Who was in the wrong here?

Neither.
Reggie's fun means Bing-Bing Wahoo man children's retard game while Druck Truck means fun is a movie.

Miyazaki has surpassed both Nintendo and Sony.

Neil isn't taking the stance that games shouldn't be fun or anything, Reggie is clearly saying if it isn't fun why should it even exist?

Obviously Reggie is in the wrong here, fun games and non-fun games all have their place.

Nintendo wants people of all ages to have fun.
Naughty Dog (which is one of the main developers for Sony's consoles) is pushing political stuff, sexual preferences and other stuff in their games because, according to them, all games must have a deep meaning.

Fun is a good thing for a game to strive for, but a good game does not strictly have to be fun in a traditional sense. If the game can achieve what kind of response it wants from you in gameplay then it is good.

Papers please in the gameplay leans on anxiety and confusion to get the desired results, and the insane premise for a game works as a result. Majora's mask leans on frustration to convey the emotions it wants from you as it keeps you under pressure. It is easy to fuck this up and have gameplay that is both unfun and fails to work on an emotional level: see gone home.

I do stringly prefer fun games to not fun ones.

If its not fun, is it really a game?

Neil basically said he doesn't use the word fun because his game is about killing people n shit and that isn't suppose to be fun but rather "engaging".

Reggie says games are suppose to be fun..

Poos are redpilled on jews

>"We say 'engaging,' and it might seem like a minor distinction, but it’s an important one for us."

No one, I like engaging games, and I like fun games too, OP is a F U C K I N G F A G G O T.

reggie was right here

your a faggot

Neil Cuckmann

>"We believe that if we're invested in the character and the relationships they’re in and their goal, then we're gonna go along on their journey with them and maybe even commit acts that make us uncomfortable across our moral lines and maybe get us to ask questions about where we stand on righteousness and pursuing justice at ever-escalating costs."

Hurr games should only be fun and not explore any other emotions or themes - You Inbetween Sucking Cocks

>Keeps posting out of context quotes
Pathetic

>one created the most awarded game ever made (249 GoTYs)
>the other a smelly nigger who makes video games for 28 year old boomers refusing to grow up

Gee, I wonder

Fun doesn't have to be joyful.
Fromsoft's recent games are stressful, tense and immensely fun but are in no way joyous experiences.

Neil is unironically right, Reggie is still living in the 90s

The one who doesn't sound like a pretentious cuck.

tbf it is an accurate statement
fun is so subjective all it says is that you like something

You're forgetting that naughty dog can't write so the deep meaning is a puddle

What games do you like that isn't fun?

>Reggie is still living in the 90s
And that's a good thing!

I think your definition of fun may be warped.

If a game isn't fun it's a bad game. RDR2 primarily fails because it even makes things that should be fun like riding a horse feel like a fucking chore. A game like Bloodborne is still fun even when you're suffering.

They're not talking about the same thing.
Druckman is talking about underlying in how he wants the game to feel. He wants the game to be grimdark. This isn't related to gameplay. TLoU was a perfectly fun game in terms of gameplay especially on higher difficulty.

Reggie is talking about the gameplay.

both

Attached: 360.png (430x241, 109K)

Yes a game should be fun, Reggie is completely right. It's a vague word though so perhaps not very useful or descriptive in a development context: "I like/dislike this mechanic/stage/whatever - it's fun/unfun" doesn't say much when *why* it's fun or unfun and how you can use or change that is what you're really after.

Who was in the wrong?

Attached: pc32bv6i68o21.png (680x649, 369K)

This reads like something a guy watching too many netflix shows would say

Eh, maybe one day...

Papers Please and Majora's Mask only work because they're fun though. Or rather, they are fun because they work.

If Papers Please made you manually fill out a long realistic paperwork form every time you detained anyone it would not be fun.

If Majora's Mask had NPCs that just gave you masks for talking to them, no time system, and dungeons without puzzles, it wouldn't be fun.

You do realize the only reason why papers please is fun is because it completely skipps all the monotony in actual paperwork and filing, right? Otherwise it would literally be a 8-5 desk job which isn't fun.

Your definition is fundamentally flawed since you say any game that "leans on frustration" isn't fun. Is dark souls not fun? Sekiro? DMC5? MH?

Reggie could have said 2 + 2 = 3 and he'd still be in the right. Druckmann has done nothing of value, ever.

The issue here is that I don't care about the characters, so what happens to them means nothing to me even if the lot dies miserably. I didn't care for the gameplay in the first game either, so what is there for me to latch onto?

