If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Candy Crush saga is the worst thing ever   (slate.com) divider line 262
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

22961 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jul 2013 at 4:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



262 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-07 06:17:09 PM
It's the type of game I like to call "stupiddicting". I'm on level 120 or so.

/never spent a dime on it.
 
2013-07-07 06:17:55 PM

Trocadero: [vinteeage.com image 400x300]
Yeah! Us old school gamers would never sink to such a seedy business practice. We were pure back then.
/places quarter under screen


i used to go around to all the machines and push those buttons repeatedly in the hope that some change would fly out.  usually averaged like 75 cents
 
2013-07-07 06:19:27 PM

Trocadero: vinteeage.com
Yeah! Us old school gamers would never sink to such a seedy business practice. We were pure back then.
/places quarter under screen


See: This post.
 
2013-07-07 06:19:54 PM

hawcian: Or, to put it another way: I don't give a flying fark about what you play; I do have a problem with encouraging consumer-unfriendly practices.


It's worse.  Candy Crush is a "proof of concept" of wide-scale mind-control.  Advertising and Mososos drag people in, microtransactions and play limitations activate cognitive dissonance, and the result is a shiatty, limited version of bejeweled is MORE SUCCESSFUL than bejeweled.  It's a massive (and massively profitable) experiment in social psychology and it's proving we're the mindless drones we keep pretending not to be.

shiat, we're throwing tantrums over NSA spying and overbearing government authoritarianism, but there is NOTHING they do that we don't do a million times worse to ourselves on facebook and friendster and myspace.
 
2013-07-07 06:22:52 PM

skozlaw: Candy Crush Saga: a Bejeweled rip-off for people who are too stupid to just play Bejeweled.

Between the Wii and smartphones I'm sorry to see the death of gaming come at the hands of overweight, forty-year old dipshiats.


Out of curiosity, what was your first game? Which computer or console? What year was it?
 
2013-07-07 06:22:58 PM

skozlaw: Cyno01: Dragonflew: Cyno01:  i found out today i could get Borderlands 2 + Season Pass for $15, but im not gonna play it anytime soon and it still doesnt come with the 30 or so character and skin and weapons packs, so im just gonna wait for the GotY edition down the road sometime.

For any of you wondering where to get BL2 for that price, check out greenmangaming.com

Regarding character skins... I never understood the point in a first-person game.  As for weapons, there are endless amounts of them you can find, you don't need packs.

Dafatone: Dragonflew: Cyno01:  i found out today i could get Borderlands 2 + Season Pass for $15, but im not gonna play it anytime soon and it still doesnt come with the 30 or so character and skin and weapons packs, so im just gonna wait for the GotY edition down the road sometime.

For any of you wondering where to get BL2 for that price, check out greenmangaming.com

Regarding character skins... I never understood the point in a first-person game.  As for weapons, there are endless amounts of them you can find, you don't need packs.

If you're worried about BL2 "coming with" guns, you're doing it wrong.

They won't be at the level cap, and they'll... no.  That's not how the game works.  Ow.

I was mistaken, idk what i was thinking because ive played a lot of the first one, theres the aditional classes, a few smaller DLCs that dont come with the season pass and everything else is just skins, no weapons.
[i.imgur.com image 850x514]
As for why... Im OCD and willing to wait for the complete game.

Wow. that image just guaranteed I will never buy another product from gearbox/2k.


Seriously?  A whole bunch of optional character skins are worth boycotting a company over?
 
2013-07-07 06:26:58 PM

Dafatone: Seriously? A whole bunch of optional character skins are worth boycotting a company over?


I would have gone with "Borderlands is a mediocre shooter", but that's just me.
 
2013-07-07 06:30:26 PM

MightyPez: hawcian: The problem here is not the game (which is just another Bejeweled clone, Bejeweled itself being a clone of another game), it's people spending money to play it when you don't ever have to part ways with your wallet. It encourages developers/publishers to put paywalls up in their games, because that's what makes money. You're not paying for anything; you're literally paying for nothing, for no work on the part of the developer or publisher or content creator. I'm not sure why anyone would want that. Especially ridiculous in this case, considering there are dozens and dozens of Bejeweled clones (including Bejeweled itself) on the market, most of which aren't quite as egregious in their money-grabbing shenanigans.

Or, to put it another way: I don't give a flying fark about what you play; I do have a problem with encouraging consumer-unfriendly practices.

How is that a problem? If people want to pay money, it's their choice. God forbid developers make money on their product. I just don't see how having people pay for a product  as an option is consumer unfriendly.


Did you watch  The Matrix?  One of the little elements of the plot was that the Matrix only WORKED because the overwhelming majority of people plugged into it CHOSE to remain plugged in, CHOSE to accept their drone world and drone life.

Microsoft's virtual monopoly on personal computing was forged the same way, it's a problem of something that is bad being accepted by the herd and hedging out the superior (but less popular) competition.

"So what?"  So I don't like it, and it's going to hurt me, and maybe there's nothing I can do about that but complain, but I'm going to complain.
 
2013-07-07 06:30:35 PM

Mike_LowELL: MightyPez: How is that a problem? If people want to pay money, it's their choice. God forbid developers make money on their product. I just don't see how having people pay for a product as an option is consumer unfriendly.

The free market breaks down at the point where you say it's okay for the consumer to make uneducated choices, and that people are being nuisances by providing educated opinions on the topic.


So they don't know they are paying money? It isn't clearly marked in the game that certain things will cost money? If that's the case you're right, that is very deceptive. But from what I've seen everything is pretty clearly marked and there is even confirmation dialogues that such and such costs $X.XX. Are you suggesting people don't understand how monetary transactions work?

And several people in the thread have verified you can advance in the game without paying a single red cent. So the ones that do are apparently paying to make that advancement easier for them. Sounds like they had a choice and chose to pay money for that convenience.
 
2013-07-07 06:32:01 PM
Just got The Simpsons; Tapped out on my Kindle Fire for free three or four days ago.

Have not bought any donuts and do not intend to, but the game takes so long to play as all is real time and the donuts do speed it up. The game gives you a few at the start and lets you find a couple during the tutorial, but is very stingy with more, have found one and am about to make level 12.

Nice thing about the Kindle Fire is that you can lock out in game purchases(don't know if other devices can do this or not), which I did the very first time I got one of these blood sucking games(and promptly forgot the password) and have not spent a single penny buying pretend crap that does not and never will exist, except in the minds of some lower life forms, for real money!

I'm not sure but I think that my gamer friends would not give anybody these tickets to continue game play, they would just laugh and say something to the effect that "you will never learn it if I tell you so go play the game and leave me alone!"

If I am going to buy donuts I'm going to eat donuts!!!
 
2013-07-07 06:32:50 PM

GreenAdder: Out of curiosity, what was your first game? Which computer or console? What year was it?


PC: Kroz
Console: Circus
Arcade: Rally-X maybe? Some top-down 2D racing game.

Dafatone: A whole bunch of optional character skins are worth boycotting a company over?


No, but I'm a little unclear on why I would waste my money on a game from a company that spends its time doing that instead of, I dunno... making a game? If I wanted to play with dolls I'd buy a Barbie.
 
2013-07-07 06:32:56 PM

MightyPez: Mike_LowELL: MightyPez: How is that a problem? If people want to pay money, it's their choice. God forbid developers make money on their product. I just don't see how having people pay for a product as an option is consumer unfriendly.

The free market breaks down at the point where you say it's okay for the consumer to make uneducated choices, and that people are being nuisances by providing educated opinions on the topic.

So they don't know they are paying money? It isn't clearly marked in the game that certain things will cost money? If that's the case you're right, that is very deceptive. But from what I've seen everything is pretty clearly marked and there is even confirmation dialogues that such and such costs $X.XX. Are you suggesting people don't understand how monetary transactions work?

And several people in the thread have verified you can advance in the game without paying a single red cent. So the ones that do are apparently paying to make that advancement easier for them. Sounds like they had a choice and chose to pay money for that convenience.


I think MIke was agreeing with you.

Mind you, Mike_LowELL is a known troll who makes nonsensical "Poe's law" arguments  defending Right-wing and anarcho-capitalist positions, so that's a dubious honor.
 
