Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Deviant Member XoPachiUnknown Recent Activity
Deviant for 2 Years
Needs Premium Membership
Statistics 150 Deviations 4,497 Comments 28,314 Pageviews

deviantID

XoPachi's Profile Picture
XoPachi
Machines and ladies.

I am very simple so here is an FAQ so to speak:

Trades and requests are for close contacts.
I do not do kiribans.
Commissions will be open when I announce them.
I do not roleplay.
Unless you pay me, I'm drawing nothing conceivably related to My Little Pony.
I will not join your group.

Any requests for any of this will be ignored/deleted. Initiate roleplay anywhere on my page/journals/submissions, and you will be blocked.

Take none of my opinions personally unless there is a RARE occasion where I openly haze you directly...in other words never.

Follow this list, keep your cool, and you'll be 100% welcome around here.

Activity


A lot of shooters lately have hit PC. Some I want, some I'm not sure about so I'm looking into. That can be pretty annoying as this genre is niche so many people misrepresent it. The problem is they think they're right. Naturally, I have some issues with certain criticisms casually tossed around. The main ones typically are they're "too hard" or "need more story". Let's not even get into those because I'd rather not punch a hole in my wall. So we'll go with the third most annoying thing I see when talking about modern arcade shooters. Reviewers especially spout the line:

The game pretends to be hard, but it’s unlimited continues means you can die your way to the end killing replay value and challenge.

Congrats!

You just proved in one statement that you know nothing about the genre! It's one thing to spread an uninformed authoritative opinion, but spreading false information missing the point of your subject? I have an issue.

I died my way through a game and “beat” it.

Sounds like everyone who brags that they “beat” Dark Souls on their first blind playthrough. 

In Sonic games, the satisfaction came from earning your speed and maintaining it to the end of the level without losing your rings. The flow was intoxicating when you mastered a level. How did you achieve that? Replaying the game.
In fighters, the satisfaction comes from reading opponent's, learning your mains, and punishing openings. How? Replaying the game. The replay value of any difficult game comes from the time spent learning it’s mechanics, understanding it’s patterns, and remedying bad habits that cause you to lose. In other words, replaying the game. Every game/genre handles this differently.
The game, of course, needs to be fun in the first place to want to come back, of course, but good game design and fun are subjective so we won't touch what makes a good shooter. 

The satisfaction comes from knowing you mastered an entry in one of gaming’s most brutal genres. This particular satisfaction is one that is earned. There's a massive difference between beating a game and seeing the end, the latter means nothing. You don’t “win” these games by dying your way through them. Credit feeding is not beating the game. That’s the game beating you, hogtying you, and dragging your defeated ass to the vanilla ending. It’s ok if that happens, so don’t feel bad. You’re supposed to get bodied. It’s learning through failing and as long as you pay attention to where you failed the hardest, your next run will be improved dramatically, guaranteed. You don't have to know how to "dodge rain" as the tired joke implies. But spamming continue is not how the genre is intended to be played. Or rather that’s not the goal. It's daunting, but the boss in this game (Mushihimesama Futari) shown in this sensationalized video CAN be defeated on one life. I've done it. After a week of practice.

On a side note, certain titles like Ketsui even reward skilled players with a harder special difficulty and extremely difficult secret bosses for getting to the end unscathed. Something to work for as opposed to handing you everything which one could debate too many modern games do. 

That is the genre’s nature. It’s not for everyone and it is niche but that doesn’t mean it needs to change. I’m sick of seeing the concept of replay value watered down to how many hours it takes to finish a game. That might be for certain games, but not these.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.

  • Drinking: Nintendo Fanboy Tears
DimePiece Batz by XoPachi
DimePiece Batz
I was working on this in between work over the last 4 days or so.
After looking further into suicide girls (alternative models) I realized my last attempt was weaksauce in comparison to the real hardcore and dedicated models. So I tried to top the previous iteration of alternative Rouge.
My friend said that adding the speaker and the overall composition made her look like a mix between SG models and "hip hop hunnies" though so I mixed in elements of both worlds including the WSHH logo for a small chuckle.

Tossed a lot of references from the Sanicball franchise in here.
Loading...
Sketch: Chooby Dog by XoPachi
Sketch: Chooby Dog
Commission from someone whose name escapes me...I was actually never given an alias. This was fun though. I liked the big nose.
Loading...
The game. So Valve pulled Hatred from Greenlight. Before any intellectuals jump to any conclusions, no. I don't care that Valve pulled the game from Greenlight. It didn't bother me. I don't WANT this game. And I don't think this is censorship or suppressing freedom of speech, whatever those terms mean anymore. But there is still something about this that did bother me.

There are two sides to the choice Valve made: 

"But you have Postal on Steam which is just as bad and other violent video games so what's the big deal with Hatred?"

And 

"This game had you killing solely innocent people. It was disgusting and wrong and should not have been on Steam"

I'm in the camp of the first because the second sentiment, to me, is hypocritical. The common comparison for Hatred is to games like GTA V. GTA V gets a pass because killing innocents is a choice...even though you kill regardless and the same brutal ways you kill "the bad guys" are the exact same methods you utilize to kill hookers, the cops, civilians etc. I have also seen people say that in most violent video games, it was justified in murdering countless people in gruesome and cold ways. And let's be honest. Not one person who is a fan of GTA will tell me with a straight face that they DIDN'T go on a rampage or at least didn't intentionally kill a handful of civilians. We all did it. We all made that choice.
Idiotic overly edgy premise or not, extreme violence is still extreme violence and GTA is known to have that in spades. It's what made the game a success. It makes it's millions of dollars on it's detailed violence, debauchery, and vice (U C DAT REFFRINCE M8?! :u). It does not matter WHO is being killed, it's still graphic and morally questionable.

The other thing is a backpedaling on their OWN ideologies, I've noticed. Anita Sarkeesian will make a bullshit argument about Hitman being misogynist and gamers everywhere will go in droves to tell her how she's wrong. They'll flood YouTube with video after video making claims that games don't influence a healthy, mature mind to commit heinous acts. They'll tell politicians trying to ban a violent video game that they're wrong in the assumption that these games mold murderers.

They'd be absolutely correct in every counter they make to people like Anita and politicians. BUT suddenly Hatred comes along with it's laughable...plot and everyone's gone back to the 90's; "it's too violent". Why? It's a stupid premise for a game, but how is Hatred "too violent" when compared to a game thousands are hyped for in Mortal Kombat X? An upcoming title whose trailer features a man having his torso blasted out only to have his still beating heart dangle from his eviscerated chest cavity. Another game that made it's name and thrived on gratuitous violence. 

I've seen some gruesome video games from stuff like this, to literal first person rape simulators made purely for shock value. And while I have my personal boundaries I'm not about to let them get in the way of my belief that a game cannot go too far. A belief that a lot of the gamers against Hatred seem to have abandoned for this one instance. It made them uncomfortable and they caved to that discomfort making them contradictory in my eyes. I've even seen some people go so far as to say that it could influence children...yes, "THINK OF THE RUGRATS". Game enthusiasts worried about children obtaining violent video games and being influenced. I won't even get into poor parenting. You know what I'd say from there.

Again, I don't directly care one way or another if Hatred was pulled nor do I think it's censorship. I also don't care if the developers had some twisted ideology expressed within their product. This title's overall fate is not my concern. I can bet it will suck or at best be mediocre. I'm solely confused by the response from the gamers. It is backwards as HELL to me. If the game is showcasing poor technical quality or isn't complete like a certain U B Soff title recently, then I can completely understand every amount of vitriol this game receives from the consumers. The game would then be putting it's edge factor and shock value over substance and replayability, actual important features when developing a video game for a price. But the idea of it being "overboard" is just not plausible to me. I would be MUCH more upset if I heard broken trash like Sonic Boom was to be ported to Steam through Greenlight.

Pardon if I sound authoritative on this subject, but I just feel decently adamant about today's events and that's where I stand...
  • Drinking: Nintendo Fanboy Tears
Still toiling away at commissions. Pardon my slowness. They're coming.
A lot of shooters lately have hit PC. Some I want, some I'm not sure about so I'm looking into. That can be pretty annoying as this genre is niche so many people misrepresent it. The problem is they think they're right. Naturally, I have some issues with certain criticisms casually tossed around. The main ones typically are they're "too hard" or "need more story". Let's not even get into those because I'd rather not punch a hole in my wall. So we'll go with the third most annoying thing I see when talking about modern arcade shooters. Reviewers especially spout the line:

The game pretends to be hard, but it’s unlimited continues means you can die your way to the end killing replay value and challenge.

Congrats!

You just proved in one statement that you know nothing about the genre! It's one thing to spread an uninformed authoritative opinion, but spreading false information missing the point of your subject? I have an issue.

I died my way through a game and “beat” it.

Sounds like everyone who brags that they “beat” Dark Souls on their first blind playthrough. 

In Sonic games, the satisfaction came from earning your speed and maintaining it to the end of the level without losing your rings. The flow was intoxicating when you mastered a level. How did you achieve that? Replaying the game.
In fighters, the satisfaction comes from reading opponent's, learning your mains, and punishing openings. How? Replaying the game. The replay value of any difficult game comes from the time spent learning it’s mechanics, understanding it’s patterns, and remedying bad habits that cause you to lose. In other words, replaying the game. Every game/genre handles this differently.
The game, of course, needs to be fun in the first place to want to come back, of course, but good game design and fun are subjective so we won't touch what makes a good shooter. 

The satisfaction comes from knowing you mastered an entry in one of gaming’s most brutal genres. This particular satisfaction is one that is earned. There's a massive difference between beating a game and seeing the end, the latter means nothing. You don’t “win” these games by dying your way through them. Credit feeding is not beating the game. That’s the game beating you, hogtying you, and dragging your defeated ass to the vanilla ending. It’s ok if that happens, so don’t feel bad. You’re supposed to get bodied. It’s learning through failing and as long as you pay attention to where you failed the hardest, your next run will be improved dramatically, guaranteed. You don't have to know how to "dodge rain" as the tired joke implies. But spamming continue is not how the genre is intended to be played. Or rather that’s not the goal. It's daunting, but the boss in this game (Mushihimesama Futari) shown in this sensationalized video CAN be defeated on one life. I've done it. After a week of practice.

On a side note, certain titles like Ketsui even reward skilled players with a harder special difficulty and extremely difficult secret bosses for getting to the end unscathed. Something to work for as opposed to handing you everything which one could debate too many modern games do. 

That is the genre’s nature. It’s not for everyone and it is niche but that doesn’t mean it needs to change. I’m sick of seeing the concept of replay value watered down to how many hours it takes to finish a game. That might be for certain games, but not these.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.

  • Drinking: Nintendo Fanboy Tears

AdCast - Ads from the Community

×

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:icononehungrypotter:
onehungrypotter Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014  Hobbyist Photographer
thanks so much for the fave :)
Reply
:iconxopachi:
XoPachi Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014
Your photos are top notch. I've been holding onto some to use as study reference.
Reply
:icononehungrypotter:
onehungrypotter Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014  Hobbyist Photographer
Oh really! Well if you ever get around to using them, I'd love to see what you've done
Reply
:iconbenji-blacksky:
Benji-Blacksky Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2014
Hey. Mind talking a sec?
Reply
:iconslb-creations:
SLB-CreationS Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks for watching :heaart:
Reply
Add a Comment: