There is no good game that you "have to take the time to learn"...

There is no good game that you "have to take the time to learn". It's always a facade of depth built with dozens of obscure mechanics, which ultimately boil down to the most basic-bitch gameplay structure.

Change my mind.

Attached: starcraft-2-the-complete-trilogy-eu-pc-cd-key-4.jpg (1048x655, 144K)

No
You can just stay a fucking moron it's not my job to help you not be stupid

>change my mind
Nah. Mad cuz bad LOL ;)

Imagine investing 100s of hours into something that ultimately boils down to a diceroll.
That must hurt.

Dumbshit normie OP absolutely destroyed. OP is the kind of retard who can spend years playing a game like Dota and still suck at it because it requires a level of intelligence he doesn't have. Go play some Fortnite, you faggot.

>gameplay isn’t real
ok dude

>Imagine investing 100s of hours into something that ultimately boils down to a diceroll.

imagine being so shit at every game you play that you delude yourself into believing you lose because of RNG

Mordhau, swordfighting.
Warband, faster melee combat (windup mechanics prevent chiv+mordhau autism)
doter 2
you're still a moron btw lmao
Games like Killing Floor and Quake rely just as heavily on player skill as they do map knowledge. Strange connection, but it exists

Chiv or Mordhau aren't good examples. People abuse the fuck out of the mechanics so that top tier players look absolutely retarded when fighting. They tried to fix Chiv with Mordhau but it still happens. People jumping, spamming crouch, spinning. Looks terrible. They single handedly ruin the game for everyone else by destroying all immersion.

Imagine believing you're "good" at a game because you know more obscure mechanics, rather than actually executing on them.
You're the mental equivalent of a child shouting "my superpower beats your superpower".

Executing mechanics properly can be its own reward though.

Attached: ballisticNG_barracuda_platinum.webm (889x500, 2.87M)

>Change my mind.
Not interested in talking with retards

There's no helping a complete retard such as yourself

How the fuck is Mordhau a good example. It doesn't even have that many mechanics, so the community has to come up with shit like "accels" and "deccels" to make it sound like moving forward and backwards is a gameplay mechanic.

What is "depth" by your definition? Use specific examples.

Absolutely seething that your time investment isn't an actual achievement.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing and fairly certain that it's bait

Attached: 2b0aee0de1a68c2697c42d2730b6d62b8c639d7e33c52fbd4c3b81db13d26f32.png (625x626, 100K)

you don't like games. go watch a movie instead.

Well, duh, it's a fucking videogame, why would it be an achievement

I would generally describe depth as the amount meaningful of choices any player has. This includes big, meaningful choices like round-wide tactics and small choices like combat management.
Counter-Strike is a really good example of a bloated game with a really low amount of choices, even though it's certainly not the worst of offenders.

I am not surprised that you cannot grasp the concept.

Nah, there are good games around, but there is a minority that hyper-fixated on "difficult" games that are actually simplistic as fuck.

imagine being this fucking stupid

Great response.
Go queue up for a ranked match in whatever game you enjoy, get matched up with a new player, win with a cheesy strategy and pretend that had any impact on your life.

>Counter-Strike is a really good example of a bloated game with a really low amount of choices

Counter Strike is actually really deep if you've watched high level play and are capable of understanding it. Every step is a choice, every millisecond where they shoot or don't shoot is a choice. A single round is hundreds of decisions that the players have to make instantaneously, ultimately deciding the outcome. It's the epitome of easy to learn, hard to master.

Attached: 1548736077066.png (601x508, 127K)

>Counter-Strike is a really good example of a bloated game with a really low amount of choices
Compared to what exactly, other FPS games? All games? Shooters are mostly mechanical skill games, everyone knows that. There's no way to boost your mechanical skill other than through sheer practice and from being talented from the start

Except for a player to truly grasp the amount of meaningful choices they have requires time investment. Even a game like Tetris which is very easy to understand on the surface has plenty of advanced strategies that a player would only learn organically through many hours of play.

I watch CS regularly and it is absolutely a distilled FPS, to a point where it's difficult to even compare it to other shooters. You can make any game sound deep in this way, while I can tell you that it ultimately boils down to peeking predetermined spots and using similar tactics round after round. Mechanical aspects such as movement, recoil control, following a moving target, are either simplistic in nature or nonexistent. Where the game really shines is when a player has to do something unorthodox, which doesn't happen that often.
Again, not the worst of offenders, I enjoy playing it, but it's definitely not as deep as people think. That might actually be to its advantage though, in terms of viewability.

There is very little mechanical skill in Counter-Strike, compared to other shooters. It is obscured by certain mechanics, like spread patterns or sidestepping management, but that's also the reason while it's a binary system - you either get it or don't, there's very little to get better over.

>Mechanical aspects such as movement, recoil control, following a moving target, are either simplistic in nature or nonexistent
I give you movement and maybe following a moving target, but recoil control? Really? Even if you're in the crowd of thinking that RNG decides 99% of the CS encounters, you can't possibly be thinking that there's a shooter with more pronounced recoil control mechanics than CS

>That might actually be to its advantage though, in terms of viewability.

I don't even play CS:GO and I enjoy watching the tournaments. It's made more exciting by the fact that I bet on it. But yeah, it's really easy to understand for the newbies like myself. In comparison, Dota 2 is like unwatchable for people who haven't played the game and even hard to watch for people who haven't played thousands of hours because there's so much shit to learn. Hundreds of skills, hundreds of items, the way the skills interact with each other. I can only enjoy watching Dota 2 because I play it.

>There is very little mechanical skill in Counter-Strike, compared to other shooters
Like?
>It is obscured by certain mechanics, sidestepping management
>mechanical skill is obscured by mechanical skill
>you have to understand mechanical skill to play well
Get the fuck outta here, retard

That's why mechanical bloat is a "clever" way of pretending like your game has depth. It requires time investment, you are technically improving (over people that haven't invested that time), but as a player you are making zero progress. You're going through a linear path everyone has to go through. Meanwhile Tetris is basically pure skill, there is very few mechanics you have to know about, but you can master them for years and people still do.

I think that you are complaining about how tactics can be learnt by following the meta or wasting a lot of practice time . Unironically in our current technology the only way to counter that is by introducing some amount of rng.
Why do you think that 1vs1 in rts feels so robotic while team matches with unexpected mates behavior can be more exciting and encourage improvising?

>Why do you think that 1vs1 in rts feels so robotic while team matches with unexpected mates behavior can be more exciting and encourage improvising?

1v1 is just repetition autism. 5v5 is infinitely more interesting because teamwork becomes a factor. It's why European or American dota teams can beat Chinese ones because the game isn't just autistic cookie cutter do the same shit every time.

The recoil is predictable, meaning that you don't actually have to "control" it, you're just following a pattern. It's a matter of investing a couple of hours, then you've basically hit a ceiling on that aspect of the game. It's not RNG, it's anti-RNG if anything.
Learning something isn't a "skill". The skill is how well you can do something. Capping any player's capabilities on controlling these mechanics is a matter of days or maybe weeks, not lifetime experience.

What you call team work , i call it the unexpected.A type of the "rng" that you all hate .
It is some kind of luck that you got with a good team or retarded mate or that your teammate was a very friendly guy ....
In singleplayer games , the only way to replicate it is with very advanced ai (we are still not there) or well placed amount of rng

You dont need to know dozens of obscure mechanics to play the game. Only to be the very best at it. But becoming the best at something always requires thousands upon thousands of hours of practice regardless of obscure mechanics.

To understand game's depth, you need to understand what differentiates worlds best player from top 5. A top 5 player from top 20, a top 20 from top 100, a top 100 from top 1000, a top 1000 from an average player, and an average pkayer from a beginner.

Not really, CS is just a really mechanical and methodical game compared to other shooters. It has very little on-the-fly skill, which doesn't mean it never happens - it happens every round, but in much lower proportions.
Teamplay is definitely a strong non-linear skill measure, that's why generally team games are much more skillful over something like Tekken.

Wargame and Steel division: the post

>RTS
AHAHAHAHAHAHA

Super Smash Brothers,

MAYLAAAAAAAAAAAAY

>You dont need to know dozens of obscure mechanics to play the game. Only to be the very best at it.
The former is actually more accurate. In any of these bloated games, you'll get absolutely destroyed if you do not know the meta. The biggest scrub in the lower league will know them and will probably execute some form of a cheese on you, because it's a quick dopamine kick to feel superior while not displaying any actual skill at all.

I mean, look at the beginning of this thread. People are genuinely offended at a concept that knowing a game's mechanics should be the first step, not something the game is built upon.

In my opinion a part of teamplay is just a form of rng.
Yes they way you know how to handle people and work with them in the game is a skill but in practice the teamplay can't do anything if your mate is a retarded or a part of the enemies are just very skilled.

lol asshurt as fuck OP
go get cannon rushed in bronze you nooblord and enjoy not being good at games

>Come to Yea Forums about literally any game
>"Game is too easy if you just do optimal strategy from the very beginning"

*Cough*
Racing Simulators
*Cough*

I don't know if this is a parody or a bait, but that's a pretty stellar example of a player I was mentioning, thank you.

That's a great example of a game without bloat, even though it's arguably very hard to pick up. Depends which games you mean specifically - Rally sims are essentially pure skill, there's very little to learn, yet usually a ton of master.

With random teammates, yes.
With premade teams, that's just "being worse" m8.

This could be applied to any game and all you're doing is drawing an arbitrary line at where being called a retard should be.
For instance, if you have a shooter, you could easily make the argument that a retard might stand in the middle of an open area firing wildly and get shot immediately by someone near cover. Would anyone but an absolute retard do that? No. But anyone who has 'learned' the game would know that they will perform better by not doing it.
Now apply that same logic to playing an RTS where someone builds too many of one building when they should be using their resources on something else. That person will likely lose to someone spending their resources properly. The argument here is that while nobody would say the first person isn't a retard, you're arbitrarily deciding you should not be called a retard for doing the second thing.
In that regard, every competitive game is built around knowing the mechanics. You're just disregarding all the knowledge of how games work that does not fall into what people consider 'meta'.