2013-07-07 06:33:01 PM

TheBigJerk: Did you watch  The Matrix?  One of the little elements of the plot was that the Matrix only WORKED because the overwhelming majority of people plugged into it CHOSE to remain plugged in, CHOSE to accept their drone world and drone life.


So the right idea is to remove the option for people to send the developer money?

But apparently a developer adding a completely optional payment scheme is analogous the humanity being enslaved. Care to compare DLC to the holocaust next?
 
2013-07-07 06:36:08 PM

MightyPez: So they don't know they are paying money? It isn't clearly marked in the game that certain things will cost money? If that's the case you're right, that is very deceptive. But from what I've seen everything is pretty clearly marked and there is even confirmation dialogues that such and such costs $X.XX. Are you suggesting people don't understand how monetary transactions work?


Implying the free market works on the premise that purchases are not holistic, implying that you are not making that purchase as a value judgment against your other available options.

TheBigJerk: Mind you, Mike_LowELL is a known troll who makes nonsensical "Poe's law" arguments defending Right-wing and anarcho-capitalist positions, so that's a dubious honor.


No, I only troll the politics threads.  Video game discussion is worth having.
 
2013-07-07 06:38:47 PM

Mike_LowELL: Dafatone: Seriously? A whole bunch of optional character skins are worth boycotting a company over?

I would have gone with "Borderlands is a mediocre shooter", but that's just me.


Loot grinding + FPS is like crack to me.  I can't explain it.  Even while playing Borderlands, I sit there going "man this sucks."

/helps to have dedicated friends to do it.
 
2013-07-07 06:38:49 PM
i1.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-07-07 06:39:58 PM

skozlaw: GreenAdder: Out of curiosity, what was your first game? Which computer or console? What year was it?

PC: Kroz
Console: Circus
Arcade: Rally-X maybe? Some top-down 2D racing game.

Dafatone: A whole bunch of optional character skins are worth boycotting a company over?

No, but I'm a little unclear on why I would waste my money on a game from a company that spends its time doing that instead of, I dunno... making a game? If I wanted to play with dolls I'd buy a Barbie.


It's almost as if game companies are large, with a lot of people working on a lot of things.  The game has a whole lot of skins.  If you want to complain that some are found in game and some are sold, you can, but whatever.

/aren't you trolling a PETA thread right now?
 
2013-07-07 06:40:04 PM

Mike_LowELL: Implying the free market works on the premise that purchases are not holistic, implying that you are not making that purchase as a value judgment against your other available options.


That sounds like it's up to the person paying the money to me. Which is exactly what is happening. I still don't see the problem.
 
2013-07-07 06:42:15 PM

Dafatone: Loot grinding + FPS is like crack to me. I can't explain it. Even while playing Borderlands, I sit there going "man this sucks."


Experience and loot mechanics can be a fun supplement for a game, so long as the game offers enough freedom that skillful play can ignore those variables, i.e. "you can beat the game at level one".  (See: The Souls games, modern Castlevania).  But then you get games like Diablo III and Borderlands, which require you to have the proper gear and setup.
 
2013-07-07 06:43:00 PM

TheBigJerk: Pichu0102: Pichu0102: This is the garbage that ads on every site keep force opening the App Store without me doing anything.

Fark them.

To add more, even on sites like right here, by the time you manage to get the page loaded without it hijacking you and sending you to the App Store, the ad is different.

A pox on whoever coded that POS ad.

Seriously, Candy Crush was the first (and so far, only) pop-up ad that would hijack and lock the system of my mobile device.


Me too. It would always pop up when I use Fark Mobile. But it seems like those ads are gone for the most part now.
 
2013-07-07 06:44:27 PM

Mike_LowELL: Dafatone: Loot grinding + FPS is like crack to me. I can't explain it. Even while playing Borderlands, I sit there going "man this sucks."

Experience and loot mechanics can be a fun supplement for a game, so long as the game offers enough freedom that skillful play can ignore those variables, i.e. "you can beat the game at level one".  (See: The Souls games, modern Castlevania).  But then you get games like Diablo III and Borderlands, which require you to have the proper gear and setup.


Mostly, it's a good game to play with a dedicated set of gaming friends.  If I were playing it alone or in public games, I'd cry myself to death.
 
