I rage at the blatant cheating. Same is true for 4X games on the harder skill levels. At that point they are just fucking the player over because they have no idea how else to make it difficult.

>> No.3527782

thats why i think difficulty levels are good to have.

if i want a challenge i can have it, if I wanna just coast through a game and feel powerful than I can do that as well.

The real hard mode comes with multiplayer titles though.

>> No.3527894

>old Twilight Zone episode
damn you had to go there, didn't you.

>> No.3528259

I think hard games need at least two things to succeed. The first is really good controls. Difficulty coming from just struggling with controls kinda suck. Games like Megaman or Mario shine here. It takes seconds to come to grips with the controls.

The second thing is that playing through the same levels over and over again needs to be fun. So if part of the difficulty is a level being really long or really tedious, that's no good.

Honestly, I think Mario games really show that you can have difficulty in a game and not have to have systems that awhile to come to grips with. Mario's systems are all perfectly explained and understood within seconds. Yet the theoretical limit for how hard you can make a Mario level before it becomes unfair is very high.

I feel like nowadays, a lot of people think in order to make a game hard, you have to put the player at some huge disadvantage. Not just making a game hard to beat, but hard to play at all. A lot of people reference Dark Souls, not really understanding what makes the game good. They just think if an enemy takes off half your life in one attack, or if the players attacks are slow, then that's good "hard" game design.

"easy to play, hard to master" is my ideal for hard games.

>> No.3530325

First play through, normal mode. Second play, hard mode.

>> No.3530478

"easy to play, hard to master" is my ideal for every game

>> No.3530512

>Let me start off; just because you pirated or bought a book, just because you stood in line for twelve hours waiting to get into the library on release night, just because you got the extra-expensive hardcover copy--YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO READ THE BOOK COVER TO COVER.

>> No.3530531
File: 49 KB, 564x859, b741202480503179d5b2b0f067b05790.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

games aren't books, though.
see pic related and think about it.

>> No.3530532

Have you tried playing not-shit games?

Seriously, try it sometime. Because your entire rant is dismissed as inane when you STOP PLAYING SHIT GAMES.


One more time: STOP.




>> No.3530547

Rubber band racing AI, or respawning enemies (Ninja Gaiden) are so cheap and frustrating. I'm against most difficulty because the people who make the games either 1) play with cheats, just to make sure the game works, or 2) have played the game so much that they're too good and can't remember what a fair challenge is for someone new to the game

I love ninja gaiden, it makes you feel good knowing whats coming up, throwing a star, keeping moving, wall jumping exactly right. but I just can't fucking beat it and it sucks, I've put in plenty of time over the years

>> No.3530969

>respawning enemies (Ninja Gaiden) are so cheap and frustrating
You're playing it wrong. Ninja Gaiden rewards aggressive play. You hold right a lot. If you ever see an enemy respawn you fucked up.

>I just can't fucking beat it and it sucks
There is no shame in training with savestates if you do a legit run afterwards. If you are rich enough you could do the same thing with real hardware by buying a shitload of consoles and paying a lot of people to get to the point you want to practice.

>> No.3530983

There is something you're missing. Even as far as current gen games go, most people just never beat the games they buy.

Try to find games which have achievements based on how much the player progressed through the game. There is going to be the first achievement for the first step into the games then an achievement for the first quarter of the game, the 2nd, the 3rd, and for beating it.

With the first achievement you know how many people started the game, (on Steam for instance, many people buy, but never play) so you take that number as the player base, and from that point check the other achievements. You'll see that the further progress is required, the least people will have the achievement.

Devs don't want people to quit because of difficulty, because most players are quitters already who'll never beat the game. In this day and age the attention span is minimal, and if something gets in the way or if for whatever reason you don't like it, people can just go do something else easily.

>> No.3531003
File: 119 KB, 1024x683, Scared engine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Is this a pasta I'm not aware of?
Or is it genuine, unadultered biased autism from someone who only plays shit games and thinks his childhood games are the epithome or good games?

>> No.3531057


This is a fundamental difference between the gamers of today and the gamers of yesteryear. '90s born retards (AKA participation trophy generation faggots) feel that they're entitled to pretty much everything, and that them not being able to beat a game is indicative of bad game design, when it actually means they suck dicks at the game.

Hell games becoming too easy is one of the main reasons this hobby doesn't interest me much anymore. I remember buying a game as a kid and not knowing if I'd be able to beat it and I enjoyed that feeling. It represented a challenge and beating it meant I actually earned the win through mastery of the game's mechanics. Going to school the next day and telling my friends felt good and was an accomplishment. Most kids weren't able to beat games. They just accepted they were too hard for them and they were fine with that. This attitude is completely gone with the modern generation. Why do you think regen health is now a standard feature? Games are even starting to have wallhack as standard now.

These days you buy an AAA game like COD and know you have a streamlined 5 hour cinematic campaign in store for you. Any retard will be able to beat it. I really don't know what people get out of that but I guess it makes sense from a business standpoint. Cater to the lowest common denominator and you'll sell more copies. Apparently it's not about gameplay, skill and mastery anymore; it's about pretty graphics and muh cinematic experience. This is why the industry is the casualised shithole it is today.

>> No.3531063

An anon after my own heart.

>> No.3531071

Not pasta, I was just real mad and having a stroke all over my keyboard.

You tell me to not play shit games but it seems like these days there's only one good game a year, if even. Nothing Nintendo makes is good anymore. Most other big developers are the same.

>> No.3531092
File: 35 KB, 600x657, d33.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What an absolutely miserable, abysmal, utter failure of an analogy. Just because you think a game should be like a book... does not make it like a book. Not everything you buy guarantees success, for example jigsaw puzzles, crossword books, or even items that are a pain in the ass to assemble.

>> No.3531104
File: 51 KB, 546x455, fishing hot girl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>But in so many, so so many games these days it's outright impossible to fail--Nintendo games are particularly guilty of this

>/vr/ making bait threads about modern games again

Strap yourselves in for another 400 posts of bickering

>> No.3531107

>it's about pretty graphics and muh cinematic experience
the most important thing in AAA is power fantasy, which is why these games are so easy, so that every looser could feel powerful after a day of wageslaving, and choosing higher difficulties doesn't solve the problem, since games today are build around being easy, sure playing CoD on the highest difficulty will make it hard, but in the cheapest way possible, becouse the game is shallow by design.

>> No.3531113
File: 361 KB, 174x172, 1333548559262.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is what people who only look at the top 10 most popular games actually think. There are still difficult and challenging games, but the market is a lot broader than it once was so you have to look more carefully.

I've always been a hardcore leaning gamer and I think these days are better than ever for gaming. I know you won't believe me and just want to be angry and upset though so I'll just leave you to your bitching thread.

>> No.3531115

Difficulty is an unsolvable enigma because each player share a different set of skills: it's not just about getting good, there's reflexes, space orientation, logic, memorization,... You can be great at Civilization and completely shit at Tetris, and vice versa.
Making the ideal difficulty for every player profile is impossible. Difficulty levels are unappreciated by players (beating a game on easy difficulty is ridiculed even if it's a game where the easy difficulty is as tough as the hard setting of another game). Dynamic difficulty just doesn't work, it makes it look like the game is constantly cheating.

I guess the only way to make it right is to make a game so good that players will love it without getting frustrated no matter the difficulty.

>> No.3531118

Jesus, this is the most senile ranting that I have read on 4chan in a while. What's next buddy, going to ask those Millennials to get off your lawn?
Lots of retro games are based off arcade games, which are notorious for having artificial difficulty based around cheating AI to munch quarters. Lots of games in general have shit difficulties because the developers couldn't think of other ways to make the game hard.
But not every game now is a scripted qte Fest like Uncharted or God of War. Many modern games are beatable but have layers of depth, unlike the NES days where you had to be amazing to beat anything. Super Mario World, for instance, is easy even without the cape, but 100% still took skill.

>> No.3531128

>What's next buddy, going to ask those Millennials to get off your lawn?

That's what 50% of his posts are. OP is a legit autist retard. He honestly believes everything he's saying and is proud of it. No joke.

>> No.3531141
File: 128 KB, 446x366, weaponlord8ao1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Single player games are easier because they're more for casuals. Multiplayer is what hardcore gamers do now. No one really gives a shit if you get great at a single player game. Competition is where people show their skills. It's why stuff like Dota, Street Fighter, Splatoon and Overwatch get so huge.

There have always been games like that, but internet makes gaming with others so much easier than ever before.

>> No.3531180

>No one really gives a shit if you get great at a single player game.

Hahaha. That sort of thinking is the whole problem and the cancer - "doing something hard is only worth it if other people know I did it and I get the respect I deserve". You're admitting you're playing videogames for what, to earn the "respect" of others?

Multiplayer obsession is the biggest casual circle jerk ever. People aren't playing because the game is still good, they're playing because they can't stand to see the other guy beat them and want to show all their friends how good they are.

>> No.3531196

This is true, but there are still some games that are fair. Mega Man, for one. The games do a good job of showing you threats and giving you time to react to them. Only except is maybe the death lasers on Quick Man's stage.

The Mario games are very well designed.

One of the genres where you can really see the arcade mentality are beat 'em ups. The Streets of Rage games are the only ones I play nowadays because most other ones have a lot of bullshit.

On the other side, there are indeed modern games that are challenging, once you get past the "hollywood blockbuster" games. You also do have legitimate advances in games. I put Shovel Knight above every single NES platformer.

>> No.3531226
File: 166 KB, 620x327, invisible inc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Outside of fighters I don't actually play many multiplayer games actually. I'm just explaining the market to you. There are still hard and engaging single player games, they're just not usually the biggest popular ones.

>"doing something hard is only worth it if other people know I did it and I get the respect I deserve".

You didn't intend it, but you really wrote this message to yourself. You are clamoring for respect and recognition and lamenting that no one else really seems to care. Stop focusing on what other people think and just enjoy games,

Also, we are living in a golden age of gaming. No joke. There are way more games with way more variety being made now than ever before, and there are plenty of balls to the wall hard single player games too.

But understand that it's not just aspie nerds playing anymore, everyone is playing games now. So there are games for everyone, and the games you like are probably not the most popular ones. So you have to look to find what suits you.

Or you can just sulk and be sour all day forever. All the same to me, but you sure don't seem like a happy camper.

>> No.3531229

>Games are only worthwhile because of the potential for failure. I'd even go so far as to say that these current gen games like Yoshi's Wooly World, or the Arkham Batman games are hardly games at all and just storybook experiences that guide the player along to the end
This. For a piece of software to even count as a game, there has to be conditions for success and failure. When you beat the final boss, or top the high score list, you "win." When you see the words Game Over and it boots back to the title screen, you "lose."

A game where you can never get Game Over is really only half a game.

>> No.3531238

I don't think you understand what the word "game" means very well.

>> No.3531239

>A game where you can never get Game Over is really only half a game.
So that's why most of the NES games show "Game Over" even when you win.

>> No.3531254

>Multiplayer obsession is the biggest casual circle jerk ever. People aren't playing because the game is still good, they're playing because they can't stand to see the other guy beat them and want to show all their friends how good they are.
Eh, I'm not the guy you were talking to and I agree that it sucks that SP has gone to shit, but shitting on MP is retarded. You could never find the depth of gameplay that you find in multiplayer in single player and that's a fact, seeing as you're not dealing with limited dumbass AI that only does the same shit and can't adapt etc. To say people only play multiplayer because of circle jerking is full autism. And hell the competitive spirit that is alive in multiplayer is another thing you won't find in SP - unless you're a speedrun fag. Multiplayer is always awesome, whether it's local couch or via lan/internet, coop or vs.

>> No.3531260

>Also, we are living in a golden age of gaming. No joke.
lol no we're not. The only way to say this is correct is to include the cop-out argument that you can still play classic games today so there's nothing to complain about (although this argument mainly applies only to single player). Fact is however that the actual games that are being made today are mostly turds and you're a total fucking idiot 2bh.

>> No.3531273

You can have a failure state that isn't necessarily a "game over" state.

Like respawning at a checkpoint or something.

Yeah, the industry isn't doing too hot right now.

But actually, the problem isn't that most games are turds, it's that they're incredibly mediocre. Lots of higher budget games take the safe route and use mechanics that are already proven to be at least a little fun. So we just get variations of the same basic shit.

Only smaller devs are trying new things, but they can't have production values on the same level as AAA games, so lots of people just pass them up.

>> No.3531278

>but it seems like these days there's only one good game a year
Only if you're a pleb who doesn't know where to get good games.
>Nothing Nintendo makes is good anymore.
Nintendo never EVER made any game that was anything beyond shallow entertainment for kids, don't even pretend their games are hard or well designed when most of them played themselves since back in the days.
The only difference is that now that you're older and with more experience you see the games for what they are, but they're virtually the same exact games they've been churning out since the 80's, which is why I never bothered with them after the SNES, they're great for kids, but they're not nearly enough to keep an adult entertained unless you've got a terminal case of nostalgia or fanboyism.
>Most other big developers are the same.
Just as they were in the past.
Like really, get off your nostalgia goggles, go look at all the lists of "best games of all time", they're shallow garbage, no matter the generation we're talking about, you make it sound like games were so hard and so refined back in the days, they weren't, if anything most genres today are much harder to learn and magnitudes more complex, the difference is that now many devs give the players more optional crutches to play them and learn to play them and then there's mongs like you who play either shit games or use all the possible crutches and then complain that games today are 2 EZ.
It's like all those faggots in here that think that JRPG are all garbage like Chrono Trigger or that Radiant Silvergun is the best SHMUP ever, maybe if you actually got some taste you could see how many great games we have today and how bad many respected retro games were in retrospect compared to even older games or lesser known titles.

And let me tell you, I loved SF2 but it can't hold a candle to any GG game past XX, Contra isn't anywhere near as fun, complex or hard as Vanquish or the latest Hard Corps and so on.

>> No.3531279

That's true though. Infinite Jest is long and difficult to read for a reason, and if you complain that it should be shorter and more digestible then you'll just look like a stupid, whiny child (and correctly so).

>> No.3531287

>You praise old things in comparison to newer ones?
>Well I'm going to dismiss the idea of even considering the substance of your argument because you're clearly just nostalgic! History is linear and there is no such thing as degeneration over time, everything newer is always better because reasons!
Is this non-argument registered as a proper fallacy yet? It should be.

