Shadowheart
Member
Has alcohol gone too far?
So, Polygon 'playing' Doom...
- Thread starter Salsa
- Start date
- Status
stan423321
Member
Where is the seven feet distance supposed to be on that picture? Middle pink line? Right pink line? Somewhere else? Does it depend on the wall that the projectile eventually hits?
It's also worth pointing out that Polygon was founded with the express purpose of "raising the bar" for videogame journalism.
The site exists because its founders wanted to "do better" than the status quo.
Given that it's not really fair for anyone to toss an accusation of "elitism!" at critics, when the main thrust of said criticism is that Polygon isn't living up to the standards it set for itself.
Ah holy shit, and I SUCK at console FPS. Fps in general, don't really play them.
I wouldn't review a FPS for the life of it because I suck and can't give a qualified comment on it's gameplay. But I will totally review strategy games or platformers or even fighting games, though for stuff like Guilty Gear I am too bad. Oh, and RPGs. Any kind of RPG.
Anyone remember that Football Manager game review? The reviewer basically complained that all you do is manage and not play and why would anyone prefer this over Fifa? Prime example of completely missed review because of incompetence.
It would be amazing if all launch trailers had to feature bad gameplay from now on.
I wonder if people would also consider it "elitist" to expect good grammar in reviews etc.
Spiral Insanity
Banned
So no need to have Neogaf? Jesus. Just don't engage in the discussion if you do not accept the conversation to begin with.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Yup, it's really quite something.
And the problem with this discussion is that posters in this thread refuse to acknowledge that people have different levels of what they consider to be incompetent or competent, especially when looking at it from the context of what it is - a random 30 minute preview of a game with no commentary. For example, I wouldn't have noticed anything unusual about the video if it wasn't pointed out (and I still don't care), and I imagine the only people who would are a vocal minority of their target audience, or people not even in their target audience, otherwise Polygon wouldn't have uploaded it the way they did.
If their target audience truly did care, they would have taken more time to play "well". Seriously, it's a video preview of a game, with no commentary. Those don't exactly burn up the charts for view numbers (and no, the view count of this specific video isn't worth bringing up, since this is apparently "controversial", so it has more views than usual). I imagine the effort it takes to play "well" vs. playing how they played isn't worth the difference in view numbers.
There. are. more. reasons. to. play. video. games. than. just. mastery. and. skill.
You are viewing this video through the perspective of someone who comes to video games primarily for skill and mastery. Or at least this game. Judging by the video, Polygon is not for you, or at least this video isn't. And that's fine that it's not for you. There are plenty of people who just want to see the weapons, enemies, environments, get a sense of the tone, get a taste of the music, see if it's anything like the original Doom, or any other reason not related to playing the game well. And again, we all have different definitions of "playing well". As mentioned before, many people, probably most of Polygon's target audience, wouldn't notice anything wrong with the video.
In game design, there is a theory called Bartle's Taxonomy. It's not perfect or hard science (though nothing about game design is), but it's a good way to re-frame how we look at games. In this case it allows us to see that games aren't only about mastery (though it's fine if some games are).
I encourage you, and anyone in this thread, to watch this video about it and look into it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxpW2ltDNow
Clearly, since Polygon uploaded the video, they believe that certain types of players will get something out of the video. My guess is that it's aimed at explorer types, and it's not worth the effort for them to also appeal to killer or achiever types - the kind of viewer who would want to see them play well (and the socializers would probably want to see the multiplayer mode, so that's why I didn't bring them up). Keep in mind that "explorer" doesn't just mean explorer in the geographical sense, but exploring new things. New areas, new weapons, new enemies, new music. They are there for the content. And they can get a sense of all of that in this video without requiring that the player play it well.
I doubt that Polygon had the above specific train of thought regarding the video, since they're not game designers so they probably don't think about it in that way, but I think it's worth pointing out why some viewers can get something out of the video. And also that, if you're mad about the video, it may not be for you.
If you want to talk about reviews being played like this specifically, then sure, that may be a different conversation. But it's also a hypothetical, since this is a random gameplay preview that probably doesn't require much effort to get the views they need.
Their target audience might be mass appeal rather than neogaf and people who are deep into videogames. Judging by the video, I'd say it's mass appeal. And that's fine. There's room for mass appeal, there's room for super-specific stuff.
I have a terribly slow connection right now, so I cannot watch the full video. But as a game journalisst myself, I want to add a thought or two.
Someone who writes about games or creates videos about them, will never play in ideal circumstances. Your console s plugged into a monitor in a bright, open space office in full dayligt, not a bigass, perfectly calibrated TV in a cozy mancave. Oftemtimes you have to play using the OBS-preview-windoes wich adds - depending on your capture-hardware - a certain ammount of delay. And if you record video and also talk over it, you sometimes do not even have proper game audio to help you out. Add the urge to create some content about the game quickly, since Bethesda did not give out review keys and time is money when doing this online, and you have suboptimal gameplay like that.
This is just a general fact of life for people like us. Some outlets have a better hardware infrastructure, some might not push for quick content as much, but most of the time, the editors have to play in suboptimal circumstances. YouTubers and Streamers that take care of their own and only their equipment and workflow have a definite advantage here. Unfortunatley a comapny cannot just scale what a YouTuber is doing.
Does this explain the performance in the gif? I do not know. I cannot know. But I wanted to add my thoughts to the discussion. Have a nice weekend, you guys!
Someone who writes about games or creates videos about them, will never play in ideal circumstances. Your console s plugged into a monitor in a bright, open space office in full dayligt, not a bigass, perfectly calibrated TV in a cozy mancave. Oftemtimes you have to play using the OBS-preview-windoes wich adds - depending on your capture-hardware - a certain ammount of delay. And if you record video and also talk over it, you sometimes do not even have proper game audio to help you out. Add the urge to create some content about the game quickly, since Bethesda did not give out review keys and time is money when doing this online, and you have suboptimal gameplay like that.
This is just a general fact of life for people like us. Some outlets have a better hardware infrastructure, some might not push for quick content as much, but most of the time, the editors have to play in suboptimal circumstances. YouTubers and Streamers that take care of their own and only their equipment and workflow have a definite advantage here. Unfortunatley a comapny cannot just scale what a YouTuber is doing.
Does this explain the performance in the gif? I do not know. I cannot know. But I wanted to add my thoughts to the discussion. Have a nice weekend, you guys!
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Ha oh come on now that's not possible. I've never personally witnessed anyone that bad
gunslikewhoa
Member
No, it doesn't. In all seriousness, it appears as though this person is playing an FPS with a controller for the first time in their lives.
I remember joystiq's "review" for Nier where the reviewer didn't complete the game because of being too frustrated with the fishing minigame.
Turns out he was fishing in the wrong spot the whole time and accidentally ignored the big red X on the map indicating the correct fishing spot that was appropriate for his level. He spent too much time failing that, even after the internet corrected the dude, he refused to go back to the game and finish his playthrough. Saying "the damage was done, and my spirit had been broken, sadly.". The title of his unfinished review was "Hook, Line and Stinker".
So yeah, the argument you mentioned is legit, but one with no real value. Do we have access to videos documenting every reviewer's experience with a game they're reviewing? Nope. That's why the relevancy of a review is very limited to objective stuff like technical details.
The Real Napsta
Member
Yes.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Pretty wild
Iztok Mravlja
Banned
Yes, yes of course there has to be.
I mean, it's a wide margin, but the person playing in that video misses even that.
Man, you misread a post one time, bruh.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Holy. Shit. It's. Not. About. Mastery. And. Skill. It's. About. Basic. Competency. That. Shows. People. If. The. Game. Is. Interesting. To. Them. Or. Not. This. Has. Been. Addressed. On. Almost. Every. Page. Of. This. 26. Page. Thread. You'd. Think. You'd. Know. The. Difference. By. Now.
Even someone who has never played a FPS game before gains nothing from the video in the OP. I've never been good at RTS games but watching someone being a fuck up at one doesn't help me to see if the RTS they're playing would be something that would get me into the genre or bot. It doesn't show anything about how the game works or how it's supposed to function. The fact that youre bringing up this tired arguement again, even though multiple people have not only addressed, but completely shit on the argument you're making is just a tired waste of time at thid point.
You are looking to see if the game is interesting to you. But the video is not for you. Other people can still get something out of it, since they have a lower "standard" for what they consider competent playing. You are assuming that no one else can get anything out of it. That's not the case.
Edit: moved the edit to my new post.
Dash_Riprock
Member
On. the. plus. side. the. obnoxious. way. he. put. a. period. at. the. end. of. every. word. was. pretty. funny.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
No it doesn't. See my edit (And frankly multiple peoples arguements about why this logic is totally flawed) as to why that line of thinking is totally illogical and useless.
There is nothing to be gained from this video that couldn't be gained from a veteran FPS player explaining how the game might function for people new to the genre. Getting someone who knows what they're doing and can dumb it down for newcomers is always going to be more useful than letting someone bumble around with a controller with no commentary.
Fantastic
For contrast here's Jim Sterling playing the first part of the game.
That's how a regular playthrough should look like. I think it's fair to expect a game journalist to at least have this level of competency.
That's how a regular playthrough should look like. I think it's fair to expect a game journalist to at least have this level of competency.
Iztok Mravlja
Banned
Well, to be honest, we all got something out of it, at the very least a mega thread and a good laugh?
I guess the question is does the video achieve what it set out to do.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
No it doesn't what?
Your experience does not represent everyone's. Neogaf is not representative of the target audience of this video.
Haha, I'd say so, for Polygon at least. It has a ton more views than a lot of their other videos, which is impressive, considering I imagine they spent a lot more time and money on the other types of videos compared to this one.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
My experience with RTS games are about the same as the experience that this person has with FPS games if the video is any indication. That's why I used it as an example. If I made a video of me bumbling my way through an RTS game it would be equally as useful to both newcomers of RTS games and vetertans of RTS games as this video is to veterans and newcomers of FPS.
Which is to say, it would not be useful at all.
Even if I view this through the lens of someone who has never played a game in the FPS genre before it's completely useless. I can easily put myself in that position because as someone who has barely ever tried RTS games, watching someone totally botch playing one would neither tell me if I would enjoy the game or educate me on how I could enjoy one.
Post you quoted was referring to me. I didn't notice the link to the full playthrough and misunderstood a post early on referring to Let's Plays and talking during playing as to the whole thing.
And what I'm saying is that, while it might be more informative or useful for someone to do that, Polygon has determined it is in their best interest to put not much effort into "playing well", as to them it is diminishing returns. They could put in more effort, but it wouldn't add enough views to their view count to justify it.
...to players coming to that game that are interested in mastery and skill. I could still watch your video and get something out of it if I were looking to see what the art style is, what units are in the game, or any other random reason not related to skill and mastery.
Mechanized
Member
Who is the target audience of that polygon.com video? Since you seem to have some behind the scenes access and all you could at least share the marketing strategy of bad gameplay that doesn't show off the game very well.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Dude is legally blind like the Polygon person.
Or doesn't know how to operate a controller either.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
It's not about mastery or skill. I don't know how many times I and others have to say this, but it has to do with the ability to be competent at the game. You don't need to be particularly skillful or masterful at FPS games to finish them on easy.
The fact that you're arguing that they should let people play the game badly because someone playing the game well wouldnt net them more views just shows how pathetically low the standards of video game consumers are. Why do you give a shit about what nets them more views? Why dont you care more about what informs you about a product best?
gunslikewhoa
Member
I'm beginning to believe they haven't actually watched it.
This isn't simply a matter of 'not playing well.' This is a matter of not playing as well as an average seven-year old.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I don't have behind the scenes access. I'm just going by their output.
Their target audience is obviously, at least for this video, people who don't care enough about how well someone plays a video game to not watch a video. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have posted it. If that isn't indeed their audience, they will listen to feedback and take down the video and maybe upload a new one. Until then, their actions show who their target audience is.
But it is related to mastery or skill, in that you and others in this thread and I have different levels of what we consider to be "competent". Players who aren't interested in mastery or skill don't give two shits about competency, so it is a relatively low bar. They are there to see the content. Therefore, their minimum requirement of skill is that the player progresses. And the player progressed in this video.
gunslikewhoa
Member
So if they post a gameplay video created by a chimp, they can simply respond to any criticism with, "Well, you're not our target audience."
I'm guessing that they rushed to post this simply for views, thanks to the late review copies and dearth of Doom footage at the time it was posted.
Or, a lot more realistically possible reason is that they fucked up. I honestly don't know who the target audience could be for a completely incompetent play through is. Is it the total novice who doesn't know what video games are? Basic controller skill isn't really that rare nowadays.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
They screwed up and uploaded a bad video, thats all. All this game design theory stuff looks like a bizarre attempt to shoehorn something you just learned about into the discussion. That or you're trolling us all.
I have to agree with him regarding the "glory kills". I rolled my eyes at the idea when I first read about it many moons ago, but the system integrates quite nicely with the underlying philosophy of "always be killing". They don't interrupt the flow of regular combat as much as I thought they would.
They can do that all they like. All that matters is if they are successful or not. If Polygon continues to stay in business, then clearly they have a target audience large enough to support them.
I already answered that. The target audience is people who are interested in seeing the content. Their minimum requirement is that the player progress.
I'm just pointing out that neogaf is not representative of game players at large or Polygon's target audience. People have different preferences. Neogaf is it's own bubble.
How wonderfully recursive.
The "target audience" is "whomever is interested."
Ergo, every video ever made is only targeted at people who enjoy the content, and immunized from outside criticism!
Zen_Arcade
Banned
No it's not. Competency is not the same as mastery. Even people who don't give a shit about playing a game with mastery still give a shit about what the game looks like when it's played with some level of competence.
Like I said multiple times in this thread, and it's a statement that has yet to have a counter to, there is nothing that a person who has no idea what they're doing can teach you that a person who is skilled at something can't by dumbing down their actions and explaining to you. Even if someone is completely oblivious to how FPS games work, a video with zero commentary and bad gameplay does them no favors in either helping them to understand this new game or letting them know if the game functions well.
You're welcome to criticize it. And they're welcome to respond to feedback if you're in their target audience. If you're not in they're target audience, why would they care about your feedback? They're not making it for you. Not everything has to be for everyone.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I love this assertion that Polygon's audience is so braindead that Polygon purposefully finds people terrible at games to "cater" to them.
L-O-L
L-O-L
- Status