2013-07-07 06:50:14 PM
 
2013-07-07 06:50:33 PM
At level 118...have never purchased a single upgrade in this game...
 
2013-07-07 06:51:10 PM

MightyPez: That sounds like it's up to the person paying the money to me. Which is exactly what is happening. I still don't see the problem.


You have the right to make a purchase, you have the right to enjoy something.  You do not, however, have the right to an opinion, opinions which are used to make those purchases, enjoyment usually created from your opinions on those purchases.  Your original point of contention is that people are "ruining gaming" for you and others because they're chiming in and telling you what's "good" and "bad".  They're not.  They're doing what they're allowed to do, they're doing what a strong market relies on.  If you make a shiat purchase, people have the right to tell you that.  And subsequently, it is not your right to ignore what they say, just because you don't like it.
 
2013-07-07 06:52:34 PM

Mike_LowELL: skozlaw: No, it's the ones who wanted nothing to do with video games back when we were inventing them that are defining the concept today.

Modern video games described in one sentence: Society wants video games to be more like television: Passive, brainless, minimal interactivity.

js34603: /you think it's fun? Play it, screw the idiots telling you you're destroying the industry

That's perfectly fine.  But don't tell people the game is "good", and be open to other opinions when more knowledgeable players say it is "bad".All I see are uninformed video game players making judgment calls on the quality of a game, and then when confronted on that misinformed opinion, lashing out in order to defend their emotional, financial, and time investment in the game(s).


Oh you're a more knowledgeable player of games, I see, which apparently means you get to proclaim your subjective judgments about what games are good and bad are objective reality. La di farking da douchebag. You don't get to decide what good games and bad games are no matter how much knowledge and how informed you think you are. You know what makes a game good? I have fun playing it. I don't give two shiats what you or any "knowledgable" game player thinks about it.

If pushing candy around is fun to someone, than you are a real jackass by trying demean them as uninformed and saying they're lashing out against you privileged few "real" gamers who apparently are the arbiters of what games are worthy. They're not telling you it's a good game (and even if they did, since its a subjective judgment anyway, they'd be right), they're saying they enjoy the game. But luckily you're here to mock them so they never make the mistake of enjoying a game without your permission.

It's the worst case of "stop liking what I don't like" possible. And your piss poor justifications (oh the free market! Oh they're ruining the industry! Woe is the video game world if they don't heed your earnings!) for it are really just sad attempts to rationalize your obsession with an entertainment medium that is supposed to be about fun. It's not about good or bad games, or knowledgeable gamers v. us poor uninformed rubes. It's about simple diversion and fun. Do you even enjoy playing games? Or do you just get hard thinking about all the things that you can list on your blog posts trashing them when they don't meet your high standards?

/your stupid troll act is much more entertaining than your studman69-video game edition act
 
2013-07-07 06:52:43 PM

DO NOT WANT Poster Girl: ByOwlLight: I am so baffled as to why replacing jewels with candies has made people go apeshiat.

Pogo games (EA) has a version of this called "Sweet Tooth" which has been around for years, and is a bit more challenging as you not only have to clear candies but also clear background patterns as well -- kind of like Bejeweled's mining game.


Came to see "Sweet Tooth".

i39.tinypic.com
 
2013-07-07 06:52:55 PM

Mike_LowELL: And subsequently, it is not your right to ignore what they say, just because you don't like it.


ts4.mm.bing.net
 
2013-07-07 06:55:49 PM
Level 86 not a penny spent. There are people that make walkthroughs?!?!?! WTF?
 
2013-07-07 06:56:38 PM

skozlaw: Wow. that image just guaranteed I will never buy another product from gearbox/2k.


To be fair, the $128.66 total in that image is misleading, the top one, the Season Pass for $29.99 includes five of the other ones.

Captain Scarlett and Her Pirates Booty $9.99
Mr. Torgue's Campaign of Carnage $9.99  
Sir Hammerlock's Big Game Hunt $9.99  
Ultimate Vault Hunter Upgrade Pack $4.99  
Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep $9.99

So thats a savings of 33% for those, bringing the actual total for that to $83.71. $24 of those being pointless character skins.
 
