Genres you don't "get"

Yes, and that ended up evolving into the likes of Dustforce, a game which has some of the deepest movement mechanics out of any platformer and hey that even has a cleaning combo gimmick so fags like you can jerk off to its "innovation" lol

I find it varies for me

like, spacechem and human resource machine were additive as fuck, but TIS-100 and infinifactzry just bore me

nothing's ever really beaten the incredible machine though

Because 3D platformers are way worse, just look at ReCore. Same shitty and uninspired gameplay but now you have a million collectables to many any of the platforming meaningful.

I feel like on one hand you're arguing that you, personally, don't "get" 2D platformers, and on the other hand you're arguing that you enjoy 2D platformers, but believe the genre has peak from an innovation standpoint, so why do people still play them?

To the first point, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze is a fucking fantastic game.

To the second point, I agree that there isn't much left to do with 2D platformers, but games like Super Meat Boy and Tropical Freeze are two good recent games in the genre. But I wouldn't call them "innovative."

Nuanced physics. Seriously, if you get way into a platformer (especially a really hard one) you'll appreciate the minute of how the game handles and controls because you'll understand it inside and out. To really understand a game at that level is quite thrilling. If you can't tell or understand how Donkey Kong Country, Mario World, and Super Meatboy are worlds apart in terms of gameplay then you don't really understand this.
I don't blame you though, "character action games" like devil may cry and Bayonetta are the same kinda thing but I never got into them enough to appreciate it. Getting through the game once isn't really enough to appreciate the supposed "depth" of those games' combat.
Also I could not get into Wonderful 101 for the life of me, that game is a clusterfuck.

Where the fuck do you two think you are?

platformers are really an innocuous genre to dislike. most are so simple to understand and play and you don't have to worry about depth perception like in 3D. I dunno.

But I don't understand how the majority of players I know like MOBAs. How League stays at the top of Twitch with ten thousand something watchers baffles me

Starcraft 2 puzzles me, as outside the campaign mode, the game is shallow and repetitive as fuck in comparison to many other RTS's. Whats the appeal of SC2 competitive?

It's true that platformers have been done to death. However, first person shooters have been done to death too but that doesn't stop them from getting shoved out the door by the truckload every year. I wouldn't say platformers are any more "stagnant" than those.

Diablo and its ilk. ARPG is the term I think?

I really want to like them, cause they contain so many concepts that I like. But I absolutely hate the way they control. It's like some awful middle ground between full on action games and an RTS, where you can clearly imagine all player input just mapping to a series of unit commands for an RTS.

If they played more fluidly I don't think I'd ever stop. Imagine Diablo but it played like Monster Hunter. Wew.

There's typically a lot more going on in a 3D platformer. Usually even things first person shooting mechanics, vehicles, flying and etc. get incorporated

A lot less 3D platformers were made than 2D ones though, so I guess I see them more positively because they didn't become indie cancer (yet?). Even something like Yooka-Laylee appeals to me exponentially more than some hipster dev's new GameMaker2 atari graphics platformer

as far as character action games go, W101 is a bit more at the deep end.

if you want a more casual experience, but with the depth still there to be found, try MGR:R

Visual Novels without added mechanics. I don't get that.

Platformers I get. It's just an oversaturated market, so you really have to look for the gems and most people don't bother.

>make it hard as fuck
I see someone doesn't know what they're talking about.
I Wanna be the Guy is NOT about being hard as fuck.
It's a dual line satire about "2D Platformers used to be a pile of BULLSHIT." in that it has a bunch of literal BULLSHIT like cherries flying up, the moon falling on you, Mike Tyson destroying his own arena so the fight can become literally impossible with a bit of RNG.
The other half of it is homage to old 2D games.
That said, it's not a hard game, the bosses can be a bit challenging at times, but it nor any of the major Fangames are particularly actually hard until I Wanna be the Boshy. In addition to piling on BULLSHIT, Boshy has some of the genuinely most frustratingly hard segments, especially bosses, in any Western I Wanna be the Fangame.
And easily the most fair and most BULLSHIT HARD one for Western makers is Not Another Needle Game. It incorporates a myriad of gimmicks without drowning you in them, has no bullshit, and is simply you versus a gauntlet from hell.

What's it like being such an asshole that you think it's not possible for anyone to like something you don't like.

If you'll forgive the food analogy.

If you just like something, like a genre or what not, it's just like a good meal that you enjoy. You don't need some different sauce or topping with it every time you eat it, and while some variety can spice it up it's not vital to your enjoyment of it.

And when you're done eating one, after a while you'll be back for another. Platforming is great for shit like exploration and a bit of puzzling/technical skill in sequence breaking. You don't play the games for the innovation though, and I cannot understand the sentiment that games NEED to be innovative to be worthwhile. Give me a good game with solid core mechanics and I'm sold, I can do without gimmicks.

you should try D3 on consoles, the stick directly controls the character.

also shit like the witcher 3 might scratch your itch

Why are walking simulators such a crime but driving simulators are perfectly okay?

Play D3 on console?

>Also I could not get into Wonderful 101 for the life of me, that game is a clusterfuck.
IKTF. I love character action games and even bought a Wii U to play W101. I really just didn't get that game. Clusterfuck was exactly how I felt about it too.

>if you lived in the 90s you saw EVERYTHING there is (and likely ever will be) to the genre

I would definitely say 2D platformers are more stagnant than FPS simply because being 3D allows you a whole extra dimension to work and innovate with, even if in practice it doesn't happen that often

I would argue that almost no games that I play are innovative. The few that are stray so far into indie territory that they're almost research projects more than video games(things like talk of the town, which I've read a paper on but not played)

In that regard, platformers are like any other genre. Just because it's been done before doesn't mean you can't do it again in your own way, with your own characters and story, and do it well and make a great game.

you start to enjoy W101 on new game plus, it's just one of those games

>up there with Fez in the "Most Overrated Indie Game" category

Generally cause Driving Simulators are "in the moment blood-pumpers where you're inching for every bit of space you can get."
Walking Simulators are usually not funny, slow-paced story-driven "games" with a focus on making you feel. Not all of them, mind, but most of them. The ones that aren't are also hit or miss and then there's the whole "Are Puzzle/Adventure games in a full 3D world Walking Simulators?" argument that muddies up the whole thing.

I mean you could just rig up the keyboard/numpad or mouse movement/touch area to do that on a pc too

Fighting games.

Playing a fighting game and then playing an actual game feels as different as a fish swimming in a goldfish bowl versus swimming in the ocean.

>up there with dorf in the "i don't get it so it's overrated" category

or plug a controller into the pc. There are shitty bindings for an xbox controller, or pretty great steam controller support for d3, PoE, etc

Conflicting

The key factor that making gaming a worthwhile activity over say reading a book or watching a movie is the concept of a challenge, something you need to improve to overcome, thus improving some skill in a minor way.

Walking simulators do none of that (puzzle games with walking in between aren't walking simulators, narrative bullshit like Gone Home is.) Same goes for P2W games, remove the challenge from games and you turn a potentially productive hobby into the equivalent of sitting on the couch watching day-time dramas.

Don't reply to it, user. Feeding trolls is not gonna help you.

>muh overrated

what the fuck

Let me guess, not enough exploration and story for your dumb ass?

RTS
I played the shit out of Warcraft 2 as a kid, but as I got older I realized how unfun it was. I'm not even sure why, I love the idea of having armies at my command, but most RTS games are just not entertaining to me.

playing fighting games is like watching wrestling, if you focus on the prefabricatedness and the repetitiveness of it, you don't enjoy it. if you focus on the drama and the twists and the mind game's its a deep fucking genre

He had to fucking go and post a food analogy

>If you'll forgive the food analogy.

No, I won't. fucking kys

I have tried that, and it was okay. Still, there was no weight to anything. I felt so disconnected from it. Maybe I just need ROLLAN mechanics to be truly happy in life. Abilities with cooldowns need not apply.

Zombie shooters where the zombies are basically helpless.

I'll bite.

What makes "an actual game" to you, that a fighter isn't?

Movie games like heavy rain and such.

They're so goddamn boring.

Sorry user, but every time I try something more sophisticated people start spamming with memes about pseudo-intellectuals and nothing gets done.

explain this one:

I find L4D2 dull as fuck and repetitive and just all round hate it, but killing floor 1, a very similar game, has given me hours of enjoyment

am I retarded?

This gets shilled so often I'm almost wary to try it

The last indie darling platformer was Super Meat Boy and I didn't think it was anything special

You would know, being a fish?

MOBAs that aren't Awesomenauts and Competitive Pokemon.
Both of them are just so autistic and so annoying to play "correctly that I can't imagine having fun with either. MOBAs are even worse because you don't even get any form of tutorial to tell you what the fuck is going on, you're just expected to watch hours of footage and fuck with keybinds and shit endlessly until you get good.

On a lesser note, I hate fightan game input, but that's mostly just me being bad at it.

It's one of those games with state of flow, like mirror's edge

if you are good they are fun as fuck but if you suck then get ready to hate it

see:
Then see the autistic shills being mad I didn't like one 2D indie meme of the month platformer:
You decide.

I dislike SMB and most indie precision platformers really but I love Dustforce. It's much better.

The most stagnant genre is FPS, there are just a fuckload more platformers though.
I like them, mostly, especially when you have wall jumps and sliding. It just makes you feel skilled at a game, in ways where regenerating health don't.
You can't just turtle your way through difficult sections, you have to take initiative, read those obstacles

I reiterate, don't reply to it, out of courtesy for your fellow Anons.

It's a matter of taste, if you didn't like Dustforce you either suck at it or don't like the genre.

Neither of which can be used to call the game overated, meaning, you are an idiot.

I think of FPS as boring point-and-click adventure.
I tried so hard to like half-life 2 and I almost did during the gimmick sections but god the shooting things bits are so so dull.

This.

To me, it's just so repetitive. D2 was awesome back in the day because it was sort of "all we got". Maybe I was just poor, but I didn't have access to all these other games, and D2 was addicting.

D3 and PoE though? You are leveling/grinding to higher level/better gear just to grind better? Where's the purpose? Where's the end game? At least a grindy game like Warframe is fun from a gameplay perspective. D3 and PoE is pretty much just click with a few skill binds. Is it just because it's super comfy to grind while listening to a podcast in the background?

Wrong, the most stagnant genre is fighting, and I say that as someone who likes fighting. After 20 years of literally nothing but Street Fighter clones the genre is only just starting to take its first baby steps towards innovation... by making clones of Smash Bros instead. It's really fucking frustrating.

A very small percentage of people play video games because it's a worthwhile or productive activity for them.
There's streamers, youtubers, and pro players who compete and probably not much else so that really doesn't apply for the vast majority of us who probably just play for entertainment.

this is actually kind of true. I used to think games were only good if they're original. The best games combine originality and game design. That all said, a game can be great if it just carries out the game elements well.

For instance, the Mario 2D play well, however they aren't original really. They're just really, really fucking good.

I wouldn't call 3D "more fleshed out" at all. Since there is so much more freedom of movement, the experience can't be as tight as a 2D platformer can be. Not saying this is always the case. There are good and bad in each camp, but it is far easier to craft a perfected experience in 2D.

How is it hard to believe? I'm not personally a super dedicated 2D platformer fan, but I'm not going to turn my nose up at something as fun as pic related. Maybe you're just a tired gamer in general. I can get that way easily.

Didn't suck at it. Do like the genre.

Sorry.

Game is overrated. At no point did I call it bad, simply called it overrated.

Get angry people disagree with you, Reddit.

>boring point-and-click adventure

I'll second that. Seriously, games like MYST, what the fuck? They had a novel appeal back then. These days it feels like playing a Newgrounds room escape game

I appreciate the artistry that goes into many of them, but could never call myself a fan of them

>. Getting through the game once isn't really enough to appreciate the supposed "depth" of those games' combat.

This is my biggest issue with DMC1, you're expected to play on the default difficulty and relay the whole thing multiple times.

The thing is that it can be both. It's fine as mere simple entertainment if that's what you want, but video games offer very little that television or books don't already provide if you take away all challenge, take away meaningful interactions,

If a game is trivial to play, with no challenge or interactivity you might as well watch some streamer play through it, shit like Allan Wake, Gone Home and other narrative driven games with no actual conceptual challenge in gameplay are not worth actually playing.

Racing games.

I don't think they're bad or unplayable.

Just... boring.

Bastion - what the fuck was that turd of a piece of shit of a game? Horrible.

MMO's

Every one I played I saw no benefit of it being an MMO, it could have just been an RPG with co-op multiplayer and probably would have been a better game for it. Like Guild Wars 1.

It's a strategy game.
A battle of overall planning and execution. Kind of like chess, in a way, you won because somehow or someway you outsmarted your opponent with what information you managed to gather.

you should play some guilty gear m8

Nah, W101 is a game where you slog your way through mediocre gameplay to view silly over the top cutscenes. Same as every Platinum game.

>Didn't suck at it
I'm curious then, would you kindly show us your Double S+ achievement?

MOBA
Basically a grinding competition to me

>Didn't suck at it
Sure you didn't. How far did you get?

What happened to the dichotomy in 2D fightan being SF clone VS airdash fighter"? I don't think there's nearly enough Smash clones to shake that up yet, especially as big budget anime fighters are still getting made (i.e. GGXrD)

Except you are wrong, first, overrated is not an opinion, it's a fact.

You cannot say wrong facts about things and not expect to be called a retard, retard. Specially without explaining yourself

>I do like the genre

Playing brainded platformers like Mario does not count, everyone likes those.

How about games you don't 'get' but desperately try and play anyway?

I adore RTS games but I'm absolutely awful at them. I forget hotkeys, can't micro without literally pausing the game, and after the initial beginning build order get overwhelmed and swamped by the variety in tech trees and can never figure out what to do.

I have a big problem with 4x games and strategy games in general because it always feels like there are a lot of bad options and a lot of good options and the only way to know which is which is to read a guide or some shit.
Civ I can play casually for the "crafting a narrative" aspect, but I find the total war games kind of baffling. I try to make decisions based on what sounds appealing to me but the niggling sensation that I'm making bad/incorrect decisions always irks me.

What game is that? It looks really familiar

Play Burnout 3 or F-Zero GX.

If neither game does a damn thing for you, then yeah you just hate racing games.

no, thats how a traditional RTS works

who can click the fastest, scout the fastest and rush down their opponents early expansion is a shallow and mind numbing way to play and is why SC2's popularity baffles me

same desu

Pretty much same here, except toss in grand strategy and Turn-Based strategy.

do not reply to the "platinum gameplay sucks" poster

myst was popular purely because of the immersive "3D" graphics. I'd say 95% of people who bought it never got past the first world... or even to the first world

Open world games like GTA, Red Dead Redemption, Saints Row, etc. There's never any mechanical depth to them, there's no challenge, and the missions all seem to follow a formula of driving from point A-B for several minutes while another character talks at you and then shooting some people with either the clunkiest controls imaginable or the most forgiving aim-assist you've ever seen.

Diablo clones. The first D1 was great and I beat D2 twice, but after that every single hour played of ARPG's literally makes me drowsy and sleepy. I have no idea how I was able to play clicky looty games before.

Whatever the fuck Papers Please belongs to. I'd be okay if people treated it as a mediocre novelty, but a lot of people act like it's an actual good game.

Cinematic games. Tried to watch a lets play of Virginia in a 2nd monitor and couln't even handle it as background noise.

