site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   2189 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for October 13, 2023

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The future I see is dominated by lots of rehashed trash, marketed to eager and uncritical buyers, on AAA and indie levels both, and increasingly more games-as-service and, above all, mobile games ported to PC.

Really? Even with things like Elden Ring, Cyberpunk, Red Dead, etc coming out recently?

The mobile games take is a bit scary I'll admit. Haven't looked into it too much but I do see kids gaming on their phones in public, which horrifies me for some reason.

I readily admit that Cyberpunk is a rare gem, rough as it is. Elden Ring I never played, but from what I gather it's mostly a continuation of the Dark Souls series under a different name, so while it may not be trash, I would say it's squarely a rehash of a well-established formula. As for Red Dead, again I didn't play it, but as far as I can tell it dazzles with scale and AAA production value but doesn't exactly do anything new, either. My judgement may be off in either case.

But even with those three, how much further does your etc go? Other than them, the biggest sellers on steam are still counter-strike, call of duty, battlefield, EA sports, GTA, DOTA, Starfield, Total War, various MMOs...all extremely formulaic by now. Trash by my snobbish taste, and certainly rehashes.

There are innovative games, of course, but I'd go so far as to say that they're universally indie productions. And with the games market as it is, most of those seem to fail financially, at best subsisting on developer passion and small but dedicated niche audiences. The few that break out and become successful, say Factorio or Vampire Survivors, are immediately followed by an unceasing deluge of copycats.

Really, at present my only hope for gaming remaining at all interesting rather than a form of wireheading is specialized publishers like Hooded Horse. Can't praise them enough. See for yourself: https://hoodedhorse.com/games/

Elden Ring I never played, but from what I gather it's mostly a continuation of the Dark Souls series under a different name, so while it may not be trash, I would say it's squarely a rehash of a well-established formula. As for Red Dead, again I didn't play it, but as far as I can tell it dazzles with scale and AAA production value but doesn't exactly do anything new, either. My judgement may be off in either case.

I think we've talked about souls games before and agreed to disagree, but I'm a complete simp for both of those games so I a) will take any opportunity to talk about them and b) can't let that statement stand unchallenged. As far as video games go, I used to consider Metal Gear Solid 5 the pinnacle of immersive video game design until rdr2 came out, and I considered rdr2 the pinnacle of immersive video game design until I played Elden Ring, although they are immersive in very different ways.

Rdr2 is the perfect balance of immersive sim and action adventure. Whereas immersive sims usually model everything, but 95% of it is pointless, in rdr2 95%of what you can interact with has a point, but because it covers so many different experiences it feels pointless at the start. Like, to mount a horse in rdr you just got close to it and tapped Y, so when you play rdr2 and you have to get close to your horse, highlight it with LT and then mount it with Y (instead of leading it or brushing it or feeding it) it just feels unnecessarily convoluted. But it soon becomes second nature, and when it does you realise it allows you to connect and interact with the world in a much deeper way. Then on top of that you get absolutely pitch perfect gunslinger gun play, with just enough bullet time to make you feel like The Man With No Name, capable of dropping a room full of strangers between blinks, or of humiliating an opponent by disarming him and shooting his hat off. Throw in a story that works great as a Western but also beautifully tells the tale of generation x - torn between the depravity of freedom and the suffocation of modernity - an old cowboy trying to save the people who worship him from the life he simultaneously loathes and glorifies - and rdr2's greatest flaw is that it didn't get a single player expansion.

And Elden Ring is genius. While it is true that it follows the souls formula, it is a pure disservice to call it a rehash, it expands and refines the formula in every way possible, and unlike the souls games it can be made incredibly easy right from the start - go magic build. I have platinumed Elden Ring on the playstation and pc, and the reason I did it a second time was because once the melee combat clicked with me I felt like I'd cheated myself a bit doing it as a mage. The story telling is pretty similar to the souls games - gleaned through archaeology and parsing the subtext in conversations, but in a universe steeped in cosmic horror as much as Elden Ring it works so well! I don't need to know exactly why I have stumbled across the stone bodies of hundreds of people petrified while clawing their eyes out to know I'm approaching a being of incredible power. And the world itself, the environment, is awesome. And I have to say awesome, because it fills you with awe - I want to say beautiful, because it is beautiful at times, but at other times it is purely grotesque, a nightmare brought to life, the very thought of turning another corner filling you with dread.

My theory (which I've probably explained here before, but for others reading) is that it's almost impossible to explain soulsborne games to people who aren't fans of the genre in a way that will hook them, because the real hook of soulsborne games comes when they finally click. When you finally understand how to spot the tells, how to time and lead them, and how to throw them back in your enemies face. Because when that happens the game changes completely. Number One starts playing in your head, you start grinning with half your mouth and saying '-tt-' a lot, all that shit.