2013-07-07 06:56:45 PM
What the fark? I will never give that company my money. I can't believe what they're bringing in...
 
2013-07-07 06:57:23 PM
I'm on Level 142. Haven't spent a dime. Encountered a few levels that stumped me for a few days, but I figured them out. After my 5 lives are up, I put the game away for the day.

Anyone biatching about being "forced" to spend money on the game either A) suck at the game, B) have no self control and can't put the damn thing down to let lives regenerate, or C) both.
 
2013-07-07 06:57:32 PM

MightyPez: Mike_LowELL: And subsequently, it is not your right to ignore what they say, just because you don't like it.


Don't you get it? He's more knowledgeable than you. He gets to decide what is fun because reasons and so forth.
 
kab
2013-07-07 06:57:52 PM

Mike_LowELL: Modern video games described in one sentence: Society wants video games to be more like television: Passive, brainless, minimal interactivity.


I'd agree 100% with this.
 
2013-07-07 06:58:14 PM
Remember, people, these poor hopeless addicts are the 'new gamer demographic', the one that some companies try to convince you are running consoles and PCs into irrelevance.
 
2013-07-07 06:59:38 PM

Dafatone: It's almost as if game companies are large, with a lot of people working on a lot of things


You know what those people could be doing instead of playing with digital dolls?

Look, you can buy whatever you want, I don't care. I have Borderlands and I really liked it, but the fact that they decided to dedicate time to stupid crap like purchasable skins tells me two things:

1. They are less than entirely serious about developing games (and let's be honest, Borderlands has never exactly been a super-smart game from the start)

2. They ARE interested in making money by selling useless crap

That's not a good sign to me and it's not as if there's any dearth of options available when it comes to spending my money on video games. It's a highly competitive field and that's something that, to me, makes them less competitive.

You feel differently? Fine, but YOUR opinions don't influence MY wallet.
 
2013-07-07 07:00:11 PM

js34603: MightyPez: Mike_LowELL: And subsequently, it is not your right to ignore what they say, just because you don't like it.

Don't you get it? He's more knowledgeable than you. He gets to decide what is fun because reasons and so forth.


I know, right? I should listen to more people that say they know better than me about other things. What station carries Glenn Beck again?
 
2013-07-07 07:01:57 PM

skozlaw: Candy Crush Saga: a Bejeweled rip-off for people who are too stupid to just play Bejeweled.


But that's what FB games primarily are:  Every single one is a ripoff of something basic:

Match 3: Bejeweled, Candy Crush, Farm Heroes, Jewel Epic, etc.
Peggle: Hotshot, Papa pear, etc.
Puzzle Bobble/Bust a Move: Bubble, Bubble Witch, pretty much every game with the word "Bubble" in it.
Zuma: Hoop de Loop, etc.
SameGame: Collapse, Poppit, Pet Rescue, etc.
Scrabble: Words w/ Friends, Word Trick, Word Off, etc.
Solitaire: Solitaire Blitz, Pyramid Solitaire, etc.
Slot Machines: Millions. I recommend the ones that actually emulate real slots (Jackpot Party and Lucky Cruise have WMS games, High 5 is from High 5 Games, a major contractor to IGT; and DoubleDown has a lot of IGT stuff, too.)
 
2013-07-07 07:04:50 PM

MightyPez: TheBigJerk: Did you watch  The Matrix?  One of the little elements of the plot was that the Matrix only WORKED because the overwhelming majority of people plugged into it CHOSE to remain plugged in, CHOSE to accept their drone world and drone life.

So the right idea is to remove the option for people to send the developer money?

But apparently a developer adding a completely optional payment scheme is analogous the humanity being enslaved. Care to compare DLC to the holocaust next?


Did I say that?

Nope.

I said I don't like it, I said it's bad for me, and I implied heavily that the correct choice of action is to tell everyone you know it's a terrible, terrible game that shouldn't be played.  This is one of those "lose-lose" scenarios where stopping the dick from doing bad things has side-effects that are worse than letting the dick do bad things.  I still have a right to complain about those bad things, even if there is no way to stop them.