You just did

Are you me?

I feel like the Blizzard RTS games are fun to watch but hard to pick up.
I loved playing the campaign and the UMS but I can't keep up with the meta to play competitively.

I find I have the most fun against the AI with friends over Lan anyway, still have never beaten AoE2's hardest AI, even 2v1 with my flatmate

I think it is just a problem Platinum has in general. They throw you into a game hard with little, poor, or no information on some really core mechanics. Not saying they should just flat out hold your hand but every game of theirs I have played has had this issue. Take the Defensive Offensive move in Metal Gear Rising. Made it to Senator on hard never using it once. Was kicking myself so hard over something pretty crucial and I even had purchased the skill too.

no I didn't, I just slogged through the reply process to view the silly over the top (you)s

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you I just don't see why that should be a problem.
There's a market for visual novels, they offer little in terms of gameplay beyond dialogue choices but apparently there's a market for them.
It takes the interactive nature of a game and combines with story like a novel. Some people like games that are like interactive movies.

Video games are so insanely versatile it seems really silly to try to pigeonhole them as one thing or another.

>Newgrounds room escape game
Except many Flash Room Escapes are pretty good. Go play the Neutral series.

neutralxe.net/esc/index.html

Suggested order is Sphere, RGB, Switch, Linkage, Lights, Vision, Elements, but any order or even back and forth is fine.

the gameplay for GTA games suck. Driving cars can fun be I guess but the rest is horrible. People like it because they can cause chaos without restriction in a real-world environment

I-No's my main. I'm dogshit but I have fun.

Anime fighters are still Street Fighter clones. It's like contemporary jazz vs freeform jazz, just different flavors of the same thing. They're both shackled to the exact same life meter-super meter-stand no more than 10 feet apart from each other paradigm they have been since the SNES. If anything the dichotomy would be 3D vs 2D, except the FGC is so hidebound that 3D fighters are barely considered """real""" fighters despite the obvious callbacks to Street Fighter. Something really needs to change in this genre, the declining numbers tell the whole story.

The Smash clones are really only just starting to surface, and who knows if any of them will take off? It's grim shit.

If it's such a strategy game, why does it seem to try so hard to make executing any kind of strategy so difficult?

>Whatever the fuck Papers Please belongs to. I'd be okay if people treated it as a mediocre novelty, but a lot of people act like it's an actual good game

This. Indie games """journalists""" will hype the fuck out of anything

platinum games give you a basic tutorial and explicitly explain all game mechanics, either at the start or upon obtaining them.

the only time i've been puzzled by one was the glider sequences in W101, didn't clock that you have to dive down then level out to gain horizontal speed

>Myst
>95% of people who bought it never got past or even to the first world
That's not possible.

>Visual Novels without added mechanics
they're not games
they're visual novels

I just can't get into most RPG's. It's not like I get walled or frustrated, I just plain lose interest before I get to the end.

I thought Papers, Please was something interestingly different. I wouldn't call it good or bad I guess, maybe more a novelty?

I don't see how one could stand to play through the game more than once, despite the apparent several endings. It wasn't interesting enough to keep sitting through it for every result (similar to how I feel about The Stanley Parable).

Just a novelty, "hey look at this kind of different idea only a video game could do." Sit through it once, maybe tell a friend, but never touch it again.

>There's a market for visual novels, they offer little in terms of gameplay beyond dialogue choices but apparently there's a market for them.

It's not hard to imagine what the market consists of. Depressed NEETs need their qt waifus. VNs flesh them out quite a bit (even if often in the shallow anime fashion) and make the waifu even more believable

whats your thoughts on twists on the format, like soul calibers weapon system? they help reheat the stagnation

Considering games on steam have a completion rate of about 30% it's not that far fetched

This, more or less
over massive amounts of time spent playing I eventually got to terms with aoe2 and aom back in the day, but I have too much fun with the base-building aspects of RTSs even when I'm a shitter to really drive myself to improve

But it's the most populair of all the interactive medium in Japan and are made for video game consoles. I just don't get that.

i played through every ending of the stanley parable, took around 2-3 hours.

i'm glad I did, the ending vary so wildly that it held my interest

papers please i've never finished, having got 4 different endings that aren't any of the good ones, i've given up

Dating sims.

1. Not a sim in any sense of the word
2. Super depressing
3. Requires a lot of effort to unlock shitty rewards that aren't worth the time
4. Do not lead to real dates

Are you in a situation where you're unable to play them for a while? I know when I was in university I never finished any games because I'd be unable to play them for a week or so and coming back just felt wrong.

Visual novels do provide something unique in that it lets the user make choices that affect the story, Kinetic novels also exist which are really just books, but they too add things like music and screenplay to liven things up a bit.

The key thing though is that they don't really qualify as games, outside of the decision making in VN's which is arguably as much of a game as deciding which DVD to rent for the weekend, as they're decisions of preference and not competence. There are some VN's with puzzle game elements and even a bunch with actual gameplay mixed in, but then those are the components that make it a game. In and of itself VN's and kinetic novels are just books with sound and pictures. Nothing wrong with it, but inherently different from games.

Speaking of visual novels, when the fuck are we getting some decent ones translated? It's been months.

Execution and planning go hand in hand.
You can easily BTFO aggressive players if you're able to plan accordingly to your opponent's moves, and importantly act on that planning.

Quick-thinking, having an overall strategy and tweaking or shifting to another strategy is apparently key to Blizzard RTS's.

That being said, I find that Blizzzard RTS competetive are fun to watch but hard to actually grasp, what with different patches and constantly shifting metas

Not really. It might be the reverse, really. I have way too much free time and when I try out a game I'll be playing it non-stop until I burn out on it. But RPG's can be so long...

>3. Requires a lot of effort to unlock shitty rewards that aren't worth the time

Lewds are worth it. Looking up the CG online is cheating. It's like cheating on you're waifu

visual novels in japan are mostly made by small studios for pc. they're one of the only things japs use pcs for instead of consoles. they're definitely not the most popular 'game' or electronic entertainment. you shouldn't really think of them as games anyway, vns arent neccessarily even interactive

Depends, it's about how many tasks your brain can process in tandem, how many factors you can juggle successfully. While it's easy to dismiss that as 'my hands are just not fast enough' it's still mostly your head that's falling behind in letting you process the tasks quickly and accurately.

It's still mostly about strategy too, because the highest APM is only a minor factor in overall victory. Hell, people with the highest APM actually rarely seem to win the bigger tournaments. MC for example (believe he's still the most successful SC2 player) really didn't have exceptionally high APM by any measure.

Personally, I think Platformerscan be one of the most skilled games of all time, thinks like IWBTG can get insanely tough and require pinpoint accuracy.
I wish there was a competitive scene for platformers, Quickest time through a course

Surprising, since games on steam have a 85-15 ratio of absolute garbage to actually good.

starcraft is barely more of a strategy game than a fighting game is
every game has some element of strategy but for a genre where the S in RTS is supposed to stand for strategy there certainly isn't alot of it

I thought it was something like that, but then where does something like Red Dead Redemption fit in? The horses are boring compared to cars, there's less room for chaos, and the game does more to punish you for trying to have fun with the whole bounty system. So what you're left with is a literal desert with nothing to do besides the most formulaic GTA style missions imaginable, and the game still managed to get a 95/100 on Metacritic. Is there something else I'm not seeing?

>No "shmups" post yet

Who knew, Cred Forums does improve after all

the completion ratio for games that are good doesn't change that much. it's one of the reasons why AAA games are so easy these days

That must be among the people who've played them. I bet completion rate among owners is like 0.5%

>Quick-thinking, having an overall strategy and tweaking or shifting to another strategy is apparently key to Blizzard RTS's.
>it's still mostly your head that's falling behind in letting you process the tasks quickly and accurately

But the games make it so damn obnoxious to do any of that. Maximum number of units selected, very little automation of tasks, an economy that requires you to hover like a hawk over each of its participants, camera that can't zoom out far enough to actually grasp the situation.

Look up high level play of SupCom: FA. There is so much more happening because the game actually facilitates being played.

Visual novels that are non-interactive have a different name; Kinetic novels.

The more you know.

>Spoiler
Speedrunning has been a sport for many years across all games. Including I Wanna be the Fangames.
youtube.com/watch?v=aJXmGHV0RAw
This one was released 4 months ago after the prior record of 1 hour 46.

It's not the result of people appreciating shmups more it's the result of people forgetting they even exist.

The problem with W101 is it works off annoying rock paper scissors mechanics.
ie. You need to be in Sword form or this laser will nail you and send your mans flying.
Speaking of, the dudes flying bit is extremely annoying. I understand being punished for making mistakes, but if you look at a game like Bayo2
you can get slapped around and not feel like you're being completely removed from gameplay for 30 seconds because of it. EVERY single time you make a mistake.

On top of that annoying enemy design.
Rock paper scissors turrets whose projectiles travel instantly, SPIKED rock paper scissors turrets.

It's just got some odd/unfortunate design decisions like that. I think a W101 sequel could be really good if they would iron out some of those issues.

Never played RDR, but simulating a wild west world probably has some appeal in it aswell and rockstar make some of the most polished games out there. Most casual game players will like a game that 'feels' cool on the surface that doesn't neccessarily have any interesting mechanics or gameplay

Oh, I get it why. I just don't like them.

I was alluding to the fact these threads often get many posts by people who see no appeal to shmups

The dudes flying everywhere is probably what killed my interest the fastest out of all that games shortcomings.

Before they made MYST the developers were making walking sims for kids. MYST is a walking sim with puzzles added so it could be considered a game.

Their walking sims are actually superior to today's indie trash. They knew a good walking sim is about exploring cool shit, not exploring boring shit to pick up notes and "beat" the story.

pretty much the same thing most of the choices in VNs just amount to picking the story route you want to go down they're not really games

I'm really not sure what makes you think so. In what way would a 'real RTS' be different then?

I got myself to master league at some point not through mechanical competence or repetitive build-orders but through reading opponents and effectively reacting, or unconventional strategy that they weren't prepared for, never got more than 80 APM on my best days, and my wins were purely strategic and not through out-pacing my opponent.

Is this the "retarded babies with no skill" thread?

Oh yeah, it is.

There's a program that keymaps some arpgs so it's WASD based and not click based. I've been meaning to try it out myself though, but what you're describing as far as control being clunky is something that you aren't experiencing alone. Other posters about playing on console are right too, Diablo 3 on console is a much more enjoyable experience in my view.

Go play some unpopular fighting games like IaMP. Then you can have the experience of actually finding a non-SF clone that is actually good, but endure the suffering of having nobody to play it with.

Is this Frog Sword? i thought they cancelled it or is it just some other game.

>If only you were skilled you would like platformers!

Fuck off

The difference in negligible for the most part, on that we can agree. The choice elements can also lead to challenges though, or at least somewhat include them, see shit like 999 for example.

I dug up my browser history to find what I was thinking of...

desiquintans.com/wasdcontrols

RTS never managed to successfully develop rich strategic gameplay before the genre died out (one of the reasons it did die out honestly). It's an exaggeration to say it's barely better than a fighting game, just annoying to me that starcraft and it's micro-intensive gameplay that deemphasizes strategy became the most popular RTS

I figured dating sims were invented as an easy way to program hentai games. But enough retards actually enjoyed the gameplay and it became a legitimate genre.

Racing games

I remember playing SupCom. I loved it for that extremely zoomed-out map. It really helps with actually managing an entire army.

play 1001 spikes to get all about the genre

It's an excuse to say it deemphasizes strategy. Warcraft 3 is micro-intensive, calling SC2 micro-intensive is just silly. As I explained before, the challenge is in how many tasks you can juggle while executing and adapting complex strategy. The core issue is that predefined build-orders and 'if x then y' ruins most of the strategizing but the same is true for shit like chess, the more such a game gets figured out the less strategic it becomes for an individual to play.

However, that's an issue endemic to popularity/genre, not the product.

Fighting games. I appreciate the skill involved, but for most people its just button mashing and I cba to learn all the combos and match ups

Whether you call them visual novels, video games, walking sims, or whizzle-bangers is kind of beside the point.
There's an audience for them, thus they continue to get made.

The gaming industry is big enough for games with challenge to coexist alongside whizzle-bangers.

The issue with fighting games is that it's really simple in terms of core mechanics, and very sparse in actual engaging interaction. There's two things you do in fighting games; decision making and execution, and the execution stage is often a drawn out waiting game until another decision needs to be made. You hit your combo, and you don't really do much else until you're done, you spam your zoning, and don't really do much else until your opponent breaks through.

While both these aspects have a lot of depth to them, it's like comparing a well to a lake. Sure the well might be deeper, but it just doesn't hold as much water as the lake, and the amount of shit you can do with it are much more limited.

I never really claimed otherwise, my point was that the part that sets video games apart from books and movies is the interactivity, and worthwhile interactivity comes from overcoming a challenge to reach a desirable state.

As I said before, non-challenging games are still perfectly fine as entertainment media, but when perused as such they're little more than entertainment, whereas otherwise they can (potentially) be a worthwhile activity due to the potential for self-improvement.

the amount of balanced options you have in a game sets the depth of the strategy required to play. blizzard games set the gold standard of 11 units per side with 3 sides which is extraordinarily low to me. yeah micromanagement doesn't remove strategy from the game, it's just what the developers chose to focus the gameplay on. A more in-depth strategy game would be much harder to balance, but I can't say I've ever seen a game of starcraft 2 where anyone's ever had a 'complex strategy'

a visual novel isn't that different to a comic. or even a book. does non-interactivity make comics and books little more than entertainment? people who can't understand visual novels just can't look past the 'video game' label

I'm not even very good at fighting games and this seems like an extreme over-simplification to me

I think the problem is summarizing a huge chunk of gameplay as >decision making
a lot goes into reading and learning a human opponent.

I'm still not really getting your point here. By what comparison is 11 units 'low' and why is such a distinct numeric value important? Chess only has 6 unique pieces, but maybe I'm just thinking on entirely the wrong tangent here.

I haven't watched competitive Starcraft in years though, but when last I was watching you'd see people do completely different things based on who they played, where they played, and what was happening on the map, they would have a general goal they set out to work toward, but the strategy wasn't in the goal, it's how you got there. Do you focus on bunkering down and rushing there, do you try to hinder the opponent in their path to victory, how do you stop him from scouting you and countering you, and how will he respond to that and try and get the information anyway, do you fake him out or play it straight?

Viable strategies also change with the terrain, adding an extra layer of complexity, though competitive will unfortunately reduce complexity in favor of balance (since otherwise you'd get maps favoring certain factions, which is casually interesting to play around, but competitively not viable)

Agreed. For me RTS lost its luster when I finally realized that, for a 'strategy' genre, 90% of whether or not you won was your speed and had nothing to do with strategy and I just didn't have the skill required to perform three thousand actions per minute.

By comparison, turn based strategy games often include SO many factors and so much bloat it takes four eons to play through a game. I appreciate depth, but I also work for a living, I want some kind of middle ground where I can make meaningful strategic decisions on a relatively large scale without it 100% boiling down to my actions per minute.

/blog

>you spam your zoning
How to spot a shitter who gets mad at losing.

>Does non-interactivity make comics or books little more than entertainment
I'd say so, yes. Barring exceptions like educational books (which is more the acquisition of knowledge and books are merely the medium, not to mention books are arguably the worst text-based medium for acquiring knowledge) or the concept of language osmosis through reading.

