The Derrit
-
Posts
2,780 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by The Derrit
-
-
I have a very soft spot for these, and have been collecting them as a hobby for a little while now. Does anyone else enjoy these sorts of things? The one that got me really started off was the new Prince of Persia trailer:
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/tgs-2008-prince-of/41113
If not for that trailer I would have never bought that game, and though there are varying opinions on the game I'm glad I did.
Does anyone else have trailers like this (or just cool trailers in general) that they really enjoy? Post them here!
Another favorite is the Gears of War commercial.
-
2) If the skill gap between two players at a tourney is sufficiently big, the better player doesn't need to completely dominate the player. Why not take this time to experiment with risky techniques for a minute? The reaction of an unbiased (doesn't know the "standard" reaction/counter) player might actually help your game develop. Note that here I'm talking about the skill difference between, say, my wife and I in Smash (yep, I'm better than her, go figure).
I know everyone's coming to their conclusions and whatnot but I just want to say one more thing on this point. While it is a good opportunity, I believe many people who play would be offended if they were being beaten and their opponent decided to do ultra-fancy high risk stuff, because it can come off as showing off. I think its perfectly fine but there's two ways to see everything, as evidenced by this thread as a whole.
Good talk, everyone.
-
My problem with the "playing to win" community -- largely championed by Sirlin -- is that they don't accept that there are other ways to play the game. Anyone who isn't playing "their" version is a scrub, to be ignored at best and ridiculed at worst. The entire idea of the community is that if you're not playing to win, you're a scrub, and therefore not as good as people playing to win. I don't mean in the sense of "not as good at the game", I mean in the sense of "those that play to win are better people/gamers/fans than scrubs". They suggest that playing to win is the only "right" way to play competitive games -- which is just silly.
I think this is a fair point to make, but just the same way that people who don't play to win don't enjoy playing to win, it goes the other way too. In general I think there is a belief that people who play to win consider themselves more devoted than those who don't, just due to the time put into the game and learning the trade. However, I don't think this usually becomes an issue until a very pivotal point, that I have never understood.
That is when a casual gamer comes to a tournament, competitive online hub, etc. and is upset at what happens there. It's akin to walking into the lion's den and not expecting to get eaten; when you go to a tournament or something similar, those are the types of people who are going to be there.
JackKeiser mentioned he's seen people get destroyed at tournaments and then get upset. Those people, wether they like it or not, are playing in a competitive arena. If you come to a tournament, people are going to play in a competitive fashion.
Now, one would think that if you don't want to play in a competitive fashion, you just wouldn't come to a tournament right? But somehow a lot of casual or "not playing to win" type people think its a good idea, and then get fed up with people not playing their way.
I feel like if not for those types of incidents, people would be able to co-exist, but so many times I've seen people come to events like this and then be appalled that their opponent used a "cheap move to win." Then they go complain about it, saying how much of a jerk their opponent was.
In my opinion, no player who plays to win goes around looking for casual players and telling them how bad they are. To the contrary, casual players come to tournaments and when they lose, accuse their opponent of being a douche. The agression comes from the casual, not the other way around.
-
If that's what a scrub is, then there are a LOT more scrubs than competitive communities want to admit to. SWF has right now debates on:
* Metaknight
* Stages
* Chain grabs
* Infinites / infinite grabs (not the same as simple chain grabs)
* A minor (very minor) kerfuffle over items (still)
And these aren't because of casual players registering and bitching. I'm talking about people like Xyro, one of Texas' premiere TOs. Members of the highest eschalon of Smash still complain about parts of our rules (or at least, the Shadowy Board of Pro Players' rules). If wanting to change accepted rules qualifies you to be a scrub, then every player HAS to be conservative all the time. Nothing changes, which means nothing gets better. That, simply put, is BS.