Kinda like this biatch:

i75.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-07 07:05:03 PM

js34603: Oh you're a more knowledgeable player of games, I see, which apparently means you get to proclaim your subjective judgments about what games are good and bad are objective reality. La di farking da douchebag. You don't get to decide what good games and bad games are no matter how much knowledge and how informed you think you are. You know what makes a game good? I have fun playing it. I don't give two shiats what you or any "knowledgable" game player thinks about it.


You're absolutely correct that my opinions on the topic are subjective.  Video games are a combination of mechanical logic (game code) and abstract aesthetic design (art assets, narrative contextualization).  However, the simple fact remains that some opinions are demonstrably---dare I say objectively---better than others.  My opinion is that the confluence of economic and game design decisions makes it a bad game, and something not worth paying attention to.  Your opinion is that you like it, so that's what counts.  My opinion is more well-thought-out, well-researched, demonstrates a better grasp of what I like and dislike in a game, and is generally more complex than yours.  My opinion is better than yours.

js34603: It's the worst case of "stop liking what I don't like" possible. And your piss poor justifications (oh the free market! Oh they're ruining the industry! Woe is the video game world if they don't heed your earnings!) for it are really just sad attempts to rationalize your obsession with an entertainment medium that is supposed to be about fun. It's not about good or bad games, or knowledgeable gamers v. us poor uninformed rubes.


Do you want a run-down of why Bejeweled's randomness and small number of possible moves per arrangement (within a playing field template, as conceived in Tetris, that is designed to provide a large number of possible arrangements and moves) is a bad template for a puzzle game?

js34603: It's about simple diversion and fun. Do you even enjoy playing games? Or do you just get hard thinking about all the things that you can list on your blog posts trashing them when they don't meet your high standards?


Uh, yes.  I do enjoy games.  I probably enjoy them more than you, because I can actively engage outcomes and considerations you aren't bothering to conceive, and generally speaking, there's a lot more going on in my brain when I play a game then when you play a game.  Even when I don't like a game, I can still get some entertainment from trying to figure out where the mistakes in the design process were made.
 
2013-07-07 07:06:09 PM

MightyPez: ts4.mm.bing.net


And that's why your version of the free market is an intellectually bankrupt one.
 
2013-07-07 07:10:42 PM

skozlaw: Dafatone: It's almost as if game companies are large, with a lot of people working on a lot of things

You know what those people could be doing instead of playing with digital dolls?

Look, you can buy whatever you want, I don't care. I have Borderlands and I really liked it, but the fact that they decided to dedicate time to stupid crap like purchasable skins tells me two things:


So your problem is that "skins" are digital dolls.  So the game shouldn't have any, or shouldn't have more than a few?

Is the problem that they're selling skins, or just that skins are "useless"?
 
2013-07-07 07:13:11 PM

kab: I'd agree 100% with this.


Basically, all the people who wrote off video games as "brainless" are now in the process of getting into video games...so long as they can do it with minimal effort and the games require minimal effort.  It's wonderfully ironic.
 
2013-07-07 07:17:05 PM

Mike_LowELL: MightyPez: ts4.mm.bing.net

And that's why your version of the free market is an intellectually bankrupt one.


Yes yes, you're the arbiter of what is good in the world and anyone that ignores you is killing the free market. And probably violating your free speech or some such nonsense. The politics troll on Fark should be listened to about this very serious topic.
 
2013-07-07 07:18:48 PM

Mike_LowELL: js34603: Oh you're a more knowledgeable player of games, I see, which apparently means you get to proclaim your subjective judgments about what games are good and bad are objective reality. La di farking da douchebag. You don't get to decide what good games and bad games are no matter how much knowledge and how informed you think you are. You know what makes a game good? I have fun playing it. I don't give two shiats what you or any "knowledgable" game player thinks about it.

