Tfw not smart enough to enjoy games for their mechanical complexities and depth

Nothing wrong with /simple/ games if they are good. At least you aren't playing a Telltale game, right?

>tfw smart enough to enjoy those things but still enjoy games for fun

Most "detailed information" correlates to "this game doesn't play like the one's I played when I was a kid, so let me chalk up a one sided argument for why it sucks".

What's good/bad in games are largely just subjective, user. Unless a game you like is literally bugged out, broken, or literally unplayable, there is no reason why you shouldn't like what you like, and anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is an insecure faggot who is just mad you don't support their niche as fuck interests.

Never played a Telltale game. Only saw the first two seasons of the Walking Dead, only played a few hours or Borderlands 1 and never seen Game of Thrones.
So
Much
THIS

I can play every game with every kind of graphic but i cant with strategic games in general.
Halo Wars and Armys Men were fun

>playing games just for fun
You cant even begin to imagine how much I envy you

I like you. You're alright.

>always pick simple classes/builds in games
>enjoy games like Metroid, Muramasa, Halo, Souls and Castlevania because they have simple controls and let me enjoy fighting things without caring why
Simple is best.

>Decently intelligent
>Can identify mechanically-based flaws with a game after playing for a while
>Can identify unbalanced/unfair sections
>Keep playing because I want to 100% it eventually
Knowing what's bad isn't always better, it just makes you feel worse about it

There isn't a single metric of intelligence, user, don't sell yourself short.

Their detailed opinions are just subjective, so there's no weight against you still enjoying the game, just them making a case because it's not like their preferred genre of game. Fuck em

>mfw too inteligent to enjoy video games but to nilihistic to do anything more productive with my life

I tried The Crew last night since it's free and I skipped all the story missions/tutorials about upgrading your car and just drove around the map for 2 hours straight in freeroam listening to music. It was very fun.

>nihilism
It's called depression

Actually, no. It's just called being a moron. Depression is a form of psychopathology. "Nihilism" is just shitty attitude of an immature brat. Big difference.

I don't understand what crossing the road to look at balloons has to do with fucking anything in that situation
D-does that make me autistic

If you're a legitimate nihilist but don't just off yourself, you confuse me. user is probably just depressed.

>If you're a legitimate nihilist but don't just off yourself, you confuse me.
Actually, no nihilist actually seriously considers suicide precisely because they are nihilist, and not legit depressed. It's a depressed person that might consider suicide seriously.

A nihilist is a person who does not want to assume responsibility over himself, finds comfort in a shitty "nothing really matters, which is why I don't really have to fucking try" excuses and even thinks himself somehow intelectually superior for such vapid attitude, but in reality he is bullshitting - himself and everybody else too.

Depression is a form of legitimate pain, a disturbance in healthy mental functions. It can drive one to want to kill himself.
Nihilism is an intelectual laziness and being a spoiled brat, there is nothing actually uncomfortable about it (as long as you live a shielded enough life to be able to afford it) so there is absolutely no reason for it to actually drive one to suicide.

If I played Papers, Please and stopped playing because my head started hurting does that mean I'm dumb as well?

It's also about dressing in black and threatening to cut off people's Johnsons

tldr fagtron lmoa
Nah, for real. You're on some real shit, man.

>tfw you prefer SRPGs because there is no real hurry.

That's what annoyed me about Atelier Totori. There was a time limit when all I wanted was a comfy game about bombs and pies.

>just them making a case because it's not like their preferred genre of game
Where was that said? Well, you belong in this thread atleast.

>tfw just lazy and disinterested

Nobody cares faggot

You apparently do.

I actually dress my characters like '90s stereotypes with shades and everything when I have the option, and I enjoy it.
I may have a problem.

That makes two of us, I fail to see the connection

If you guys don't understand then how can you expect anyone else to?

>mfw I was clinically diagnosticated as a super genius back in high school
>mfw my parents didn't give a shit about it
>mfw I later discovered that I'm not truly a super genius, I only learn and figure out things astonishlingly fast.

I don't know if I'm actually smart or not. I mean, I learned english entrely by myself, and I can easily do intuitive solutions to most problems.

I still have a minimun wage slave job, though. Sometimes I kinda wish some institute examined my brain to see what I actually am.

>mfw have a friend that can't enjoy any game that's not Cred Forums approved because muh objectivism

I play vidya for fun, not to be an uptight, snobby faggot that has to live vicariously through his hobbies

Fuck all this metagame from MH, I play with what works for me even if it's shit.

I'm not out to lose interest in the game in 2 weeks by rushing to the end.

I actually like FU's Hunting Horn

You could at least try not to be so reddit.

Effort to use the learning you have is being smart, learn some CompTIA + shit, do exams for A+ cert, in a 16+ hour job in no time

you're not

>At least you're honest. Hopefully you're not proud, though.
>tried to sound like a smartass who is better ands smarter than OP
>failed miserably

kek
this is why Iove this board

lay the foundation pupper

>the Crew has complex mechanics

>tfw too intelligent to enjoy Overwatch

KF2 is nothing but rooty tooty click and shooty unless you are the last guy left

>diagnosticated

Nah, I'm pretty sure you're retarded.

You should probably try reading before you spew retarded shit everywhere buddy.

lay the foundation pupper

Forms of nihilism[edit]

This article is written like a personal reflection or opinion essay that states the Wikipedia editor's personal feelings about a topic, rather than the opinions of experts. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (October 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Forms of nihilism
Epistemological
Existential
Metaphysical
Mereological
Moral
Political
v t e
Nihilism has many definitions, and thus can describe philosophical positions that are arguably independent.
But he is right retard

No he isn't, all he attributed to nihilism is baseless conjecture, how is that in any way 'right'? Unless his prejudices conform to yours.

Nihilism is a complex issue that can't be hand-waved with a few snide remarks.

>clinically diagnosticated as a super genius back in high school

is the person who wrote this autistic? why would it upset the author if their kid looked at some baloons that weren't the authors favorite color? what?

sounds like nihilism is just a person's attempt to rationalize their depression

My class received a surprise test that consisted of about 200 questions of mathematical and verbal logic exercises. The catch of the test was that the questions were divided by pages, and you had only like 2 minutes to solve the most questions possible in the fastest time per page, then you would go to the next page and so for.

I finished every single page quite easily. After the test I was called apart and found the psychologists, testers, the school director and my class tutor all surprised as fuck. The tester said that I was a part of a generation of super geniuses and that no one else in about 200 schools solved the test as fast as I did.

That's why I'm wondering if I'm actually smart or if I'm only mentally agile.

Nothing wrong with being radical dude.

>Nihilism is a complex issue
kek
t.nihilist-wanable

lmao

Same desu

Tfw every neckbeard has some made up story like this but then they work at dollar tree.

What makes you think my story is made up?

Is that the treasure master bloke?

>You should probably try reading before you spew retarded shit everywhere buddy.
Oh the irony. Here is a fucking pro-tip: Nietzsche predicted nihilism to be the grandest fuck-up of all time and possibly the end of humanity. His work, while fascinated with Nihilism, is a MASSIVE criticism of it, not vice versa. He was one of the very first (predated mostly only by Kierkegaard and Dostojevskij who both made EXACTLY the same points before him) is precisely the kind of shit you should read to realize just how dumb nihilism is, really.

No, it's a way to rationalize their laziness. Nihilism isn't actually about perspective (which is the problem of depression, really), but of value and behavioral attitudes. A depressed person can understand what is important and what is not, what is right and what is wrong, but will find himself lacking the motivation to engage with any of it.

A nihilist will not lack any motivation, but he will simply ignore notions of right or wrong, meaningful or meaningless by conscious decision.

Because it is

But it's not. I don't have any reasons to lie to people I don't know about. And as I said, I don't know if a purely timed logical test is enough to determine if someone "belongs to a generation of super-geniuses" as they told me.

I'm from Peru, btw.

>Nihilism is a complex issue that can't be hand-waved with a few snide remarks.
It really isn't. And you'd fucking know that if YOU actually fucking studied the shitty thing. Hell, it's NOT EVEN A FUCKING PHILOSOPHY. Nobody fucking actually recognizes nihilism as an actual philosophy: in history of philosophy, it has been recognized as a vapid bad habit, a FAILURE of cognition, not a complex philosophical structure. It's what happens when your philosophy DOES NOT WORK. Where you end up when you are failing to make sense of the world.