Are you literally just triggered by me using the word 'spam' here? Really?

RTS strikes me as a micromanagement tower defense but more boring and not as fun as city builders/sims

ASSFAGGOTS I are slow, filled with some of the worst people imaginable, and generally a slog of shit that flooded the market for ages, thank fuck they're finally dying out

I haven't played this game in at least fifteen years.

>RTS strikes me as a micromanagement tower defense
its funny reading this post considering tower defense games came from a warcraft 3 mod just like dota did

>But I wouldn't call them "innovative."
I think one thing Tropical Freeze did very well that not a lot of platformers do is really incorporate the environment into the level design.

For example, most "2.5D" platformers have some 3D landscapes in the background, but they're just that. They don't do anything. In Tropical Freeze, you're consistently interacting with all of that despite being limited to one plane.

Nah good platformers are fun, there are a lot of shitty ones around though.
I love:
>mega man
>spelunky
>super meat boy
for reference

The genres I don't get are;
>Visual Novels
I'd rather just read a book or some manga or something
>Survival games
Multiplayer can be fun, but that's true for all games. The base mechanic in online survival games are generally shit.
>Walking Simulators
UHH, BORING
>JRPGs
After playing quite a few, I've gotten dead tired of the turned based combat and can no longer stand playing them. Turned based like Person and FF I mean, not like Disgaea, I like Disgaea-like combat.

>very sparse in actual engaging interaction
You said this off-hand and didn't elaborate despite it being completely wrong.

>decision making
Yeah, see, you've condensed the entire depth of fighting games into this to try and downplay it.
"Decision making" in fighting games is not the same decision making as in something like a Moba where you are weighing up build options, assessing risk, and knowing typical hero usage to try and make an educated decision, it's a long game of cat and mouse where you try to pick out patterns while setting up your own fake patterns while discerning their fake patterns, in all levels of the game from mid-low mixups to how you move and when you throw out normals and at what range.
You've condensed basically infinite layers of possible options into "decision making"

>the execution stage is often a drawn out waiting game
The only FGs with long drawn-out combos that don't have constant decision making built in to them are Anime fighters, and even those at least have bursts despite how rarely they can be used.
In SF combos are short and simple, in KoF combos are short and simple aside from doing multiple supers, in Tekken combos are usually long, but the person doing the combo is actually changing his combo based on his position in the stage to try and maximize damage with a good wall splat, and on top of that in TTT2 he's also making a decision about using a tag combo based on health levels, red health levels, and whether they have rage or how close they are to rage, at the same time as improvising their combo for the wall splat.

>spam your zoning
That's not how zoning works, spam implies a lack of thought, if you don't place your projectiles correctly you will get 0 hits and the advantage you gain from being long range with a projectile is lose, one thoughtless projectile at the wrong range and you can lose half your life, again your condensing something extremely important into words that sound basic to make it sound correct

>Retarded comment
>"You're retarded"
>LOL TRIGGERED
Yeah dude people play fighting games because they want to just do QCF+P over and over without thinking to create an easy path to jump over without thinking for anyone who isn't a fucking moron, you're totally right.

i dont get RPGs and MMORPGs
i mean i get it, you make progress, numbers go up, but the gameplay is just awful
the only positive thing is seeing your "progress" in your virtual character, and sometimes the story (lmao)

I never understood this mindset. So you've experienced "everything" about something. Is there a problem with experiencing more of that?

Does every experience need to be completely new and devoid of what you enjoyed in another? Is this really how some people live life? Just crossing off experiences from a list and not seeking further enjoyment from them because they experienced them once?

RPG is way too vague a term to describe a genre as a whole, you have to be more specific. Do you mean action RPGs? Turn based? Tactical?
Give me some games as examples of what you mean here.

Combos are obviously a barrier for a lot of people, but you "learn" matchups by playing, you can accelerate that by talking to people about specific matchups, watching videos and taking notes etc. but if you're not planning on being a top tourney player that's a waste of time anyway, just play, lose, think about your options and experiment with possible solutions the next time you get the same matchup, if you're totally lost after like 20 games, find someone who's not a dick and ask them, or watch vids.

wut gaem?

Also 2D platformers are one of the simplest, yet elegant genres. I fucking love them.

paying money for shitty lewds
well done also your waifu sucks

Musou. Seriously, what does it offer compared to stuff like Onimusha or Ninja Gaiden?

You were right.

Final Fantasy type combat looks boring as fuck

Tbqh massive open world games tend to lose me very quickly. I've tried a couple, and they all bored me to tears. The whole passing distances, looking for stuff to do.. maybe i played the wrong ones but the action comes to a halt too frequently to keep me entertained.

(Yeah yeah i know, add n shit)

pretty sure it was popularized by starcraft, and not in the "aeon of strife existed and some people played it" kind of way either

i would guess its cause there's usually a shit ton of characters, and games actually come out for the series
where Onimusha and Ninji Gaiden are dead

This. And open-world games rarely have game mechanics worth a shit.

I am really looking forward to Breath of the Wild though. It really looks like the first open-world game that had more to it than just having a huge, vast open world to explore.

From what I hear, the Yakuza series is good though, if that counts.

Musou is a series that I've been meaning to get into for the longest time. I'll do it eventually, probably.

he literally says in his post man.

How am I supposed to know what he says in his post man? You think I spy on him while he gets his mail delivered? Fuck off.

>Yoshi's Island
>innovative
lmao. I will never "get" the massive hardon people have for YI

Platformer which merges solid classic Mario jumping with projectile-based combat (with fun stuff like ricochets)

It's really rather unusual to this day

>To the second point, I agree that there isn't much left to do with 2D platformers, but games like Super Meat Boy and Tropical Freeze are two good recent games in the genre. But I wouldn't call them "innovative."
You can say the same about 3D games.

Literally copy&paste ofthe copncept with few changes

ITT: op is a faggot with shitty tastes and subtly pushes his shitty opinion as an objective state of this.

i.e. classy Cred Forums resident

Nothing new, move on.

This is already the second thread in two days in a row that shits on platforming games.

Either OP is a fag that insists with his bullshit or underages really can't into 2d platformers.

>Personal opinion: the post

dat fallacy

>another thread where people can't separate not understanding why people like a genre and why they personally don't like a genre

Looks liek Frog Sord

Cancelled

Yep, you have to legitimately be an autist to not understand why people like a certain genre. Seriously, you have to just straight up not understand people on a fundamental level to not get why a person would enjoy something.

Name any genre, I can tell you why at least one person likes that genre.

>"I don't understand why people like X"
>"i won't say X is bad because Cred Forumsv will cal me on that but I clearly will imply X is pleb level compare to Y"
>"because I think so but can't explain why"

You have to be 18 years old to be able to post and visit 4chins.

>Name any genre, I can tell you why at least one person likes that genre.
Tell me why I like:

Sandbox Puzzle Games (i.e .Talos)
Metroidvanias (SoTN)

Yeah, but it never really does anything with that. Despite the fact that no game ever really ripped Yoshi's Island off wholesale, it's always felt like a very, very standard kind of platformer to me. Never any particularly low points, but never any particularly high points. Boss battles are safe and simplistic and the most "gimmicky" bits of the game take place completely separately from any actual platforming.

And it really doesn't feel anything like Mario platforming. In Mario, surfaces are largely flat or sloped simply, and holding right is life. Yoshi doesn't have that sort of weight or slipperiness, he's often changing direction, and his jump just isn't anywhere near as high as Mario's. It's a perfectly serviceable control scheme, it feels good to the point that I can understand people really enjoying the game for its controls alone, but the game as a whole just doesn't do anything for me. I'd like to see what some people see in it that leads them to call it "the best platformer of all time," but I just don't feel it.

Is this the "retarded baby with no skill" post?
Oh yeah, it is.

