/v/ - Video Games

>>15463521

Consider the following: Rate games based on how much they push the industry forward. Revolutionarily innovative games are rated 10; games that stagnate the industry are rated 5; games that actively push the industry backward are rated lower than 5.

There was a "videogames that push the industry forward and videogames that push the industry backward" chart that I meant to include with this post, but I can't actually find it.

>>15463534

While you raise a fair point, it's irrelevant to the point of this thread

>>15463537

You're not paying attention to the main point

What exactly invalidates B movies from being masterpieces? Either way, here's how i see it, opinions aside:

10/10: Super Mario Bros 3 ( Good & varied level designs with pleasing aesthetics despite limited hardware, Mario controls perfectly and the game's general design philosophy conveys an idea on what to do for most situations & ennemies: Timeless pioneer of 2D Platform )

7/10: Bomberman 64 ( A fairly enjoyable take on Bomberman in a 3D space, with pretty fun, but rather classic multiplayer. The game doesn't invent anything, can be considered rather slow, and a chore to 100%, but remains an enjoyable experience throughout the whole run )

5/10: Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link ( Pretty riveting combat if not rough against some ennemies, the game is however riddled with elements that can hardly be figured out without a guide, and can be rather unfair at times. Kind of just evens out to be an average experience, at the end of the day )

3/10: Clock Tower 2: The Struggle Within ( Games of this category are more miss than hit: They can show neat ideas here & there, as CT2 does with a split personality protagonist that plays a key part in the game's interactions, and while not totally broken, a die & retry horror game really isn't all that fun to go through )

1/10: Tons of shit games, too lazy to list one ( Games of this kind should be here because they genuinely don't " work " )

>>15463521

>10 should be perfect in every way

Stopped reading there. 10 should mean the reader is practically guaranteed to enjoy it.

Otherwise you run into the "no game is truly perfect because it's always theoretically possible to improve" mindset, and the effective scale only goes up to 9, reducing precision.

>>15463607

Keep reading or else you won't get it

>9/10: Infinite Undiscovery(Xbox 360)

DINNER DINNER DINNER DINNER DINNER DINNER DINNER DINNER

DANCING RHAPSODY DANCING RHAPSODY SPINNING WALTZ DANCING RHAPSODY SPINNING WALTZ

>>15463521

Subtle, I like it. Wonder how long it will take for Mark to notice.

>>15463534

That's retarded. How would you rate something like Doom which both pushed the industry forwards and arguably led to its major decline by spawning the shooter genre.

>>15463521

>Nine Persons, Nine Hours, Nine Doors(DS)

>8/10

heh

>battalion wars

>10

kys

>>15463636

oh damn

Oh now I get it.

Op you son of a bitch.

>>15463654

You say that as if Call of Duty wouldn't have existed if it weren't for Wolfenstein and Doom pioneering the FPS genre. If Doom didn't create the FPS, someone else would have. The idea of emulating the perspective that we as people experience life through would have come about regardless.

All those games did was create those games before the technology was really there. Less innovative studios would have waited for the full 3D of the late 90s to do this while they pushed for it despite 3D technology being really weak at the time.

>>15464333

And yet people blame the Halo franchise for ruining the shooter genre

No game is perfect. 10 is an unattainable score. It represents an ideal. You can get close to it, but never achieve it.

>>15464216

>he doesn't know

>>15464394

Tetris is perfect. Chess is perfect. Even by your definition both games are representations of an ideal and therefore 10/10.

*…Right?*

>>15463521

>8/10: Nine Persons, Nine Hours, Nine Doors(DS)

>not 9/9

Come on OP

>>15463548

I want to bing in Klonoa's wahoo

Bump

Game reviews are not objective. They are subjective and the overall rating is how strongly the writer recommends you buy it.

>>15464216

A game, because in a Youtube Poop, the last "Dinner" would be slowed down to half speed And you know exactly what that sounds like

>>15464394

11 is

If it's a ten point scale, you use all 10 points. If you say no game is a 10, you're using a 9 point scale, which is fucking dumb

10/10: Ocarina of Time:Mostly because its a game that is remarkable not in doing anything particularly great, but in how little it did wrong.

9:10: Bayonetta: Most of my favorite games are in this area, because they generally have one or two things they did amazing, but one or two things they completely fucked up on

8/10: Golden Sun: A fun RPG that manages to be fun, interesting, and keeps your attention. It has a lot of fun aspect to it, but isn't perfect by any means, and nothing individually stands out as groundbreaking, and the flaws, while relatively minor, are noticeable.

7/10: Halo ODST: The unsung hero of the franchise, and the best game in the series. A solid game that, while still plagued with some of the Halo flaws, does enough right to be considered a good game.

6/10: Alan Wake : Slightly better than average. The mechanics are fun and the story is engaging if you are into that kind of Steven King esque stuff, but otherwise its kind of meh. Its bland enough to not be groundbreaking, but there is enough there to be worth giving it a shot.

5/10: Sleeping Dogs: This game is… serviceable. The parts that are supposed to be good are fine, and the leftovers aren't. If you don't know anything, you may be fooled into thinking this game is "good", rather than "barely passable".

