For me its simple, if I enjoyed the game I consider it good. Also if the game has very little visible bugs then its even better.
There is no objectively bad game.
>>343527284
Well except the games that are extremely broken but if we don't count those games then you're right there are no bad games.
I think the majority of /v/ makes blanket statements about why a game is bad without ever going into detail because they actually have never played them. For me what makes a game good out of the gate is if I find its combat enjoyable, it doesn't have to be deep either it just has to be solid and fun. Everything else piles on top of it and either makes the game bad regardless of the combat or even better because of those aspects. Gameplay is king with music, replayability and a likeable cast all vying for 2nd place.
>>343527284
There is always objectively bad content in every artistic (or, in this case, autistic) medium. Go back to your special snowflake Liberal Arts classes, faggot.
>>343528978
Liberal?
Besides that, you're a fucking retard. Look here just because you don't enjoy a game does not mean that someone else will not enjoy it. Even tho we're all connected, we do not think alike. Now if a game is broken and has a bunch of glitches, its bad. But if the game is clean then its up to opinion. One mans trash is another mans treasure.
>>343528978
(you)
>>343526780
It's called "opinions" and they are like assholes. We all have one.
If I'm itching to play it again, then it's a good game.
I go on Metacritic. I don't play games that have a lower score than 80.
>>343529513
>there is no objectively bad game
>if a game is broken, it is a bad game, objectively
You seem to be changing your story, buttfag.
>>343530293
The point is that if a game is not broken, its all up to the person if the game is good or bad. Also I prefer nosefag over buttfag.
>>343530461
Subjectivism ruins everything good. When you have no standards and just say "well, y'know, everybody's got opinions" then everything starts turning to shit.
good game = I enjoyed playing it and didn't experience any severe issues to get in the way of that enjoyment
bad game = at least one major part of the experience was bad or broken, and/or it is not enjoyable to play
that's as simple as it is for me
>>343526780
If it isn't riddled with cliches, isn't broken, and is engaging with its pacing and gameplay, it's good. Personal taste is what makes good games stand out, but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to say a bad game is good.
>>343530061
>If I'm itching to play it again, then it's a good game.
Or you're itching because your asshole is just shitty
>>343530972
This is a good, mind if I steal?
>>343530882
I think clichés can be used well sometimes, I like it when they ham it up and use clichés honestly, like in FFIV.
>>343530651
You like this type of game well go play games that are like that. Oh you like this type of game, go play games like that.
>But fallout 4 is sooo bad compared to fallout 2!!!
Well find games that are like fallout 2 then.
>>343531221
>opinions about games=opinions about genres
You're stupid.
>>343532149
Here is something your mind might understand...
The only games that are bad are the ones that are broken and not working. Just because you don't like a game does not mean that everyone else thinks the same.
>But this leads to worse games
Well in your eyes these games may be bad but not for others. Also there is no one entity in the sky that creates video games and goes by the most popular opinion. There are many game devs who make games that they personally like and heck who knows maybe you like em too.
And if you think that all games made right now are sooooo bad then why not make games yourself? Show the world how great you are by making games that you consider to be good.
>>343532718
>if you don't make games, you have no right calling them bad!
well done fucking up, kill yourself while on it.
>>343533486
You can say whatever you want just remember that you're full of shit.
>>343526780
I believe there are two categories to which one can judge games:
1. Games you personally enjoy.
2. Games a majority enjoy.
I think Ico is the absolute best game ever, and it gets a respectable following, but ask most Madden players or NBA game players and they'll tell you the game is fucking stupid.
"Good" and "bad" are relatively subjective. Even broken shit games that don't work could provide some redeemable qualities in a community, if not in the way it's traditionally suppose to ( such as functioning, etc).
>>343533670
awwww...
losing nerve already?
>>343534370
Ayyy remember that cool show that ran on cartoon network. There was this sailor boy and that weird blue sausage thingy. I really liked that show it was so weird yet interesting.
>>343534671
Name? you got me interested.
>>343526780
Is fallout 1 any good?
>>343534809
Its called the marvelous misadventures of flapjack. You should check it out
Would i want to play it again?
Thays how i determine if a game is good.
>>343534892
Dunno, have not played it (yet)
>>343534341
Wow, the only guy here who hasn't been irretrievably mindfucked into hating games on principal alone.
Never change anon. You are the light in the darkness. You are the torchbearer.
Is EYE a good game?
>>343528978
>I don't know what "liberal arts" means.
>>343535575
Yes
>>343526780
> if I enjoyed the game I consider it good
typical retarded child who cant differentiate between x thing is good and I liked x thing
>>343537262
Why is x thing good?
>>343526780
>Also if the game has very little visible bugs then its even better
>posts FO2
>>343537407
Because its elements are of objectively high quality
I love the big bang theory but the only thing id consider objectively good about it are the actors and the quality of the sets
many people like bad or subpar or mediocre games (MGS) and tout them as actually good games just because they like them
Bloodborne is an objectively amazing game, the only faults probably being that the graphics and performance could (and should, considering games like Uncharted 4 and battlefront on the PS4 run from fine to amazing) be better
>>343537262
>thing is my favorite but it's not the best
>>343537741
Yeah I also love bloodborne... But why is it objectively good? Care enough to type what makes a game objectively good?
>>343537927
>Yeah I also love bloodborne... But why is it objectively good?
every attribute of the game comes together, the combat and the mechanics are part of the theme and narrative, the story/ backstory is there but its completely optional and still well written, the music is absolutely immaculate, the level design is excellent, the game has zero padding unless you count the optional dungeons, there are no million throwaway items, every weapon and armor is viable, so on and so on
bloodborne is one of the only genuinely 10/10 games in the last 10 years
>>343538298
What if I don't like games about combat?
>>343538535
what you "like" has nothing to do with how good something is
>>343526780
A game is good depending on its strengths and weaknesses. That's it. There's no objectively perfect or shit game. If you or a large amount of people like something is irrelevant to whether it's good or not.
>>343538635
Well if I hear that its so objectively good, and then I play it... Woops I did not enjoy my time because I don't like games about combat...
>Tho it would be pretty dumb to play a game about combat if you don't like combat games...
>>343538865
>I'll buy something I heard is good and not check anything about it before I make my purchase
Are you fucking stupid?
>>343539069
Food... Why food? Well someone may really love a dish and say
>The flavours just combine to create a great experience and everything compliments the final taste
But even tho it does all that, you might not like the dish because its not your taste.
And yes buying a game without looking into it is pretty dumb.
