If you want to analyze a game, first you look at the bare gameplay and mechanics. Pretend there are no graphics, no sound (or just beeps), just squares or cubes (depending on if it's 2D or 3D) as placeholders. Is there something unique about the game even given no real graphics or sound? Is the game fun like this? No? Well, on a FUNDAMENTAL level it has failed as a game, and it will never be truly fun or engaging. Adding graphics and sound will never make the thing fun. You need to throw the game in the bin and look for another one. One where, even given the absolute barest placeholder graphics, and no sound or jusp beeps, would be fun.You can tell the devs know this too. Right now there's a thread on the board about some gay gaymer-to-trooner gacha game where you can adjust the body type of the woman you wish to become IRL, that apparently is an engaging feature for coomers. The devs added this in because the game itself has antequated mechanics and wouldn't sell at all if it was just squares, cubes, and beeps.Story-games, walking simulators, movie games? These are narrative storytelling. You may like or dislike the story. But how's the game itself, mechanically? Is it fresh, new, better, does it perfect the mechanic? No? No.A good analogy is chess. If you play chess on a plastic mat with cheap plastic pieces, does it really destroy the fun of the game? No. And while it might be fun to play with a very very fancy chess set, after a few moments you don't really even see the fancy pieces and board. You're simply playing chess. Most gaymers don't "get" this, being easily fascinated by moving lights and loud noises. And developers used to KNOW all this but forgot it too. And it's why some autist making a C64 game in his free time and selling it on itch for "pay as much as you like" can produce a better quality and MORE PROFITABLE game in 2026, than ten thousand developers working for a decade.
>>750222439>Adding graphics and sound will never make the thing fun.Bro plays like this
just play the demo or watch a lets play. youll know after a few mins
>rhythm games would be fun without audioCmon man. At that point youve just given the player a drum to tap but it makes no noise to provide feedback. Some genres require audio
>>750222585SOUL
>>750222585You're an NPC, you can't even see the outline of an apple in your mind. The point is that the mechanics of the game are what makes it fun, better graphics and sound might improve an already good game but can't save a bad one. Yet the bulk of gaymers are like you, and now devs as well apparently. NPCs.You never hear a chess master day "well it could have been a good match but the CHESSBOARD AND PIECES DIDN'T LOOK FANCY ENOUGH AND THERE WAS NO QUARTET PLAYING SOFT MUSIC NEARBY!">>750222750Know what?>>750222791I admitted beeps, that would be enough to make a fun game. You could add more complex music and graphics, but it wouldn't improve the fundamental qualities of the game. The base or foundation.
>gatcha fans getting really quiet with their bottom of the roster Atari 2600 tier minigame games which are just spackled with not-quite-porn coombait they love to pay to playGatcha fans are BORN NPCs and they aren't gamers either.
>>750222439I don't give a shit about gameplay and will gladly cheat if it's getting in the way.
>>750222884You keep bringing up chess but it's a terrible analogy, they're completely different.If you can't tell the difference I'm surprised you could even solve the captcha.
>>750222884good atmosphere and soundtrack can and does absolutely save many terrible gamesyou can only play chess when you play chess, you can do infinite things in a videogameone specific example of a limited, physical game with fixed rules vs hundreds of thousands of potentially limitless digital experiences>>750222439>trooner>coomer>NPC>the appleyou are not a real person, it's ironic how you don't realize how much of a tool you are
It’s simple.1. Are there any niggers?2. Are women ugly on purpose?No? Good to go.
>>750224110What's the point of the game then? I'm not against cheating in single player games, that can be fun at times too.>>750224295No they're not, the analogy works perfectly. Chess is a set of rules, you can play with anything, seashells, pieces of paper, giant solid gold Faberge realistic sculptures encrusted with enamel and jewels and mother of pearl.It's the same with all games, video games included they all boil down to a set of formalized rules which define the gameplay. Is that fun? Great. If not? Chuck it in the bin and examine the next game in the same way.You can't even explain what a game IS. It's a set of formal rules. Video games even more than other types of games as you usually can't easily change the rules. You could change the rules of chess, takes just the will to do it. But it's very difficult (or expensive with AI) to change the rules of a video game, they're even more formalized than board or card games.
>>750224640One could make a game that's fun and has tons of niggers and ugly women on purpose. It's been done.
>>750222439Autism.
>>750226463Nope. And this is true with all games like board games too. Games are being cranked out at a high rate by AI now, there's no need to play them because they won't have anything new.
>>750222439>a thread on the board about some gay gaymer-to-trooner gacha game where you can adjust the body type of the woman you wish to become IRL, that apparently is an engaging feature for coomersWow, that sounds terrible. Can you link the thread pls? To laugh at all the degenerate coomer trannies, of course.
>>750227313>>750220745
>>750227220>"Nope">immediately starts spewing some autistic non-sense again
>>750222439Counterpoint: Pathologic.
is wizball actually good?
>>750222439this might be /v/'s most autistic post of the decade
>>750233453It's great to this day, bitchin music too.>>750234465Thank you.
>>750231502What's that?
>>750236758wouldn't you like to know old man
>>750237041>brings up supposed counterpoint>refuses to elaborateNot really I guess, not any more.
I think I get what you're trying to say but you're saying it in the most retarded way possible.
>>750237075heh, better luck next time pal
>>750237076Do you get it though?
>>750237127Luck at what? You sounded like you had an insight, turns out it was a bluff.
>>750237137Well that's the thing, you talk like such a fucking retard that it's hard to be sure.
>>750237204I don't think you got it at all. Getting it means realizing a lot of games you thought were good, weren't, and you were just dumb for thinking they were. Conversely, it means a lot of games that "didn't age well" or so it may often be said, are much better than whatever came along afterward.
>>750237434No I get that, it's just that you say retarded things like >Pretend there are no graphics, no sound (or just beeps), just squares or cubes (depending on if it's 2D or 3D) as placeholders.
>>750237630What's the problem? You should remove all the graphical and story elements from a game, then you can arrive at the basic ruleset. Is that fun? No? Probably not.The graphics and sound can enhance a game, even a bad one, of course. But they can't fix fundamental rules problems and the gameplay issues they create.
>>750237806So tell me this: if two games have the same basic ruleset, is the former game automatically better for doing it first?
>>750237907No. Not always. Not automatically either. But in general, probably. But it's not even about what's the best, it's more about what games are worth playing. Is it worth playing the ten bajillionth game in a genre? Or should you seek out more fundamental genre-defining games? Lots of old games have strong player bases to this day, while most of the imitators have been flashes in the pan.
>>750238240But what about being fresh, new, and better? If it has the same base ruleset, it's failing to do these things you ask of it.
It's impossible to deny the problem, which is that there are reams of games which probably aren't worth playing. They might be playable, but there's no reason whatsoever to bother. A slightly different type of story, different style of graphics, some gimmick or another, Disgaea's creators obviuosly felt the same way and took all of this to the level of absurdity which was a fresh and bold move.>>750238351Which it, the thing that was fresh and bold and new at the start? Or the other thing that came later which might have been produced later in time, but wasn't really new, bold, or fresh?That's just it. It's hard to come up with a good fresh bold new fun playable game. Or is it? Maybe it just isn't done because many people will play any old garbage. Gatcha is popular in some regions, why? It's baby-tier minigames with some not-quite-porn and not-quite-gambling mixed in. Who would play such a game?
>>750222439Complete pseud bullshit full of false equivalencies and poor analogies but Wizball is based so I'll let you off
>>750238498>Or is it?Wow dude, you're a dumbass.
You want I should explain the chart?
>>750238719is this phantasy star?
Some games click. Gold Box games, for instance. SSI took from earlier games, fused certain elements and succeeded in making enduring classics. Nothing in these games was brand new, but all the elements harmonized and it created the mold for RPGs to come later, to this very day. Mechanically it's fun, and conforms to the point I was making. It took all the necessary and at the time, possible elements needed and fused them properly.>>750238719Your opinion is malformed, how do you analyze a game? Thinkers know ever increasing graphics and sound potential ruined video gaming. Do you just play and sorta have fun like a mood?>>750238730Smarter than some.
>>750222439How would this work with puzzle games?
>People can't just look at a game and know if they'll like it or not.>People don't have games that look shit and feel shit but they know there's a good game in there they just have to "get it" and do and then really enjoy it.>People not only read, but need reviews to make up their own mind.Sad. Just get stockholm syndrome like me
>>750238901Visuals inform the player. They convey information regarding movement, feedback, level design, game logic, frames, object interaction, status. They enhance mood and atmosphere. They're a crucial part of a game's design, communication, and appeal. Assessing game design without the visuals that define said design is inherently extremely fucking stupid.
>>750238965A lot have the same mechanic as others, is it fun? Fine. You might like the music or graphics in one or another game but turns out you probably played something so close that you might as well skip whatever, if they match in terms of the formal ruleset closely enough.There are so many video games, you'll never come close to playing even a fraction of them meaningfully. My method allows you to determine if a game is worth your time or not, or if it's the same tune in another key so to speak, and skip it.Turns out the older games really did nail most things, that's why they defined genres, and starting there will let you make informed gaming decisions in the future. Morrowind, for instance, is garbage once you've played Ultima Underworld. There's no reason to play Might and Magic if you've played the Gold Box games. Nor is there any reason to play HOMM if you've played King's Bounty. Unless you just really like that particular game. But it won't be very interesting.>>750239269Visuals are great, I didn't say they weren't. They can make a shitty game into something that's meh-ish, and a good game into a great game. But they do not define the fundamental rules of the game and if a game isn't fun with the barest visuals, it'll never be great even with the best ones. Fancy graphics should always come later in the development stage and have no real influence over the actual gameplay itself.
>>750238901>Smarter than some.You're not smart at all. You've said absolutely nothing of substance this entire thread, you're throwing out half-baked ideas with no dedication to any of it ("Or is it?"), you're genuinely convinced that you're a "thinker" for figuring out the same shit everyone else did.You're going through the pseudo-intellectual phase of being a teenager that literally everyone else goes through. I'm not gonna blame you for it but go write your thoughts in a journal or something instead of making it a thread.
What's the typing equivalent of "talking just to hear yourself talk?"
>>750239363>But they do not define the fundamental rules of the gameThey literally do. Visuals are created in tandem with game designMario faces right when he runs right. He faces left when he runs left. Link has his shield up when he's not attacking so he can deflect projectiles. Ryu is facing away from his opponent after a Shoryuken, leaving him open for a punish if it whiffsAnd so on and so on, you pretentious fucking cocksock
>>750222439>Is the game fun like this?Not a single game in existence would be fun without visuals and sound. They're a fundamental part of the experience.>b-but muh PongPong isn't fun.
>visual/audio cues aren't part of the game designunderage
OP is a god among men.
>>750237434>a lot of games you thought were good, weren'tThat's an oxymoron. If i think a game is good, it's good. That's all there is to it.
>>750240884Nope.
>>750240052>getting hung up on tree-level distractions when talking about the forest
>>750240764This anon gets it. Ain't nobody got time to play every silly game out there.