Just curious, do you have the same control issues with mobas? Since the controls are basically identical between the two genres.

I don't really understand how Diablo 3 could be more fluid, it has the "blizzard polish" on it and it plays really smooth. If Path of Exile got over it's 16 year old animations and playstyle it would be the perfect clicky looty.

d3 is really fluid
i don't know how it was before but i tried free version few months ago
it's not what fans wanted from diablo game but it's really good arpg
haven't tried it on console though but i can see it work
there are more stuff to designing platformers than gimmicks on what you char can do
there is level design, fluidity of movement, pacing...
try braid, battleblock and super meat boy and you will see they only share side scrolling perspective and ability to jump - it's very varied genere

For me genre i don't understand is jrpg - they are so grindy and always have generic stupid stories that take up most of playtime that is again - grind

>why at least one person
>why I like
basic reading user

I'm going to say a reason and you'll say no, that's not it. But that doesn't mean i'm wrong, because it will be the reason for at least one other person who likes that genre.

For example people like Metroidvanias because it combines multiple facets of different genres to facilitate exploration and adventure. People (or at least one person) who like to play Metroidvanias enjoy the gradual reveal of a place they are exploring and the basic platforming is conducive to actually making a map/level/zone look filled as well as providing an actual challenge in some other games.

These types of games has appealed to at least one person who enjoys action-adventure, character progression, and a world that is linear enough to be specifically crafted but open enough to give a sense of exploration.

For you, it could just be that your brother likes Metroidvanias and therefore you grew up with em.

smb as idea was not to be innovative but to flesh out platforming mechanics with no extra bullshit

>i don't understand video game design
>i wish other people didn't
>i am mad about this

>JRPG
>grinding
people enjoy both because it's a very calculated and repeatable way to simulate progression and growth

It's the reason why idle games have literally any popularity

>because it will be the reason for at least one other person who likes that genre.
>at least one person
>literally can't be wrong

What are you doing is empty, unfocused talk aka water under bridge. "I can't tell you why you like bread but I can say for sure at least ONE man likes bread".
Just because one person may like the specific game genres for exact reasons you've mentioned does not mean the rest follow his examples.

My point it to, well, point out, how hollow an pointless your attempt at argument was because there is no need to prove that sand is sand. Nothing you say hold any value to the discussion and the way I see it the only reason you said what you said is for the sake of saying it. Quite literally. Because you perfectly know there is no point to discuss personal tastes but you felt like you need to say something "meaningful" or at least "meaningful looking". And what is best if not a loaded statement with no effort that looks like you have some understanding on the subject?

>Cancelled
Fug

forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=35723.760

it was pretty neat there is an alpha build to play with if you want

>grinding
Unless you're talking about NES games the vast majority of japanese RPGs can be beaten just with the experience you get from bosses and random encounters you get while playing normally. The thing is that people don't try to learn the mechanics of most games when you can brute force your way through it.

>Having the capability to wall jump the same wall

So you never played Super Metroid?

Believe me, the ability to wall jump from the same wall twice in a row was the LEAST of the issues of walljump mechanics in that game

Yeah, I did, and I've always hated Metroid's wall jumping mechanics.

Even then though, Super Metroid required some degree of timing in order to get it to work.

>some degree of timing
>some degree
kek
it was objectively literally the worst implementation of it

Don't fix what isn't broken

How so? Boo hoo, a hidden sequence breaking mechanic is somewhat hard to pull off!

>hidden
Isn't it required to get out from that hole with the monkeys?

No he's right

I only went light on it when I said some degree because I know Cred Forums's ass blasted kitties would tell me to git gud if I went too far.

SM's wall jump is fucking god awful.

Flight games, be it Ace Combat or IL-2 Sturmovik.

The game shits itself at the very end because it expects you to finish kaizo tier levels with its loose as fuck controls. N and its sequels are infinitely better momentum based platformers.

Put me a list of games with walljump that have the same or very-very similar implkementation of walljump mechanics with such small inpout window as SM/metroids.

Go on, I'm waiting. If it was soo good clearly there are are more games adopted it and not the walljump mechanic similar to Ninja Gaiden, for example.

Oh boy I can't wait to get told and crushed.

I laid you the point on a silver platter and you keep missing it. Walljump mechanic in SM is not something you're even supposed to be doing as a first timer. Unless you fall into that (optional) pit where walljumping monkeys rub themselves in your face, you can finish the game without being aware of this mechanic.

Oh go you are fucking retard.

Even another user jumped into discussion to point it out:
It is fucking ironic that you are the one appealing to "missed my point!" argument":
>and you keep missing it.

when you yourself have hard time to understand that we weren't talking about the fact that it is "hard to learn and find out about walljump existence in SM" but about the implementation and mechanics of it.

IMPLEMENTATION.
MECHANICS.

They have nothing to do with existence or non-existence spoken walljump. It is about how these mechanics work and implemented, what are the rules.

You are really fucking dense and slow.

Sorry, all I'm seeing is a generation Z kid who had trouble with walljumping because his emulator had input delay.

The only "Kaizo tier" levels in dustforce is "Yotta" and "Infini"

Mega, Giga, Peta, Terra, Exa, and Zetta are perfectly fine.

I should know ive SSed every level except Yotta and Infini.

And if I can do it anyone can.

antichamber and portal are 2 of my favorite games and i really like tis-1000. I also code for a living tho so that might be part of it

The worst genre of all time is JRPG

>Linear as rope
>Cutscene after cutscene after cutscene
>Text in textboxes are so fucking slow letter appear after letter not full text at once
>the only choice you have in those games are party members
>you can't even skill and stat your characters as you want just level up and get everything automatically as designers made
>random encounters are so fucking annoying, you can't even travel to town for potions without fights so enemies can kill you just because you made too much steps. The best one JRPG is Chrono Trigger because no random encounters
they are made in manga style so they look like shit

see
Come back when you put up a list. Obvious you can put some eight behind your shitposting so people will take you seriously.

Yes, I know you won't and that the point

I can't comment on the TIS thing, but Spacechem is an absolutely brilliant puzzle game. Unlike most of its genre, it's not about finding "the" solution, but rather about building one of hundreds possible solutions and then being graded on performance.

I don't get FIFA or other sports games. Yes I'm a huge sperg, when my normie friends come over to smoke and drink and one of them brings a copy, I'll play with them, but I don't get the appeal

Fuck off underage

>Cancelled
Geez was this so hard to finish 2d pixel shit platformer
Those indie game devs are such a retards

>2D platformers are such a fucking tired genre. If you were there in the 90s you saw EVERYTHING there is (and likely ever will be) to the genre, the end

Because you can't improve perfection kid

>rockstar make some of the most polished games out there. Most casual game players will like a game that 'feels' cool on the surface

You're right and wrong. Wrong in that RDR is really not polished. It's a compromise that has to be made for the sake of the scale and scope, but it's unfair towards games that are polished as fuck (Inside comes to mind as a recent example).

I enjoyed RDR but I'm not gonna pretend that it wasn't severely limited compared to GTA games. It's okay because it's not GTA game, but it's very noticeable. The missions and few memorable characters is what really lets RDR down. The game fucking shines at times, but really only the first and the last (or two) acts are really great.

People would call it a Ubisoft open world game if it didn't fucking nail the setting and didn't make satisfying (albeit casual as fuck) horseback combat.

ill probably get flamed but leauge has a tutorial

Then why are there so many of them? Which platformer attained perfection and why did they continue after it?

>the game shits itself because the devs added ultra-hard post-game content post launch

None, I'm not a babby.
There's genres I don't play less of but I can pretty clearly see the appeal in all of them because I'm not retarded, and play them all to a certain extent because I'm not a child.

ur so mature onon
when i grow up i wanna be liek u

>I can pretty clearly see the appeal in all of them because I'm not retarded, and play them all to a certain extent because I'm not a child.

