I'm Playing Uncharted 4 for the first time and I don't get it

no I just went on a detailed rant about FUNCTIONAL MECHANICS

and how crafting has more FUNCTIONAL MECHANICS then combat.

re-read

@alan_cartridge said:

@tryit said:

@alan_cartridge said:

@tryit said:

@boycie said:

Beating a opponent in KoF has just as much meaning as building a washing machine in Subnauticus.

no actually building a washing machine would have more meaning.

reason is, building a washing machine has a purpose, to wash your close, beating an opponent in KoF does not have a purpose

How does the utility of a washing machine have anymore meaning than beating an opponent in a combat arena.

the definition of the word meaning is

'what is meant by a word, text, concept, or action.'

Having clean trousers and kicking someones ass are actions.

because if you do not clean your close you will smell and get diseases and it can in fact even spread and affect other people as well.

how does defeating a boss have more meaning then that?

see...

you cant, I knew you couldnt before I even asked.

and yes...building a washing machine as more point and purpose then fighting a boss, I challenge you to explain how that is not true.

Again that is the breadth of a game, not the depth. Read the link. Step out of your mind dude and accept that game designers know more about the language used to design games than you do. :P

again, a crafting game has more depth in functional mechanics, in overall game arc, in decision trees in all aspect of game play.

i read what you said, I understand what you said, you are not acknowledging that I am addressing functional mechanics four times now

in all metrics, its more for subnautica

@alan_cartridge said:

@tryit said:

@alan_cartridge said:

@tryit said:

@alan_cartridge said:

How does the utility of a washing machine have anymore meaning than beating an opponent in a combat arena.

the definition of the word meaning is

'what is meant by a word, text, concept, or action.'

Having clean trousers and kicking someones ass are actions.

because if you do not clean your close you will smell and get diseases and it can in fact even spread and affect other people as well.

how does defeating a boss have more meaning then that?

see...

you cant, I knew you couldnt before I even asked.

and yes...building a washing machine as more point and purpose then fighting a boss, I challenge you to explain how that is not true.

To be honest I've never been asked to explain with a washing machine has more meaning than fighting a boss so it might take awhile to reply to that.

people very rarely question the value of violence.

ever wonder why? first things first, explain how its more valuable. lets start with that simple exercise

@tryit:I don't think it does.

I think because every building tool either has an obvious 'not helpful' or 'helpful' value, the decisions required in crafting are simplistic and do not need much thought. Subnautica is simply too easy to require any deeper, strategic thought.

"To avoid making a game whose real-world counterpart is a children’s wading pool, you need to invest in the other dimension: depth. Assessing the breadth of a game is easy — it’s just a matter of counting the gameplay elements. Depth is harder, as it’s all about qualities that are more ephemeral.

It’s about the reward inherent in learning a skill that’s hard to master. It’s about the joy of being faced with complex and meaningful choices, and being experienced enough with the game to make the right one."

That does not describe the crafting system of Subnautica to me at all. It does, however describe many of the quick-fire decisions that come at you in a match of King of Fighters. The are very, very little wrong choices in Subnautica's crafting, and the wrong choices are plainly obvious like not crafting food when your hunger meter is full (because cooked fish goes off).

that is because you are defining the objective of game play to a very small specific function.

the actual act of crafting something, how many keys is involved is all that is important to you.

Not the 20 different items that are required to make it, not the 20 different materials that those different items where required to be made, not the device that is used to make turn the materials into components, etc etc etc. just the functional action of making X into Y without any regard to the number of components or how those componets came to be.

that is being desperate.

I will say this though, a fighting game does have more twitch based decision trees then all crafting games, THAT much is true.

but the argument that, physically act of hammering a nail is more interesting then planning out a wall is one i have heard before and also find silly.

what you are NOT seeing is this:

physical functional approach vs a logical functional approach.

THAT is what you want to say. combat games has more physical functional approach and far less logical functional approach

@alan_cartridge said:

@jumpaction said:

@alan_cartridge said:

@jumpaction said:

@alan_cartridge: I hope you have clean trousers for our date tonight, Alan! :O

unbelievably boring.

Joke post right?

@tryit: Because as I stated, the gameplay loop revolves around crafting stuff so you can find more stuff to craft more stuff. :P

Given how schematics unlock as you progress by discovering materials, there's a very clear and linear line of progression that you are not even referencing here. In fact, most of the stuff you find later on is better versions of stuff you had before. None of it requires thought though. It's all fairly obvious what you have to do and is typically governed by point of progression. I think KoF succeeds at both physical and logical requirements above Subnautica.

I feel like Subnautica requires very little planning and strategy to play. You build what you can, use that stuff to find more materials, then discover new stuff that you can build with the new materials and repeat. You rarely have to really stop and think regarding what the best way forward is because the way forward is fairly transparent. The game is flooded with resources as it is and is too easy. It doesn't require any logical thinking to play...

no that is absolutely false

you are not crafting things so that you can craft other things. no absolutely not.

you craft a better ship so that you can go deeper and find the answers to the question you found in the PDA.

you craft a farm so that you dont have to hunt for berries the entire time and thus frees up more time to explore and do other things.

these items in many of these crafting games have purpose and they are NOT....cosmetic and they are NOT just to 'be able to make more stuff'

your bias is friggin screaming!!!!!!!!!!

besides....'what is the point in combat, it just is combat so that you can then have more combat'

Guys help put with UC4. I have turned off the auto aim but the game still chooses to automatically aim at the enemy's? Am I doing something wrong here? I had easier time shooting in the previous games than UC4

@Gamerno6666: I never had autoaim problems myself, you're just trolling

It's the same thing. The whole game revolves around cutting down on repetitious tasks so that you can continue to explore without having to return for food, water or to the surface for oxygen and so you can get to and from places faster. You craft stuff so that it's possible to find more resources to craft more stuff that cuts down on these repetitious tasks. I said all this a number of posts ago. Remember when I compared it to Stardew Valley? That's because it functions on the same gameplay loop.

I never said you craft for the sake of it, but you do craft in order to explore more and craft more.

@recloud: you have problems dude. I asked for help and you are replying me with BS.

there is more meaning in the loop of a crafting game then their is in a fighting game.

same points you are making right now can be made about a fighting game AND the points would even apply better.

@tryit: The end goal of a fighting game is derivative. You fight to win. It's fairly banal in context, but the actions with which you perform in order to win are what I am interested in and they have more value and require more thought and skill than the decisions required to play Subnautica.

and I cycle back to my orginal point.

you personally do not hold any value to anything in which you can not win.

I am just the opposite, I hold no value in that, it doesnt interest me, its a meaningless loop of actions that just lead to more meaningless loops just like you see for crafting.

are you getting it yet?

BUT...one thing that is becoming clear to me, maybe people dont like crafting/building games because they can win.

THAT is an asnwer I totally get and understand

@tryit: No? Didn't I mention I like Stardew Valley and Subnautica? Those games are still fun. All I am saying is that decisions are relatively simple to make in those games because they require neither much thought or planning.

"you personally do not hold any value to anything in which you can not win." Nope. Wrong assessment.

ALL games, no exception are hamster wheels. 100% of all games are hamster wheels.

just because you can finsih them doesnt mean they are not meaningless hamster wheels with loops that do not nother other than lead you to another meaningless loop

that is some certifiable horseshit

'games like Subnautica are relatively simple (compared to combat games) and do not require much thought or planning and are not deep (compared to combat games)'

absurd trolling if you ask me, whats the motovation in that trolling I dont know

@tryit: Yeah, one of them (King of Fighters) is a competitive game played for sport and the other (Subnautica) isn't. The reason that competition can even exist is because KoF has the depth and skill ceiling to facilitate competitive play. Subnautica is an enjoyable time-sink but it's not hard. It's an easy game, sometimes the atmosphere is tense but the gameplay? Nah. It's about exploration and discovery, right? But it's not a tasking or challenging game.

@jumpaction said:

@tryit: Yeah, one of them (King of Fighters) is a competitive game played for sport and the other (Subnautica) isn't. The reason that competition can even exist is because KoF has the depth and skill ceiling to facilitate competitive play. Subnautica is an enjoyable time-sink but it's not hard. It's an easy game, sometimes the atmosphere is tense but the gameplay? Nah. It's about exploration and discovery, right? But it's not a tasking or challenging game.

honestly given this general statement:

(paraphrased)

'games like Subnautica are relatively simple (compared to combat games) and do not require much thought or planning and are not deep (compared to combat games)'

I think you are just trolling me, I just dont understand why. The only way you would not be trolling me is that if you think competition is the ONLY thing that has value.

if a game is not competitive, it has no point. that is the only way I can think that the paraphased statement is not trolling because its a statement that is unbelievably absurd on multiple levels

@tryit: Really not what I am saying at all... :P

I have not once associated depth with the point of playing a game. Where you got that idea is beyond me.

@tryit: he's basically saying subnautica is easy. There's nothing beyond that.

I feel confident now that I understand why you and some others do not value building crafting games and its a reason that is completely understandable and acceptable to me.

because you cant win.

to you that is the entire point of a game and you struggle in even conceptualizing that its not the goal of others thus being able to communicate breaks down.