>> No.3531293

>Apparently it's not about gameplay, skill and mastery anymore; it's about pretty graphics and muh cinematic experience.
>it's about pretty graphics
One glance at the current state of /v/ will dispel any suspicions that you're merely a nostalgia-blinded oldfag. It's funny how they pretend to be superior to people who focus on story, then turn around and ignore gameplay and shitpost about muh grafix for every new release (or alternately actually praise games like Uncharted for that reason).

>> No.3531296

The thing with Nintendo games is that they don't pretend to be what they aren't. Fun little games for kids.

>> No.3531297

It's very courteous of you to share drafts of your next essays with us, Icycalm

>> No.3531306

>Nintendo never EVER made any game that was anything beyond shallow entertainment for kids, don't even pretend their games are hard or well designed when most of them played themselves since back in the days.
Kid Icarus? Zelda II? Super Mario Bros. II (Japan)? Ice Climber? Fire Emblem 1-5?

That being said, an occasional tough one still slips by. Radiant Dawn could be pretty challenged (and apparently Conquest too, though I haven't played it yet). Even if Wonderful 101 wasn't Nintendo-developed, if FE counts, this one does as well.

>> No.3531312
File: 48 KB, 1280x720, deletethis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Icycalm died in a street race a year ago

>> No.3531325

>Fact is however that the actual games that are being made today are mostly turds and you're a total fucking idiot 2bh.

Amazing reasoning there, friend. At least you wear being autistic on your sleeve now. It helps to remember when I read some of the post you make that it's coming from someone literally retarded. Even if it is a mild form, you see the world in a special way. I don't think we have any reason to continue conversing though.. .

>> No.3531331

>but they can't have production values on the same level as AAA games,

So you'll only play it if it has high production values? But you're on a fucking retro games site?

>so lots of people just pass them up.

Why does this matter to you at all? That's what's great about games these days, even small devs can thrive making niche games for very specific audiences. Sure they don't have the production values of AAA games, but that only matters if you're a graphics whore. If you care about gameplay, these days are amazing.

>> No.3531336

>Using /v/ as your example for modern gaming

No wonder you're in such a state.

>> No.3531345

Don't be autistic, you know what I meant.

>respawning at a checkpoint
Fuck off, this is exactly the sort of non-game we're talking about.

>> No.3531350

>So you'll only play it if it has high production values?
...No? I never said that.

The point I was trying to make that a lot of great games aren't popular because they just don't look as impressive.

Obviously, that doesn't matter to me, but it matters to the industry. A lot of these games just aren't selling very well. Occasionally you get a break out success like Shovel Knight, but that's far from the norm.

So Mario games are non-games?

>> No.3531351

On that I have to agree with.
>Kid Icarus? Zelda II? Super Mario Bros. II (Japan)? Ice Climber? Fire Emblem 1-5?
None of those games are even remotely hard.
Especially Fire Emblem which is as casual as you can get.
>but that only matters if you're a graphics whore. If you care about gameplay, these days are amazing.

This, I still can't believe we kind of got back to the C64 days where everyone had access to developing tools and the small dev scene thrived, we have a huge range of choice nowadays and what's even more incredible is that development tools are much more accessible than before.

>> No.3531353

Not him but if anything using /v/ as an example for modern gaming would probably be viewing it in its most favourable light. It's sad but true. What in your mind is the correct example for modern gamers? Gamefaqs? Reddit? Neogaf? COD kiddies and bro gamers?

>> No.3531359

>I often see retro games being disparaged by people these days. I read things that talk about how the lives and game over systems were flawed, that the character movement sucks just to make games harder, and that one can “build a good difficult game without those archaic systems.”
>In a Roguelike-obsessed indie games market

Gr8 b8 m8.

>> No.3531360

So? The games that are selling best are doing so because that's what most people want to play. You are just upset that not everyone likes the exact same kind of game as you. Get over that and there's no problem at all.

There are still plenty of great games out there. Even if the ones you like aren't the most, most popular, if you support them and it's good it will usually survive to make more and ultimately that's all that matters.

And don't try to pretend like there weren't shitty shovelware games in the past. Ignore the bad and just focus on the good. Sure there's lots to not like these days, but there's plenty to like as well. It's all perspective.

>> No.3531363

>There are still plenty of great games out there.
I agree

>And don't try to pretend like there weren't shitty shovelware games in the past
I don't

>> No.3531368

Those are all websites... my idea of modern gamers is everyone now. I ride the train and all sorts from college kids to business commuters are playing something. My nephews are all kids and they play games. My grandmother is 102 and she's on her tablet all day. Everyone games.

>> No.3531371

Mario 1 and 2(J) have limited lives, if you're not a pussy who uses that shell glitch to farm them. Beyond that, yes, Mario "games" are interactive picture books for children.

>> No.3531373

okay, pal

>> No.3531378

Cool, then your only problem of getting over the hump that your taste in games isn't what's popular and that what you do like is niche. I get that it's an ego kick to take, but once you do you'll be much happier. I just had to make that leap decades ago now so it's old hat. To me, at least 50% of everything isn't a god-damned platformer so it's a big improvement right there.

>> No.3531380

I don't get why you think I don't think this already.

>> No.3531382

You've beaten Fire Emblem 5 then?

>> No.3531386

Must be mistaking you with the guy who calls modern games cancer. Sorry, gets confusing with all the anons.

>> No.3531409

Yeah, and the games they play tend to be pretty fucking horrible and worse than what is being played on /v/. That's the point you retard. Industry is generally a casual ass bitch now and /v/ is at least a step above that.

>> No.3531424
File: 53 KB, 1610x474, 1983 nostalgia.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Majority of the best-selling /vr/ games are easy games, games with an "easy" difficulty setting, and multiplayer games. Low difficulty has ALWAYS been what the majority prefers, all this shit about "these new people are fucking up my hobby and back in my day we loved difficulty!" is total bullshit. People on /vr/ like to think that the mainstream was playing Alien Soldier and Comix Zone, but the reality is that the mainstream was playing Mario and Sonic, both incredibly easy platformers, especially for their time.

Even difficult games like Contra that got popular were usually played as co-op or using cheats. There was a reason why cheat books and hint books sold, and it wasn't because the mainstream loved difficulty.

There will always be easy games and difficult games, and the easy ones will always be more popular.

>> No.3531438

So all those people are playing and enjoying games, but it's all terrible because they're not the "right" kinds of games? Is that really what you're saying?

>> No.3531445
File: 12 KB, 356x496, georgelaughing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>difficult games like Contra
Top kek.

Btw I can tell from your post that you play all your emulated shit with save states don't you faggot

>> No.3531448

This. I remember having discussions with so many people like this. It's all the same things being said just with a new coat of paint.

>> No.3531451
File: 110 KB, 577x459, simply epic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Great argument, you sure showed me.

>> No.3531452

>Mario and Sonic
Super Mario Bros and Sonic The Hedgehog are both far harder mainstream games than you'd find on the market today.

>> No.3531458


You're missing the point. They were also some of the easiest games of their time. People had to choose between difficult and easy, and they chose easy.

