The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
An amazing amount of posts on here seem to be posted by people who think that unless a game has repeated violent death and plotlines worthy of a Nobel Prize for literature, it instantly becomes a "kiddy game" and shouldn't be played by anyone over the age of 12. What's the matter? Are you all that insecure about yourselves that you can't simply enjoy something because it's fun anymore? Do primary colours now scare you more than the gloom that more and more games are set in?
Games are meant to be fun. We all know this; that's why they're called computer games and not "SUPER HOME SADOMASOCHISM SYSTEM X-TREME 6000!!!" (Though, some games do feel like it). It isn't necessary for violence to be involved to make something fun. It isn't necessary for other media to resort to violence and dialogue that has half the audience wanting to commit suicide by halfway into the story all the time. Why should games playing be different?
If we consider the films industry, it makes films specifically for children. These films are rated U, and large groups of people between the age of 12 and 16 labels them worthless because they're made for "babies". These people then miss out on some of the most entertaining films made. Films like Shrek, which is far better than most of the films made that year. There's no gore, no swearing, no heart wrenching dialogue. But it's entertaining for everyone.
Games should be like this. If I want to pick up Mario Sunshine and play it, rather than an in depth RPG that takes hours to get into or a driving game that requires hours of pedantic fiddling with car set-ups, then why shouldn't I? It annoys me when people younger than me tell me that I shouldnt play a game like that and should be playing GTA3 because "it has violence and stealing and you can beat pedestrians up." Maybe I don't want to beat the pedestrians up, maybe I want to cave your head in for being a shallow minded ****. Most of the "Adult" oriented games around aren't. They're aimed at pubescent boys who want to think they're grown up. A good example of this is the BMX XXX game just released in America. It has naked women, swearing and "A disrespectful attitude". I bet it sells by the bucketload. Even though it's just Dave Mirra's BMX with a few bolt-ons.
Let's take pokemon as a prime example. People argue that "it's designed for children" and "There's no realism" and that "The plotline isn't very good." They say that games like the Final Fantasy series, which went deadly serious in only the last few editions, are the only type of RPG worth playing because they're the only adult ones.
Give. A. Flying. ****.
Pokemon is fun. So are Final Fantasy games. Why should I only play one of them? Why can we no longer rank games on how much fun they are to play and instead have to obsess over plotlines, adult themes and language?
I'm not saying that adult oriented games are bad. Nor am I saying that all games should be aimed at everyone. What I'm saying is that just because a game is advertised for children, it isn't necessarily only for them.
Anyway.
Games = Fun.
Fun = Good.
Good = Happiness.
Happiness = Less rage.
Less rage = Less poxy fanboys.
See? It's good for all of us.
Now, why have I used so many rhetorical questions?
Games are meant to be fun. We all know this; that's why they're called computer games and not "SUPER HOME SADOMASOCHISM SYSTEM X-TREME 6000!!!" (Though, some games do feel like it). It isn't necessary for violence to be involved to make something fun. It isn't necessary for other media to resort to violence and dialogue that has half the audience wanting to commit suicide by halfway into the story all the time. Why should games playing be different?
If we consider the films industry, it makes films specifically for children. These films are rated U, and large groups of people between the age of 12 and 16 labels them worthless because they're made for "babies". These people then miss out on some of the most entertaining films made. Films like Shrek, which is far better than most of the films made that year. There's no gore, no swearing, no heart wrenching dialogue. But it's entertaining for everyone.
Games should be like this. If I want to pick up Mario Sunshine and play it, rather than an in depth RPG that takes hours to get into or a driving game that requires hours of pedantic fiddling with car set-ups, then why shouldn't I? It annoys me when people younger than me tell me that I shouldnt play a game like that and should be playing GTA3 because "it has violence and stealing and you can beat pedestrians up." Maybe I don't want to beat the pedestrians up, maybe I want to cave your head in for being a shallow minded ****. Most of the "Adult" oriented games around aren't. They're aimed at pubescent boys who want to think they're grown up. A good example of this is the BMX XXX game just released in America. It has naked women, swearing and "A disrespectful attitude". I bet it sells by the bucketload. Even though it's just Dave Mirra's BMX with a few bolt-ons.
Let's take pokemon as a prime example. People argue that "it's designed for children" and "There's no realism" and that "The plotline isn't very good." They say that games like the Final Fantasy series, which went deadly serious in only the last few editions, are the only type of RPG worth playing because they're the only adult ones.
Give. A. Flying. ****.
Pokemon is fun. So are Final Fantasy games. Why should I only play one of them? Why can we no longer rank games on how much fun they are to play and instead have to obsess over plotlines, adult themes and language?
I'm not saying that adult oriented games are bad. Nor am I saying that all games should be aimed at everyone. What I'm saying is that just because a game is advertised for children, it isn't necessarily only for them.
Anyway.
Games = Fun.
Fun = Good.
Good = Happiness.
Happiness = Less rage.
Less rage = Less poxy fanboys.
See? It's good for all of us.
Now, why have I used so many rhetorical questions?
Page:
Grix Thraves wrote:
> Like why kids will eat the crappest of foods, if they get a free toy.
Like American Pie. People see it for the gratuitous breast showage. Or not.
Good post.
> Like why kids will eat the crappest of foods, if they get a free toy.
Like American Pie. People see it for the gratuitous breast showage. Or not.
Good post.
" Games are meant to be fun "
Exactly, good post.
I actually found the Pokemon Gameboy game quite fun and addictive.
What happened to Pokemon anyway?
Just die away like most fads
Exactly, good post.
I actually found the Pokemon Gameboy game quite fun and addictive.
What happened to Pokemon anyway?
