A song that will make the PC master race happy

[Mido]

None of these titles are amazing. They're whelming - completely and utterly whelming.

My obligatory Young Justice joke aside, I'm intrigued by the direction of this conversation, as interesting points have been made thus far. As a console peasant who has become content simply tilling his fields for the PC Master Race crop harvest, I'd like to throw in my two cents.

Amazing should mean more than that you really liked it or that it was really solid. Amazing should denote groundbreaking, or incredibly touching, or a rare experience to be had that few other things have ever given you.

I'm glad that you threw this definition, since I can get a better grasp of your perspective on Nintendo's track record. If we are operating under this definition, then I honestly find it difficult to argue against your point, especially if we are taking into account Nintendo's run with the Wii U. I wouldn't go as far to say that the Wii U lineup is subpar in terms of game quality (although in terms of star power/standout games, one could say otherwise), but I would say that the lineup consists of very solid ventures that could potentially considered underrated gems in future days. Nothing groundbreaking as of yet, sure, but nothing downright bad from my own experience. Overall, I mostly agree with you, but I suppose perspectives on a certain game's merits is all a matter of preference after all is said and done. Honestly, this entire discourse has really got me thinking about what defines a standout game.

Pulling back the reins a bit now, I did get a good laugh out of the song. It was done well!

 

[Misty]

My obligatory Young Justice joke aside,

Yes, that was my reference point as well. I quite liked them saying it because it added a way to articulate myself I had been needing.

as interesting points have been made thus far. As a console peasant who has become content simply tilling his fields for the PC Master Race crop harvest, I'd like to throw in my two cents.

Yeah, absolutely, get in here. The more the merrier.

I wouldn't go as far to say that the Wii U lineup is subpar in terms of game quality (although in terms of star power/standout games, one could say otherwise), but I would say that the lineup consists of very solid ventures that could potentially considered underrated gems in future days.

Another factor which I know Loz will be aware of from our Skype conversation, and that it is fair to let you in on is that I am considering the track record of the developer or in this case, Nintendo themselves. Something can be absolutely solid and sleek in terms of the wider context of gaming, but rather limited by the standards which it itself has set. I don't think developers should really pay much attention to the wider context of gaming so much as their own track record. Nintendo had a track record of making not just solid, but innovative and arguably actually deserving of the term amazing games. They were pioneers and deserve mad respect from any gamer for their earlier efforts.

But at this point, they're gimmick and run of the mill machines like much of the gaming industry. I tend to think this is because the new final frontier is well past them on computers (a discussion for another time and place), but unlike their console brothers on the piss poor and xbone, they have a vastly richer history and should be ashamed of themselves for playing the same money game as their compatriots.

 

[DoomDash]

Embedded just fine for me. And I call shenanigans. Nothing will please the master race. The sales thing always bother me. Consoles get the same sales. Then they link me those key resellers (yes that's what they are called even though that triggers PC gamers) as if it triumphantly proves their case... and they usually fail to notice the site they linked me has console keys for sale there too... in obvious plain sight, for the same prices. You see a lot of tunnel vision with the crazy PC gamers, even some who are not entirely crazy drink a bit of the Kool-Aid.

Majority of time PC games are cheaper, but console games can be bought used. The nice thing about PC is your entirely library works forever though. If you look at slickdeals which keeps track of the lowest prices the PC versions are always cheaper, and this is from the legit sites, doesn't even begin to include the cheapest you can get them with 3rd party sites.

I have about 300+ games on Steam/Origin/GOG/Uplay and 300+ PS1-PS4 games but I know I've spent a ton more on console games, and that's with being a retail insider getting me a lot of games for $10.

 

[Emma]

Majority of time PC games are cheaper, but console games can be bought used. The nice thing about PC is your entirely library works forever though. If you look at slickdeals which keeps track of the lowest prices the PC versions are always cheaper, and this is from the legit sites, doesn't even begin to include the cheapest you can get them with 3rd party sites.

I have about 300+ games on Steam/Origin/GOG/Uplay and 300+ PS1-PS4 games but I know I've spent a ton more on console games, and that's with being a retail insider getting me a lot of games for $10.

Hmm... but you see, with the summer sales that JUST HAPPENED for Steam and Microsoft, the prices on the exact same games were the about same on both for free members and a little bit better on Xbox than on Steam if you were a Gold subscriber. I spent more for less content on Steam than Xbox for this summer sale actually. And some of the sites that you yourself have linked me before that are key resellers (yes that is their actual name no matter what you want to call them) saying how great a deal it was for PC gamers actually HAD console game keys (meaning codes for DIGITAL VERSIONS) on there selling for the exact same prices. I'm just not buying this whole "PC is cheaper" thing because in actuality it isn't true. And as for a library lasting forever, well yeah, I'll give you that one. But Microsoft and Microsoft alone is trying to change that for consoles.

 

[Ronin]

Why did you create a list of sub-par to whelming games when you were meant to make a list of amazing games? I'm confused.

I can't speak for the other games listed (huge backlog, long time no play), but Xenoblade X is hardly subpar or [under]whelming. In fact, due to the immense amount of content it's more apt to say that it can be overwhelming; you could reach the 200 hour mark before the final chapter because it's so easy to get distracted on the side. But that's a fair statement to make, because X specializes in exploration and customization over story. If you don't think a game can be fully enjoyed because its plot lacks in certain departments, then no this game wouldn't be "amazing" in that regard alone. But if X doesn't satisfy then the original Xenoblade Chronicles on the Wii (also ported to the Virtual Console and N3DS) is more than sufficient with its incredible story and characters on par with the likes of Witcher 3.

 

[Viral Maze]

The nice thing about PC is your entirely library works forever though

Not entirely true.

 

[the8thark]

The nice thing about PC is your entirely library works forever though.

Only if you are a crack whizz at older OS emualation.

Anything that was released on:

• DOS
• Classic Mac OS
• Mac OS 10.0 to 10.6
• A non intel Mac
• Apple Newton
• Very old versions of Windows
• And others

All need their OS emulated to play the games on movern computers.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

Amazing should mean more than that you really liked it or that it was really solid. Amazing should denote groundbreaking, or incredibly touching, or a rare experience to be had that few other things have ever given you.

So basically almost no game since ... what, the early to mid 2000s? Almost nothing on PC, XBO, or PS4 meet this criteria.

I would say that Splatoon does, however.

 

[the8thark]

Amazing should denote groundbreaking, or incredibly touching, or a rare experience to be had that few other things have ever given you. .

That's 100% subjective. What is amazing to one person mught not be amazing to another.

 

[Misty]

So basically almost no game since ... what, the early to mid 2000s? Almost nothing on PC, XBO, or PS4 meet this criteria.

I would say that Splatoon does, however.

I disagree entirely, although I can see that is a clever sausage way to go at it. I would agree that once you start defining amazing more accurately, yes, the bulk of games will not meet the criteria for amazing. That is not to say they should be tossed aside like so much garbage, it just means lionizing them isn't a very intellectually honest position. And I think we should tell the truth to ourselves as much as to others. The truth being that most games aren't amazing and weren't even trying for amazing and that most games will be constantly cashing in on what you want them to be like a whore and console games are more often in this department than PC due to the fact their audience has several key differences.

Splatoon is an interesting case because it is a fresh take on a dead horse genre (shooters). I'd love to explore the whole cartoony shooter that seems to be gaining a bit of speed these last few years and how it came to pass, but that's a side note. Splatoon is closer to being something special than a lot of the games on the list, where it falls flat is largely in game play aspects. Depending on the game, game play aspects can mean a lot less, but for the shooter genre, which will largely be devoid of character or story, technical choices become the area to judge merit on. Lower amounts of maps, amiibo-locked content, lack of private lobbies, no voice chat, and matchmaking issues aren't small flaws for a shooter to have as each afflicts the game play in major ways. When your area of judgement is going to fall on your game play, that's a laundry list of issues. Having not played it myself and only listened to people I trust, it may very well make up for this through stunning visuals and interesting gameplay, but I must admit it seems unlikely. Like many of the other games on this list, it seems on the high side of whelming, but still tragically whelming.

 

[Misty]

That's 100% subjective. What is amazing to one person mught not be amazing to another.

That is true to some extent, yes. But, I would argue that is only true because most people aren't thinking very critically about the games they play and throw the term amazing around like confetti because it is more fun to be in love with something than decide if it is worthy of your love. I tend to think that taste can largely be removed from the equation if people are willing to activate their brain boxes.

 

[the8thark]

I tend to think that taste can largely be removed from the equation if people are willing to activate their brain boxes.

I disagree. Taste is always a major part of it. You can admit a game you hate can be very good. But a person will only find a game be truly amazing if they like it a lot and it really leaves an impression on them.

 

[Misty]

I disagree. Taste is always a major part of it. You can admit a game you hate can be very good. But a person will only find a game be truly amazing if they like it a lot and it really leaves an impression on them.

I disagree in turn. It is entirely within the realm of the human to dislike a game or any form of media and see the amazing qualities within it and have an impression left. I simply counter that most humans don't do this because they value their taste and their own identity lens more than they value the ability to think and speak critically to the media they consume. But just because most humans are doing something in a silly manner in no way changes the standard at hand.

 

[the8thark]

I disagree in turn. It is entirely within the realm of the human to dislike a game or any form of media and see the amazing qualities within it and have an impression left. I simply counter that most humans don't do this because they value their taste and their own identity lens more than they value the ability to think and speak critically to the media they consume. But just because most humans are doing something in a silly manner in no way changes the standard at hand.

My responce to that is this.

An amazing game (in my opinion) is one that the player finds amazingly fun to play and really makes an impression on them. Fun is why we play games in the first place. It does not matter how HD or VR or whatever the game is. Fun is the most important thing in gaming. Fun is also very highly subjective. One could say an overall amazing game is one that many people find fun. We all know what games have provided us with the most fun. It's those games we each find amazing.

I do not disagree with your point. It's all about how you define a quality game. If you base it on technical and other arbitary specs or sales figures then sure you can quantify what is an amazing game. However if you base it on fun, then at bast you can make a qualitative statement on what makes an amazing game. Cause fun is so subjective. This is not a case of one of us is wrong and the other is right. This is a case of us both being right, based on the differing criteria we are both using to judge what an amazing game is.

 

[Misty]

And what I have to say to that is this:

People who define the value of any media based on entertainment are why so many of these games are stagnant even to them. Don't spend time complaining about every movie being the same summer blockbuster or that skyward sword is a poor Zelda if you believe entertainment is the highest calling a game can have. People who do as you say will constantly be content and complacent. People who do as I say will constantly demand better and more. I tend to think seeing entertainment as the standard is a bit infantile or rather promoting of infancy. People should grow out of it.

Still, you are correct we disagree on the criteria.