Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by exanimo | exanimo's ProfileDestructoid
exanimo's Profile - Destructoid




Game database:   #ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ         ALL     Xbox One     PS4     360     PS3     WiiU     Wii     PC     3DS     DS     PS Vita     PSP     iOS     Android




click to hide banner header
About
The Trinity (Xavier):
Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz
EVGA GeForce 8800GTS 640MB 320-bit GDDR3
Patriot 2 Gig DDR2 1150


I currently play;
Counter-Strike
Unreal Tournament 2004
StarCraft:Brood Wars

Badges
Following (11)  


This was another one of my responses that just got too damn long.
Hereís Knee-owns post.

You raise a lot of good points, knee-pwn-ee. :D <3. From your writing, it seems that you are more of a console player (nothing wrong with that, buddeh. <3).

The topic you bring up is something I've thought about a lot, but never really thought of what to say to argue for it (This could be why my response is pretty terrible). I guess the reason your pal said that heís more ďgrown upĒ by playing the PC is because there are younger people playing consoles. And I also really like the arguments the others bring up, especially galaga. The only thing I think consoles bring to the table is level play because everyone's hardware is exactly the same.

I'm not looking at the gamers, to each their own I say, but rather the hardware/games itself. The way I look at it, consoles are just computers now, just more simplified (in a way .. they do use some pretty wicked hardware). It seems that all the consoles now are trying their damnedest to keep up with computers. XBL, PSN, map customization, et cetera.

I'm going to say that computers are superior (start the hate now, *flinches*). Sure it takes a little bit of work to get a good setup and keep it upgraded; computers are not for the lazy. When you're not lazy, a computer gives you unparalleled game play and flexibility.

Not only can the computer community get new maps, new skins, new textures, but we can customize it ourselves too. They can use programs to make Ö well, almost anything, from models to maps, and can download shit tons new things. Control schemes are also very customizable, hell, we can use a controller too if that's your thing. Also, modificationsÖ There are a lot of modifications of popular games that can be played with a PC.

Sure itís really difficult to get people together and play together like one does with a console. You need a lot of room for it, a lot of hardware, and electricity. :D. But the cost far outweighs the perks.

I hate split screen. A lot. It completely ruins the game experience when youíre squinting to see the enemy. Plus, how many times have you hated the person sitting next to you for looking at your screen and gives away your position. F THEM. The only reason I have a PS2 is for fighting games. I will probably be getting a PS3 for the same reason (I need Blue Blaze like crazy).

Also, because of the controller, there are arguments that game play changes. PC requires much more precision. Iíve played Halo 3 and noticed that the characters run so damn slow. This is because itís so hard to shoot the bastard with a controller. Also, even with auto-aim turned off, you will still notice the crosshair twitch to the head a bit. Why is that? Because the developers knew that people canít be precise with a controller and the gamer needed help. Mouse and keyboard doesnít require auto aim because of its precision. I will say, COD4 was a real step forward for consoles in terms of this. Real Time Strategy is another genre where PC far outplays consoles. I would love to see someone micro manage with a controller. Iím sorry, but StarCraft 64 was terrible.


If RPGs/Platformers is your thing, itís easy to just get a controller for the PC and play it. Of course not as many games of this type get released for PC and the reasons are clear. There is more money in releasing games to all consoles for more money. Driving games .. Just get a steering wheel and play GTR2. Amazing. But I will say the Gran Turismo series is incredibly good. I would just love to see it come to the PC. But the PC does have many racing games that are released for consoles.

The only reason developers develop games for the console is because they realize the money there is in it. It opens the gaming industry to more people; therefore more people can buy.

All in all, there are some perks to console gaming. More games of specific genres, level game play, and ease of use. However, I just think PC is better. :o).

Itís just my opinion, it has flaws, Iím human, Iím just throwing it out there. <3










My stark dorm setup;

Equipped with microwave, toaster oven, and mini fridge full of Coke Classics for those intense (lazy) moments when you just don't want to stand up for sustenance.


Xavier, my PC;
ASUS P5K DELUXE/WIFI-AP LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 Quad-Core Processor
Patriot Extreme Performance 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1150
EVGA 640-P2-N821-AR GeForce 8800GTS 640MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16
ASUS Black SATA DVD-ROM Drive
Western Digital Raptor WD740ADFD 74GB 10,000 RPM SATA 1.5Gb/s Hard Drive
2x Western Digital 120 GB 5200 RPM IDE
1x Western Digital 320 GB 7200 RPM SATA

Acer AL1916Fbd Black 19" 2ms (GTG) LCD Monitor
MX518 mouse
El cheapo Logitech USB keyboard (As long as my 'w' 'a' 's' 'd' keys work, I'm happy)
SENNHEISER HD 280PRO headphones


... And Norton's Anthology of Theory and Criticism, copyright 2001








Before I start writing my first serious work of c-blogging (sorry, egg), I would like to apologize beforehand for not having a "gamer" sense of humor to my writing. This includes the overuse of sarcasm and the predictable comparisons of certain things with a random tangent of incomprehensible, trivial gibberish. I am a boring English major that writes very boring things. I know many will not like this, but itís something that Iíve noticed over the years and is my personal opinion.