>> No.3531460

Where was I arguing lol. I did nothing more than laugh at you and call you a faggot. Might wanna get your meme lingo right there kiddo.

>> No.3531475

This shit is baffling to read. All this philosophizing about the value of struggle and persistence or what the fuck ever is completely besides the point.

Devs only give a shit about the bottom line. In the arcade era, an addictive but difficult game was the ideal quarter-eater. Early action games usually had less than an hour of content, so you bump up the difficulty to extend the game's life. And narrative was minimal, usually due to constraints.

Modern games don't work under the same business models or limitations. There's really no reason to make a game difficult now, other than to appease a niche hardcore community. Games can now have hundreds of hours of unique content, and narration has taken on a huge role. And it still comes down to the bottom line, devs will make something people want to buy, and if that means something that's more movie than game, they'll make it.

>> No.3531480

You're missing the point. Games were generally much harder in the past and Sonic The Hodgehog and SMB aren't exceptions.

>People had to choose between difficult and easy, and they chose easy.
Only reason SMB and Sonic sold so much is because they were flagship titles with heavy marketing (and they were also good games). SMB even came free with NES. Nobody looked at Contra and SMB on a stand and chose SMB because it was supposedly 'easier' (it's actually not btw). You're going to argue now but I know you have literally no idea what you're talking about and are probably born around 1996.

>> No.3531481

>Just name calling now

>> No.3531486
File: 3 KB, 239x180, images copy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>kiddo thinks Contra is hard

>> No.3531491

>arcade cabinets in supermarkets
This is still a thing if you live in Mexico. I see a lot of arcade machines in convenience stores and supermarkets; I don't think they're "real" arcade games though, just bootleg MAMEboxes.

>> No.3531494
File: 2.52 MB, 480x360, sanic1464188997240.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Welcome to every post OP makes. He's an autistic try-hard with ADD and a cocktail of other mental issues. Just watch him spaz for laughs and poke when he slows down. It's good times.

>> No.3531501

Wasn't me. Don't know if I've ever even played contra, no clue if it's hard or not. Just think it's funny that you've already been reduced to name calling and pulling out a classic "kiddo".

>> No.3531502


>Only reason SMB and Sonic sold so much is because they were flagship titles with heavy marketing

And they wouldn't have become flagship titles if they weren't easy. Is it just a coincidence that the 2 big mascots that took off just happened to be easier than the average game?

>> No.3531521


Nu-uh! Back then, everyone was just better at video games. Kids trained for weeks in boot camps to defeat Doctor Eggman. Cheat books and game genies were made illegal and using one was considered a war crime.

>> No.3531525

Question: Have there been any flagship titles that you would describe as hardcore at all?

>> No.3531528

Smb and contra arent harder than each other kiddo. And again, smb is harder than almost any game released the entire gen.

>> No.3531539

Is he pretending to be stupid now? I don't get it...

>> No.3531541

Lol u seem rly butthurt for not being the one called kiddo, kiddo.

>> No.3531543
File: 3.60 MB, 320x320, 1464192325032.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>SMB not easier than Contra

>> No.3531545

>I don't get it...
That much has been obvious since the start

>> No.3531547


Are you saying that mario and sonic are "hardcore"?

Okay, lets forget about them then. Take a look at the top seller list of any console and tell me how many "hardcore" games you see. If people love difficulty, then surely the top selling games would all be difficult, right? If people loved difficulty then magazines and books dedicated to helping people get through games easier wouldn't exist, would they? Because why would people buy something to make a game easier if they love difficulty so much?



You probably are in your 20s and think you're old.

>> No.3531553

No no, I'm saying they're very obviously not hardcore. I was asking if you could think of any that actually were. I don't think I can.

>> No.3531554

So clear it up. Are you saying Contra and Mario Bros are equally easy?

>> No.3531565

The thing I've learned from this thread is no one has a goddamn idea what they're talking about.

Just shut up and play video games you nerds.

>> No.3531569

Hardcore is a design style, not a difficulty. Hardcore games require long-term planning that will have irreversible consequences across the entire playthrough.

Jagged Alliance 2 for instance fits into this. Is it a difficult game? IS IT FUCK!

>> No.3531572

I'm saying you're a total retard that has absolutely no idea what he's talking about and is making bullshit excuses for his pathetically casual generation of faggots raised on halo and the like. Tell me I'm wrong.

>> No.3531575

My definition of hardcore is different and you can't prove me wrong.

Jagged Alliance 2 doesn't fit under my arbitrary definition, therefore it's casual garbage.

>> No.3531578

There were people exactly like you in the 90s, talking about how YOUR generation was a bunch of pussies being raised on casual games.

>> No.3531585

Lol I started with atari 2600 kiddo. How does it feel to be a tryhard halo baby shitposting on vr pretending he knows jack shit about anything? You literally know you're a shitter that's why you're so butthurt right now lmao

>> No.3531587

First off, I'm 42. Second you're still not clearing up the actual thing I asked you about. Are you really saying Contra and Mario are equally easy?
>Smb and contra arent harder than each other kiddo.

Because that's ridiculous.

>> No.3531590

t. underage pretending to be old

>> No.3531593
File: 8 KB, 619x147, J69g6M3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Hardcore only refers to people involved in a thing.

A person can be hardcore about video games. A game can't be hardcore. That doesn't make sense.

>> No.3531598

>First off, I'm 42.
Hahahahaha no you're not you hopeless fucking birth defects. You're Clueless as all motherfuck and it really shows. Top lol either way.

And yes contra is not harder than smb without warps. I doubt you've even played the games you sound like a memer.

>> No.3531606

Holy shit, what are you doing on 4chan, grandpa? Shouldn't you be off listening to your phonograph or something?

>> No.3531608

He's 20 years old at best and utterly full of all shit. Guaranteed.

>> No.3531609

I've played both and think you're being ridiculous. Your reliance on name calling is really sad for someone claiming to have been gaming since the Atari days. You're an embarrassment.

>> No.3531613

I wasn't so old when I first started coming here. Now it's one of the few places that still reminds me of the old internet. Also I'm here because I have a cushy job with unfettered net access.

>> No.3531614

Lol sure thing halo baby. Looking forward to your battlefield 1 preorder?

>> No.3531616

That's funny, I don't remember the old internet being full of contrarian idiots.

>> No.3531621

>Now it's one of the few places that still reminds me of the old internet.
Jesus could this kid be more full of shit? You need friends son, honestly

>> No.3531626
File: 118 KB, 1024x768, Starsiege_Tribes_3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

FPS was never my thing, sorry. Tribes was perfect and then since then nothing else has grabbed me. I'm happy for all those Halo fans though. They love those games for some reason, and I've always had plenty more to play. Gaming just keeps getting better and better.

>> No.3531629

>this shithead is claiming to be 42
Nice try kiddo, but it's beyond obvious. Stay 20 and keep memeing.

>> No.3531630

LOL!! Are you serious?? Come on man.... if you're even close to my age you will know the internet has always been like this. 4chan is more like old BBSs and chatrooms than anywhere else on the internet now. Now everything's accounts and upvotes and likes and follow me and twitter this... 4chan's one of the last wild wests there is.

>> No.3531642

I don't care how old you think I am. Trying to say Contra is as easy as Super Mario is really ludicrous any way you slice it. This age thing is all trying to deflect from that. I could be a 9 year old potted phycus and you'd still be talking bullshit.

>> No.3531648

I don't care how old you claim you are because it's obvious that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about kiddo.

>> No.3531650

Super Mario 1 isn't easy.

>> No.3531667

Neither is Contra.

>> No.3531669

>wild west

I didn't know the wild west was filled with people that couldn't stand to share interests with anyone else.

>> No.3531682

Actually it is. Both games are, but not to the modern generation of shithead gamers like yourself.

>> No.3531692

>Holy shit, what are you doing on 4chan, grandpa?
Lame insult, isn't that kind of nasty? What are YOU doing here is more to the point if you weren't even born when these games were made.

>> No.3531697

Again, were you never on bbs and chatrooms? It was all like this.

Also, I'm not the one not sharing my interests. I'm the one trying to champion how great games are these days because of how much diversity we have. On top of easy access to almost everything that's come out before.

Also that I think it's *RIDICULOUS* to try and say Super Mario and Contra equally hard/easy.

This age thing only ever came up because you like to call others young as a primary method of shutting down an argument. I don't think it matters either way, but if you want to get upset or not believe that I'm in my 40's be my guest. Let's just go back to the actual issue of the discussion.

>> No.3531705

>Also that I think it's *RIDICULOUS* to try and say Super Mario and Contra equally hard/easy.
They are though kiddo. Doing a deathless run of Contra is much easier than doing a deathless run of SMB without warp zones and this is a fact of life. You sound utterly terrible at video games and again it's obvious as all hell that you're 20 years old. I genuinely pity your existence.

>> No.3531709

I was, and stupid shit like people saying Contra is no harder than SMB or any of the other blatant lies or bait you see on this board would've resulted in that person being kicked out or mocked endlessly.

The difference between now and then is that back then you would be called out on your bullshit and were expected to back up your claims. Nowadays all I can say is "contra is easy, kid" and that qualifies as an argument.

This is why discord servers are better than any forum nowadays, retards can be swiftly dealt with.

>> No.3531719

Okay, well you're stating something polar opposite to my experience and keep talking about age over and over and over so we're clearly not getting anywhere. But I haven't played either game in decades anyways. So meh

>> No.3531721

>. Doing a deathless run of Contra is much easier than doing a deathless run of SMB without warp zones and this is a fact of life
Stream yourself doing this.

>> No.3531725

>But I haven't played either game in decades anyways. So meh
Well thanks for admitting that you are actually utterly clueless on the subject, just as you've been with everything else you've said. Although,
lol sure kiddo

>> No.3531732

>I was, and stupid shit like people saying Contra is no harder than SMB or any of the other blatant lies or bait you see on this board would've resulted in that person being kicked out or mocked endlessly.

No it wouldn't That's what's funny about stuff like this. >>3531424 It's not just that the types of shit is the same, sometimes it's literally the exact same shit and people acting the same way they did 20 years ago.

Sure discourse has changed because culture has changed, but it's the anonymity of 4chan that I like because it reminds me of the old days when even people you knew were sort of ephemeral. It's not about getting recognized and having people like all your posts, it's about just saying what you think and it standing on that.

I don't know how to describe it more than that. But it's why I still come to this place.

>> No.3531736

Except anonymity was not the norm. You at least had a name so that people can recognize you and say "oh it's that idiot, I can ignore him".

>> No.3531742

Not a joke. I don't really like platformers like Mario and did play Contra a fair bit at a friends house but never wanted to own it. Contra always seemed way harder though. Mario is just boring.

Haven't played Contra since my friend's house and honestly couldn't tell you the last time I played Mario 1.

>> No.3531745
File: 15 KB, 360x253, shitposting since 1989.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


war never changes

>> No.3531747

Keep trying to convince me kiddo.

>> No.3531750

Yeah but that's what I meant about it being ephemeral, people changed those willy nilly. And even when you did stick with names, the sense of talking to this sea of people you didn't recognize from everywhere. They had names, but it was all anonymous in a way it just isn't now.

>> No.3531753

The RPG arguments that go on here, I swear could be copy pasta from ones back in the day. It's hilarious sometimes.

>> No.3531758

Yeah and 4chan ain't exactly a promised land, it's gone to shit too.

What started out as people acting stupid for fun eventually turned into actual idiots that felt they were in good company.

On /vr/ especially, it's just this competition to prove who has the "best taste" which just means who hates the most popular games. No discussion of any kind can happen. Someone posts a thread trying to talk about Chrono Trigger, some sperg will rush in to let everyone know that he doesn't like the game. His ego is such that anyone enjoying something he doesn't like is an offense to him.

Only there's not one person like that, it's 90% of the entire board.

>> No.3531773

No I'm saying it's too bad games have been dumbed down to incorporate this larger demographic of retards. It wouldn't be a problem if we still got decent games, but high budget video games have gone to shit because they cater to the lowest common denominator that results in the most sales. You might be happy with the CODs, Halos, Assassins Creeds and modern Battlefields but I sure as fuck am not.

>> No.3531781
File: 956 KB, 192x154, 1328626293012.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't necessarily disagree with that, I just think it's still better than most of the alternatives.

Personally, I'm firmly against the concept of "best" tastes. I think all sorts of games can be fun for all sorts of different reasons. I may not like Mario or Halo, but I'm always happy they're there for people that do.

I just love games, and as long as I have games to play I'm happy. And considering even if games stopped being made right now, there are already more out there I want to play than I'll ever have time for... I'm pretty happy.

Difficult, balls to the wall hard games are fun, but so are relaxing or playful ones. It's all good!

>> No.3531797

Again, this only matters if you care about playing the AAA games with the highest production values. I don't play any of the Halos, Cod or Ass Creeds (tried that last one, it SUUUUUCKED) but there's still a ton of shit to play.

It's just not made for me because I'm not that target demographic anymore. But it's the same way with everything. If I only went and saw the AAA Superhero movie #14 and listened to Taylor Swift all day I'd be miserable. But even though it's not as popular there's still plenty of awesome stuff to watch and listen to.

>> No.3531802

t. 20 year old

Just stop m8 this is really pathetic.


>> No.3531829

>Difficult, balls to the wall hard games are fun, but so are relaxing or playful ones. It's all good!
t. casual 18 year old homosexual

>It's just not made for me because I'm not that target demographic anymore
Yeah and that's why I have a right to be annoyed. I preferred when devs actually catered to me.

>there's still a ton of shit to play.
Oh yeah? Like what? What upcoming games look good to you? Seeing as you think Just Cause is a good game I'm already prepared for the cringe.

>> No.3531861
File: 174 KB, 700x446, DSCF6548copy_zps0881c003.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>20 year old
So is that literally all you're going to talk about for the whole thread now?

Sorry if I offended but I thought Assassin's Creed was boring as all hell. Which was frustrating since I like a good open world game and the setting seemed cool.

As for looking forward to releases, I never do. I'm always a few years behind and pick up what looks neat on the cheap. My pile of have to play is always growing though. I could name some games but you'll just nitpick and my whole point was how I like that not everyone has to like the same thing.

