Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Bad Games - PAX Prime 2013
Bad Games
PAX Prime 2013
We’ve all played “bad” games, but what truly makes a game “bad?” Is gaming beauty not in the eye of the beholder? Is one’s miserable experience not simply subjective opinion? Is there such a thing as an objectively “bad” game? More importantly, however we define the term, do bad games serve a purpose? Much as how without evil, there can be no good, without the worst of gaming, how could we possibly recognize the best?
It turns out that the problem is not in defining what makes a game “bad,” but in what makes a game a “game.” Some games are great at certain things, but terrible at others. Candyland teaches children colors and counting, but is a terrible candidate for a serious tournament. Dungeons & Dragons is great for that heroic fantasy adventure, but not so much for your future cyberpunk transhumanist court drama. Silver Surfer serves as a lesson (and a warning) to future game designers the world over.
Join us for a lively discussion of the worst of gaming, what that truly means, and what we can learn from “bad” games. You may find that some of the worst games ever made can be some of the most fun you’ve ever had.
Source Link
Comments
Still a not a bad panel.
Obviously with race walking the sport would be dead however others would not.
e.g.
Cricket has 2 on field umpires and an off field umpire who has access to everything from cameras surrounding the oval, on the pitch, in the wickets, thermal cameras, microphones etc.
Soccer doesn't embrace it even though it is a good sport with out the diving.
What we used to call "direct fucking" we now call "politics."
That book just gave us a nice focal point around which to define our terms. Our primary goal for the near term is to drill that lexicon and the concepts thereby described into everyone's heads in order to facilitate higher level discourse later.
Take Go as an example. We expressed this exact complaint about the game as early as 2003, vocally and publicly. I remember arguing with the Go Club at RIT at length on the topic of how the fuck a beginner can make decisions in the game.
I only recently have a term - directional heuristic - to use for it. Characteristics of Games uses that same example because Go is a perfect example of a lack thereof.
Fuck you, High Bohn. Fuck you.
We skipped a lot of topics at PAX due to time. We're running the same panel 90 minutes instead of 60 at MAGFest to correct that.
I was definitely surprised by and loved the examination of ET as a way to explain the "good at vs. bad at" concept. Looking at his wrinkly pixel-face is all I need for sustenance this day.
"Diving" is called this because in soccer people are doing all sorts of contortions and acting to be awarded something by the referee. This is analogous to an olympic diver jumping off a diving board, doing all kinds of contortions to be awarded a score by the referee. Not like diving with a scuba tank in the ocean.
The diving picture is wrong, as chaosof99 correctly points out.
Also Scott fiddling with the bottle on the edge of Rym's closeup is super annoying. You can super easily remove this! No reframing needed, just cut out a segment of the bottles where Scott isn't fiddling with them, and loop it over the top of when he is fiddling with them.
Also, I've played E.T. and it's a bad game. The collision detection is such that if E.T.'s head touches a hole or well, he falls in. This has now been fixed.