It's not a complex or clever school of thought. It's a dead end of pretentious wankery.

Oh Peru? I guess your story is true then.

lay the foundation pupper

That's like saying there's no objectively good music. Nobody criticizes The Beatles or Bob Dylan, whether or not they listen to them.

This video should explain things.
youtube.com/watch?v=roxzqaq0IMs

Teenagers criticize them all the time when they see their friends who go their classic rock phase or anyone who really enjoys them just to rebel. Besides that are also people that genuinely dislike them. Like fuck bob Dylan def needed to throw that harmonica out in a lot of older recordings to make them listenable

All of this confusion about "objectively good" shit could be solved so easily people just understood the concept of normativity. It's actually absolutely terrifying that such FUNDAMENTAL principle of human social organization, actually one of the very most important aspects of human existence, is so damn profoundly misunderstood.

It's really scary. People are idiots.

>to explain this supposedly obvious and simple idea, I must make a 20m video and talk about science
Not watching that right now.

But teenagers also don't like broccoli and cheese casserole. They just don't have the experience or maturity to fully enjoy that because they're already entrenched in their experience.

But an objectively good game would exist within a genre, not to mention if those not into the genre would just open their unnecessarily closed opinions into what makes the medium unique: action. APM is the crux of the market. So, tell me a game idea like multiplayer combo hack and slash isn't objectively fantastic.

It's like saying Brad Pitt isn't objectively attractive.

>tfw you can objectively see your favorite game is actually kind of shishitand mechanically dull as shit but you still love it
>have held it as your favorite for so long it feels impossible to let go of it as your favorite
Fuck you Earthbound.

>So, tell me a game idea like multiplayer combo hack and slash isn't objectively fantastic.
It's not.
Because the notion of "objective" and the notion of "good" (and it's derivates, like "fantastic") are simply from two entirely different classes of judgements.
Good and bad are matters of preferences among multitudes of potentialities within human behavioral options, objectivity is a observation of current (or deterministic and inevitable) state of physical matter.

Something being preferable behavior-wise and something being a specific, measurable and testable STATE OF MATTER are just two vastly different notions.

That's not a supporting argument, but a conclusion.

Fun is objective because playing games has specific states that are required in even amounts, specifically concentration, energetic effort, and mental quietness. Putting any game through these three criteria, in equally-required amounts, is the fun factor. Less interactive games are fun in some manner, but it's realized on a subconscious level that quick, 3D games improve real skillfulness.

forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2013/11/27/4-reasons-video-games-are-good-for-your-health-according-to-american-psychological-association/

>That's not a supporting argument, but a conclusion.
What the fuck are you talking about?

>Fun is objective because playing games has specific states that are required in even amounts, specifically concentration, energetic effort, and mental quietness.
First of all, this is wrong on so many levels it's not even funny. There is no objectivity for "fun" because "fun" not defined precisely enough to be measured scientifically. It's a vague term that means something different to much of different people and cannot be directly associated or attributed to any concrete mental states or processes that could be objectively measured. Some people find high adrenalin elevation "fun", others hate that shit, for an example.

"Fun" is an incredibly vague sentiment that one finds something subjectively enjoyable and even there we have consistent problem of agreeing whenever fun should be restricted to immediate viceral pleasure, mere focus of attention, or more complex experiences that can be recognized as valuable upon retrospect.
So this all tirade about "fun" being objective is a fucking joke.
Second of all: NONE OF THIS ACTUALLY RELATES TO SOCIAL NORMATIVES, which entail the notion of "good". Things being fun does not equal to being good, as drugs or unprotected sex often remind us of.
Third:
>Less interactive games are fun in some manner, but it's realized on a subconscious level that quick, 3D games improve real skillfulness.
The FUCK does that have to do with ANYTHING else we talked about so far.
Fifth: Fucking forbes, are you kidding me? Here is a pro-tip: games can be good or bad to your health like everything else and stupid clickbait articles like this should never fucking be taken seriously. Especially since we know that the whole "Skillfulness" of videogames is largely absolute bogus and absolute majority of skills learned in videogames don't translate well into real world. Which does not make games good or bad, it's just a fact.

>Fun is a vague idea, so we can't measure it
Not true.

scotsman.com/news/one-smile-can-make-you-feel-a-million-dollars-1-738272
forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2011/03/22/the-untapped-power-of-smiling/

It's also not helpful appealing to the inexistence of something to prove its inexistence.

None of that post proves anything. It's just asking "why".

Yeah. Except, you FUCKING IDIOT, we do not have a definitive, deliminative way to identify what makes people smile. There is a major difference between pleasure and fun, by the way. Also, if you knew at least BASICS of modern neurosciences, you'd know all of these articles are bullshit because we still don't have a sufficient and realiable way to measure complex emergent phenomena like "pleasure", we have at best a heuristic or completely reductionalistic theory in which we identify one specific factor to measure and attribute our hopes and assumptions to it. You can notice how in that shit pseudo-scinetific article on Scotsman they actually completely hand-wave the whole methodology of the test by talking about "complex mood boosting value", which should alone tell you how poor grasp of the whole notion we have.

I'm not saying that positive emotions are not a thing. Or important. I'm saying that A): actually measuring and understanding positive mental states is still in it's absolute infancy and in no way reliable enough to speak about objectivity, B) attributing fun to positive emotions is wrong (because many people experience fun while experiencing negative emotions, such as fear, hence the popularity of horror games), C) attributing fun to "good" is even further wrong because "good" is a normative, social notion based on arbitration to begin with.

Ï'm not appealing to non-existence of fun, I'm merely clearing out the meaning of the word, which is very different from what you think.

>Ï'm not appealing to non-existence of fun
The implication is that it's an appeal to the inexistence of "proof of" fun, and a previous post very clearly describes a way to understand fun.

..Which again, avoiding and deflecting isn't an argument.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, suicidal fag.

I have that with stories in games. If something retarded or a plot hole comes up i'll just go "huh, that's dumb" and move on, a lot people I talk to, including you lot, get really hung up on that bullshit and never move on.

The only game I quit because of bulllshit like that is bravely second, fuck that fucking game.

>The implication is that it's an appeal to the inexistence of "proof of" fun,
The implication is the lack of objective criteria reliably denoting fun as a concept of objective knowledge.

Previous post does not describe a way to understand "fun", it provides bullshit articles about incomplete research noting that social acknowledgements triggers relatively high neurological response you idiot. And the post before that noted the mind-blowing discovery that videogames, as any form of complex input systems, can train brain to improve on certain activities, such as fine motorics or pattern recognition. None of which actually really addresses the issue of "fun" to begin with, really.
Some people find fun in pissing other people off. How do you, for an instance, reconcile the bullshit articles about how important smile is with trolling that is so prevailent around here? Most of those people do that shit - an EXACT OPPOSITE of what the scientists discovered to be "super important", "fun".
So please tell me, how we have objective means to measure "fun" for fuck sake. And you STILL have not adressed the problem of something being "fun" and something being "good" being two widely different things.

In fact you had not actually address any of my points so far, just provided increasingly unrelated and increasingly weak articles that don't really relate to anything that we are currently talking about.

Why do you cunts ruin everything? I just wanted a thread talking about fun games.

>352998783
You made the mistake of bringing up intelligence. Now every average to high intelligence loser with low mental health feels the need to prove their intelligence on a taiwanese bantam chicken raising simulator discussion forum.

The claim is made on what makes playing games fun. That's what has yet to be countered.

>The claim is made on what makes playing games fun.
Actually, it has yet to be PRESENTED you fucking idiot. You have STILL NOT PROVIDED AN OBJECTIVELY MEASURABLE criteria on what makes a game "fun".
Which by the way is STILL UNRELATED TO THE ORIGINAL SUBJECT OF QUALITY, and the objective measurement of something being "good". Because you have YET TO EXPLAIN HOW SOMETHING BEING FUN MAKES IT AUTOMATICALLY GOOD.
AND YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED A WAY TO OBJECTIVELY DEFINE "FUN" EITHER.
Jesus you are one dumb motherfucker.

how did he fail?

"lay the foundation pupper"

so you are mildly retarded?

>and then i just said intelligence is just a social construct
>pshhh I don't need you silly scientists.

you shouldn't waste time with these idiots, especially on Cred Forums