You're absolutely correct that my opinions on the topic are subjective.  Video games are a combination of mechanical logic (game code) and abstract aesthetic design (art assets, narrative contextualization).  However, the simple fact remains that some opinions are demonstrably---dare I say objectively---better than others.  My opinion is that the confluence of economic and game design decisions makes it a bad game, and something not worth paying attention to.  Your opinion is that you like it, so that's what counts.  My opinion is more well-thought-out, well-researched, demonstrates a better grasp of what I like and dislike in a game, and is generally more complex than yours.  My opinion is better than yours.

js34603: It's the worst case of "stop liking what I don't like" possible. And your piss poor justifications (oh the free market! Oh they're ruining the industry! Woe is the video game world if they don't heed your earnings!) for it are really just sad attempts to rationalize your obsession with an entertainment medium that is supposed to be about fun. It's not about good or bad games, or knowledgeable gamers v. us poor uninformed rubes.

Do you want a run-down of why Bejeweled's randomness and small number of possible moves per arrangement (within a playing field template, as conceived in Tetris, that is designed to provide a large number of possible arrangements and moves) is a bad template for a puzzle game?

js34603: It's about simple diversion and fun. Do you even enjoy playing games ...


I didn't think you could be more of a condescending, obnoxious douchebag.

I was clearly wrong.
 
2013-07-07 07:19:38 PM

MightyPez: Yes yes, you're the arbiter of what is good in the world and anyone that ignores you is killing the free market. And probably violating your free speech or some such nonsense.


"Free market relies on people being educated."
"They don't have to, it's their right to be uneducated!"

Lol.

MightyPez: The politics troll on Fark should be listened to about this very serious topic.


Which may have been a damning and prudent argument (if only to muddy things) had you done it by the first or second response, but not so much now.
 
2013-07-07 07:19:55 PM

Mike_LowELL: kab: I'd agree 100% with this.

Basically, all the people who wrote off video games as "brainless" are now in the process of getting into video games...so long as they can do it with minimal effort and the games require minimal effort.  It's wonderfully ironic.


You left out that they get maximum profit with that minimal effort!!
 
2013-07-07 07:22:26 PM

Mike_LowELL: "Free market relies on people being educated."
"They don't have to, it's their right to be uneducated!"

Lol.


This hinges on the premise that your educating anyone. The game in question does a good job of letting people play the game, and laying out options on optional payments. Are they hiding something? You really haven't said anything that says they are. You're just being condescending and telling people they don't have the right to ignore for condescension.
 
2013-07-07 07:25:35 PM

Mike_LowELL: kab: I'd agree 100% with this.

Basically, all the people who wrote off video games as "brainless" are now in the process of getting into video games...so long as they can do it with minimal effort and the games require minimal effort.  It's wonderfully ironic.


Because everyone knows when you're playing video games it should be all about maximum effort. There can be no entertainment, it must be a struggle and EFFORT must be exerted.

You're boring at this point, and no different than the other 5000 hardcore gamers who bemoan the effect of 'casuals' on video games. I can find your arguments on every MMO forum in existence where the OMFGLEETS throw hissy fits because people aren't playing games the way they want them to, thereby ruining games forever since MuDs...er since Ultima...er EQ...er WoW...er Candy Crush.

/I'm going to guess you have failed to develop a game at some point in your life and you desperately want to blame that on the uninformed casuals or the stupid masses or anything but your own farking failure to make a good game
//I guess I'll miss your stupid sports tab trolling. But not that much
 
2013-07-07 07:29:29 PM

MightyPez: This hinges on the premise that your educating anyone. The game in question does a good job of letting people play the game, and laying out options on optional payments. Are they hiding something? You really haven't said anything that says they are. You're just being condescending and telling people they don't have the right to ignore for condescension.


I don't think there's any real discussion to be had when you keep repeatedly trying to get the answer to a question which has nothing to do with whether or not the game (as a value and time investment) is better or worse than other comparable games.  Your laser focus on whether the game's business practices are transparent (via a legal interpretation) has nothing to do with this.  And even if it did, the game would still be crap, and I could argue off of that.

js34603: Because everyone knows when you're playing video games it should be all about maximum effort. There can be no entertainment, it must be a struggle and EFFORT must be exerted.


Implying those who commit time and effort into video games are not enjoying themselves.

js34603: //I guess I'll miss your stupid sports tab trolling. But not that much


I'm guessing this means you put me on ignore, which wow, I think that pretty much made my point.  Fantastic.
 
2013-07-07 07:30:35 PM
Move your clock forward on your iPhone for free lives.

You're welcome.
 
Displayed 50 of 262 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report