But Elden Ring has more than just the soulsborne hook, I swear. It worms its way into your heart and mind so you never want to leave the lands between. It has two best waifus, buff santa, and a blind girl you can trick into eating eyeballs for laughs. I'm gonna go play it again now.

Yeah man I just started playing Elden Ring, and it's amazing. First time going down a well, I was blown away!!!

Oh yeah, I knew it was a special game when I realised the underground levels could be as beautiful as above ground.

You're almost selling me on those games, but you've got the wrong man for subtlety. What you need to tell me is whether, unlike Dark Souls, Elden Ring is meaningfully playable with KB+M.

Other than that, I wonder why the Souls games and Red Dead never held much attraction for me, while they get that much love from you. You've written out the second part, but allow me to have a brief look at the first: I played but never finished Dark Souls - at some point memorizing attack patterns just became boring to me and I felt like it gave me too little for how much effort it expected. I had seen the setting, and sure enough I appreciate the excellent craftsmanship behind the map, but lore-wise it seemed to be all style without substance. You call it subtext-based, but to me it was just vague and meaningless. And I adore westerns, but I just don't trust a big company like Rockstar to tell a good western story. I expect it to be modern cinematic tripe wearing a cowboy hat and a gravelly voice. An overrated deconstruction like Unforgiven, maybe, or even just a tale of social justice given some token masculinity to help it sell. I know you just said it isn't so, and I'll certainly place that on my mental scales, but right now they're still inclined in favor of generous cynicism.

(It also doesn't help that those games are expensive.)

Thanks for explaining your view!

Oh hell no, Elden Ring is a complete bitch to play without a controller. Rdr2 is great though, really customisable but even the default is well thought out.

The thing about rdr2's story is that it is written by gen xers, so it absolutely deconstructs the hell out of everything. So it depends on what aggravates you about deconstructions - if it's any kind of pomo meta bullshit that annoys you, you are going to have a bad time. But if it's the fact that everyone deconstructs everything the same fucking way to get the same pat globohomo message of 'peace and love and consume and victims are wonderful' then you might actually enjoy it, because it's not that. There are elements of that - it's a triple a game, but Rockstar put a lot of effort into working them in as a natural extension of the story, like with Lenny your black protege, and Sadie your female protege.

I know I'm being very forgiving but my rationale is that big companies like Rockstar have to pander to the woke a bit, they are beholden to investors and can't afford to be crucified by 90% of their advertisers (the gaming press). So I can tolerate the diversity bullshit, because they put a sincere effort into making it fit the story and setting. Like I said, rdr2 and elden ring are immersive in very different ways - in rdr2 you feel like you are in the world because you have so much input, whereas in er you get sucked in by the environmental storytelling.

But shit man, if you nailed dark souls so hard you can no longer not see the seams, you probably will bounce off er. It's significantly more refined and there are more systems at play, but if they don't distract you from the loops I know it's not going to be any less frustrating. I do think you should give rdr2 a go though.

I'd say our main point of divergence is that I like vague and meaningless storytelling. I like putting my own ideas into it and especially figuring out what the author was going for.

This is kind of disjointed, sorry about that - this is actually my third attempt writing it because I guess brave really doesn't like android 14 - I can't even change tabs without it refreshing since I updated. Largely I agree with you though and I think we should get a thread about indie games going.

Hah. I don't do long posts on the phone because I tend to fatfinger the back-button, thus deleting it all. Sorry to hear that your digits, too, are too clumsy for your device!

And alright, alright. No Elden Ring for me, I won't be getting a controller, but you sold me on RDR2. I'll get it when it's cheap enough for my slim wallet.

I'd say our main point of divergence is that I like vague and meaningless storytelling. I like putting my own ideas into it and especially figuring out what the author was going for.

Absolutely fair assessment. I for one can't stand that kind of thing - on finishing any book by Gene Wolfe, I have to simultaneously admire his craftsmanship and curse him for leaving me with a giant mess to sort out and not enough information to do it with.

I think we should get a thread about indie games going.

I might do that when next I feel the need to review something. Might be a while yet because my gaming budget dried up. Or I could drag out one of my more readable steam reviews and freshen it up a little. Hell, I'll certainly join in if you start it first. Games are just much nicer than culture war, lately.

Really? Even with things like Elden Ring, Cyberpunk, Red Dead, etc coming out recently?

All these games came out after my AAA burnout. Starting around Skyrim I couldn't make myself finish any major game, and at some point I decided there's better uses for $60 or whatever they're going for these days.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats