Leaderboard

The problem here is that as good a system as it seems, people are still going to just use it as shorthand for "what I like" and "what I don't like", you know, like they do with "hardcore" and "casual" today. Terminology is only as intelligent as the people who use it, and from what I've seen lately, it's not very. And what if you leave the developers decide? That's even worse. Every dev making something of decent complexity is going to insist that they're crafting an "experience", because that carries an air of a superior product. Then they can say it over and over again to make the game look better, regardless of actual substance. It's like "natural" on food products. It'll be meaningless.

You might have interest in this. Do look at what I said before, but nonetheless, IIRC MovieBob does explain some important things about this movie's technical background. OXM is one of the magazines that I have a certain disdain for, because it seems like they are highly unbalanced with their reviews. I want to touch on this in a future episode. I unfortunately must admit that I do occasionally play it while waiting for something else to happen. It's not a particularly fun game, but it certainly keeps me distracted.

As Cyrem brought up movies, I can think of one very good example of this. "The Last Airbender". Yes there were some things that could have changed, like "Avatar" kind of stole the name (supposed to be "Avatar: The Last Airbender"), but how the critics rated it was a poor job as a whole. If you didn't know, this movie is based on the Nickelodeon cartoon series "Avatar: The Last Airbender", which was actually really cool to watch. It was one of the only cartoons that had an actual story behind it, which is part of the reason I watched it. As it did have some funny moments in it, it really was more of a serious cartoon. What the critics don't know is that "The Last Airbender" was an IRL movie based on the cartoon. They probably never even seen the series. The movie was only a part of the story, and therefore wasn't finished. They probably would have made two more movies to finish the story, had they not been so poorly rated. This is just my opinion though. You guys may have different views if you have seen the movie/series. Back to the topic at hand, I read OXM (Official Xbox Magazine), and every time I do, I see games that I wouldn't even think to play out rank games I have already played. All that you said makes perfect sense to me McJobless. Games aren't just games anymore, and needed to be treated as such. Also I HATE Peggle! It is very pointless to me and too happy cheery anyway. Sorry that I didn't have much to say on the matter but Cyrem brought up the movies and I felt that was a perfect example to use.

I couldn't agree more with that, and ofcourse with McJobless as well. For example, LEGO Island may be full of bugs and glitches, but the experience makes me love the game, even when I grow older. But back then, all I cared about was the gameplay, and not really about graphics and music. Heck, if I were the age I am now, in 1997, and played LEGO Island for the first time, I don't think I had liked it as much as I really do now. That's when I realise that your age also has an impact on how you experience a game, as well as the nostalgia you bear with that game. I can't think of anything else to say now, it's pretty much summed up already on this page.

I don't think I've seen anyone against your blogs yet. Oh boy, I know what you are talking about here. I think I know what you are getting at, the problem is, games are very broad and it would be hard to divide games into 'experience games' and 'distraction games' when a lot have a bit of both. For example, Journey on PS3. Now, THAT was an experience... but it has no story. It was also a very short game and was very casual in it's gameplay. But it's style, music and graphics made it an experience like no other. It's not a game I'd play a second time, but I'm, glad I played it the first time. There are some games e.g Dues Ex, which are almost like interactive movies. I think the true problem here is not with the categorizing of games, but with the comparing and rating of them. Games bring their own words and own experiences. The experience depends on how the player reacts to it. Quite simply, rating a game is inaccurate and always will be. The only thing you can do is convey your experience. But I think that this not only applies for games... but also movies. How many movies have you thought were the best of the year, then find out people rated it 5 star with 'meh'. I think that makes sense...