#gamergate megathread

[Ladios]

This interesting argument about the relativity of "fun" that becomes more interesting when you bring up that most other languages don't even have a word that directly translates to "fun"? Its a fun fact.

[Ad Bot]

[McJobless]

In the context we're arguing fun means "a childish measure of how people enjoy a past-time." Hence why I put fun in quotes.

Except, it doesn't when it applies to games. No matter who it comes from, subconsciously their enjoyment derives from the other definition of fun. The only thing is that people don't study what fun actually is, so they have a bunch of preconceptions as a definition instead. That doesn't change the fact they are still, inside their head, voting based on what they learned.

That's the whole reason we enjoy different types of games. Each of us takes different lessons from different things. Some people can learn from the story (story is the most powerful way to teach a lesson since it causes a whole bunch of memory receptors to fire off and allows the brain to make all kinds of interesting connections, btw), others require deep gameplay, and some people are comfortable with some types of gameplay (like fast-paced shooters and platformers) and others can only enjoy other gameplay (like RTS and MMOs), all because of the boredom mechanism.

[Kishgal]

TIL zombi doesnt know what fun is
must be rough

[ResonKinetic]

TIL zombi doesnt know what fun is
must be rough

"Fun - amusing, entertaining, or enjoyable."

that's weird; with someone as robotic as zombiloin i would figure he'd understand a basic definition

[Katadeus]

Thanks.

If that's the case, then that only supports my arguments. The brain is rewarding us with a bigger boost of dopamine and adrenaline for successfully circumventing what it perceived to be a life or death situation (since the brain can't really determine between a game and real life once it hits cognitive flow/engagement).

What are you saying?
Fiero is an aspect of fun.

And yes this whole thing is difficult because of definition issues. Learning can be fun, isn't always fun. Fun can be learning, but isn't always learning. It can be momentary adrenaline, it can be the feeling of victory, it can be total immersion in a new environment, or it can be striving for completion. Or of course, learning.

[ZombiLoin]

TIL zombi doesnt know what fun is
must be rough

TIL you can't read the original quote we were arguing over
The writer we were arguing over was saying that instead of using "fun" (in the sense of it being the fun some people get when running over pedestrians in GTA V) as the ONLY factor in what makes a game good, other factors such as it's capability to have the player learn should be taken into account.

[ResonKinetic]

TIL you can't read the original quote we were arguing over
The writer we were arguing over was saying that instead of using "fun" (in the sense of it being the fun some people get when running over pedestrians in GTA V) as the ONLY factor in what makes a game good, other factors such as it's capability to have the player learn should be taken into account.

but if a game isn't fun (amusing, entertaining, enjoyable) what's the point

[ZombiLoin]

but if a game isn't fun (amusing, entertaining, enjoyable) what's the point

to challenge the player's preconceived ways of thinking and opinions (stanley parable, pathologic)
to relate a story or point of view to a player (papers, please)

[McJobless]

but if a game isn't fun (amusing, entertaining, enjoyable) what's the point

As ZombiLoin said.

Fun is not just about blasting a bunch of guys and winning. There's far more to it.

What are you saying?
Fiero is an aspect of fun.

Sorry, I misread.

And yes this whole thing is difficult because of definition issues. Learning can be fun, isn't always fun. Fun can be learning, but isn't always learning. It can be momentary adrenaline, it can be the feeling of victory, it can be total immersion in a new environment, or it can be striving for completion. Or of course, learning.

No, fun is absolutely due to learning, but the lessons aren't always some incredibly useful thing we can with us. A lot of times "learning" is just repeating things we've already learned, in a process called grokking. Basically studying and getting better at something.

Immersion in a new environment is caused by us learning the patterns of a new environment and successfully being able to identify how the environment works. To some degree, beauty is about patterns.

[ResonKinetic]

to challenge the player's preconceived ways of thinking and opinions (stanley parable, pathologic)
to relate a story or point of view to a player (papers, please)

but those games are fun for those very reasons.

[ZombiLoin]

but those games are fun for those very reasons.

i thought we already went over what fun means in the context of this argument.

In the context we're arguing fun means "a childish measure of how people enjoy a past-time." Hence why I put fun in quotes.

The writer we were arguing over was saying that instead of using "fun" (in the sense of it being the fun some people get when running over pedestrians in GTA V) as the ONLY factor in what makes a game good, other factors such as it's capability to have the player learn should be taken into account.

also in no way, shape, or form would i call pathologic "fun". it's frustratingly difficult to survive and almost everything can kill you very easily. but that's intentional, it's meant to impart a feeling of dread and, yes, frustration, which can be regarded as the opposite of "fun."

[McJobless]

but those games are fun for those very reasons.

I got confused, now I see what you're saying.

That's something I've argued a lot. What's the point of making a game that isn't fun? That's why I despise Depression Quest.

[ResonKinetic]

I got confused, now I see what you're saying.

That's something I've argued a lot. What's the point of making a game that isn't fun? That's why I despise Depression Quest.

Holy stuff someone truly understands me for once.

i thought we already went over what fun means in the context of this argument.
also in no way, shape, or form would i call pathologic "fun". it's frustratingly difficult to survive and almost everything can kill you very easily. but that's intentional, it's meant to impart a feeling of dread and, yes, frustration, which can be regarded as the opposite of "fun."

You're setting up a linear definition for fun so the argument works in your favor.

And again, fun is relative to the type of person engaging in whatever game. If you don't think that game is fun, someone else does because not everyone is you.

And in that scenario specifically, there are a lot of people who get enjoyment (fun) out of those situations. And when they succeed? Fiero.

fun.

[Katadeus]

I suppose my fervency is somewhat unjustified. The way that you are connecting things to learning makes it better. I have trouble believing that the people who read the article will all see it your way though. To most people when you say learning in video games all you think is Math Blaster. I don't see how fiero and completionism fit into the learning = fun thing, but I'll stand by.
Sorry if I was abrasive.

[ZombiLoin]

i thought we were explicitly arguing the definition of fun the op was talking about. all he said is that the linear definition of fun you're talking about should not be the only judge in how good a game is. at this point we're arguing the same loving thing.