Do you play lewd hentai games like Rapelay and Violated Heroine?

>tfw W101 was the easiest hack and slash for me to grasp
I just can't keep up in Bayo or DMC3/4.

>why did they continue after it?
you have a brain problem son

polish on a huge budget open world game is different than polish on a small indie game
I've only see screenshots of RDR but GTA5 was one of the most polished games I've played, Inside may be polished aswell and have more attention put into the small details but the production effort and quality behind rockstar games is something that can hardly be matched by anyone (I'm not saying that because I like rockstar games either, I don't)

Wrong answer

The actual answer was SMB3

thanks bud
Of course, user.

>Where's the purpose?
The endgame.
>Where's the end game?
Map tiers.

>3D platformers are way worse, just look at ReCore
I thought ReCore was some sort of action-adventure shooter business. All the trailers had a lot of shooting in them.

it's about the story and the art/visuals

the gameplay is complete it's simple and just works.

Good for you, because you seem rather childlike in your behavior.

You're such a calm and collected badass

This. Also story mode of fighting games.

>musou
I like to see numbers go up and it's far more relaxing than something like Ninja Gaiden. To me, it's like sports games. Pick one up on a whim every few years, have some fun, never touch it again.

I've even slogged through a couple bad ones just because I'm so gay for Kenshiro. Ken's Rage was pretty slow and Ken's Rage 2's signature moves didn't feel as good. I just wanted to be Kenshiro!

youtube.com/watch?v=Xg3fMdIRlJk

TIS is based on the same idea.

>Why did they continue?
>SMB3!
Okay.

>story mode of fighting games.
they do their job in giving the player characters a personality.
Would you prefer everyone being an empty shell?

I don't get meuporgs

Fighting systems are ass. Just standing and hotclick icons like an idiot and you don't even know what's going on because there is so much shit on the screen

Do you "get it" yet?

Are there any hardcore 3D platformers?
I noticed that while many 2D platformers rely on tiles (so it's common to see challenges like left pic, where tile-precision is required), 3D platformers tend to be more flat and open, with bigger platforms (right pic).
This means that the gameplay is not so much about precision when jumping and landing, but more about walking up to a ledge, press jump, and move to the side while your character is hanging from it.
In a way, you could say 3D platformers are kinda casual compared to 2D ones. Am I wrong?

It's about the community and the appeal of a large shared world. And also about working towards improvement of your characters, your guild, etc. - In a world with many other players

But do you think the fact the fighting isn't as interesting as in a fighter or hack n' slash escapes any MMO player? There are some weird diehards that insist on shit like "x game prepatch had great combat!" but it always ends up being "good for a MMO" and not in general

There are things like Kaizo Mario 64. 3D platformers as a genre didn't live long enough to go through the "make everything sadistically hard" meme, so I doubt any existing ones, commercial or not, will be as hard as you're expecting

It personally didn't click with me, but Cloudbuilt fits your requirements, it's kind of like 3D Dustforce.

>Yoshi's Island for the SNES was the last truly innovative platformer) in the few choice decent games drifting in the sea of lolsoretro 2D indie platformers that get dumped onto the market every year
Then your issue isn't that you "don't get" platformers.
Its that you don't like bad platformers.

Last sentence in the OP was

>tl;dr Are there seriously dedicated "platformer fans" that have stuck with it for years and somehow haven't lost interest in what is likely the most stagnant genre of all time? Jesus fuck

I honestly think there isn't. There's no "platformer scene" like there is one for shmups or rhythm games or whatever

...

Turn-based strategy games. They almost always end up being a poorly made puzzle game where you have to find the overpowered thing if you want to beat the cheating, bullshit AI.

I was gonna say "platformers don't have a competitive element like shmup or rhythm" but then I remembered diehard communities exist for non-competitive games like point n' click adventures and CRPGs

If the genre is so perfect and deep like many have stated in this thread, where are all the platformer fans? There might actually be something to the whole "platformers are stagnant and everything was already done" allegation

>For my money, Yoshi's Island for the SNES was the last truly innovative platformer
That's really fucking ignorant.

Let's see some platformers better than it

literally everything you listed isn't a problem with the genre but with specific games in that genre

And we've already moved the goalpost from "innovative" to "better".

I'm calling the OP ignorant for claiming YI to be the last truly innovative platformer. I'm not commenting on overall quality.

Agree with much that has already been said:
>Fighting games
I just don't understand why certain moves have to be so complicated to execute. I don't think the term artificial difficult was ever as applicable as for fighting game combos, why not just make it like in Smash Bros one or two buttons you have to press at a time, always the same control scheme for all your characters? Because having inane combos make these games seem more difficult than they actually are. It's just not fun for me having to learn combos or learning how to execute a quarter-circle.

>Sports games
It's literally the same game released each year. They look almost identical, they play almost identical and almost none have something like a story mode (until last year or so at least). And even then these games become insanely repetitive, since there isn't really a big difference in presentation between different stadiums or teams unless you are a huge fan of the sport.

>Difficult Plattformers
I get the charm of something like Banjo Kazooie , but never found the ones that require super-precise jumps very appealing

>why not just make it like in Smash Bros one or two buttons you have to press at a time
Because that limits how many moves a charater can have.

>tfw been playing SMT:IV Apocalypse recently and half of these don't even apply to that game
No random encounters (you see enemies on the map), you can skill and stat your character but not your demons aside from inheritance, like all SMT games probably several endings that depend on your choices, very little cut scenes.

Seems to me more like you are criticizing one specific game and not necessarily a genre.

I've just taken a moment to think about this and I couldn't come up with a genre whose appeal I legitimately don't understand. There are many genres that I find entirely uninteresting (like bullet hell shmups or MMOs of any kind), but I can still see what it is that others like about them.

I think for me the closest thing to really not getting a game's/genre's appeal is when I read absolutely glowing reviews of games that I would consider completely mediocre or even bad. Virginia would be the most recent example. Its reviews just leave me scratching my head, because I'm just not seeing the qualities this game is being praised for.

There's a very, very big difference between a precision platformer like Dustforce or Super Meat Boy, and a collectathon 3D platform like Banjo Kazooie. Even if the latter can be difficult at times, the difficulty doesn't lie in pixel-perfect jumps or frame-perfect inputs.

So does dota 2, HoN and Smite.

Guy is baiting obv.

Platformer is a pretty simple genre, so most successful "platformers" are actually hybrids (see cave story, megaman, spelunky). The joy of platforming tends to come from tight controls and seeing your character move exactly how you intended; it can be very rewarding especially when combined with other gameplay elements.

For me it's MMORPGs, I always drop them after a week max. I like the idea of them, but you quickly realise that you're just another player of x class with y gear, and there's no skill to set you apart from a person who has the same level/class/gear as you. The social interaction is laughable at best unless you're playing with friends. Seriously, fuck that cringeworthy ERP shit.
MOBAs are shit too, but I understand that a combination of popularity and simplicity when compared to RTS makes them a lot more accessible. Doesn't make them less shit though.

Some people enjoy the challenge of mastering a difficult challenge. A lot of people don't and that's fine. Please don't refer to fighting game inputs as "artificial difficulty" though, I had really hoped that meme died out.

Part of the appeal in MMORPGs is the social aspect. You can join a group of people, end up talking with them and getting to know them together, and end up becoming friends. It was the main idea behind guilds and setting up their own forums, so the users had a way to easily connect with each other. These people probably ran off to games like TF2 and later to MOBAs, since they had the same benefits but without the required grinding to make everyone the same level.

Older MMORPGs were lore-heavy, and so they provided basically a several hundred hour long RPG experience for some people. Something like Everquest or Ultima Online, or even older World of Warcraft, had a bunch of things you could find out about different locations and history and monsters. Of course, all that is dead nowadays, with most MMOs just trying to mimic WOW raids and even WOW itself not focusing that much on it anymore.