There are obvious concsesions to making your game playable that need to be made.

MM induces frustration as a tool with the timer, the pressure to get it all done before needing to rewind is what engages the player, and the generally prevailing atmosphere of doom you are constantly fighting. The relief of doing it gives satisfaction, but the acts you do are not strictly fun. Contrast to OoT, which is more traditionally fun with less peessure to keep going.

The characters suck, so who cares?
The gameplay sucks, so who cares?

Frustration to me is not a fun emotion. It is a powerful motivator and way to create satisfaction when you overcome frustration. You listed games I consider good games but not strictly a fun game. Does that make sense?

Papers please makes you go in a panic to keep working, and that panic is the key to the fame and the emotions it tries to get out of you.

Fun is subjective, but to say that a game isn't fun is silly. MM is fun to most people because being able to work around the mechanic is rewarding and at the same time the day/limit system turns the game into a living breathing world that OoT could never hope to achieve making it all the more fun to explore.

Again I challenge you to name a game you like that isn't fun the only correct answer are the Simulator games which only autists like.

Both of them are wrong.

Fun is simply a small part of "simulation/engagement"

One guy is treating fun like its immature and taboo, something not to be considered
the other is treating it as Gospel. Like games should always be capable of providing -fun-.

Fun is simply just a feedback you get from a game, You can get all kinds of other feelings of stimulation that dont nessecarily equate to the definition of fun.
And if you say "well, feeling sorrow, and horror for characters survival is also part of the FUN" then you're just dirtying up the word fun with other definitions beyond it.

Fun is a great thing to aim for but it's not gospel, nor is it taboo.

Attached: 1548794008496.png (661x688, 699K)

druckmann looks like yet another greasy bay area kike who failed film school and now takes his limp dick rage against "THE MAN" out through making mediocre movie games. he's cut of the same cloth as the yiik faggot and phil fish. nigger probably gets high off his own farts between dunking his kike mop into a bucket of grease

I disagree. I find Dark Souls very fun in spite of the difficulty and most of the population agrees with me.

>s dark souls not fun? Sekiro? DMC5? MH?
No, and you intuitively know this is the case. "fun" holds childish connotations. Fun games are based on novelty and gimmicks, they are objectively not engaging just pleasant. Shallow games like mario kart and most nintendo games are "fun" especially with friends, and very dull to anyone with standards. Everyone with taste looks for experience driven games be this from challenge or genuine innovation and depth that encourages mastery. Fun games are just supposed to waste your time, memorable experiences are almost never "fun" You bing bing wahoo and then you move on.

There is actual fun and there is nufun.

both of them.
druckmann has disappeared up his own ass to the point where he's forgotten why people play video games.
reggie has never made a video game in his life, but is still trying to act like an expert. in doing so, he is shilling for a company that routinely shits out unfun "games" like amiibo festival, labo and lgpe.

considering nintendo can buy sony twice over, I'd say nintento

t. cuckmann

?
Reggie has done even less

who the fuck plays games they don't have fun with?
Obviously the retards who post on Yea Forums.

what in the hell is nufun

>Fun doesn't have to be joyful.
Do you even know what Fun means?
Is every positive/engaging/provoking emotion FUN to you?

Uncharted being shit and movie games not actually being as engaging as duckman thinks they are doesn't refute the principle. They think having minor control over the scene deepening the engagement when really it just hinders the cinematography, acting etc that act as effective heuristic devices to get people to "connect" with a film and hold their interest.

I find the sense of satisfaction wgen you overcome a challenge in souls to be super satisfying, but not fun. When I am flailing around like an idiot getting crushed that is not fun, the elation that comes after winning is top notch.

It is a damn good game though.

I think I just work on a different definition from you. I may just have an overly narrow sense of what "fun" is. Darkest dungeon is another game I consider not fun, but still recognize as a very good as a game and overall enjoyable experience.

>Wanting your values pushed upon other people
How insufferable.
Fun isnt essential to enjoyment/engagement/leisure of a product.

Unless every single term for "enjoy" is a synonym for FUN for you
Then why even debate the word FUN

>Fun means EVERYTHING, case closed t.shithead

You need to go back.

People are purposefully using the term too broadly because "fun" can be made synonymous with "good" if you have a 60IQ. The most simple and accurate definition of what people really mean when they say "fun" is the expression "dumb fun"

Because it's Nerf or nufun.

>Using lebbit memes.

Do you even have to ask? If it's not fun it's even MORE of a waste of time then games normally are.

Unless you want assholes like pic related shoving their worldview down your throat

Attached: 1466473068919.jpg (1192x832, 531K)

This

Nufun are games where you actively have to delude yourself into having fun because it's the template for "good game" It's shallow fun but lacks the novelty of actual fun, it exploits the fact that it's easy to have "fun" with anything if the person really wants to have fun with it.

Fun is the surface level descriptor of what you can derive from a game.

Don't use fun to dirty up other things you can attain from a game

Druckmann is a fuckface
Reggie is a fuckhead
They're both wrong

Attached: Image_137.png (499x673, 16K)

imo neil has a myopic view of what fun is (as do a lot of people these days) but using just that one fragment of his comment substantially distorts his message. neither of them are wrong.

they are both wrong

there are reasons why you might want to make your game "not fun"

but if you are a faggot who doesn't care about making a game that will engaging to players, then you should kill yourself

the idiot insisting on what others do/should do. the one going "let people make what they want, we just want to make a good time" is based

That awkard moment when you realize Reggie has done nothing for the industry in the last fifteen years, outside of being a smiling poster boy.

he said the word "fun" in context to the subject matter, not the gameplay.

cope more

>play game
>walk up to designer
>man your game aint no fun
>he looks at you puzzled as you take your leave

vs

>play game
>walk up to designer
>man this lighting system is bullshit, it's poorly telegraphed and it doesn't really add anything to the game, in the end I used this item to cheese the boss and it didn't feel rewarding at all
>designer now knows what you didn't enjoy about the game

Fun is a word you can use on casual conversations with friends that are in the same headspace as you, fun is the raw emotion you feel at the moment and using it conveys that you don't really want to bother explaining the details about your experience. When you use the word "fun" you are not speaking the same language as a game designer or critic, we all now what it conveys, we at least know that you enjoyed the game somehow when you say it's fun, but we won't know why.

He was a "fun" meme machine for nintenbabies.

Hey fella /r/gamingphilosphy is over there. This is a board for people who enjoy games, not people who want to figure out the conundrums of what "fun" means.

>This is a board for people who enjoy games,
Obvious redditor

>all games must have a deep meaning.
can you source me on this, because the quote in op's image doesn't imply this in the slightest, and that's an opinion so retarded that i can only assume you're making shit up because you don't like this guy.

Snoy fanboys are mental. Holy shit.
They are actually debating that games dont need to be fun. If it's not fun, why are you playing it? If you're not getting enjoyment out of this, why place the game?

Attached: 62844591_p5.png (737x1000, 176K)

>telling people to go to your favorite boards.
Pure reddit.

While I'm inclined to agree, all Naughty Dog did is replace the word fun with engaging. Meaning they somehow internally took some level of aversion to the word fun internally and replaced it with something equally vague.

My view of this is it doesn't seem that they want to be more descriptive or have a more meaningful back and forth in specific. They just don't want to make a fun game. That's not the goal.

How can developers overcome the need for gameplay Yea Forums?

Attached: 1550163600976.jpg (864x336, 48K)

Forgot to reply to this poster.

Oh lawd, he coming.
techradar.com/amp/news/it-looks-like-well-be-seeing-more-of-the-last-of-us-part-2-before-e3

Fun needs to be sacrificed sometimes to tell a compelling story.
A game does not need to be anti fun to have a story, and throwing out lore/immersion for a series that was lauded FOR it's story/atmosphere for the sake of dumb fun is bad too.

Lisa is a good game BECAUSE it's so often "not fun"
Metroid Federation Force is a BAD game because it focused on fun and not story.

Attached: 1551579267416.jpg (570x538, 32K)

They have the vocabulary and intelligence to know what "fun" as a descriptor actually means and aren't using it so broadly it's synonymous with "good" or "I like it"
I've played too many games to be interested in "fun" games. As a child fun games are fun because playing a game in itself is a novelty. I still have fun when I ride a rollercoaster because i've only ever been on like a dozen in my life. If I went on one everyday it would lose the novelty and become bland. This is what "fun" games are and what reggie means when he wants games to be "fun" because it's the most profitable style of nintendo game. Games like Kirby and Mario kart and mario odyssey are "fun" fun things are only fun if you are a casual shitter. People with higher standards find higher quality enjoyment from games that evoke more nuanced emotions and deeper thought.

Reggie let Hungry Box win