What game category do you prefer?

Statistic games are determined by, well, whoever has the best statistics. You pit a level 10 pikachu against my level 85 pikachu, I will win because of my better statistics. It's like math, the number 10 < 85, no matter what.

Golf

If you mean skill as in getting headshots, that's obvious reflex, a physical trait. Skill as in chess, that's a logic trait because it's about thinking.

I'm incredibly slow when it comes to my "physical traits" but I still knock heads off, its not about reflex, its about accuracy, speed, agility. 2 of which I dont have

( Edited on 30.01.2006 09:24 by K i n )

I like what you're doing Revelade. Its a tricky thing - classifying videogames and telling us which ones we'll like to play...

the current system isn't perfect, but its alright. Your idea tells us what is involved in winning the game. its a novel idea, but the thing is - you're oversimplifying things.

To win starcraft, i don't just need "logic-reflex".

its more like - "tactical decision making-multitasking-strategic prioritisation-risk assesment-quick hands with the mouse-etc-etc-etc"

and that just tells me how to win. I still don't know really whether i like it or whether its worth a purchase

i think a perfect system of game classification would have to cover storyline, sound style, graphic style, length, open-endedness, speed of gameplay, difficulty, learnability, among millions of other things. I'm sorry but there is oh so much more to a game than just "luck-logic-reflex-stat"

( Edited on 30.01.2006 11:10 by theduffman )

I like the way you think Revelade, and I agree with you. Not going to post a big in depth article as to why I do, but I do, and I like games of the logic/reflex catagories.

And tell me, what exactly is wrong by labeling games ON THEIR GAMEPLAY? Does labeling a game as a "horror game" even tell me how I'm going to play, or is it just going to tell me that there are zombies or "oooh SCARY" things in it?

Tactical decision making? Just simplify it to decision making, which is a logical process, not a physical one. Prioritization? Again, a logical process. Quick to hands? That'd be a physical or reflex trait.

You can break down what you do logically, but I'm saying that there is logical thinking in the gameplay.

I understand that there are other features ADDED to gameplay, but these features by itself aren't gameplay. You can take graphics by itself, but if there isn't rules as to what to do, it's not a game. If you take sounds, but if you don't do anything with them, it's not a game.

Gameplay is the number one ingredient in a game. That's why classics like chess don't require OMG XBAX 340 graphics, or HAX0R SURROWND SOWND. Better yet, you only need sound to play Marco Polo.

Again, things like plot, sound, graphics, whatever can be used or NOT in games. Gameplay, or the what you need to do to win is what has remained constant and exists in EVERY game.

That brings me to my point again. What is your problem against classifying a game by it's gameplay?

And tell me, what exactly is wrong by labeling games ON THEIR GAMEPLAY? Does labeling a game as a "horror game" even tell me how I'm going to play, or is it just going to tell me that there are zombies or "oooh SCARY" things in it?

But what if i wanted a scary game?

It depends on what you think is scary. Eternal Darkness was more of a "hmm, that's interesting" game. Some people are afraid of bunnies.

I mean if you want to buy a game for its looks use the old system. But if you want a game that plays similarly to another, mine does the job.

Yeah but at the end of the day..no one uses your system, so we all just have to put up with the old system.

I guess Revelade = no one in your world =/

I think the category I prefer would have to be RPG. However, I'm a huge Resident Evil Fan, so Survival Horror would have to be up there too.

I like statistic and reflex games. Luck games a la mario party etc. I'm only keen on with multiple persons (though thats the idea so fair enough)

I like the system if a little pointless as no real game fits perfectly into any one genre usually. I think though there is no need for the logic section, as surely you'd place AoE and Starcraft in statistics!?! I used to be pretty good at AoE and that was because I knew the stats of which troops to use against the others.

RE: my post about suggesting a game, I suppose I'm on the statistic & logic team just now.

Luck games as you call them are perfect for piss ups, ala Monkey Ball.

And reflex games certainly have the time and space in my collection, god bless Meteos for keeping me awake on over night flights to Greece and back recently!

Here's how I see the difference between statistic and logic.

Statistic is like having a red sword that does 1 damage and a blue sword doing 2 damage. In all cases, that blue sword is better than the red one.

Logic is like having a red sword that does 1 damage, BUT does 2 bonus damage to evil monsters, while a blue sword only does 2 damage to anybody.

In that S-game, once you get the blue sword, you throw away the red one. However, in the L-game, both swords have a use in different situations.

Also in most S-games, the more time you play, the stronger you'll get. No matter how many times you play Starcraft, the unit properties will remain the same, therefore, it comes down to what you use and how you use it.