Things that kids today don't understand about gaming

[LauriJ]

Same as title. Perhaps the most prominent are the video game lives and how running out of them would end your game. Sure, certain titles does utilise them today but tends to be an exception rather than the rule.

 

[Satoshi Ookami]

Graphics is NOT everything.

 

[Alfieri]

Your phone/tablet is not a video game console.

 

[NinjaRaichu]

Everything.
Gaming is gaming. doesn't matter what you play on, if you play games regularly you are a gamer. Sick of being told by kids that i'm not a real gamer because I dont have a fancy gaming PC that mummy and daddy paid for.

 

[Aether★]

Not everyone can afford games and proper platform.

 

[Megan]

To appreachiate the games they have. With thousands of games to choose from and a low pricing on a lot of them, it's easy to pick up a game, play it until getting stuck and then just delete it and go on to another one and do the same.

 

[Arsenic]

Teamwork. You can't beat every game running around solo like an idiot!

 

[Necrum]

Your phone/tablet is not a video game console.

I have to disagree with this. A phone or tablet is a computer. So is any gaming console. So is a Nintendo 3DS which, big surprise, you also hold in your hands. A platform is a platform. It's up to the programmers to make it viable, but bad content doesn't make it not a game console, it just makes it a shitty one. There are some great games on Android though, and even full games from consoles have been ported to it like KOTOR, although I can't speak for how well it plays.

 

[Alfieri]

I have to disagree with this. A phone or tablet is a computer. So is any gaming console. So is a Nintendo 3DS which, big surprise, you also hold in your hands. A platform is a platform. It's up to the programmers to make it viable, but bad content doesn't make it not a game console, it just makes it a ****ty one. There are some great games on Android though, and even full games from consoles have been ported to it like KOTOR, although I can't speak for how well it plays.

Are you just disagreeing with all my posts? lol

I don't consider it one because there are no physical buttons to be pressed. Trying to handle a phone's on-screen "analog stick" feels uncomfortable and clunky. If you want to call it a gaming console, that's fine.

 

[Necrum]

Are you just disagreeing with all my posts? lol

I don't consider it one because there are no physical buttons to be pressed. Trying to handle a phone's on-screen "analog stick" feels uncomfortable and clunky. If you want to call it a gaming console, that's fine.

It was actually by accident that I disagreed with two of your opinions haha, whoops!

I can understand hesitance to want to place devices like that into the gaming category, but games are games and like it or not mobile games make up a huge chunk of the market right now. Hopefully that leads to more quality games but for the time being it's quite stifled by greed.


And to keep myself inside the topic, one thing kids don't understand today about gaming is that while having a wide open world can be great, sometimes it's more fun to keep things inside the box, to be more linear. Sometimes you need a path in your life without a million choices. Being a straight forward game does not make it bad. Super Mario Bros, Sonic The Hedgehog, Half-Life. These are not games generally considered to be bad, and they did it within the confines of a single path. Pull your head out of your Bethesda for a while and enjoy a walk down the path already trodden.

 

[Bounsweet]

Lack of backlight on handheld consoles - so many nights I spent staying up past my bedtime straining my eyes to see my GameBoy Color screen with this tiny little light.

The really cool kids had the one that came with the magnifying glass.

 

[RailgunSkye]

Graphics is NOT everything.

I got into gaming late 90s early 2000s so I think I am one of the rare few that was brought into gaming during a transation stage. Where graphics were not great but moving into HD. So to me I am cool with all graphics myself. Heck I more fun with some GBA games than I do with AAA next gen games.


Also memory cards holding hardly anything. A few MB was a big deal back in the day

Teamwork. You can't beat every game running around solo like an idiot!

Tell this to the GTA Online players. So many people mostly during heists have no idea what team work is and take it on themselves screwing it all up. I have also had team members run me over or toss C4 on my car. WHY?! Were on the same team.!!

 

[machomuu]

Local Multiplayer.

An old friend I used to know.

 

[Centipede Chan]

Things kids will never understand about games these days:
-Graphics mean absolutely nothing, for the most part
-There are more FPS games than Call of Duty
-Nintendo likes E for everyone, and that doesn't automatically mean it's a kiddy game. Because E has to be for everyone so it kinda has to be down in direct violence.

 

[machomuu]

Graphics mean absolutely nothing, for the most part

What's with all this talk about graphics? While I'd say that the idea that graphics defining an experience is slightly antiquated and not a big thing in 2016, it's been around for decades. That was how Sega intended to prove that they did what Nintendon't and how Sony pushed their first disc-based console. This was the subject of many a playground argument and online flamewar since pretty early generations of console gaming.

And while I'll agree that graphics aren't everything, stating that the mean absolutely nothing, even for the most part, is a pretty devaluing statement. If you've ever been pulled in by a breathtaking view or completely pulled out of an experience because you saw a PS1-level texture in a AAA game, it's affecting your experience, and it can sell one as easily as sound, controls, or even gameplay can. I really think the unfortunate thing about all this is that graphics have become just as much a victim of belittlement as they have a vehicle for hype.

 

[pkmin3033]

Reviews are subjective, NOT objective.

A high score means absolutely fuck all, it is no indication of a game's quality whatsoever. It is an indicator of how much that one individual - whose experience will not be entirely the same as yours - enjoyed that particular title. Reviewers are incapable of objectivity. The only difference between an "official" review and someone's opinion is that one is published and the other is not.

This is not a wholly new thing, but the situation with reviews has gotten significantly worse these days, to the point that if a game gets anything less than a 7 it's regarded as mediocre, and the judgement of reviewers is considered iron-clad. Kids these days use official reviews as fencing tools in an effort to "prove" how good or bad a game is, not as another piece of evidence to judge for themselves whether or not they will enjoy a game, which is the whole point of a review. Kids these days let reviewers do their thinking for them, and attach far too much value to scores that ultimately mean nothing.

A lot of sites that review games have done away with antiquated scoring systems, but the more well-known ones, as well as the magazines, still use it. It's still a problem. A huge one. It's been a problem for years, but eh. You'd think people would have gotten a little moe progressive by now.

 

[LexAnarchy]

- There are more games than just the ones you can buy in any game shop around the corner.
- There is more than a multiplayer mode in a shooter.
- Having all sorts of 18+ games doesn't make you the coolest kid in town.
- An N64 does have games that easily outclass PS4 games. Generally meaning the newest consoles don't always have the best games. In fact, really good games are a rare thing today, on any console.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

1. Cinematic cutscenes don't make a good game
2. Local multiplayers brings as much importance, if not more, than online multiplayer
3. Story doesn't need to be overly complex to make it good
4. Mobile gaming does not provide the same experience as you can with traditional gaming, whether it be on an arcade, a console, a handheld, or a PC

Reviews are subjective, NOT objective.

A high score means absolutely **** all, it is no indication of a game's quality whatsoever. It is an indicator of how much that one individual - whose experience will not be entirely the same as yours - enjoyed that particular title. Reviewers are incapable of objectivity. The only difference between an "official" review and someone's opinion is that one is published and the other is not.

This is not a wholly new thing, but the situation with reviews has gotten significantly worse these days, to the point that if a game gets anything less than a 7 it's regarded as mediocre, and the judgement of reviewers is considered iron-clad. Kids these days use official reviews as fencing tools in an effort to "prove" how good or bad a game is, not as another piece of evidence to judge for themselves whether or not they will enjoy a game, which is the whole point of a review. Kids these days let reviewers do their thinking for them, and attach far too much value to scores that ultimately mean nothing.

A lot of sites that review games have done away with antiquated scoring systems, but the more well-known ones, as well as the magazines, still use it. It's still a problem. A huge one. It's been a problem for years, but eh. You'd think people would have gotten a little moe progressive by now.

What about /v/, which represents the majority of gamers? According to them, a review score of 7 or less means it's a bad game, as you've already mentioned, whereas a score of 8 or more means it was a paid review.

 

[Dter ic]

You can't beat the satisfaction of trying to beat that single level you've been stuck for months or even years and one day you try again and succeed without any in game cheats or help.

 

[TheBaconToastie]

Taking your controller around to a buddy's house for multiplayer and playing splitscreen.