It is seen more and more over the years, examples as to how and why the human race is being dumbed down. The evolution of mass media has created a very visually oriented people. This is seen in different types of mindless art that most people partake in. Movies full of action with no substance, incoherent modern art, and repetitive music. It seems that media, mixed with big business is forcing people to give into worthless pop culture. More specifically, this can be seen in visually appealing, yet destitute games. Examples of this can be seen in the evolution of popular games such as Team Fortress/Team Fortress Classic, StarCraft, System Shock, and high profile console games.

Walter Benjamin looked at the phenomenon of mass mechanical art reproduction and saw it as a way of being able to decentralize the hierarchy of art. The form of art being looked at here is from a gamerís perspective, the video game. Over the years, games have been getting more and more easily attainable for more and more people. The fact that these games can be easily played by everyone is a great idea. Most people can now pick up a controller or keyboard/mouse and be fairly decent at most new games. Now the problem arises as to how this affects gaming in general.

To have massive amounts of people to become involved in a game there needs to be a shorter learning curve and easy feel to it. However, this takes away a very crucial aspect of gaming, the depth to it. Depth to anything leaves things open to interpretation and always makes something better. In this case, depth is a solid story line, changing gameplay, interesting characters, et cetera. When a games learning curve gets shorter, the depth also decreases. It ruins the longevity and the competitive side to a game. This competitiveness and longevity is what makes a game timeless. By making one think deeper about it, and more challenged by a game makes it that much better.

Team Fortress has an incredibly deep gameplay for a first person shooter. The class based system made for good team work and strategizing. When Team Fortress 2 was released, fans of the original Team Fortress were incredibly disappointed, mostly because the lack of grenades. People argued that the element of grenades separated players of different skills too much and kept new players away from the game. The removal of the grenades, bunny hops, and other elements took away the depth of the game. The lack of depth can be seen in league play. The amount of Team Fortress players found in a league is far greater than the Team Fortress 2 players. There is no challenge to Team Fortress 2, no reason to come back other than to be with the community.

When there is mention of great real time strategy, StarCraft is always at the top of any list. The balance and gameplay involved is second to none in the real time strategy genre. The micromanagement involved and the strategy makes the game truly great. This is proven by the fact that the game is still played competitively even after 10 years. Every match there is always changing and evolving gameplay and strategies, this shows just how deep the game is. Recently brought up on a Korean show devoted to StarCraft and StarCraft matches was the much anticipated sequel. Many professional Korean players were allowed to play a beta version of StarCraft 2. The players expressed worry in the way the game was played. The lack of micromanagement and simplified gameplay did not allow for any deep gameplay. Their worries were consolidated when Blizzard explained to them that they were looking to simplify the gameplay. Players wondered whether StarCraft 2 would be played professionally with this type of play.

Reasons behind this change are based off of the gamer community and big business. Because gaming has experienced a boom in recent years there is a definite trend showing that more people are gaming, and more people are becoming better. Because of this there is a growing gap between the hardcore gamers and the conventional gamer. To keep people coming back to a game, businesses seem to have dumbed their games down. What is not helping this is big industry companies such as Electronic Arts buying out many companies. These buyouts disallow smaller companies to create new and original games. Like all things, it becomes a need for money rather than a want to progress.

People today seem to be mesmerized by great graphics now rather than gameplay. This is due to the nature of our society and media. It can be seen in the lack of depth in games of being released today, especially console games that aim only to show the visual strength of the console and end up being short and repetitive. There is still hope with avant-garde and truly original and revolutionary games being released like Psychonauts and Portal. We need to see more games like these, otherwise there is no say as to what will happen to the future of gaming.







exanimo
11:29 AM on 03.12.2008

This was originally a comment response to Nad Crushers worries
It got a little long winded so I thought I'd make a post.


There is always going to be unbalance in this game. It may be a small unbalance, but it's there. After broodwars, Terran had the advantage. I'm afraid that Terran will have an advantage in this game too, maybe Protoss as well. But Zerg.. Zerg only had the upper hand in the original game, and it looks as if they won't have it here too.

The cycle of StarCraft ... Terran > Zerg > Protoss > Terran
Terran beats zerg, zerg beats protoss, protoss beats terran.
Of course player skill comes into play too! :D


Reactor?! As if Terran's marines weren't strong enough, especially with the medics, now they can double their production rate.



In the new video, did you see how many ultralisks attacks it took to kill an archon? And as great as that burrowing infecting unit is, it will be hard to pull off in a real game with turrets ,comsat stations, and now radar towers. It is nice to finally see a zerg unit that does splash damage, I have to say.



Protoss looks as if they'll be powerful as well. Their new ability to move units without the use of an arbiter looks promising. And, like usual they look very strong.

Now, I'm a Zerg player, and I've watched A LOT of Korean matches. I saw a huge upset with my favourite player, Lee Jae Dong. There was a match he obviously should have won but lost because of the class restriction. Even the announcers were confused as to why he lost a major battle using a large number of Guardians, Mutalisks, and Zerglings against a handful of Goliaths and Siege Tanks. For Zerg, the power always comes from number, not quality. Protoss, quality, not numbers. Terran is something in between. For Zerg, you always have to work really hard to win by getting a lot of expansions. Without this you are done.

I know this is just a beta and it's hard to get an idea of the game, these are just early thoughts. I'm really excited to see this game. And I'm really excited to see it being played competitively. I just don't know if I'll be playing Zerg anymore.







exanimo
10:52 PM on 03.05.2008

Just released a beta of a fun map I made for TF2 the other night,cp_bessjump.
Check it out if you wish!




Also, All jorge.