You can choose to be annoyed that devs don't cater to you as much anymore, but it's wasted effort. No one owes you anything.

>> No.3531880

you are all children and every game you like sucks XD

>> No.3531923
File: 71 KB, 634x386, wowie kazowie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Yeah and that's why I have a right to be annoyed. I preferred when devs actually catered to me.

It's nice to feel that way, but no one else in the world cares. Also, if you can't find games you like I honestly think you're either not looking or just don't actually like gaming.

As for calling each other casual, I'd like to see you try to get your wowie kazowie in Monster Hunter 3. Or are you going to embarrass yourself?

>> No.3531958

/rlg/ here, the correct term would be "roguelite", thanks.

>> No.3531961

I don't give a shit about Ass Creed. I was merely bemused by your ridiculous childlike posting style. I never said devs owe me anything.

>just don't actually like gaming.
Wew, no shit. I think most modern games are turds, and that's what the problem is as I used to love video games.

You sound like an autistic child. If you're truly a 42 year old man, my sincerest condolences.

>> No.3531980

>drop the worst bait I could possibly come up with
>neckbeard still shoves it in his mouth

For fucks sake, man.

>> No.3532001

I quoted you accidentally you fucking retard. I thought the quoted greentext from the post I wanted would make it obvious enough but apparently not. Jesus how dumb are you buddy?

>> No.3532208
File: 2 KB, 48x97, Joe-moon1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I was merely bemused by your ridiculous childlike posting style.

This from the person who calls everything he doesn't like "cancer". Cute. Enjoy your misery, I'm going to enjoy some video games.

>> No.3532270

Have you ever considered the possibility that there's more than one person on this board who isn't a gay baby like you?

>> No.3532318

This guy and >>3530512 this guy have no idea what makes a game good and have no right to post here.
They probably should go somewhere else. No idea where but they shouldn't be here.

>> No.3532320

>a gay baby like you
Have you considered the possibility that everything you write sounds so specifically idiotic that I can always pick you out of the crowd of anons?

>> No.3532321

Didn't read your whole blog but as someone who was born before the git gud gene was bread out of the human race I've never had a problem with games being too difficult. At the same time I can enjoy casual games. Maybe I just don't want to put in the effort on a hard game or maybe I'm playing with casuals who simply can't handle a hard game. Whatever the case they have their place.

>> No.3532327

Partially right. But mostly wrong. There is to many free games now so there is no satisfaction in playing or beating games like there used to be when you only got at most 2-4 games a year.

>> No.3532337

Check the number of posters, kiddo. It went up.

Unless that's just too difficult for you.

>> No.3532338

While I agree with most of your rant I disagree with the Nintendo not making good games part. There are some good games there might not be as hard but there are some good ones. Nintendo seems to be the only one catering to the new gen properly and the others follow.

>> No.3532360
File: 32 KB, 453x500, a9e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>mfw a man claiming to be 42 years old made this post
(but I know you're 18 so it's not that bad. either way you're fucked.)
I literally haven't used the word cancer once itt kiddo.

>> No.3532361

No, but I saw a LP a couple times and it didn't really seem that hard. So my point stands.

>> No.3532370

Play it without the Konami code faggot.

>> No.3532373

>so hopeless he needs the konami code to play Contra

I literally just replayed Contra again for the first time since 2006 because of this thread. I beat the game and only saw ONE continue screen, on my very first try after ages. Back in 2006 I beat it with a deathless run.

You are a fucking joke m8.

>> No.3532381

That's even more pathetic. If you are in your 40s calling people "kiddo" have little to no understanding of the hobby on the board you are posting in and won't even attempt a reasonable troll you probably should just go and do something like get put the house and meet the neighbours or travel.
You just made me sad for my whole generation.

>> No.3532391

Shhh adults are talking right now. Moat of us in our 30s and 40s have been here since around the time your mom sold her pussy on the night your mistake ridden ass ruined her figure and tits.

>> No.3532396

>If you are in your 40s
Incorrect kiddo. I was born into a household that already had an Atari 2600 and that's where I started. My next console was the NES.

>> No.3532435

Anyone that comes to this board using that stupid "t" cap immediately has show their age and have invalidated anything they have to say cuz no self respecting adult on an anonymous board or otherwise would put that into their vocabulary.
It mainly shows me where you spend most of your time.

>> No.3532445

By you saying that they don't cater to you but you wished they did is direct implication that you feel that way.

>> No.3532451

So my point still stands. But how the fuck did you see the continue screen with 30 lives. You really are pretty bad.

>> No.3532454

So you admit youre 18 barely then.

>> No.3532468

Feeling bad that devs don't make games catered to me anymore does not mean that I think they owe me anything you magnificent dumbass. If something you like isn't being made anymore you'd feel bad because you miss it and want more of it, not because you think people owe you something. Are you actually too stupid to understand this?

>> No.3532473

I thought Konami code gave 30 continues and not lives. I have never used the Konami code in my life, glad to know you have though retard :^)

It seems /vr/ is completely incapable of logic. This is pretty hilarious 2bh :)

>> No.3532474

>he thinks that thing works?

>> No.3532481

We all used codes growing up back then. If you grew up around that time you'd understand the culture. And to say you have played any Konami game that's retro and not know that code shows your age more than anything else. No worries tho, a couple more years and you can have your first legal sip of alcohol and finally be considered an adult.

>> No.3532486

It's okay to feel slighted. I used to get that way to when I was your age.
You kinda grow out of it in your 20s.

>> No.3532487
File: 10 KB, 251x240, attachment.php.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I literally beat Contra when I was like 6 years old with no Konami code and I didn't even know what it was.

>mfw I was a better Contra player at 6 years old than you are now

>> No.3532489
File: 120 KB, 450x399, 1134850596997.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

He's not me. Why are you so hung up on age in the first place?

>> No.3532492

Lol I just miss the times when games were actually good and we didn't have shitters like you clogging up the video game industry m8. No harm no foul, it's just 4chinks.

>> No.3532502

>nice family portrait fag.

>> No.3532505

Yea we all did.
Most of us with the code, you're just the only guy that won't admit it cuz you need the e-cred.

>> No.3532507

I don't think you know who you're replying to or what you mean.

>> No.3532510

I keked

>> No.3532518

whatever helps you sleep darling
its best not to project your own inadequacies unto others and to try to deal with life like a man
it might help you build at least an ounce of character
that's the best advice I can give you for today kiddo

I think you're retarded

>> No.3532580

just passing by to tell you that you are disgusting

>> No.3532583

IP count didn't go up so I wouldn't say you were 'passing by'. Sit and simmer son.

>> No.3532585


stop calling people "son" or "kiddo" you piece of shit

>> No.3532586
File: 47 KB, 396x386, 1310672235781.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

lol okay then kiddo

>> No.3532623

People like you two cretins is the reason this board went to shit. You're both arguing like five year olds.

>> No.3532626

I've literally been on /vr/ since day 1. goml kiddo.

>> No.3532654

hint: one of the two posters you've quoted made a total of two posts in this thread so far. I agree that this thread went straight to the dumpster about half-way in, though.

>> No.3532705

Sure thing sport.

>> No.3532708
File: 95 KB, 486x330, 1442946984385.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I like to imagine the "kid" posters had an emotionally abusive father or uncle that talked to them like that.

>> No.3532723

at least you got your picture right

>> No.3532727


>> No.3532798
File: 95 KB, 612x792, anime show generator.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>heh millennials heh kiddo XD thems were the days
This thread is a pile of stupid ass bullfuck. Give me your brand new, industry changing Chinese cartoon show /vr/.
>Neon Goddess Girl

>> No.3532921

You got it champ.

>> No.3532982

okay bud

>> No.3533029

Take it easy squirt.

>> No.3533131

Will do slugger

>> No.3533140

so youre just gonna shit on a guy who just likes video games? for what purpose?

>> No.3533364

>being this new

>> No.3533390


>> No.3533421

Because he's angry about everything. Has to get it out somehow.

>> No.3533426

By your command buckaroo

>> No.3533526
File: 13 KB, 236x285, fishc23a2368.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>seriously responding to kiddo tard

/vr/ I am embarrassed for you

>> No.3533663

i feel like most modern style shooters are like that though it's why i never really take any complaints about health regen seriously

>> No.3533705

Health regen just makes the game focus more on the action and less on the resource management which is what most people seem to prefer.

>> No.3533796

Hence why I left the thread for a couple hours until the kids went to bed so we wouldn't derail it anymore.

>> No.3533878

Wow you sure told me.
Anyway. I'm so sad now. Bye.

>> No.3533998

>Fact is however that the actual games that are being made today are mostly turds and you're a total fucking idiot 2bh.
Not buying that. There's more interesting ideas coming out of "indie devs" than you're willing to acknowledge, I think; it's not all Steam muh-retro shovelware.

We were told for a decade that games suck now because AAA studios aren't willing to take risks -- now you have thousands of indie studios putting out riskier games (many of which are terrible, granted) and now it's indie devs which are ruining gaming? Come on.

>> No.3534047

ahahahaha. ok kiddo.

>> No.3534219

>derailing a kiddo bait thread

Good one.

>> No.3534276

This guy gets it. In a lot of ways 6th gen was the darkest time. AAA had taken over and there was very little room for anything else. It was all $60 games competing and little else.

People give Microsoft shit, but the XBLA and Indie Games projects did a lot to start opening the market to smaller, more niche kinds of games. And now Steam and other services have improved it more and more.

We really are in a golden age of gaming like never seen before. It's amazing.

>> No.3534328

What new genres have been introduced since 1999?

>Walking simulators (aka dumbed down FPSs)
>MOBAs (aka dumbed down RTSs)
>3D sandboxes (not dumbed down anything, which means Minecraft is the most important post-/vr/ game, and that's not intended as praise)

But there has been some good work with genre mixing, eg. Tomb of the Necrodancer (which would work just fine with 1999 tech).

>> No.3534331

Action games like DMC3, I guess.

I don't think there have been big new inventions, but more nuances have developed, and new sub-genres.

>> No.3534341

I guess if "3D sandbox" gets to be a new genre, then "3D beat-em-up" does too. In both cases the 3Dness makes a big difference. I can't think of any pre-2000 examples.

>> No.3534417

>MOBAs (aka dumbed down RTSs)
lol you are atomic retarded

>> No.3534421

Uh Fighting Force?

>> No.3534452

What new genres were introduced between 1990 and 1999?

>> No.3534463

Jesus christ these '90s born shitters just don't stop being retarded. I guess it's not really your fault though. You've simply been raised on literal shit and don't know any better. Seventh gen was an abomination and somehow this one has managed to be even worse so far. Stop taking it so personally that the games around now suck dicks, it's not like you made them. Best thing you can do is kys 2bh.

>> No.3534505

You're still obsessed with age like that means anything. I'm still in my 40's and still think gaming just gets better and better. You are free to disagree, but all your arguments are just saying over and over that anyone who disagrees must be some kid. Literally nothing of substance other than that.

I feel a little bad for you but I also honestly believe that if you can't find any current games you think are good, you don't really like games and gaming. You like a razor thin slice of gaming that reminds you of a time in your youth.

Cry and yell kiddo all you want, but that's how it is. Just like someone who only likes the music they heard when they were young, you are no different and are doomed to misery.

>> No.3534556

It's only bait if it offends you cuz you can't adapt to older games.

>> No.3534557

I guess that counts, add it to the 1990-1999 list

3D beat-em-up as mentioned
Survival horror (as in AitD/RE/SH style)
Rhythm game
MMOs as the genre is understood today not some weird turn based thing

>> No.3534613

Cool story kid. Alright. You've proved you're a retro poser and are so hard core retro you're made physically ill by anything that doesn't fit the arbitrary made up rules of a Japanese toon board and so bad ass you shit pixels. All fedoras are tipped to you. Now go play some games and let the grownups talk.

>> No.3535673
File: 47 KB, 495x363, tail of the sun9736935.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't think 2D/3D matters as much. There were open world 3D games already, but what most people usually mean by open world now are GTA derivatives. GTA was pretty much the same thing when it was 2D though. And even though Retro City Rampage is a 2D game, it's very much a modern open world game. Similar to Terraria is definitely a Minecraft variant even though it's 2D.

>> No.3535786

But you are a kid. And if age didn't mean anything you wouldn't keep trying to convince me you're 42 lmao. Sad either way though.

>I also honestly believe that if you can't find any current games you think are good, you don't really like games and gaming
Yep, that's because you're a '90s born retard that is incapable of understanding this as he's literally been raised on shit. As I said it's not your fault though. And there are games here and there that I like - it's not that I 100% hate every modern game, not at all. But the current situation the market is in is a fucking terrible joke compared to where we were in the past. You'll just never understand kiddo.

>What new genres were introduced between 1990 and 1999?
Lol this is such a disgusting question and shows just how young you children are. I don't know about """genres""", but the change games experienced during this decade was unprecedented as we shifted between 2D and 3D consoles. Games were obviously massively different when we made the move from SNES/Genesis to PlayStation/N64, and with it came innovation and novelty. When we then moved onto 6th gen, we saw an improvement on the formula and performance/capabilities that began in the fifth gen and games were thriving. PC gaming was also at its absolute best during the mid to late '90s and early '00s. Then we moved to the fucking seventh generation and this was the mark where everything started going to shit. This dumbing down continues to this day and we've reached a point where the 99% of the AAA market is an abomination.

And top kek at all these idiots talking about the "indie scene" like it's worth a good goddamn fuck. Only decent games I can think of are Hotline Miami, Super Meat Boy and Rocket League. Everything else has been a complete crock of shit. First dickhead that says something like Undertale should promptly fuck off and die.

>> No.3535793

This whole thread is pretty much '90s babies being upset that they're too retarded to play real video games and are making excuses for being the casual retards that they are. It's okay that you like dumbed down shit, but don't feel bad when somebody calls you the retards that you are. And stop trying to convince me that your shit ain't retarded. I bet absolutely none of you kiddies could beat Super Marios Bros on NES without warp zones and save states. Hell I bet you never play any NES, SNES or Genesis games without save states. You are all shitters and you know it which is why this thread cuts you so deeply and you can't do nothing but inane damage control. Go back to Halo already kiddos.

>> No.3535808
File: 86 KB, 500x628, e26.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.3535818

Looks like this well constructed bait had many bites.

>> No.3535829
File: 46 KB, 634x473, fish200000578-708_634x473.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This whole thread is an autistic man trolling for replies and /vr/ biting like there's no tomorrow. I don't know which is more sad.

>> No.3536176

>all these words
>forgets about difficulty settings and achievements
>even though DOOM is still easy as fuck on easy
>Sincerely, an autist

top kek

>> No.3536979

>im a big grownup who can call everyone kiddo. I'm so oldfag i can even triquote.
One of your imaginary personalities must have hit a big number like 25 or 30 to be crowing about it so much. You're a pathetic little thing that still has to prove it's retro cred by pretending nothing else is good. What a sad, sad little shit. And a kiddo to boot.

>b-b-but im an 80s baby
Sure you are. And even then that makes you a kiddo, kiddo.

>> No.3537091

Lol okay kiddo.

>> No.3537093

That's what real autism looks like.

>> No.3537403

>tfw you will never have a qt3.14 midget gf

>> No.3537591

If you're that ass mad I must have hit a nerve kiddo.
>b-b-but adults totally spend their life F5ing and samefagging
Sure they do kiddo.

>> No.3537634

I like when games give you something extra to strive for when playing at higher difficulties. True ending, extra unlocks, more exp, etc. That way all of the spectrums can be covered.
Just remember not everyone grew up playing NES. Even controllers can be daunting for new players these days.

>> No.3537657

>I read things that talk about how the lives and game over systems were flawed

I'm sorry, but even back in the day I hated life systems and all the bullshit they entail. It is way, way more fun to be able to master each level individually without being told I have to go back to an earlier one if I fail x times. Endurance challenges have their place, but I'd much rather tackle levels at my own will, practicing exactly what I need to, instead of having the most limited time for later parts and spending an excess on earlier.

>> No.3537876

>back in the day
That was last summer sport.

>> No.3537880
File: 199 KB, 1080x1920, tmp_728-Screenshot_20161003-122127-2025860043.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Lol okay kiddo

>> No.3537887

>Fire Emblem 1 - 5 are easy


>> No.3537892

This can't be real. Are you joking? Fire Emblem 5 is probably one of the hardest games on the SNES

>> No.3537897

Bubblegum Psychic Chaos. Sounds rad.

On topic though, although OP is clearly a fuck, his point isn't completely unfounded. Game difficulty in mainstream games is different now, but I think it's unfair to say that it outright doesn't exist. There are some genuinely great hard modes in newer games.

>> No.3537906

you'a're worst imo

>> No.3538014

>shits on someone for phone-posting

>> No.3538082

>And if age didn't mean anything you wouldn't keep trying to convince me you're 42 lmao.

Honestly dude, what's even the point of this? I'm obviously not posting ID on 4chan and repeatedly have tried to say it's irrelevant, that we should get back an actual discussion. But it's all you talk about in every reply. You seem to have noting at all of value beyond that.

The entirety of your argument is "I am older than you people so I know what's best." But that's completely worthless, even if it were true.

Why don't we actually try talking about games and you try making a point that's based on something other than age.

>> No.3539845

>being this insecure

>> No.3540127

Read the full post kiddo.

>> No.3540167

You realize a large chunk of people on things like Steam get that first achievement to see how the game runs, right? I bought Grim Fandango a year ago and it had hitches on my toaster. I upgraded recently and now I'm on Year 3.

It's less that people don't finish games and more that they buy well before they're ready to start.

>> No.3540213

Why would I continue to read your bullshit when the first part is always you just saying NYA NYA NYA NO WAY YOU'RE OLD BABY FAGGOT! Anything I say is instantly discounted because you keep insisting age is the barometer of taste and I couldn't possibly disagree with you if I'm of a certain age. It's ridiculous and pointless.

>And top kek at all these idiots talking about the "indie scene" like it's worth a good goddamn fuck.

Are you honestly trying to say this is an attempt at actual discussion or or serious debate?

You can say you hate modern games all you want, and that's fair. But your experience isn't universal. No one who's really into music, movies, books or almost any other creative medium only looks at the most popular things out there. They explore all of it to find what's new and exciting in the area they love.

You are like someone trying to claim that you're a huge music buff, but it's all complete garbage now because Taylor Swift is popular and you don't like her. You refuse to dig deeper and find music you actually do like, you just see what's popular and decide everything sucks because of that. No other music fan anywhere would take you seriously with an attitude like that. Which is why when you say "Everything else has been a complete crock of shit." I find it very hard to not roll my eyes at your whole attitude.

>> No.3540217

tldr son

>> No.3540223

Somehow that's not surprising. Seven whole sentences is too taxing for you to comprehend all at once.

>> No.3540226

>No, but I saw a LP a couple times and it didn't really seem that hard
You absolutely cannot be serious.

>> No.3540231

No one sat and watched a long play of Fire Emblem. Don't take such easy bait.

>> No.3540259

lol actually the source isn't worth reading kiddo

>> No.3540297

>I can't be bothered read a handful of sentences but I will still declare they're bullshit.

This is your entire attitude in a nutshell. You know nothing but will yell as loud as possible that you know everything in a desperate attempt to deflect. Here's some more reading for you to not understand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

>> No.3540326

lol ok kiddo

>> No.3540329

Did you forget that DOOM has difficulty settings? LOL

>> No.3540379

>an autist.

What were you expecting?

>> No.3540480


>> No.3540531
File: 38 KB, 635x160, Screen Shot 2016-10-04 at 18.12.33.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

you going retard over there m8?

>> No.3540550

Holy shit. Either way that's crazy. How much free time do people have these days?

>> No.3540571

I doubt many people actually watch the full thing. Probably like 2% do. We've given it views right now just by clicking on it.

>> No.3540584

True say. I think I just don't get it. I can't stand to watch gameplay videos at all, so seeing a 4hour one with a bunch of views is surreal.

>> No.3541426

that's not how YouTube's "view" is determined

>> No.3541463

who knows, might be easier

>> No.3542617

I always thought it was.

>> No.3542625

DOOM is surprisingly easy on normal, the biggest challenge for someone who never played it (or some doom clone) will be navigation and environmental hazards, not enemies.

>> No.3542650

It is, dudes an idiot. Source: I have a YouTube channel

>> No.3542684

Exactly. OP's point is weak to start with, but picking DOOM for his example makes it completely retarded. He says games like Arkham Asylum, and Bayonetta are easy trash, but ignores that they also have difficulty levels where the games become very challenging. As well as achievements which completing all of usually means mastering the controls and systems of the game.

There's plenty of challenge in modern games, the main difference now is that seeing the ending is rarely the end of what the game has to offer and similar to games like DOOM it doesn't take a lot to do that on easy if you want to.

>> No.3543049
File: 10 KB, 236x328, 426b8689de9f2eb01b7951ba2f7ce81a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Arkham Asylum
>not trash
>not casul af

>> No.3544310


>i can beat those games 10 times faster than you anon
>different challenge than 'completion'

>> No.3544319

>similar to games like DOOM it doesn't take a lot to do that on easy if you want to.

None of my family or friends back then knew about mouse look, making doom and quake a lot harder than today

Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.