thomas

To all chunk haters:

I think one of the things going on is that the industry and gaming community as a whole maybe expects / wants video game players to be playing more games than they actually should be or even want to be playing. I read one post yesterday complaining about the failure of Highguard that said (paraphrasing): “Do gamers expect a new game to be better than any other existing game in the category for it to be worth playing?” Insinuating that Highguard should have been given a “fair chance” even though it was mediocre compared to other, already available games, whereas it would be “better” to play it anyway, despite it not being a breakthrough or something entirely novel or new or particularly well done, which would “allow” the game to develop further, etc. But the answer to that question is “Yes.” Yes, gamers should expect a new game to go beyond previous games as a standard for whether it is worth playing or not. That’s exactly what they should do. That’s how art works, it goes beyond…it is something new. Arc Raiders, for example, was something new that felt entirely novel, was incredibly well done, and for me offered something very original and of higher quality than any previous or current game I have tried in that general category. So I bought it based on gamers’ shared impressions which made clear this was the case, and even though I am not an around-the-calendar shooter player whatsoever, I keep it installed and when I want a shooter, that’s the one I play. When a new shooter comes out that similarly wows me and pushes the envelope, I will get that one as well (economy allowing)—but of course it is the normal way of things that it will be awhile before that actually occurs. This is how one supports creative game development and developers who create original, new, and groundbreaking games. There is absolutely no reason at all for me to buy mediocre games in order to support mediocre game development. That clearly only sets the industry back. Plus…why should I be playing shooter games, or video games at all, around the clock, all year long to begin with? That doesn’t sound healthy for me, for gaming, or for the economy. I would rather just buy good games, rotate through the different good games I have and then, if only mediocre games are left once I finish those or have had my fun gaming…go do something else with my time that’s more productive than playing a mediocre video game. Anyway, I downloaded Highguard to try without reading or watching reviews—because why not try a free game out—and it not only failed to wow me in any way, but felt uninspired, clunky and, to be honest, as something of a visual insult offered to my eyeballs for no particular reason that I could discern. So I uninstalled it…done and done. Whereas the moment I booted up ARC Raiders I was instantly delighted, marveled at how the game looked and played, was astonished at how fun it actually was, and played it every day for two weeks. It will stay installed and continue to get play. I will also keep my eye on future efforts of those developers, but if all the put out is ARC Raiders for a while that’s okay, too. It’s good to have one really good and fun shooter to play when I do want to play a shooter. The rest of the time, when I want to play a video game, I have a backlog of top notch single player games which are each very original pieces of art. More than enough to keep me busy while waiting for the next groundbreaking games and gaming experiences to come along. I don’t need to play video games 24/7 or even want to. I just want to play really, really good video games when I do play them—ones that provide real value to the player and reward the investment of my time with top notch artistic experiences. Anyway, those are my thoughts on it.

what's a gaming take that'll have you like this

the giant briefcase is lowkey tuff