Minecraft is now a subject at a High School

[louisg]

It undermines a considerable back catalogue of the finest software ever written.

There's a good reason for that. We live in a universe of evolution. That "fine software" that you speak of was great for its time, but it is completely and utterly obsolete today. At least the most primitive ones are. For example, I can play Garegga (1996) all day, but Space Invaders (1978) is just grossly simple and boring. No one would want to revert to a neanderthal either.

Maybe the *most* primitive. But not only is Garegga getting on in years, but there are a lot of great games from the early 80s which haven't been rendered obsolete. Galaga comes to mind. Not only that, but I find a lot of times that old games are criticized for only appealing to the nostalgia crowd. Meanwhile, modern gamers are playing flash and indie games for hours on end which, if anything, are often more primitive than games from 25 years ago. I'd also offer that, getting away from shmups (which have obviously evolved in a good way), that a lot of supposedly new game ideas (MMORPGs, open world design, narrative-driven gameplay, etc) were already done in computer games two decades ago as well. I think it's often just a perceived evolution.

(and 1996 was a long time ago-- we're talking 3 console generations back! In terms of technology, that's a lifetime)

Simplicity is a virtue in gaming, that's why we play games with the three same buttons and basic logic over and over.

Hmm...that first part is not something I see plausible at all. What I said was not a fallacy at all, but a different subjective standard than the one you now hold. If you like games simple, that's totally fine. It's just odd considering that the best games are the most deep and richly rewarding ones. In other words, high complexity trumps all.

I think he might mean shmups. While not simple as in simplistic, they are simple as in streamlined. There is a certain beauty in a design that accomplishes deep game design with only a joystick, a couple buttons, and an old arcade format. Any designer can, say, make a game with a ton of controls and features or units and say "look, see? depth!". But, it takes an exceptional designer to create a deep game and keep it streamlined (Miyamoto, Bunten are two designers who seem good at this).

[Drum]

The entire notion that a game with the ability to appeal to the broadest range of demographics is somehow inferior is a complete fallacy.

This is not even something we disagree on. I remember you mentioning in another thread (I think it was the "Recommended Anime and Manga" thread) that the majority of people have poor taste, and their tastes are a direct reflection of their mental processing power. It was a very smart quote. I've even thought about it quite a few times when reviewing games.

It undermines a considerable back catalogue of the finest software ever written.

There's a good reason for that. We live in a universe of evolution. That "fine software" that you speak of was great for its time, but it is completely and utterly obsolete today. At least the most primitive ones are. For example, I can play Garegga (1996) all day, but Space Invaders (1978) is just grossly simple and boring. No one would want to revert to a neanderthal either.

Simplicity is a virtue in gaming, that's why we play games with the three same buttons and basic logic over and over.

Hmm...that first part is not something I see plausible at all. What I said was not a fallacy at all, but a different subjective standard than the one you now hold. If you like games simple, that's totally fine. It's just odd considering that the best games are the most deep and richly rewarding ones. In other words, high complexity trumps all. Name one true modern masterpiece that isn't complicated as shit to master. Then take into consideration that all of the old masterpieces (Zelta, etc.) are so inferior it takes an extreme case of denial to claim that they are superior to the new ones. I'm not saying that's what you're saying, though. Of course you are entitled to your beliefs as well.

The second part kind of makes sense, but I can't make heads or tails of it.

Complexity can arise from very simple elements. Simple videogames can actually illustrate the idea in a clean, uncontaminated environment (sometimes - some simple videogames are just shit). Games like Asteroids, Defender and Super Mario Bros. are classic textbook cases of how a few simple elements can generate complexity. Shit, 'complexity generator' is a pretty good explanation of what a videogame is (also fits well as a definition of evolution/life). The complexity doesn't have to be hard-coded like it is in a lot of games - it can arise naturally.
Further, Minecraft is a vastly, absurdly more complex game than Battle Garegga (or any shmup). I mean, it's not even close. Which, of course, is not a slight against Battle Garegga or shmups.

[Drum]

It undermines a considerable back catalogue of the finest software ever written.

There's a good reason for that. We live in a universe of evolution. That "fine software" that you speak of was great for its time, but it is completely and utterly obsolete today. At least the most primitive ones are. For example, I can play Garegga (1996) all day, but Space Invaders (1978) is just grossly simple and boring. No one would want to revert to a neanderthal either.

Maybe the *most* primitive. But not only is Garegga getting on in years, but there are a lot of great games from the early 80s which haven't been rendered obsolete. Galaga comes to mind. Not only that, but I find a lot of times that old games are criticized for only appealing to the nostalgia crowd. Meanwhile, modern gamers are playing flash and indie games for hours on end which, if anything, are often more primitive than games from 25 years ago. I'd also offer that, getting away from shmups (which have obviously evolved in a good way), that a lot of supposedly new game ideas (MMORPGs, open world design, narrative-driven gameplay, etc) were already done in computer games two decades ago as well. I think it's often just a perceived evolution.

(and 1996 was a long time ago-- we're talking 3 console generations back! In terms of technology, that's a lifetime)

Simplicity is a virtue in gaming, that's why we play games with the three same buttons and basic logic over and over.

Hmm...that first part is not something I see plausible at all. What I said was not a fallacy at all, but a different subjective standard than the one you now hold. If you like games simple, that's totally fine. It's just odd considering that the best games are the most deep and richly rewarding ones. In other words, high complexity trumps all.

I think he might mean shmups. While not simple as in simplistic, they are simple as in streamlined. There is a certain beauty in a design that accomplishes deep game design with only a joystick, a couple buttons, and an old arcade format. Any designer can, say, make a game with a ton of controls and features or units and say "look, see? depth!". But, it takes an exceptional designer to create a deep game and keep it streamlined (Miyamoto, Bunten are two designers who seem good at this).

Galaga is Battle Garegga done right ^_^

[Elixir]

You need to end a sentence with a question mark whenever you ask a question, not a period. It makes you look dense and lazy.

It's great how someone already on thin ice is still dictating what people should do here, I guess your little time away from the forum was pointless huh.

[Ex-Cyber]

Are people seriously still calling him that.

You need to end a sentence with a question mark whenever you ask a question, not a period. It makes you look dense and lazy.

<Popular Buffalo Springfield song title>:

It's an informal convention, but ending an ostensible question with a period (or no punctuation at all, depending on the format) is sometimes used to convey a flat affect. The logic isn't terribly obscure: a question mark suggests speaking with a rising inflection, and the omission of the question mark nullifies that. The upshot is typically that the speaker is not genuinely interested in an answer to the question (e.g. it is "asked" with an air of sarcasm, incredulity, or stunned confusion), so in some sense it is not actually a question after all.

[Drum]

Upon reflection, it's brain-achingly absurd that the value of simplicity had to be explained to the guy who started the poetry thread.

[Siren2011]

hahaha. Please just stop posting. What's even more mind-numbingly absurd is how anyone could consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu6xj3BkU7c

as

"Durp, Battle Garegga done right ^_^ durp.".

Does Galaga even have rank? Do you have the slightest idea how much rank alone changes the whole playing field in Garegga? I feel as if I am talking to a very dim witted child. Not a clever child mind you, but a dim witted one.

Not to mention the lack of superb visuals and sound, as well as the fun that comes with collecting medals and using bombs to destroy structures for points. Simplicity is inferior, and yes, even my poetry thread. It was a cheap thrill in between classes, but at least I am willing to acknowledge its silliness.

Upon reflection

You did nothing of the kind. Reflections are exclusively reserved for people with above average brains. What you did was simply point out something that didn't even help your half-crocked argument at all. Try again next time.

Games like Asteroids, Defender and Super Mario Bros. are classic textbook cases of how a few simple elements can generate complexity.

No one is arguing the contrary. They are indeed games with complexity. You're not really understanding what I'm saying here at all, so I'll illustrate clear picture as best as I can for you once more. After that, I'm gone and you're hopeless. Whatever smarmy comment you leave will go unanswered and you will stay the forum jester with a preference for "teh retro." Or you could, to borrow Elixir's famous line, shuffle off of this mortal coil. Either way, I don't really care.

Asteroids, Defender, and Super Mario Brothers are far from very intricate, but they do hold some complexity. In the case of Mario, merely grabbing a mushroom that changes your physical properties and strength is complexity, because it adds to the game's rules in a meaningful way (Consumption of two mushrooms makes you shoot fireballs, which makes enemies and bosses easier to kill.). Now for a game of its time that is all fine and dandy. However, a modern action platformer with pulse-pounding action, varied weapons, and dashing/air dashing (which MUST be used if one is to progress very far, rather than be there only for show, or else it's useless complexity.) and chase sequences AND a better scoring system (Let's face it, Mario didn't have much of one to begin with.) makes it a much more meaningful game. Period. Anything that emphasis low interactivity leans toward being a bad game, or at least an inferior one when compared side by side with a more modern one ("Modern" is to be understood here as meaningful complexity added to more or less the same formula in which the earlier game had. See: Bayonetta to your Devil May Cry, or Street Fighter to your Karate Champ.). Even Cave games with their simple button schemes have very complicated scoring systems and intricacies to learn (Such as destroying the sky stations in stage 3 of Daioujou canceling the enemy bullets out, AND going in as close as possible to it with your laser out destroys it faster. Let's see that happen in Galaga.).

The healthy gamer is constantly looking for a more challenging and complicated game to wrap his head around and master. Anything that fails to meet such a requirement will not satisfy. True value judgments can only arise around this fact. Which is why, for example, saying that Mushihimesama is a horrible game compared to Space Invaders is completely retarded, as well as a sign if poor taste.

...also fits well as a definition of evolution/life...

Great. Now you're using ideas from people you despise and dressing them up as your own.

Further, Minecraft is a vastly, absurdly more complex game than Battle Garegga (or any shmup). I mean, it's not even close.

I am willing to become very familiar with this game just to see if your point above is valid. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but for now my horseshit detector is going off like an ambulance siren.

[mesh control]

[Drum]

hahaha. Please just stop posting. What's even more mind-numbingly absurd is how anyone could consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu6xj3BkU7c

as

"Durp, Battle Garegga done right ^_^ durp.".

Does Galaga even have rank? Do you have the slightest idea how much rank alone changes the whole playing field in Garegga? I feel as if I am talking to a very dim witted child. Not a clever child mind you, but a dim witted one.

Not to mention the lack of superb visuals and sound, as well as the fun that comes with collecting medals and using bombs to destroy structures for points. Simplicity is inferior, and yes, even my poetry thread. It was a cheap thrill in between classes, but at least I am willing to acknowledge its silliness.

Upon reflection

You did nothing of the kind. Reflections are exclusively reserved for people with above average brains. What you did was simply point out something that didn't even help your half-crocked argument at all. Try again next time.

Games like Asteroids, Defender and Super Mario Bros. are classic textbook cases of how a few simple elements can generate complexity.

No one is arguing the contrary. They are indeed games with complexity. You're not really understanding what I'm saying here at all, so I'll illustrate clear picture as best as I can for you once more. After that, I'm gone and you're hopeless. Whatever smarmy comment you leave will go unanswered and you will stay the forum jester with a preference for "teh retro." Or you could, to borrow Elixir's famous line, shuffle off of this mortal coil. Either way, I don't really care.

Asteroids, Defender, and Super Mario Brothers are far from very intricate, but they do hold some complexity. In the case of Mario, merely grabbing a mushroom that changes your physical properties and strength is complexity, because it adds to the game's rules in a meaningful way (Consumption of two mushrooms makes you shoot fireballs, which makes enemies and bosses easier to kill.). Now for a game of its time that is all fine and dandy. However, a modern action platformer with pulse-pounding action, varied weapons, and dashing/air dashing (which MUST be used if one is to progress very far, rather than be there only for show, or else it's useless complexity.) and chase sequences AND a better scoring system (Let's face it, Mario didn't have much of one to begin with.) makes it a much more meaningful game. Period. Anything that emphasis low interactivity leans toward being a bad game, or at least an inferior one when compared side by side with a more modern one ("Modern" is to be understood here as meaningful complexity added to more or less the same formula in which the earlier game had. See: Bayonetta to your Devil May Cry, or Street Fighter to your Karate Champ.). Even Cave games with their simple button schemes have very complicated scoring systems and intricacies to learn (Such as destroying the sky stations in stage 3 of Daioujou canceling the enemy bullets out, AND going in as close as possible to it with your laser out destroys it faster. Let's see that happen in Galaga.).

The healthy gamer is constantly looking for a more challenging and complicated game to wrap his head around and master. Anything that fails to meet such a requirement will not satisfy. True value judgments can only arise around this fact. Which is why, for example, saying that Mushihimesama is a horrible game compared to Space Invaders is completely retarded, as well as a sign if poor taste.

...also fits well as a definition of evolution/life...

Great. Now you're using ideas from people you despise and dressing them up as your own.

Further, Minecraft is a vastly, absurdly more complex game than Battle Garegga (or any shmup). I mean, it's not even close.

I am willing to become very familiar with this game just to see if your point above is valid. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but for now my horseshit detector is going off like an ambulance siren.

lol

[Elixir]

[ add a comment to this blog ]

[Siren2011]

I love how no one is actually, you know, fucking attacking my arguments. No, that's wayyyyy too much work. Instead, these scumbags would rather post an emoticon or a stupid one liner of some sort and pass it off as profundity.

BTW, the "drunk" thread is here, Elixir:

http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... start=1260

I think you would find it much more suited to your tastes than the adult conversations, here (though admittedly one sided conversations, lol.).

[Drum]

Galaga: Sacrifice ships, get money, get bitches. See, it's pretty much the same as Battle Garegga, only it has better music and you can see the bullets. And it has less crazy fans.
But to see the REAL depth of Galaga, you need to get two mushrooms.

[ChainsawGuitarSP]

Galaga: Sacrifice ships, get money, get bitches. See, it's pretty much the same as Battle Garegga, only it has better music and you can see the bullets. And it has less crazy fans.

Okay not gonna lie, this statement is pretty baller. Sigging it right now.

[Elixir]

BTW, the "drunk" thread is here, Elixir:

http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... start=1260

I think you would find it much more suited to your tastes than the adult conversations, here (though admittedly one sided conversations, lol.).

yes because there's people underage having underage discussion in the drunk thread

also I'm older than you

do keep posting, it's fun watching you trip over yourself

[Siren2011]

also I'm older than you

Indeed you are! And you can't use punctuation worth a shit, either. This is why you are a nice mix of tragedy and comedy. I would hate it if this forum lost you as a poster.

yes because there's people underage having underage discussion in the drunk thread

Who said anything about being underage? It's your mentality that is immature, not your age. Hence, why I directed you towards a thread filled with incoherent ramblings and other assorted retardations by people in the 25-30 age group. lol.

it's fun watching you trip over yourself

In your dreams, nigga. I ain't trippin'. YOU TRIPPIN'. An U gatta talk lIkE diS. You might as well go all the way if you refuse to capitalize your sentences like an educated person and not like a freaking bum who flunked out of high school.

[Drum]

i'm a werewolf

[Elixir]

And yet, the thread without the so-called "adult conversations" is the one which isn't going to be locked.

I'll make a serious reply seeing as how this thread is pretty much doomed.

Since you can't seem to understand why nobody took your larger response seriously, it's because this thread was bumped with a light-hearted reply (additionally, after 6 days of no activity), followed by a tangent. Doesn't fit. Was that really necessary? No, but you'll do it because you're lonely and want people to pay attention to you.

You've basically become synonymous with page-long, passive aggressive, unapproachable abrasive posts which people* aren't interested in reading or responding to because they don't have any place here. Whenever your name passes through PM, chat, or irc, it's never positive, always either negative or to be laughed at. I don't see how you're comfortable with footing the bill as 2011's filler, but every year, there's always someone.

Again, this isn't Insomnia or SomethingAwful; people are going to express themselves in their own ways, opinions will differ (which can be addressed without abusive, angry nerd rage) and you'll only end up in shit street if you continue correcting people, since it's actually perfectly fine. This is like talking to a 2005 version of myself; seriously, loosen up on the brute-force or you'll never fit in.

This is the only advice I'm going to bother giving you, you can either get your back up about it or do something about it, either way, I don't care.

*Well, okay... Skykid. He's got your back.

[KBZ]

Reeks of angry man foam in here. Since when did Shmups become NG?

[BPzeBanshee]

Further, Minecraft is a vastly, absurdly more complex game than Battle Garegga (or any shmup). I mean, it's not even close.

I am willing to become very familiar with this game just to see if your point above is valid. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but for now my horseshit detector is going off like an ambulance siren.

I can't speak for Drum, but I can say Minecraft has a similar level of complexity if you spend enough time on learning the mechanics of redstone.

My mind fires in ways that are not from this terrestrial realm, but personally I consider creating computers within Minecraft more complex than learning the mechanics of Battle Garegga. You will have to pay/pirate (best pay now before full version gets released for half-price savings) for the version which features redstone though, along with infinite terrain among other things which you'll notice is very different from the free Creative version provided for you to "try before you buy".

[Drum]

when i'm not being a werewolf i like to pretend complexity is a synonym for sophistication, just like a dumb fucking rube. i also like to gargle my own cum
glaaargggllglglggllll

[MX7]

when i'm not being a werewolf i like to pretend complexity is a synonym for sophistication, just like a dumb fucking rube. i also like to gargle my own cum
glaaargggllglglggllll

While Siren2011 may lack sophistication, I hardly see his posts as being in any way 'complex', unless you count chanting 'faggot' and spamming poorly articulated text walls as being indicative of complexity. His constant vying for attention is, at best annoying, but judging from his skills in articulation, I'm guessing he's still very young. Given the amount of free time he devotes to spamming the board, I would be very surprised if he was a day over 19. I imagine he'll stop posting over the next couple of months, and then be replaced with an indentikit ineffectual teenage troll, so there's no point in stressing out about it.

[Drum]

nonono i meant siren can't tell the difference between complexity and sophistication >:( >:( >:(
he was talking about complexity
as if it was necessarily a virtue

how retarded would you have to be to actually believe that?
this retarded:
>___________________________________________________________________________________________<

also, he is a virgin

[Udderdude]

Even trying to compare a shmup and a sandbox game in terms of complexity is ridiculous. I guess we should just start comparing it to racing games next, and then war simulators, and multiplayer Gundam fighting games, and etc. etc. Minecraft can be compared to anything! :P

[Skykid]

Okay not gonna lie, this statement is pretty baller. Sigging it right now.

It's also completely incorrect, but whatever, it's your sig.

However, a modern action platformer with pulse-pounding action, varied weapons, and dashing/air dashing (which MUST be used if one is to progress very far, rather than be there only for show, or else it's useless complexity.) and chase sequences AND a better scoring system (Let's face it, Mario didn't have much of one to begin with.) makes it a much more meaningful game. Period.

I sincerely hope to God above that that's not a reference to Hard Corps: Uprising. That would be the worst possible example of complexity.

[MX7]

nonono i meant siren can't tell the difference between complexity and sophistication >:( >:( >:(
he was talking about complexity
as if it was necessarily a virtue

how retarded would you have to be to actually believe that?
this retarded:
>___________________________________________________________________________________________<

also, he is a virgin

Ah! I'm a fool. Yes, asserting that something can only be worthy of positive critical appraisal should it achieve an arbitrary (and clearly highly subjective) degree of complexity is, of course, mind-crushingly asinine.

Take an ostensibly simplistic pursuit such as long distance running. By Siren2011's logic, elements should be applied to this activity in order to make it more worthwhile, or, perhaps in his own words, more "pulse-pounding". Why not attempt the activity on one leg? Award bonus points for doing a cartwheel exactly every 100 steps? It's a ludicrous notion, so why should it automatically be applied to videogames? The fact is Galaga (to use an example that seemed to wind him up pretty badly) does have complexity, it's just hard to gauge for a lot of people these days. Read Haruki Murukami's What I Talk About When I Talk About Running and you can see how complexity, depth and satisfaction can be ascribed to a pursuit that is inherently simplistic. Likewise Galaga, Donkey Kong, Xevious et al. These looping, early arcade games are certainly not to my taste, but I can only begin to imagine the mental stoicism and sheer determination that is required to play games at this level. Adding "meaningful complexity" is a sound (though far from sophisticated) suggestion, but when it is clear that he simply doesn't understand how games that fall outside his scope of comprehension could be perceived as having critical value, It's very hard to take his rantings seriously.

He's pretty funny in a kind of 'imitation brand Icycalm' kind of way though.

[MX7]

However, a modern action platformer with pulse-pounding action, varied weapons, and dashing/air dashing (which MUST be used if one is to progress very far, rather than be there only for show, or else it's useless complexity.) and chase sequences AND a better scoring system (Let's face it, Mario didn't have much of one to begin with.) makes it a much more meaningful game. Period.

I sincerely hope to God above that that's not a reference to Hard Corps: Uprising. That would be the worst possible example of complexity.

It sounded like Alien Soldier to me, which again would be a pretty bizarre game to use to underline his perceived shortcomings of Mario

[Skykid]

Yes, asserting that something can only be worthy of positive critical appraisal should it achieve an arbitrary (and clearly highly subjective) degree of complexity is, of course, mind-crushingly asinine.

That's the summary this thread was looking for.

Show's over.

[louisg]

Could we disagree without being assholes about it? Drum needs a timeout, man. I saw what you did on that thread split too, and it's not cool. Anyway, people shouldn't get worked up like this. After all, it's all just videogames, and they're supposed to be *fun*, dammit! (yes, I am aware that I could take my own advice on occasion; that doesn't make it bad advice!)

I'd take a good, solid, well-designed game over complexity.. well, I was about to say "any day of the week".. how about most days of the week? It's a rare game which is original, complex without just being a case of feature creep, and also plays tightly. Er, wait, we were talking about Minecraft at some point, weren't we?

[BPzeBanshee]

Er, wait, we were talking about Minecraft at some point, weren't we?

I was, dunno about everyone else. I think I've posted twice here and both times it was trying to be reasonable chat about Minecraft but now I'm having a hard time taking this thread seriously, so now if you don't mind:

Even trying to compare a shmup and a sandbox game in terms of complexity is ridiculous. I guess we should just start comparing it to racing games next, and then war simulators, and multiplayer Gundam fighting games, and etc. etc. Minecraft can be compared to anything!

Minecraft can even be compared to XOP. They both have shit graphics! u mad dude? [/troll]

I once heard someone say Minecraft was like Lego. There's a Lego version of everything, so going by that train of thought one could say that Minecraft can indeed have similarities to anything and everything in the Universe.

[Udderdude]

Minecraft can even be compared to XOP. They both have shit graphics!

D'ohohohoh!

I once heard someone say Minecraft was like Lego. There's a Lego version of everything, so going by that train of thought one could say that Minecraft can indeed have similarities to anything and everything in the Universe. :D

I actually made a Lego/Minecraft comparison earlier in the thread. >_>