Printable View
Yes and yes. Undoubtedly.Quote:
Is Crash bandicoot kiddy? Is Sly Cooper Kiddy?
and sethsez, aesthetics are something you view throughout the game. From beginning to end. If you are turned off by the look of the game then that's just how it is, and nobody should be arrogant enough to say "DURR ITS ABOUT THE GAMEPLAY YOU ST00P1D!"
Look, I'm not being closed minded about it. I'm all for the expansion of what videogames are capable of, like every other medium. I didn't mean to imply otherwise, but even look at music and movies. They still are widely used for the same reasons as when they were invented. Entertainment, in their respective ways. Games are to play with, call it what you will, but I call it a toy.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I'm not really disagreeing directly with anything you've said, and I think the potential videogames have in the not-that-distant future is great, when hopefully games will reach as varied an audience as movies do. But the way you're going about it is all wrong, quit bitching about "kiddy" games, and focus on wanting to see more games like you want to see. Games that you find repulsive and kiddy are never going to go away, because at their core, videogames are about having fun, just as movies will always usually be about entertainment, and there will always be a huge market there for kids. You're wasting your time, I'm wasting my time responding to it, and you should be doing something more constructive (taking into consideration this is a videogame message board) than bitching about a kind of game that will always be around and was around to give us the nostalgia that we have for old games today.
EDIT: And about the Little Mermaid thing: yes. I'm not really a fan of the little mermaid itself, but just as in games, there are movies that can be enjoyed by all ages (if primarily kids) and then there is pandering childrens material. I can enjoy a kids movie just as much as say, the godfather, if its as well produced.
Im not bitching about kiddy games you idiot, all of you are. Not directly, though, but by crying foul when you claim that RedCoKid or myself or anyone who agrees with RedCoKid. Look, if someone doesnt want to play them, thats it. They wont. But when we, me, him, whoever, say we dont wanna play these games, what are we talking about? RedCoKid wanted to provide a proper definition so we can all be on equal terms when we play them. And for right now his definition is adequate.Quote:
quit bitching about "kiddy" games, and focus on wanting to see more games like you want to see.
If you go back and actually read what I write, too, you wont find me saying "kiddy games are bad" or "kiddy games hold everything else back". I said that defining what kiddy games are is a start to actually producing the sort of scholarly inquiries and writings into videogames that I would like to see. A lot more definitions need to be made but its a good start.
I haven't come across anyone who had to go out of the way to say how kiddy those games are on these messageboards. Perhaps it is because people tend to force people to try Nintendo games because of the gameplay etc unlike the games mentioned?Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I dont know, and I dont give a shit. Because Im not those people. Like I said, the lot of you are in a uproar because the word "kiddy" is commonly associated with Nintendo and because you took RedCoKid's post as a diss against Nintendo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian79
:D Oh Yep, they were whoppas of posts. But I had to get it off my chest. Need break from game forums now. I think my mouse scroll wheel is breaking.
Agreed. All I'm saying is that, many times, the quality of the gameplay is able to overcome the limits of the aesthetics. Unless you absolutely can't endure bright colors for more than half an hour at a time, it's often worthwhile to try to look past the surface and focus on the game. To use another movie analogy, I'd compare it to a good indie film. The incredibly low production values generally aren't initially appealling, but if you're able to look past that, you could find a really great movie. I'm not a fan of generic D&D style fantasy AT ALL, but I was still able to get into Morrowind because the gameplay was strong enough to overcome the mind-numbingly boring theme.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
And obviously, everything I'm saying only applies to games with good gameplay. Games with bad gameplay aren't worth playing no matter what the theme is.
Quit acting so innocent, you have trolled many a threads about this kind of stuff in the past, and enough to make me pissed off whenever you bring it up. And grouping games into a "kiddy" category isn't a progression at all, I don't see where the hell you're getting that from, because it's retarded. If not by the content of the game, then the ESRB rating will probably let you know what kind of game you're dealing with. If you really need to put it in a paper you're writing or something, I don't see why it wouldn't be easy to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
If you want to be "scholarly" about it, I'd suggest coining a different term, because "kiddy" is a pretty demeaning name to lump so many different kinds of games under.
I disagree. For one, I don't think that "kiddy" has anything to do with gameplay, simple games aren't necessarily kiddy like Virtua Tennis. etc. Nor are multiplayer focused games like Quake. Though I could be wrong, is "Lost Kingdoms" considered kiddy?Quote:
And for right now his definition is adequate.
I think that the theme and graphics should be enough to declare if a game is kiddy or not.
LOL. Im sorry I hurt your feelings in the past.Quote:
Quit acting so innocent, you have trolled many a threads about this kind of stuff in the past, and enough to make me pissed off whenever you bring it up.
No... wait. Im not.