icycalm preaches to the choir

[Ghegs]

One more thing I was going to mention but forgot: the article paints a very idealistic picture of arcade games, that they are all perfect and demanding and whatnot. There was no mention of stuff like Idol Master or that weird Kancho-game, which, unless I'm totally mistaken about the games, are not really about playing them with a high degree of skill.

Disclaimer: I actually did read the whole thing. I'm at work, what else would I do?

[Twiddle]

One more thing I was going to mention but forgot: the article paints a very idealistic picture of arcade games, that they are all perfect and demanding and whatnot. There was no mention of stuff like Idol Master or that weird Kancho-game, which, unless I'm totally mistaken about the games, are not really about playing them with a high degree of skill.

Racing and simulation games also largely ignore the skill aspect in favor of giving the player a fun ride, since it doesn't take all that much skill to avoid timeouts and you're almost never given a free race for first place these days.

[ArrogantBastard]

too long, didn't read it (past the first couple of sentences lmao)

what is it about? i require a cliff's note version of this egregiously long article

[Rob]

The only reason I read as much as I did was to see if it would offend me as much as it did some of the previous posters. It didn't and I was disappointed.

[Twiddle]

You didn't like the Recap line?

[Rob]

It was good but I had to ctrl+f to find it. Shouldn't bury good material like that.

[incognoscente]

what is it about? i require a cliff's note version of this egregiously long article

In a world where arcade games are overlooked by the Western masses, one man must stem the tide of non-arcade games.

With chills! "The masses, as I've mentioned, are beyond hope"
Spills! "gunning down one horde of zombies after another"
And thrills! "shirt unbuttoned, tie and jacket resting on top of briefcase on the floor"


Icycalm is...


THE INSOMNIA.AC EDITOR.


Rated R. In theatres this Friday.

[Neon]

what is it about? i require a cliff's note version of this egregiously long article

In a world where arcade games are overlooked by the Western masses, one man must stem the tide of non-arcade games.

With chills! "The masses, as I've mentioned, are beyond hope"
Spills! "gunning down one horde of zombies after another"
And thrills! "shirt unbuttoned, tie and jacket resting on top of briefcase on the floor"


Icycalm is...


THE INSOMNIA.AC EDITOR.


Rated R. In theatres this Friday.

CAPITAL. Fucking capital.

And I put the first word in capital letters so it's sort of a pun, lol

[icycalm]

I am still lolling. I'll copy-paste this as the introduction to the article on some other forum. NeoGAF, perhaps.



edit: also, Ghegs dude, you are reading things in my article that I never wrote. I'd ask you to read it again more carefully, but you've already suffered through it once so that would be unreasonable. In any case, to clarify, let me just point out that there are gushing reviews of games like Onimusha, Advance Wars and even Bullet Witch on my site, and that I regard games such as ICO and Ninja Gaiden as triple-A titles.

[Dandy J]

ico

a game that has to be played

to be truely experienced

[Ghegs]

edit: also, Ghegs dude, you are reading things in my article that I never wrote. I'd ask you to read it again more carefully, but you've already suffered through it once so that would be unreasonable. In any case, to clarify, let me just point out that there are gushing reviews of games like Onimusha, Advance Wars and even Bullet Witch on my site, and that I regard games such as ICO and Ninja Gaiden as triple-A titles.

So you do, I didn't notice those. I have to admit I've never browsed through your site, I've just read the occasional article I've seen a link to. This means that the image I got of you and your gaming interests based on this article alone (you did call Ninja Gaiden and DMC3 "simple games") is at odds with the image one would get from reading the rest of your site; there's some contradiction. After checking out some of the other articles it's obvious you're not as narrowminded as this one article makes you to be.

[GaijinPunch]

My kid is crying, so I haven't finished it yet. So far (a few paragraphs in) I find nothing wrong about it. If you want to read some happy-love-a-thon about the latest piece of shit out there, go to IGN. Nice to see someone writing objectively.

EDIT: Although I wouldn't have bashed ICO and Rez. Rez was an arcade game only released on a console. They just needed to make it harder. It was also the first game that hired real musicians to do the soundtrack since Ghost in the Shell on the Playstation. And ICO was just something different. Whether you liked it or not, you at least have to give props for thinking outside of the box.

[P_HAT]

Disclaimer: I actually did read the whole thing. I'm at work, what else would I do?

+1

[warp_zone]

I read the whole fucking thing.

It's not objective. It's scathing to people who don't hold the author's viewpoint. There's no hard evidence to back anything up except for the very obvious points made. He calls Final Fantasy fans limp-wristed fags.

I loved it. Yeah, it's just an opinion piece but i guess some nerves were struck since I doubt most gamers in the states are "arcade only". We really don't have the option so I imagine more than a few of us here fall into the aforementioned limp-wristed gaming communities.

Nice work.

[GaijinPunch]

Final Fantasy fans limp-wristed fags.

These are the most annoying people in the gaming community though. I remember consulting a walkthru when I got stuck in some SE game (probably FFX) and the author was boasting that he "only plays Square Enix games, and will only play those from here on..."

[warp_zone]

Final Fantasy fans limp-wristed fags.

These are the most annoying people in the gaming community though. I remember consulting a walkthru when I got stuck in some SE game (probably FFX) and the author was boasting that he "only plays Square Enix games, and will only play those from here on..."

Hah! I play FF games, but as far as the fan communities go I had a good laugh at the article's insulting tone. And let's be honest. The author's points are valid because it takes absolutely NO skill to finish Final Fantasy. You just need to have a sufficient amount of free time.

[GaijinPunch]

The author's points are valid because it takes absolutely NO skill to finish Final Fantasy. You just need to have a sufficient amount of free time.

This is the same for pretty much all console games released in the last... uh... decade. Even games w/ controller breaking difficulty (Ninja Gaiden, Shinobi, Kunoichi) still have unlimited continuing and stage select which take a massive load off of the player. I still applaud them for the difficulty, but pretty much any Cave game will take longer to clear. All the other stuff coming out? All you need is 30-40 hours, and the patience to drudge through it.

[CIT]

EDIT: Although I wouldn't have bashed ICO and Rez.

A lot of people seem to be misreading this.

Actually, he's not bashing Ico and Rez at all (I am quite sure that icy actually loves those games), rather he was commenting on how some people project overwrought and ultimately shallow "meaning" onto these game, specifically the whole questionable "games as art" thing.

[Acid King]

This is the same for pretty much all console games released in the last... uh... decade. Even games w/ controller breaking difficulty (Ninja Gaiden, Shinobi, Kunoichi) still have unlimited continuing and stage select which take a massive load off of the player. I still applaud them for the difficulty, but pretty much any Cave game will take longer to clear. All the other stuff coming out? All you need is 30-40 hours, and the patience to drudge through it.

I can tap the credit switch on my cab over and over again and "beat" any Cave game in about a half hour. Disregarding the fact that most every arcade game outside of the fighting genre do not take any skill to beat as long as you have enough money, something Icycalm gets around by explaining the "one credit rule" (a principle that could just as easily be applied to many modern action games since all it is is ignoring the built in feature of continues) I think the point that seems to be completely lost in this discussion is that arcade games and console games are designed with different purposes in mind. It's like criticizing ambient music because you can't do spin kicks or wind mills to it.

In other words, fucking stupid. As fucking stupid as saying Ninja Gaiden requires almost no skill or comparing random game quality in a store where literally hundreds of games can fit on shelves (and because of that shitty games can sit unsold for years) to arcades where space is a premium and only successful games can last. I'd make the obligatory "tell me Ninja Gaiden Black takes no skill when you can clear it without using mid level saves on master ninja" call-you-out challenge whenever a bullshit claim is made about a games difficulty or a players skill but I'll try avoid the pattern so many fall into.

I agree, arcade games are designed with steep learning curves and high difficulties to get people to spend money on them. An arcade game that is too easy is worthless to an arcade op and arcade gamers because arcade games themselves only last a short period of time. With console games, the ability to save and the fact that they aren't designed to to eat up your money, allows for longer experiences and lets the games developers toy with format, story telling and play style.

You can spend 100 hours in an arcade trying to clear or ESP Ra.De. or you can spend 100 hours playing Oblivion without ever finishing the game. Sure clearing Ra.De. takes more skill but what the player gets out of it, how the games are experienced and what the games demand from the player and the motivations of the player are so vastly different. It's akin to the difference between reading a book and watching a movie, or walking 10 miles instead of jogging for 5. Sure, jogging takes more training, more skill, more conditioning and is ultimately more work, but what makes that inherently superior to just walking? Any claim as to which format or method produces "superior" material or experience can be rolled up and smoked with the rest of the masturbatory drivel so many use to justify their preferences.

I suppose you could claim that arcades on average do produce better quality games than consoles do because genuinely broken arcade games seem to be fewer and farther between (though the back log of MAME games shows that there are heaps of real fucking shitty arcade games out there) but then again, arcade games are fixed within a handful of genres just as much, if not more so than console games, and are arguably just as derivative as the stuff produced for consoles.

The title of the thread hit the nail on the head. The people you aimed the article at are going to nod in agreement with it and many that don't have a hard on for arcade style games or who actually enjoy modern games are going to take issue with your generalizations and, at times, insulting tone. That seems to be the point of the article judging by the lead in so mission accomplished. I'm with you. Too many people are dismissive of arcade games and they really don't understand the point of skill based games because games today by and large are too easy. Extolling the virtues and the purpose of arcade games shouldn't mean making blanket generalizations and missing the point of modern console games though.

[GaijinPunch]

I can tap the credit switch on my cab over and over again and "beat" any Cave game in about a half hour.

That is not a clear though.

could just as easily be applied to many modern action games since all it is is ignoring the built in feature of continues

Which ones that are not arcade ports? There are only handful last gen, on the PS2... basically none on the Xbox360 or GC. They fall under the collect-o-thons, even if they are action games.

Too many people are dismissive of arcade games and they really don't understand the point of skill based games because games today by and large are too easy

I think the reason they miss it is that games are now mainstream. Mainstream = too many douchebags involved. Happens w/ everything. Movies... music... once someone can make millions out of it, it goes tits up (for the most part).

[Acid King]

That is not a clear though.

A 1 credit clear is just an outside parameter placed on the game for scoring purposes. You can put similar parameters on a lot of console action games and they become much tougher. The difference is that it isn't standardized like it is for shooters because there isn't a benchmark being sought from each play.

Which ones that are not arcade ports? There are only handful last gen, on the PS2... basically none on the Xbox360 or GC. They fall under the collect-o-thons, even if they are action games.

A lot of them. Ninja Gaiden and Devil May Cry could be played without midlevel saves or continues, and anything using them could not be considered as a legitimate clear. The same could be applied to most single player first person shooters and other action games that are split by defined stages. Not too long ago there was a short discussion about the Playstation's ports of Doom and Doom 64 not featuring in level saves and how much more difficult the games become. The difference is that there isn't a standard parameter placed on them like shooters because skill is judged in multiplayer for most of these games not a benchmark during solo play.

[Ed Oscuro]

I can tap the credit switch on my cab over and over again and "beat" any Cave game in about a half hour.

That is not a clear though.

And the "clear" you mention is pretty much what's called an "Iron Man" game in Fallout or a FPS title (no saving, other strict parameters).

There's still a handful of games out there that encourage players to be thrifty on saves, by offering up different ranks or keeping a running tally (alright, maybe that's not an encouragement, but close enough).

The major difference between a shooter and most console/PC games is that something illogical will happen or the game crashes and thus players will have to use the save to continue ;)

[Pirate1019]

It didn't even hold me for three paragraphs.

So basically, what you people are saying is that you have literally no fucking clue what you are talking about.

Thanks for not making up imaginary claims for me.

[PFG 9000]

robbed me of all the interest I had in finishing the article.

So basically, what you people are saying is that you have literally no fucking clue what you are talking about.

Irony at its finest. Like Rob already mentioned, I wasn't commenting on the article as a whole. I was saying that the article begins in a way that turned me off to reading the remainder.

[PFG 9000]

In other news, this is mildly amusing:

[GaijinPunch]

A 1 credit clear is just an outside parameter placed on the game for scoring purposes. You can put similar parameters on a lot of console action games and they become much tougher. The difference is that it isn't standardized like it is for shooters because there isn't a benchmark being sought from each play.

1 credit clear is a word westerners came up with for the Japanese word "clear". Not sure how it came into play, but in my neighborhood, if you "clear" something, you've done it w/o continuing.

You can put similar parameters on a lot of console action games and they become much tougher.

Right but there's a limit to these games. To me, 40 minutes to clear said game is the max. Some of Cave's more recent games approach this limit and I don't like it. The action games on the console you're referring to are even longer... well over an hour in most cases. On that note, you can take saves out of ANY game to make it harder. Still doesn't make it a better game, and it's arguably NOT the way the game was supposed to be played. We can bitch all day long that arcade games are the same (b/c they have a continue feature) but the benchmark for bragging rights is scored based on a single credit.

A lot of them. Ninja Gaiden and Devil May Cry could be played without midlevel saves or continues, and anything using them could not be considered as a legitimate clear.

Okay, there's two. Also, two that, if I'm not mistaken, both feature at least one part where you can sit and stock up on power ups. I would buy that these two could fit in. I just don't think they're the norm, and I definitely don't think that's the way the creators intended for them to be played.

[Mortificator]

I didn't know the insomnia.ac guy posted here! I like your site. It was pretty interesting reading about Japanese location tests, like when some guy gave you the business for taking pictures. I skimmed through this thread as the article was loading and thought the criticism would turn out to be unfounded, but I have to say your fundamental point's total BS.

A 1 credit clear is just an outside parameter placed on the game for scoring purposes.

Quoted for truth. Icycalm is saying that the best thing about arcade games is that you only have one credit, but that's merely an artificial parameter he's placed on them to enhance his enjoyment, not part of the game design. You could probably think up something for any game to make it fun. Castlevania Adventure's fucking terrible, but I'd enjoy playing it if Angelina Jolie gave me a blowjob each time I killed an enemy.

Not sure how it came into play, but in my neighborhood, if you "clear" something, you've done it w/o continuing.

That's only the standard for a very small number of players. I've played in arcades for many years and it's very rare to see anyone limiting himself to just a single credit while trying to clear the game; icycalm even mentioned this himself in the article. And looking at forum posts and reviews from people playing arcade games on home ports/compilations/XBLA, the vast majority of them use continues too.

Now, it's fine if you have more fun playing a game with only one credit, but the truth is, the people who designed the games want you to continue. If they didn't, they simply wouldn't allow it (games like Pac-Man and Robotron and Defender do just that). But when you run out of lives in Esprade, does it say "game over" or "please continue?"

Of course, it's no fun if you just credit feed through a game. I've been playing Guerrilla War recently while limiting myself to four credits. I saw Havana for the first time today. Maybe one day I'll be able to 1CC the game, maybe not, but I'm having fun playing. And I don't have to look at the first stage a million times.

[CIT]

robbed me of all the interest I had in finishing the article.

So basically, what you people are saying is that you have literally no fucking clue what you are talking about.

Irony at its finest. Like Rob already mentioned, I wasn't commenting on the article as a whole. I was saying that the article begins in a way that turned me off to reading the remainder.

Well, you wrote:

But this idea that modern console titles are by-and-large crap is, well, crap.

...which is not what the article is impying at all.

Of course you might wanna read the whole thing to understand that this is the case.

Also, it's simply a matter of respect and fairness, to have fully engaged in someone's argument (i.e. reading the whole piece) before responding.

If you were really that disintersted, why didn't you just click away? Instead you felt it necessary to post a comment - sounds to me like you're kinda interested after all!

[Acid King]

Right but there's a limit to these games. To me, 40 minutes to clear said game is the max. Some of Cave's more recent games approach this limit and I don't like it. The action games on the console you're referring to are even longer... well over an hour in most cases. On that note, you can take saves out of ANY game to make it harder. Still doesn't make it a better game, and it's arguably NOT the way the game was supposed to be played. We can bitch all day long that arcade games are the same (b/c they have a continue feature) but the benchmark for bragging rights is scored based on a single credit.

You're right. It's a benchmark for bragging rights because scoring is based on one credit. Its an outside limitation put on the game to standardize the game for competition. I don't think the length of the game matters, more like the length of the individual stages matters. Bangai-o has 40 odd stages and is still played like that because of the between stage saving. That's what really allows certain it to be played like that. I'm not saying it would make it a better game, I'm saying you can put outside limitations on any game for competitive purposes. You see that in many games. (AWP-less Counter Strike servers, for example.)

Okay, there's two. Also, two that, if I'm not mistaken, both feature at least one part where you can sit and stock up on power ups. I would buy that these two could fit in. I just don't think they're the norm, and I definitely don't think that's the way the creators intended for them to be played.

I'm not sure about DMC 3 because I haven't played that in a long time but stocking up on items in shops negatively affects your end of stage score and ranking in Ninja Gaiden.

I'd rather not get into what the developers intentions are, but I'll say no game is designed purposefully around dying (exception: Bakraid). Most every game is designed to be fair enough that dying is avoidable and a player that is good enough would be able to play through it without dying. The real difference is the way the games are set up and how the developers compensate for it. It makes more sense to have a severe limitation and punishment for dying on a half hour long arcade game than a 10 hour long console game.

[PFG 9000]

Well, you wrote:

But this idea that modern console titles are by-and-large crap is, well, crap.

...which is not what the article is impying at all.

Of course you might wanna read the whole thing to understand that this is the case.

Also, it's simply a matter of respect and fairness, to have fully engaged in someone's argument (i.e. reading the whole piece) before responding.

If you were really that disintersted, why didn't you just click away? Instead you felt it necessary to post a comment - sounds to me like you're kinda interested after all!

The article is promoting arcade gaming. What's the alternative to arcade gaming? Console gaming. Perhaps I shouldn't have put the word "modern" in my statement, but all the games cited in the first few paragraphs were from modern systems.

If you'll look back at my initial post, you'll see that the concept of the article does interest me. It's the thought of slogging through such biased and insulting commentary that I find disinteresting. So my post was intended as a way of saying, "I'd like to read further but your style makes it difficult," and I think that's pretty clear from the way I worded things.