4/10: Battlefield 3: This is what I call the realm of missed opportunities. This game not only makes the mistake of being "passable", its a significant downgrade from what came before. This is like if you were served a really nice steak as the preceeding game, and then you were given a small bag of doritos as desert.

3/10: Fire Emblem: Fates: This is honestly really hard, since the area between "missed opportunities" and "dogshit" is pretty thin. This is honestly the only one I can think of that I'd put here.

2/10: Sonic the Hedgehog (2006): You might be surprised to see such a rushed piece of shit is not at the bottom of the pile. Well, it manages to avert that fate only be recent standards, since some of the most recent games have managed to set the bar lower than this could ever be which brings us to:

1/10: A Night in the Woods: This game is trash. And rather than being the familiar trash of being a buggy untested mess, this goes even further beyond that by being actively rotten to the core. There is literally nothing redeemable about this game. The writing is awful (without even mentioning how pozzed it is), the "gameplay" is non-existent, and everything surrounding it takes a bad game and brings is down even lower. This is the rare game that isn't only bad in itself, but it encourages others to be EVEN WORSE than it is.

0/10: Not a game. Reserved for walking simulators and the like, and therefore can't be rated on quality, since there isn't any that can be accurately rated.

Also fuck you OP for your BING BING WAHOO! bullshit

It is clever though

>>15463521

>OutRun

2/10

what?

>>15463558

>Zelda 2

>the game is however riddled with elements that can hardly be figured out without a guide

confirmed brainlet

>>15464380

>And yet people blame the Halo franchise for ruining the shooter genre

Halo dumbed it down and slowed it down to be playable with a controller, it didn't feature anything truly innovative but it did have a big marketing push behind it and MS threw enough money at it to get it polished to the point where it shone like a chrome green turd

>10/10 - Alien Soldier

>9/10 - Streets of Rage 2

>8/10 - Phantasy Star IV

>7/10 - Rocket Knight Adventures

>6/10 - Thunder Force IV

>5/10 - Contra III

>4/10 - Turtles in Time

>3/10 - Chrono Trigger

>2/10 - Donkey Kong Country

>1/10 - R-Type III

10/10: Earthbound (NES)

9/10: Painkiller (PC)

8/10: Infinifactory (PC)

7/10: Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin (DS)

6/10: Mario Kart 64 (N64)

5/10: E.Y.E Divine Cybermancy (PC)

4/10: M. C. Kids (NES)

3/10: Everybody's Gone to the Rapture (PS4)

2/10: X-Men (NES)

1/10: Daikatana (PC, N64)

>>15463521

>Dark Souls

Perfect 8/10.

>>15463675

>8/10

>not 9/9

jej

>>15468186

no sorry that one part where you have to cast a specific spell in a blank dead end to get an item mandatory to progress is bullshit

so's chopping down trees with the hammer to find that one town

>>15464216

>>15463631

>>15464601

when I was a kid, I thought this game was amazing

>see the DINNER video

the fuck was wrong with me?

>OP says it's 9/10 material

OP's a faggot

So much whoosh ITT

>>15478199

That's a funny place you are from because dark shits is 2/10 at best

>>15479980

both come with blatantly spoken out clues right nearby their locations

>>15463521

>10 should be perfect in every way

No - 10 should be the peak of the genre.

No game is "perfect".

>>15483502

This

This thread is 1/10

>>15483502

So many newfags.

>>15486371

>>>/9gag/

All i got is

1/10: Goat Simulator

An intentionally broken game that was sold as a "joke" but got fairly popular thanks to the youtube "influencers" and twitch streamers latching onto it.

>>15465068

>chess

>knight model is actually a horse

>castles move instead of being constructed

>queen is OP as fuck just for being female

>had to make white always go first to prevent noble babbies from arguing instead of playing

>there are states in which no moves are valid and they just made it another win condition instead of fixing this obvious bug

>to this day nobody knows what the fuck youre officially supposed to stick in the slot on the top of the bishop, although I guess you could draw your custom flag/banner on paper and stick it in there

>this is perfect

>>15495254

>>there are states in which no moves are valid and they just made it another win condition instead of fixing this obvious bug

>another

I thought leaving the king for last was a form of stalemate. What were the other win conditions?

>>15495254

>there are states in which no moves are valid and they just made it another win condition instead of fixing this obvious bug

It's called a draw, it's not a win condition.

>>15495342

>1) king can't legally move to a threatened square

>2) king is in check, you MUST move remove the threat

>2.a) can either move the king to an unthreatened sqare

>2.b) or block the path of the threatening piece with a piece of your own

>2.c) or capture the threatening piece

>there exist game states where all possible moves violate 1 or 2

A checkmate is a win condition.

>>15465595

>2/10 Sonic

Very dissapointing but should be 4/10.

>>15468159

The home console version, not the arcade.

>nearly a week later and it still goes over people's heads

>>15503465

> you list is incorrect.

.Your list is incorrect.*

>>15503130

I want to install my dick in her if you know what I mean.

10/10: Immortal

8/10: Am2r

7/10: Metroid

5/10: River city ransom

4/10: Earthbound

3/10: Tetris

2/10: Rayman Legends

1/10: Dark Souls

0/10: E.V.0

-1/10: Duck Tales

>>15503516

Why is it backwards?

I prefer a 5-star scale, for simplicity:

★ - utter shit, outright broken

★★ - subpar

★★★ - mediocre

★★★★ - very good

★★★★★ - masterpiece

>>15503554

Presumably because he's retrded.

>>15465420

SQUAAAADAAALAAAAAAA

>>15463534

Alternatively, rate games based on the number of breasts in them.

What are some games with a single breast in them?

>>15495919

The possible number of "states" of merely a single shuffled deck of cards is greater than the number of particles in the entire universe. But AI doesn't brute-force calculate every single state; that would be impossible and irrational. It just calculates based on the best possible state at the time of the move in question. That's only going to be a handful of possibilities; for example, if the AI is white and starts the match, it only has 20 possible moves (moving each pawn up either one or two spaces, or moving each knight to one or two places). As the board opens up, there is more freedom to move, but more pieces will be captured so there are less movable pieces. There will likely never be more than a few dozen possible moves that the AI will have to consider at any one time. Of course, this is just first-level with no prediction. I can add many more by "predicting" what the opponent will do several moves in the future. This balloons the number of possibilities, but not as much as you might think.

MOST of those states as you describe, while theoretically possible, in practice will NEVER happen. Why? Because they are irrational. In order to happen they would rely on things like the opponent sacrificing pieces that no real player would sacrifice, or make moves that no real player would make because they produce an overwhelming and obvious disadvantage. Think about a map of a city, and then attempting to plot all the places a car could drive and how. Can a car drive basically everywhere and every way? Sure. But the majority of those rely on assuming a driver would do crazy and irrational things like hoist their car onto a store's roof to drive up there, or drive through a house, or drive in the wrong direction on a freeway, or drive in the middle of an abandoned field or on water, or drive diagonally across an intersection, or drive at less than 1mph, or drive it at faster than the speed of sound, or drive upside-down, etc. When you compare the "possible" to the "actual", you'd see that cars only drive a tiny fraction of a percent of the potential ways they could. The vast, vast majority of people are driving in the same place, in the same direction, at the same average speed.

It's the same with chess players (or players of any other game). All of them are playing in essentially the exact same way, so they're highly predictable. There are a number of simple strategies that govern their macro behavior (like controlling the center of the board) that will reference their micro. Of those 20 opening possibilities I mentioned, no real match is ever going to see someone move a pawn in front of their rook one space. It's a stupid move. Most of the time it's going to be one of the pawns in the middle going up two spaces, or one of the knights moving to the middle. Twenty "possible" moves becomes four "actual" moves. So our AI can effectively ignore those other possibilities from its calculations.

A caveat: many, MANY pieces of media rely on the cliche of a human "outsmarting" an AI by doing something that the AI does not expect, thus confusing it because it did not predict this would happen. While it may be technically true that doing something like sacrificing a bishop to save a pawn would not be something an AI would have predicted you would do, it results in such a crippling disadvantage that the AI will simply beat you later, anyway. It's not going to cause the AI to spout "error!" and lock up; it will simply re-calculate its options for the next move.

>>15504323

>What are some games with a single breast in them?

There's no such thing as a single breasted woman.

>>15503465

>by what standards?

Look at the post a little longer and consider the whole list

>>15468253

Daikatana on PC, especially patched is fun

and even more fun is its multiplayer with the 1.3 patch

fuck off

>>15463521

>5 should be perfectly average

Being perfectly average comes out as a six though. It literally means polished but unremarkable.

>>15495919

>Look chess is super-popular, that's why they made this unbeatable robot.

Then why haven't they made a robotic commander yet? You know, so it can do ACTUAL fucking strategy in ACTUAL fucking warfare and win these wars making Google a super-power?

Because chess is not actual war, but a poor bastardization of it. It's a shitty game played and glorified by aristocrats in the past and that has been kept alive by the soviets until they disappeared just to look like le epik smart guize unlike dumb book destroying ameriburgers.

Chess is not actual strategy, just a big meme. Also showing big numbers out of context is not a true argument, show me which of those plays are viable, because if we analyze the meta-game it's probably dumb as fuck.

>>15536390

Modern warfare is less about tactics and more about psychology. There are also obviously a lot more variables; imagine chess with suicide-bomber pieces. Of course, chess between human players is also mostly about psychology, but because it's a "solved game" a dumb AI can beat any player without being able to read a thing. If all warfare were merely about who has the bigger guns and the most men in their army, America wouldn't have "lost" every single war since capturing Berlin. The reason they always lose is because the other side isn't "playing" to win in the first place, thus making them completely unbeatable.

I guarantee you don't know the first thing about modern war.

>>15463521

1 should not be a single game, but one of those machines that hold collections of games you can find in USA swapmeets. The ones that absolutely suck and can barely even function.

1/10: Final Fantasy 9, Smt nocture