Planking (ledgecamping, especially with good ole' Meta) is beatable. Doesn't mean it doesn't devolve the game into a camp-fest and ultimately hurt the competitive environment. What's worse is that this is usually an American problem. Japanese Brawl doesn't have NEARLY the problems that American Brawl has because they have sportsmanship and won't use techs that risk actively hurting the game field. The state of play is more important than a single win. That's what true sportsmanship is: not allowing a single win to be to the detriment of the competitive atmosphere as a whole. Gaming, especially fighters, doesn't have that kind of sportsmanship: they have a kind of sportsmanship that allows them to shit all over lesser players and force them to quit playing before they have a chance to get good (which only helps a pro's odds, btw).
Are there any explicit rules that prevent a sports team from stealing and studying their opponent's playbook? YES. Would it benefit them? Of course. Would everyone doing it degenerate any sport? Naturally. When it comes right down to it, EVERY SET OF RULES IS ARBITRARY. Every one of them. No sport, IRL or video game, has a set of rules that is any less arbitrary than the other. Sirlin, whether he says it explicitly or not, lays the groundwork for justifying anything you want and having a pre-made argument to shut everyone else's down. Basically, the only counter to a Sirlin "play to win" argument is to be the first person to write the rules.
For starters, the reason there is so much dissent in the Brawl community is because Brawl is a game that does not have fair and balanced competition at even a casual level, much less a competitive one. I'm sure you disagree.
Second of all, that's why the rules are still IN DEBATE. Sure there's a set of rules, but plenty of people disagree on them and plenty of people don't use them. Thus these rules are not DEFINED and thus your example doesn't fit the definition at all.
And this is a response to the bold; what would you rather have them do? Let shitty people beat them for funsies and then be all like "good job"? That's stupid. No one loses for fun. Yes there are some douchebags, and a lot of them play Brawl. But in most established communities there's a respect for new players who want to learn. I hosted a SSBM tournament in my hometown (which actual people came to, including Darc, Dazwa and SleepyK) and they were all amped to meet new people in the community, even though a lot of the kids who showed up weren't as good as they were.
Games become unsportsmanlike when the players would rather win than foster the health of the community.Isn't that every game ever made though? Games and competitions are made to decide who is better at a certain thing, even down to checkers and rock-paper-scissors. Its all about who can win. So if you're not playing to win, then what are you doing? The community will not become a healthy one if everyone feels the need to limit themselves to what everyone else is doing; that stifles the creativity of the players and the motivation to keep playing.
edit YES I HAVE BACKUP way to be zirc and KB
-
It's all a matter of defining how you wanna play the game. Non-competitive players think the game should be played one way and competitive players think it should be played another way. The thing is, no one is right. So in my mind it is unfair to call non-competitive players "scrubs", which is definitely pejorative.
Well of course. I'm just saying in that we're talking about sportsmanship, it would be applied to competitive games. And so we're all clear, the definition of a scrub is not a casual player. No one hates casual players, its just the way they play the game, and that's fine. A scrub is a player who is either a casual or competitive player, who tries to play competitively and then whines about things that are within the defined rules of the game.
And its true, there are some things in some games that are just too much, as you mentioned with the bannings and such. While most people here seem to abhor competitive fighters/gamers, these bans happen because a community as a whole wants fairness.
This is kind of off topic, but relevant if you ask me. I believe in these kinds of games there absolutely can be sportsmanship.
EDIT: and bardic you're a sweet dude don't ever change
-
Me and this friend of mine, we used to play Soul Calibur 4 quite a bit and in all honesty he was better than on a lot of levels,I might eek out a win every once in a while, but for the most part he beat me, did I ever get upset.. no.
We both just enjoyed the fun of the game, we never got all egotistical he knew he was better than me but he never rubbed my face in it.
See? that's not so hard is it.
What is dick is when competitive gamers play against casual gamers the way they would against another competitive player. I think we all agree with that. On the other hand, two competitive players can respect each other (and often do). The place where it becomes a problem is when casual players try to "be pro" and then get frustrated by players who play to win.
Its a very simple concept, if you don't want people to play "dirty" as most of you would seem to call it, play your friends and people you trust to be "fair" players. Now that's part of what sucks about online play, I get that, but then play with your friends. You did it when N64 and PlayStation were still around, I'm sure you still can. Online play will never turn into the "we play just for fun" fest that people here seem to want it to be, so recognize that.
