Your peeves about internet gamers

[Damned Registrations]

DotA is even worse than that really. They've added so many high powered items the situation relies on nothing but disables now. Everyone does high DPS. Everyone can wipe out ten creeps in 5 seconds. Defensive abilities are practically useless. Wide AoE stuns though, will give you a free win. Stun everyone, rape a building, rinse repeat. Don't even need an advantage in power level. The counter to disables? More disables.

I've learned how to play FSN on there though, and it's got pretty good balance and is based heavily on skill. It has some rock/paper/scissors issues if you're playing with too few players though.

 

[MLMarkland]

I like to play mp cops n crooks on GTA4 and get a helicopter and load it up with fellow crooks and fly it up to about 2,000 feet and then bail.

 

[Fenril]

Its ok to hate. It really is. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
I think this thread needs more though.

 

[Truth]

What stuff do you keep hearing on the internet from other gamers that annoys you personally? That includes stuff from the Codex itself. For me, it would be the following.

"Doom and gloom! The gaming industry is dying!"
Yes, the fact that recent games you have played were not to your own liking means the permanent end of all quality. I find this sort of bitching annoying, because if you don't like a game, don't fucking play it. Just go and play the ones you like. To build up such discontent about it, that you go as far as becoming a prophet of doom is downright ridiculous.

"The large stupid unwashed masses have no taste in games, and are interfering with my enjoyment of games."
This is downright narcissism and self-righteousness. So people are buying and playing the games they like, and it just happens that you don't like those particular games. God forbid! Next thing you know, they'll even start having their own taste in games. The world is truly coming to an end here!

"Today's obsession with graphics has harmed quality."
The top selling games don't have fancy graphics (World Of Warcraft, The Sims,.etc). The consumer does not care about graphics. Hordes of people still play old multiplayer shooters. And that aside, in many respects, graphics and gameplay are not mutually exclusive. Graphical technology is pushed not necessarilly just for aesthetic purposes, but for changing what is possible with a game. In context of really old games, one could only move the camera in angles of 90 degrees. Movement was abrupt rather than continuous. What Wolf3D, Doom, and Quake did for graphical technology was indispensible. It allowed for more thorough exploration of the world, and much more ease of use.

"Blah blah morality blah blah shades of grey blah blah hard moral choices blah blah"
This whole issue of morality in games shouldn't even have come up. I seriously don't know why gamers care about what kind of moral choices a game makes them do. And then they go into the whole dungeons and dragons ethics discussion. God I hate that stuff.

So I've made my rant. Like I've said above, what are your personal peeves regarding common statements made by internet gamers?

X-box 360? More like X-box three-shitty! Amirite? LOL! (zealous fanboys of any type).

If I were playing an MMO, I'd probably be trying to do stuff like this all the time.

 

[Damned Registrations]

To actually answer the question, Smash Brothers is just about as deep as any fighting game - which is not at all. They all rely on memorization of moves and characters, twitch reaction and very, very basic sets of strategy "duck under high moves, guard mids, jump low moves".
.

At really high skill levels fighting games actually become rather deep. Blocking just doesn't suffice; you need to be able to know what the delay will be from blocking different moves in order to judge what you can follow it up with vs. that character and his potential counters. You can't get there without obscene twitch skills and memory, but the top end matches are like compressing the complexity of a game of chess into 60 seconds. It's not enough to counter flying kicks with dragon punches, you have to know how to cancel your flying kick to parry the dragon punch then attempt the throw when you land unless he's ducking in which case jump again immediately or reverse dash... etc. Simply waiting to be attacked, blocking, then attacking back during the delay only works on the weakest of players. Of course, it varies on the fighting game as well. Something like guilty gear is going to be far ahead of smash brothers, where a lucky item drop wins the match for you.

 

[Truth]

To actually answer the question, Smash Brothers is just about as deep as any fighting game - which is not at all. They all rely on memorization of moves and characters, twitch reaction and very, very basic sets of strategy "duck under high moves, guard mids, jump low moves".
.

At really high skill levels fighting games actually become rather deep. Blocking just doesn't suffice; you need to be able to know what the delay will be from blocking different moves in order to judge what you can follow it up with vs. that character and his potential counters. You can't get there without obscene twitch skills and memory, but the top end matches are like compressing the complexity of a game of chess into 60 seconds. It's not enough to counter flying kicks with dragon punches, you have to know how to cancel your flying kick to parry the dragon punch then attempt the throw when you land unless he's ducking in which case jump again immediately or reverse dash... etc. Simply waiting to be attacked, blocking, then attacking back during the delay only works on the weakest of players. Of course, it varies on the fighting game as well. Something like guilty gear is going to be far ahead of smash brothers, where a lucky item drop wins the match for you.

Watching specific frames of animation to cancel moves into another (which is very twitch/skill...I'm reminded of that guy who parried Third Strike Chun-Li's kick super and the crowd went nuts), meta gaming (knowing how your opponent plays, creating openings, guessing what he's going to attempt, knowing strengths and weaknesses of characters, counters etc.), but in the end, you'll still get your ass kicked by someone just mashing buttons and spazzing on the joystick. :wink:

 

[Destroid]

What is wrong with quality twich based games anyway? Action games that require skill are great fun.