@tryit: Well I never said they have no value so you just made that up but sure thing dude. :P

All the power to you.

he keeps changing what he is saying

I would agree completely that the game is easy

its NOT however, not deep, or simple

he just constantly mixes up words and its a convoluted &&& mess frankly

I might need my own persona; 'common gamer translater' so I can understand this

@tryit: Firstly, what I meant by simple was easy. I meant the difficulty was simple.

Because the game is easy, the decisions you have to make aren't very hard choices to make. It's fairly obvious what I need to do to progress and the game replenishes resources quickly enough for it not to matter what I spend. That's why I don't think the game is deep because the choices at any given time don't require much critical thought.

I've been fairly consistent in my opinion that I am only interested in the mechanics here. If anything, I feel your reluctance to keep this about mechanics and make it about the purpose of playing a game or the narrative reasoning behind actions has muddled this conversation more than I have. :P

simple is not easy

deep is not meaning.

jesus anyway..yes..the game is easy.

it is however, also deep and compared to a fighting game not simple.

but it is easy.

I would say alpha 9ish 7 days to die would qualify as both not simple AND not easy. that version was some hard ass stuff

@tryit: Check the synonyms. I understand where you are coming from regarding simplicity and complexity. I agree with you there but I was using the simple English of simple to denote easy.

The number of meaningful gameplay states in a game is depth. Unless you can provide me a resource that contradicts the numerous sources I have provided in support of my argument, then I'm going to have to consider that you have no authority over what you're talking about... which you don't.

just use the simple word 'easy' to describe 'easy' and stop making excuses and over complicating it.

now moving on....not all crafting and building games are easy.

7 days to die first 14 days or so for a new player is absolutely not easy at least didn't use to be.

Space Engineers (depending on specifically what you are trying to do) can be far from easy (again depends).

Rising World is extreemly easy

From the Depths is not easy

so it varies

@tryit: There definitely are more challenging and demanding survival games that have more depth to them, like you suggested but titles like Subnautica aren't. But games that are like Subnautica and emphasize exploration over tough decision making and harsh survival conditions are easier to play, not as deep and more about the sense of discovery and wanderlust that comes with exploring a place and uncovering its secrets.

Despite your assertion, I do think there is value in these games. Subnautica can be cathartic, it can be expressive, awe-inspiring and even atmospherically harrowing. It's a good game, but it's good for reasons existing outside the (lack of) depth in its granular decisions and actions.

again...the word 'depth' is incorrect and I can not agree.

easy, simple and deep all have very different meanings and can not be used interchangeably

@tryit: I didn't interchange depth with easy or simple.

Easy and simple are synonymous with one another though. Simple can take up a different meaning when a applied to the systemic complexity of a game though.

here is what you said, below is not related to easy. we are not talking about which survival games are more 'demanding' or 'depth' that is separate from 'easy'.

are you trolling me right now?

There definitely are more challenging and demanding survival games that have more depth to them,

@tryit: Two separate statements. There are more challenging survival games and there are deeper survival games.

then subnautica?

maybe maybe not, we havent talked about that and this conversation is not about that.

I am starting to think you are just being argumentative for the sake of it now.

how can you not see after all I have said that 'here are more challenging survival games and there are deeper survival games.' is not remotely what I, or you have been talking about or is related to anything we are saying. how can you see that after we just had a conversation about the word 'easy'?

@tryit: It was in reply to you saying that:

"Not all crafting games and building games are easy."

I was responding to that by acknowledging that there are harder and deeper games in the genre. So uhhhh... wut? :P

You brought it up dude. You're complaining about yourself.

you used the word 'deep' twice and I explictly stated (3 times now) that 'deep' and 'easy' are not interchangeable words and you even acknowledged that you understand why and then IMMEDIADELY started using the word 'deep' and then claim you are not and its all about 'easy'

now..my question to you is this...why are you doing this? now that I know you MUST be just trolling me I want to know why.

@tryit: Buddy, I think you should read and comprehend what someone is saying before replying to them. I am not going to keep repeating what is plainly obvious to anyone else. You're reading comprehension is a little rough at the moment.

I am done talking to you.

I really would love to understand why you are intentionally being difficult but when we have a conversation about 'easy vs 'deep' and you understand and then IMMEDIATELY start to use the word 'deep' and then claim I brought it up. its not about deep...do not use the word deep

nope...I really want to know why you are being intentional on this but I am not engaing otherwise

bye

It really does come across as you as the one that's being difficult.

@tryit: Okay, well have a nice day all the same. :)

i no longer care.

I repeatly (with his understanding and agreement) illustrate that 'easy' and 'deep' are not the same thing. on his agreement he IMMEDIATELY starting calling Subnautica not deep (effectively) and when I pointed out this error to me he said it was my fault (basically)

not having it,he has GOT to be doing this on purpose, I just dont understand why and it drives me nuts which is why I have to stop

he wins I am done