-
Lizz isn't new. She's more old school than most of you.
no no no you silly, Liz with one z
its like an impostor, kind of
-
everyone everyone come listen
there's a new person on ocr. her name is Liz
where is the outrage people
-
and that whole community is built on the assumption that not only are people probably going to be dicks, but that if you don't play as a dick on purpose, you are failing as a gamer
I personally find this silly.
This is the same confusing concept I come across when people talk about the Patriots in the NFL. Everyone thinks they're dicks because they fake field goals and go for it on 4th down, because its against these silly conventions they've made in their head on how things "should" be done. In fact, they're doing what gives them the best chance to WIN. It's COMPETITIVE. If they lose a game because they don't do something like that because its "too cheap," then they would be fools.
So why does this not apply in gaming?
I also play Smash competitively (Melee, the better one) and if I play against a Sheik, I expect them to chaingrab me. Why would they not? I know they can, they know they can, and its a good idea. Given that I know he can chaingrab me, part of the game becomes (get this) NOT LETTING HIM. If you know that one part of his game is dangerous, then avoid it. It's all part of the strengths and weaknesses game you play when you play anything competitively. To go back to the football example, if you know the other team has good run defense, then don't run as much. Its not cheap for them to be so good at defending the run, just take the fact into account and work around it.
If I were chaingrabbing someone and they were like "this is so unfair" I would laugh. Because they have the opportunity to counterpick a character that could do the same to me, and if they choose not to, its not my problem.
And while tons of people will disagree, that's not dick in the least. That's called being competitive.
Now I wouldn't chaingrab or infiniteshine a friend who's just playing around with me for fun, because that's dick. But in a competitive setting, kids who can't take the heat can get off the playground. Simple as that. Learn it love it or leave it.
Good sportsmanship comes into play after a match is over, not during. There is no way to break the rules of the game because the rules are programmed in. The only way sportsmanship becomes an issue is outside the game, in the form of trash talking or not accepting a "good game" after a set.
edit: i can see why you'd get pissed about things like this, because brawl is a frustratingly imbalanced game, and becomes frustrating because a player who's put tons of time into a poor character, lets just say falcon, can still lose to someone who's been playing for a month or two with metaknight and just learned how to press b at the right time. but that's what comes with competitive brawl. no disrespect i like brawl too but could never play it competitively because of things like that
-
eh, I rather liked the pizzas they had over there
like eggplant pizza mmmmmm
eggplant ewwwieeeeee
i do kinda like the pizzas there, but its a different category almost because its done so differently. especially the ones with the tomato slices for "sauce"
-
Maybe that has to do with the fact that you always have three teammates regardless of whether you're playing multiplayer?
If Nintendo designed a Mario game where you constantly have 3 horrible AIs following you around, then I'm pretty sure you'd all still be bitching.
The Co-op is fine. Quit jumping on each others heads like retards and you'll see how well it actually works.
What he said. If everyone goes to the same place at the same time then its going to be as retarded as everyone huddling in the corner of an assembly hall, it looks stupid and you're stupid for doing it.
-
i see where you're coming from with that. there's a lot that i edited over the past half hour so check my last post as well.
-
what i mean by sampled is that instead of using the instruments individually, people pull a full drum loop from an old jazz tune or the like and use that as a base sound, and then chop up the loop if they want to mess around with it.
anyways, the drum composition isn't bad, and the samples aren't bad either. but i feel like its neither realistic enough for me to believe someone's playing it, nor is it synthed up enough for me to just look at it as a synthy set. the best way i can think to describe it is as the uncanny valley of percussion; the samples and the unfiltered sound is just realistic enough that you expect it to sound like a real drummer, but it doesn't.
something to try, i've been trying to figure out what's wrong that's giving me such a hard time with this, and i think it's the hi-hat staying out so long. if you compressed that sample so it didn't stay out as long as it does (like you do later in the song, but maybe even more so) i personally think it would sound better. i don't know if i agree with the hat where it is but if you like it there then that would be something to try.
also the wood blocks are kind of too creative. in a minimalist drum setup it seems to sit at odds with what you're trying to accomplish. once again, its not like you did it wrong but it just doesn't fit with the final goal.
i'm not disagreeing with you just to be the guy who goes up against zircon, i just want to make sure you do it right and its not quite right yet.
-
Just from what I've listened to, track 4 just seems a little too sequenced, and the bass isn't quite what it's supposed to be at first. It comes in a little better later, but when its not the middle section it lacks oomph.
Also, while drums are meant to be repetitive I feel like the type of drums you're using aren't quite fitting for hip hop type stuff. Even the set you're using could work, but if you're going to emphasize on it the way you are then it needs to be a little more dynamic. With instrumental rap in my experience (and I'm sure everyone will come up with a counterargument) starting with just the drums usually isn't the way to go unless you're going to make them sound really good, and with the drumset you're using there's just not a ton to it. You might think about sampling the drums as opposed to using a drumset, a lot of hip hop producers do that to good effect.
Not that I don't like the direction you're going, but I don't want you to have an inflated opinion of your work if its not truly A+ material. Its a good start but there's some nuances to be understood as well.
EDIT: The beasties track is good though. i like that. sometimes with rap simple is better.
-
This game is 100% what I wanted it to be. Simply platforming with some clever ideas thrown in.
I've been taking it very slow, only on World 3, because I want it to last.
-
this would be a great thing if the same games weren't nominated for EVERY CATEGORY
at least 5 of the categories had 3 games from the "game of the year" category and then one other wildcard to appease people, and there are multiple categories that have the same 6 games scattered through them over and over. there is no variety to choose from.
at least they're letting people vote though
-
clearly enough people thought it was a good idea for it to get passed, it wasn't like one person made the decision and everyone else in the entire goddamn company was like "what the FUCK was he thinking"
-
Uh... it's incredible science-fiction, yeah. I don't get it. Why post about what is obviously a hoax?
Edit: Oh, it's some kind of DJ mix. Heh, OK, that's cool.
is it good?
-
in the workshop section.
-
And I'm really sorry, Malaki, but you're putting way to much emphasis on the significance of the masses. Good is good regardless of popularity. Appeal to ignorance? No, we should not. We are more than that.
Sorry but this could not be less true. The masses are THE thing significant here. If not for the masses, things like six days in falluja DON'T HAPPEN. Companies pull out of deals and bail on good ideas, and decide to play it safe because of the masses, and because of popular opinion.
You're putting way too much emphasis on the quality. There are tons of items in ANY medium that are quality, and will never get the recognition they deserve. If every game company decided to make the game they always wanted to the industry would fold in a matter of months because while maybe we're not like this, the vast majority of people who play videogames wouldn't care about how awesome and meaningful these games were.
An awful lot of people who play videogames are dumb and/or doing so only to pass the time. This is important.
The whole point of his video was to say that while its not always what we want to do, we need to market to the masses. Not in the sense that we should give them all Halo and expect them to be happy, but when something controversial happens, to stand up for it and explain why it's so important/awesome/worth the controversy. If we all just say "well what's good is good the masses aren't important" then we will have gotten NOWHERE. The whole point here is people other than us need to understand. We already do. This is not appealing to ignorance, but instead informing ignorance; on the flip side, telling the general public "oh you just don't understand" sounds an awful lot like an angsty child. Not the image gaming wants or needs.
-
i really wanted to buy this but my computer is crap and couldn't even handle the most minimal of specifications for it
i need a new computer
-
hey guys, is a pspGo worth getting? i know its new and shiny but i can't tell if its worth it over a psp 3000.
-
Mirror's Edge
I'm running all over the place.
Why is everything white?
Oh well, it looks cool.
-
Global-Trance: Hearts on a Shoreline
Artistic Video Game Trailers
in General Discussion
Posted
*sigh* guess i'm the only one.