Soul Calibur is probably the fighting series I have had the most fun with.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Maybe if you're playing online over some shit P2P connection, but if you're playing a vs. on the same box between two people who can ace the top end computer opponents without using the same move more than twice... theres more luck involved in most physical sports quite frankly. I'm by no means one of those players, but I've played against one, and seen him play, and it's unreal. If "knowing how your opponent plays, creating openings, guessing what he's going to attempt, knowing strengths and weaknesses of characters, counters etc." doesn't fit your definition of a deep game, what does? The only thing I can think of that comes close would be RTS games. If anything vs wise is shallow it'd be racing games and FPS. And even that depends on the game in question.

 

[Trash]

There always is something epic in turning normal human being in gibbering husks of hatred by doing something douchebaggery in a game.

I fondly remember placing mines on the deck of my teams carrier or loading a landing boat full with detpacks and teammates in bf1942.

 

[Truth]

What is wrong with quality twich based games anyway? Action games that require skill are great fun.

Soul Calibur is probably the fighting series I have had the most fun with.

Don't know if this was directed at me, but I don't see anything wrong with twitch games either. I like fighting games. A lot. 2D - King of Fighters, Streetfighters and the 3D Tekken, Virtua Fighter, and Soul Caliburs. Mortal Kombats I never got into and Killer Instinct was goofy combo fun but not "competitive" ...like comparing DoW to Starcraft.

If "knowing how your opponent plays, creating openings, guessing what he's going to attempt, knowing strengths and weaknesses of characters, counters etc." doesn't fit your definition of a deep game, what does? The only thing I can think of that comes close would be RTS games. If anything vs wise is shallow it'd be racing games and FPS. And even that depends on the game in question.

I wrote that to illustrate some examples that there is a level of depth to fighting games that people sometimes don't realize and not being sarcastic. Don't know if you're directing this back at me either.

Now my sarcastic bit with a hint of truth. I have a friend who doesn't give a shit about fighting games. He can kick my ass in Tekken 3 sometimes without even knowing moves or even what button does what by just randomly pressing buttons and twitching on the d-pad. Why? It's not because I totally suck but rather because I can't predict what's going to come out next from him. He might randomly pull out some special attack at any given moment I would never expect to see and his spazzing doesn't allow me a methodical approach to close in to execute attacks. Anyways, just a fun little anecdote. It doesn't work so much in 2D games or Virtua Fighter, but Tekken seems ripe for it. Try just spazzing sometimes against someone playing "serious." You'll be surprised.

 

[LastAngryBat]

It doesn't work so much in 2D games or Virtua Fighter, but Tekken seems ripe for it. Try just spazzing sometimes against someone playing "serious." You'll be surprised.

Comparing Tekken to Virtua Fighter, Street Fighter, etc. is like comparing a crap diablo clone to Fallout or PS:T

 

[Destroid]

In quality fighters, button mashing only really works against people of mediocre skill or who don't know how to play defensively. I don't like Tekken myself, so I can't really comment about it.

Truth, my twitch comments are aimed at the people here who knee jerk hate on twitch based action games.

I would also like to recommend Garou: Mark of the Wolves <- Favorite 2d fighter. Last Blade and Last Blade 2 are also great fun 2d fighters.

 

[kingcomrade]

If "knowing how your opponent plays, creating openings, guessing what he's going to attempt, knowing strengths and weaknesses of characters, counters etc." doesn't fit your definition of a deep game, what does?

All multiplayer games are like that, though. The existence of any mechanics mean that some will be able to take advantage of them better than others. I don't feel like that's enough to say that all competitive games require skill and all the connotations that go along with being a "skill based" game.

 

[J1M]

The reason smash bros. gets a bad reputation from some people is because of a few reasons:
1) They are playing the party game mode with 3 or 4 people, not the fighting game mode of 1v1.
2) They are of low skill level and mashing buttons or a single move is effective against people like that.
3) They have a hard time wrapping their head around the concept of positioning being important in 2 dimensions.

Obviously most people, including myself, will not reach tournament level of play - or have an interest in doing so. Before writing a game off as being shit you really ought to examine that level of play first.

Furthermore, when it comes to StarCraft I agree that the asian emphasis on click speed is stupid and has no place in a strategy or tactics game. The game, however, is still extremely well balanced and confusing those two issues makes you a dumbfuck.

 

[Zomg]

I was a Tekken arcade nerd as a teen and I'd beat many a mall-'tard button masher. Soul Calibur is far more masher friendly and a guy that's played other people for a day should squash button mashers easily. I think those games get a reputation because some guy reads a combo faq and practices his badass combo a million times in single player mode, then gets his cock stomped off against a half-lidded stoner down at the mall that has far more experience playing humans despite his inability to hit triple bankshot whatevers.