And then there is the grinding. Some people just play the game as a time-killer and a way to have an impressive level to show for it, and MMOs give them the biggest chance to both do that and to show it off to everyone else.

I'm sure there are other reasons for different people, but those three are probably the biggest.

The FPS.

I just don't get it. The skill measured is how well you can point and click at things whilst you need to forget about the twelve-year-old who claims to have had sex with your mother in the background and readjust your eyes to at least hundreds of different shades of brown. It's so bizarre to think that this is a thing people "enjoy" doing.

>click at things whilst you need to forget about the twelve-year-old who claims to have had sex with your mother in the background
Just like Cred Forums.

Persona 3, played it for 100 hours and beat it and I felt nothing. Al I can say is I'm glad pcsx has turbo or I would have killed myself.

I'm getting the impression that "I don't get this genre" is euphemism for "I don't know anything about this genre".

I dont "get" Sonic. People say the physics is the main draw but everything after the first level takes away the slopes and other curvy structures and replaces it with spikes, enemies, and other hazards you'd have no idea were there unless you replayed it dozens of times.

Frankly, I enjoyed Sonic Heroes much more. I also have the Sonic Unleashed and Generations demos on my 360 and replay them all the time. I'm scared of buying them though because people say 3D Sonics are awful, even though I loved what I have played.

Why did you play it for 100 hours if you don't "get" it? What motivated you to keep playing?

>N and its sequels are infinitely better momentum based platformers.

F L O A T Y

Spyro
Crash Bandicoot
Ratchet and Clank

i agree
they are alllllllllllllllll alike

Just like black people.

How so?

Because the post I referenced criticized a very small subset of FPS as representative of *all* FPS.

Well, I'm the guy who made the post, so if you care to educate me, go ahead.

"Survival" simulators.
I don't see why anyone would bother playing it again after one good run.

Its design is simple. That's it. Why do you think people still play Metal Slug?

i don't get fighting games or sport games, especially fighting games.

I get that they *could* be fun for a couple of matches when you have couple of friends over, but playing them alone? Eh..

I think I already did. You criticized what's merely a subset of FPS (multiplayer FPS with "brown" aesthetics) and assumed them to be the entirety of the FPS genre. If you want to get an idea of the diversity of the genre, just go on a site like MobyGames or even just Steam and browse the FPS category. The overwhelming majority of entries are nothing like your description.

Not really, it starts being kaizo tier with the gold levels in city and lab when the game throws spikes on every surface and makes every floor a tile wide. It just becomes an exercise in rote memorization then, and that's not my idea of fun, casual as it may sound.

I don't think Metal Slug is a platformer

Pretty sure he was just saying Metal Slug is well liked because of its simplicity.

It just looks so ugly for me so I could never give it a chance.
Bad theme and clutter looking level design.

Modern FPS.

The idea of putting yourself in the shoes of a regular soldier in the middle of war sounds amazing, but the average FPS is insultingly easy and you just feel like a super soldier death machine with health that regenerates every 3 seconds, almost infinite ammo for any weapon you find, NPCs that constantly tell you what to do and will do it for you if you take too long, brain dead enemy AI and the most linear level designs of anything ever.

I'd concede to that, but seriously, 2d platformers are pretty simple in their appeal.

On another, anyone know the game? I'm searching for good indie shit since I don't know how to use emulators and Cred Forums wiki doesn't teach how to use SHMUP emulators.

ArmA and other milsims might be what you're looking for. They will cleave your asshole apart

Not all point-n-clicks are intended as "entertainment" I'd say. Some like Kentucky Route Zero go beyond being a game and turn into some ethereal trans-media beast, where you are exploring and following the writing one moment, then playing a recreation of cave explorer, dialing a secret tourism hotline for esoteric clues, or listening to an album one of the characters puts out. It's more an art game that happened to pick up enough appeal to fall in with other normal games.

Sirlin is fixing the fighting genre

>ground pound in a place where there's a shield in the background
>the shield starts rolling into water

This fucking game, man.

>since I don't know how to use emulators and Cred Forums wiki doesn't teach how to use SHMUP emulators.

Emulators emulate one platform usually. There are exceptions to this (such as MAME or mixed NES/Gameboy emulators such as REW)

You need the emulator and a ROM to play the game. Emulators for disc-based systems will usually load from a .iso, not a ROM. You set up the keyboard config in the emulator options, load the ROM from a folder and there you go. Saving in-game usually creates a save in your PC's HDD, but you can save and load anytime you want (savestates).

>this cuck is still at it

SF2 HDR was shit. SHIIIIT!

His forum is a personality cult too, visit it if you want to get weirded the fuck out

>focus on fundamentals
When do devs realize that simplifying the controls doesn't actually make the game "easier" for casuals? They'll still get blown up by people who know their shit and to them it'll look like the pro is being cheap or exploiting the game.

Hack n Slash

He is a bit weird, but I'm going to evaluate the game on its own merits when/if it comes out, the idea looks interesting to me

Isn't this essentially the premise of Smash Bros.? If so, I'm also not going to enjoy this.

Someone tell him Smash already exists

smash bros still has a bunch of strange, unintuitive techniques that you have to know if you want to play "the real game"

Considering I code in my free time for open source to feed my puzzle boner, yes.

>i don't get 2d platformers
fall onto spikes OP

>topic
arcadey FPS like cod, if bunny hopping and stabbing from the front works when the game involves guns its shit, end of story. what I don't get though is how some people are still hype for the series after 10 installations when most were bored after 3 or 4.

RTS

only game I liked was enpire at war and middle earth

mild kek

Isn't that basically the control scheme of the Naruto fighting games?

This sounds like the character with the best reach is almost guaranteed to have the advantage, since they could attack without much (if any) concern with a counter. Oh, your opponent blocked? Well, that's fine. They still aren't in range to do much of anything.

Not that it's a bad idea, just that the more simplified mechanics means that much more simple problems (like basic range) come into play.

same, its like the player isnt in actual control of the character but instead giving orders like an RTS. I get your complaint

Platformers are for autists.

i feel like i dont understand the love for MMOs. do people like it for the social aspects and a weird love for grinding? that's the best guess i can come up with.

I don't play Starcraft 2, I don't know much about the story, but I still watch the highest pro league and love it like hockey. The precision and execution of strategies, the thought processes of the players on the go to adapt to something unique, the mindfucks of mindfucks, it's really a chess on steroids. Also guys like Artosis are casting with so much love for the game, while acknowledging people like me to lay down everything in an understandable manner that it's very entertaining to watch tournaments.

Were these techniques intended by the designers or did they develop naturally during play?

I'm making a platformer game now. I thought I was being innovative, however, I realized I'm basically making my own Megaman reskinned.

So now I need to think of something new to make it stand out.

Social aspects, exploration, grinding can be good fun combined with socializing and the overall "gotta be da best" feeling towards gearing up.

Though you don't get many of the above nowadays due to how shitty the genre has become, but back when I played FFXI and WoW those were the main reasons.

so it's almost exactly as i expected. that explains why so many losers(for lack of a better word) attached themselves to the genre.

RTS, literally 2deep4me

There's so much shit going on at the same time and I'm terrible at strategizing under pressure

I agree with you user, well said. Though I don't play 2D platformers anymore and rather keep coming back to 3D classics such as Crash or Spyro (PS1). I can still enjoy them after all these years.

lewdness

Make the protagonist a proud Muslim transwoman of color.

Your question can be summed up: Why do I like Dead Space 2 but don't like Dead Space 3?

The tiniest of details can heavily influence your perception of the game, no matter how similar it is.

It's gonna be hard to sexualize inanimate object
worth a try though

anything is a dildo if you're brave enough

Pick a ganking hero or a very aggressive setup that relies on early game then.

Wise words.