Just die away like most fads
Spot the irony: 10 points. :0D
Best gaming topic I've read in ages.
Can't really add to this. While GTA3 admittedly IS fun [even though I've not played it, I can pretty much expect it to be], it's the whole point that people just don't keep an open mind. They don't enjoy things because they've already judged it before they've touched it.
Like why kids will eat the crappest of foods, if they get a free toy.
Can't really add to this. While GTA3 admittedly IS fun [even though I've not played it, I can pretty much expect it to be], it's the whole point that people just don't keep an open mind. They don't enjoy things because they've already judged it before they've touched it.
Like why kids will eat the crappest of foods, if they get a free toy.
Great post mate, I agree with all of your points.
An amazing amount of posts on here seem to be posted by people who think that unless a game has repeated violent death and plotlines worthy of a Nobel Prize for literature, it instantly becomes a "kiddy game" and shouldn't be played by anyone over the age of 12. What's the matter? Are you all that insecure about yourselves that you can't simply enjoy something because it's fun anymore? Do primary colours now scare you more than the gloom that more and more games are set in?
Games are meant to be fun. We all know this; that's why they're called computer games and not "SUPER HOME SADOMASOCHISM SYSTEM X-TREME 6000!!!" (Though, some games do feel like it). It isn't necessary for violence to be involved to make something fun. It isn't necessary for other media to resort to violence and dialogue that has half the audience wanting to commit suicide by halfway into the story all the time. Why should games playing be different?
If we consider the films industry, it makes films specifically for children. These films are rated U, and large groups of people between the age of 12 and 16 labels them worthless because they're made for "babies". These people then miss out on some of the most entertaining films made. Films like Shrek, which is far better than most of the films made that year. There's no gore, no swearing, no heart wrenching dialogue. But it's entertaining for everyone.
Games should be like this. If I want to pick up Mario Sunshine and play it, rather than an in depth RPG that takes hours to get into or a driving game that requires hours of pedantic fiddling with car set-ups, then why shouldn't I? It annoys me when people younger than me tell me that I shouldnt play a game like that and should be playing GTA3 because "it has violence and stealing and you can beat pedestrians up." Maybe I don't want to beat the pedestrians up, maybe I want to cave your head in for being a shallow minded ****. Most of the "Adult" oriented games around aren't. They're aimed at pubescent boys who want to think they're grown up. A good example of this is the BMX XXX game just released in America. It has naked women, swearing and "A disrespectful attitude". I bet it sells by the bucketload. Even though it's just Dave Mirra's BMX with a few bolt-ons.
Let's take pokemon as a prime example. People argue that "it's designed for children" and "There's no realism" and that "The plotline isn't very good." They say that games like the Final Fantasy series, which went deadly serious in only the last few editions, are the only type of RPG worth playing because they're the only adult ones.
Give. A. Flying. ****.
Pokemon is fun. So are Final Fantasy games. Why should I only play one of them? Why can we no longer rank games on how much fun they are to play and instead have to obsess over plotlines, adult themes and language?
I'm not saying that adult oriented games are bad. Nor am I saying that all games should be aimed at everyone. What I'm saying is that just because a game is advertised for children, it isn't necessarily only for them.
Anyway.
Games = Fun.
Fun = Good.
Good = Happiness.
Happiness = Less rage.
Less rage = Less poxy fanboys.
See? It's good for all of us.
Now, why have I used so many rhetorical questions?
Games are meant to be fun. We all know this; that's why they're called computer games and not "SUPER HOME SADOMASOCHISM SYSTEM X-TREME 6000!!!" (Though, some games do feel like it). It isn't necessary for violence to be involved to make something fun. It isn't necessary for other media to resort to violence and dialogue that has half the audience wanting to commit suicide by halfway into the story all the time. Why should games playing be different?
If we consider the films industry, it makes films specifically for children. These films are rated U, and large groups of people between the age of 12 and 16 labels them worthless because they're made for "babies". These people then miss out on some of the most entertaining films made. Films like Shrek, which is far better than most of the films made that year. There's no gore, no swearing, no heart wrenching dialogue. But it's entertaining for everyone.
Games should be like this. If I want to pick up Mario Sunshine and play it, rather than an in depth RPG that takes hours to get into or a driving game that requires hours of pedantic fiddling with car set-ups, then why shouldn't I? It annoys me when people younger than me tell me that I shouldnt play a game like that and should be playing GTA3 because "it has violence and stealing and you can beat pedestrians up." Maybe I don't want to beat the pedestrians up, maybe I want to cave your head in for being a shallow minded ****. Most of the "Adult" oriented games around aren't. They're aimed at pubescent boys who want to think they're grown up. A good example of this is the BMX XXX game just released in America. It has naked women, swearing and "A disrespectful attitude". I bet it sells by the bucketload. Even though it's just Dave Mirra's BMX with a few bolt-ons.
Let's take pokemon as a prime example. People argue that "it's designed for children" and "There's no realism" and that "The plotline isn't very good." They say that games like the Final Fantasy series, which went deadly serious in only the last few editions, are the only type of RPG worth playing because they're the only adult ones.
Give. A. Flying. ****.
Pokemon is fun. So are Final Fantasy games. Why should I only play one of them? Why can we no longer rank games on how much fun they are to play and instead have to obsess over plotlines, adult themes and language?
I'm not saying that adult oriented games are bad. Nor am I saying that all games should be aimed at everyone. What I'm saying is that just because a game is advertised for children, it isn't necessarily only for them.
Anyway.
Games = Fun.
Fun = Good.
Good = Happiness.
Happiness = Less rage.
Less rage = Less poxy fanboys.
See? It's good for all of us.
Now, why have I used so many rhetorical questions?
Page: