What percent of the experience is the software?

[fcgamer | 4,729]

19 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said:

If I start up Inscryption tonight (which I just bought), there's no nostalgia, no social element, no vacation element.  Just me and the game

This is a fair point, but even minor outside elements are still elements. What made you decide to purchase this game? Were you anticipating it for weeks or months in advance? Was it a bargain bin steal? A long awaited sequel to a series you love? Did you wait in line at launch to buy it, or take a random Thursday off at launch to enjoy it in it's entirety?

I know it sounds silly to break it down this way, but these are all outside factors that could subconsciously change the gaming experience.

 

[fcgamer | 4,729]

22 minutes ago, Gloves said:

I did purchase it in around 2019 or so, and played it within a year of purchase. I consider that purchase and play experience to be completely separate from the nostalgic experience of the external elements surrounding the game in the case at the fleamarket in the 90s.

Sure, but there are going to be outside factors attached to the latter experience, no? Even if games were randomly received in the mail every Tuesday, there'd still be outside influences that would weigh in on the gameplay experience.

[Sumez | 2,967]

3 hours ago, fcgamer said:

It's impossible to isolate the software from the external elements though.

Not sure why you'd say that. It's usually very easy to do that. 

[GPX | 1,370]

5 hours ago, fcgamer said:

It's impossible to isolate the software from the external elements though.

Even something as simple as rewarding yourself after getting a pay raise by buying a new game (which you had been looking at and desiring for awhile) to sneaking a peak in the game's manual whilst your parents are shopping at Lowes as a kid, these factors will definitely contribute to how you perceive and enjoy the game. Likewise, if your grandmother died the same day you that that recent Mario switch game was released, it's likely that this might impact your perception and enjoyment of the game, even if just on a subconscious level.

edit: I know it's not the popular choice, but it's imo the only correct answer, as it is the reality at hand.

I mean, people wouldn't be purchasing Tiger handheld rereleases, which shouldn't have even been a thing, if it is simply the software's enjoyment factor that's been somehow isolated in a vacuum.

You’re right in that with the nostalgia of a game, there’s likely to be a component of the circumstances surrounding it which builds a strong memory. However, when playing a game, my enjoyment may have absolutely nothing to do with my recall of anything else other than the feelings I had felt during playtime.

My example being Einhander on PS1:

1. Nostalgia: I had bought it cheap as a bootleg copy during my HK trip around 25 years ago. I also told a few friends back then how cool this game was, but always played it on my own.

2. Experience: played it to completion, repeatedly at least a dozen times. When playing it I never thought once about HK, friendship or the legalities of purchasing a bootleg copy.
ie. 100% joy from the software.

[Bearcat-Doug | 5,105]

7 hours ago, fcgamer said:

This is a fair point, but even minor outside elements are still elements. What made you decide to purchase this game? Were you anticipating it for weeks or months in advance? Was it a bargain bin steal? A long awaited sequel to a series you love? Did you wait in line at launch to buy it, or take a random Thursday off at launch to enjoy it in it's entirety?

I know it sounds silly to break it down this way, but these are all outside factors that could subconsciously change the gaming experience.

 

That's what makes this a tough question for me to answer. A good game will be fun no matter what, but an average game can be more enjoyable if there are other factors adding to the experience.

[T-Pac | 7,560]

10 hours ago, fcgamer said:

It's impossible to isolate the software from the external elements though.

 

9 hours ago, Reed Rothchild said:

If I start up Inscryption tonight (which I just bought), there's no nostalgia, no social element, no vacation element.  Just me and the game.

 

9 hours ago, Gloves said:

It's not impossible at all. 

 

6 hours ago, Sumez said:

Not sure why you'd say that. It's usually very easy to do that. 

I'm also of the opinion that it's impossible to isolate the game itself from external elements. This makes more sense if you don't think in broad terms of "nostalgia" or "co-op play", but in terms of surrounding factors, however small they may be.

Something as simple as how comfortable your chair is, or whether or not you're tired, or how broken-in your controller is ... all affect how you experience the game. All by a small degree, but every small degree adds up to a significant list of factors weighing towards or against your enjoyment of a game. 

Software can't be experienced in a vacuum because nothing can be experienced in a vacuum. It's semantics to a certain point, but it's an important thing to consider nonetheless.

[T-Pac]

[Dr. Morbis | 2,090]

Using the examples the OP gave at the start, I'd put the software at like 80%+, however, if you were to take into account non-software external components like OEM controllers, CRTs for older consoles, etc, then I would be more inclined to say that that the software is down to like 50% of the experience.  Seriously, get someone to try and beat Mike Tyson on an emulator using some modern chinese controller and an LCD screen and it's literally not the same experience.  Or, for a less extreme example, have a modern teenager try and beat the first three levels of Battletoads without OEM equipment and see where that goes as far as their opinion of the NES is concerned.

Like T-Pac stated, nothing is experienced in a vacuum, and playing NES with modern AV equipment and controls isn't really playing NES at all; it's more akin to trying to get a good night's sleep in an airplane; I mean, yeah, you did close your eyes and nod off for a bit, but you didn't really get a good sleep...  not really... 

Edited October 30, 2023 by Dr. Morbis

[fcgamer | 4,729]

26 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

playing NES with modern AV equipment and controls isn't really playing NES at all; it's more akin to trying to get a good night's sleep in an airplane; I mean, yeah, you did close your eyes and nod off for a bit, but you didn't really get a good sleep...  not really... 

Quoting this because I love this analogy, it's so true!

[YOURTURN | 1,256]

I'm going to be in the minority here and say that the software is close to 100% for me. I mean, yes, hardware is always important to me when it comes to how the game plays, and how long I can deal with the controls on an arcade pad... A controller... Or even a handheld.

But I do remember that my best times were when my friends and I would treat a game as a challenge. For example, one of my earliest friends and I looked for ways to be OP before we started the dungeons. And even got excited when one of us was getting close to beating the game.

And when I fly solo, I often phased everything out just to get the most out of a game. Except Final Fantasy. That game had literally told me that my save data was corrupted and it had to be deleted. 

Then again... I might feel different once I reinstall Steam onto my PC, boot up my Xbox Series S after all these months, and hook up my Switch OLED and get my old account on that. Just because I have not played a game in months, and my return in Tokyo helped me miss it.

[Sumez | 2,967]

4 hours ago, T-Pac said:

Something as simple as how comfortable your chair is, or whether or not you're tired, or how broken-in your controller is ... all affect how you experience the game.

Sure, but that doesn't mean you somehow wouldn't be aware of that? 

A good game is clearly a good game even if I'm sitting in a torture bench. 

Edited October 30, 2023 by Sumez

[fcgamer | 4,729]

13 minutes ago, Sumez said:

Sure, but that doesn't mean you somehow wouldn't be aware of that? 

A good game is clearly a good game even if I'm sitting in a torture bench. 

If you're first experience playing the latest Mario is whilst you're also get gang banged by a couple strangers, whilst being forced to huff fumes from onions and stinky tofu, you probably won't find the game very fun or even have a desire to revisit it later.

[Sumez | 2,967]

I'd be aware of why, though. I still don't get why it would be difficult to separate.

[fcgamer | 4,729]

1 hour ago, Sumez said:

I'd be aware of why, though. I still don't get why it would be difficult to separate.

We don't live in a vacuum.

[Sumez | 2,967]

[YOURTURN | 1,256]

2 hours ago, fcgamer said:

If you're first experience playing the latest Mario is whilst you're also get gang banged by a couple strangers, whilst being forced to huff fumes from onions and stinky tofu, you probably won't find the game very fun or even have a desire to revisit it later.

[Disclaimer: What Wata did with HA behind closed doors should be limited to the day they sold that 9.8 A++ Super Mario 64 for an asinine amount of money. ]

[GPX | 1,370]

3 hours ago, fcgamer said:

If you're first experience playing the latest Mario is whilst you're also get gang banged by a couple strangers, whilst being forced to huff fumes from onions and stinky tofu, you probably won't find the game very fun or even have a desire to revisit it later.

Yeah, but how often would this happen to an average gamer? The probability of playing a game while having hanky panky with 2 adult porn stars while sniffing stinky vegetables is what? Close to zero!

Most of the time, I’d imagine most of the solo sessions by gamers is the simple “I play to escape reality” mentality. In which case, it’s not unfathomable to think that the enjoyment you can derive out of a game is purely on the game and not much else external. 

I think the closer truth to the OP question is that, how much is the experience due to the software, perhaps it just depends on how much attention you want to give the game at any given time? 

 

[Link | 2,714]

Yeah that’s beyond ridiculous. If somebody were affected by that, it wouldn’t be someone who already has familiarity with the medium, and it wouldn’t apply to only one specific game. 

[fcgamer | 4,729]

3 hours ago, GPX said:

Yeah, but how often would this happen to an average gamer? The probability of playing a game while having hanky panky with 2 adult porn stars while sniffing stinky vegetables is what? Close to zero!

Most of the time, I’d imagine most of the solo sessions by gamers is the simple “I play to escape reality” mentality. In which case, it’s not unfathomable to think that the enjoyment you can derive out of a game is purely on the game and not much else external. 

I think the closer truth to the OP question is that, how much is the experience due to the software, perhaps it just depends on how much attention you want to give the game at any given time? 

 

To suggest that the software accounts for the majority of the enjoyment is foolhardy though. A person who is sick, tired, having their period, etc just isn't as likely to be enjoying that game compares to someone who is having a birthday or at an arcade.

From personal experience, I've had plenty of times where I stopped playing a beloved favorite just because I felt tired, hence wasn't "feeling it" gaming wise.

This brings up a different point 2, namely that your enjoyment of the software is bound to increase or decrease with time. For example, the original Super Mario Bros has by now become somewhat like... Stairway to Heaven on the radio, it's just not very enjoyable anymore as it's just too damn boring. 

[Sumez | 2,967]

5 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

To suggest that the software accounts for the majority of the enjoyment is foolhardy though

That's not the claim.

The claim is that in a majority of situations it should be completely straightforward to retain awareness of which parts of the experience can be credited to the software, and which is caused by external factors.

Of course, reducing external factors as much as possible helps with it, but even when you aren't able to, what is there in the software should be readily apparent. It's not hard for me to say "this is a good game, but I wasn't able to enjoy it well because I don't have any arms" or "this is a pretty terrible game, but we were drunk and having a good time laughing at its ridiculous decisions, so it was enjoyable to me regardless"

[fcgamer | 4,729]

4 minutes ago, Sumez said:

It's not hard for me to say "this is a good game, but I wasn't able to enjoy it well because I don't have any arms

Looking at it this way, we could probably analyze the question better just by watching let's play videos on YT over playing it ourselves, which would remove non-software things such as the hardware.

[Gloves | 11,794]

11 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

Looking at it this way, we could probably analyze the question better just by watching let's play videos on YT over playing it ourselves, which would remove non-software things such as the hardware.

This is the way A LOT of kids are experiencing games today, and that doesn't remove hardware from the equation. A lot of kids these days are experiencing Goldeneye 64 through their smartphones. A smartphone or tablet is their little window into the gaming world much the same as we might associate retro games with CRTs.

[fcgamer | 4,729]

5 minutes ago, Gloves said:

This is the way A LOT of kids are experiencing games today, and that doesn't remove hardware from the equation. A lot of kids these days are experiencing Goldeneye 64 through their smartphones. A smartphone or tablet is their little window into the gaming world much the same as we might associate retro games with CRTs.

Well I was talking about controllers or joysticks, per Sumez' no arms example.

What I was getting at there was that if you aren't actually playing the game because you don't have arms (or maybe he was navigating it with his chin, feet, tongue, whatever) then it's just like watching a YT video of the game... we've all seen videos where a game looks great, but then it plays like ass in reality.

 

[T-Pac | 7,560]

9 hours ago, Sumez said:

Sure, but that doesn't mean you somehow wouldn't be aware of that? 

That's the point - it's important that you are aware of those external circumstances and how they're ingrained in your experience.

The objective quality of a game is a base - it doesn’t change and I don’t think anyone’s arguing that.
But what I’m saying is external elements affect our perception of that quality, for better or worse.
You can definitely come close to acknowledging the software independent of those elements, but never entirely. That’s just not how the human brain works. Cognition is associative - we learn and make sense of the world, not bit by bit and atom by atom as a computer might, but by drawing parallels. You may think you can look past associations entirely, but their ghost is still there in your judgement, I promise.

In other words, to say your enjoyment of a game depends 100% on the quality of the software and 0% on every other factor in the experience is to defy neuroscience.

…..aaand I’m just now realizing I’ve overanalyzed this and I might be getting a bit insufferable, so apologies for that haha.

[T-Pac]

[fcgamer | 4,729]

12 minutes ago, T-Pac said:

That's the point - it's important that you are aware of those external circumstances and how they're ingrained in your experience.

The objective quality of a game is a base - it doesn’t change and I don’t think anyone’s arguing that.
But what I’m saying is external elements affect our perception of that quality, for better or worse.
You can definitely come close to acknowledging the software independent of those elements, but never entirely. That’s just not how the human brain works. Cognition is associative - we learn and make sense of the world, not bit by bit and atom by atom as a computer might, but by drawing parallels. You may think you can look past associations entirely, but their ghost is still there in your judgement, I promise.

In other words, to say your enjoyment of a game depends 100% on the quality of the software and 0% on every other factor in the experience is to defy neuroscience.

…..aaand I’m just now realizing I’ve overanalyzed this and I might be getting a bit insufferable, so apologies for that haha.

[T-Pac]

I agree on this, it's nice that someone else is seeing things the way I am, maybe it's an artist thing?

[spacepup | 2,405]

There's a lot of semantics really, which makes the discussion lean kinda silly at times.

I absolutely think external factors influence enjoyment.

Having said that, I also think that most of the time for me, the software does account for the majority of the enjoyment, and I don't think that's a foolhardy statement, it's just an opinion.  

Trying to argue about some exact percentage seems near impossible and a waste of time for me, as it just depends.  But the majority of my gaming time is spent in a very uninteresting or non-fascinating scenario - by myself, with a basic setup and nothing super fancy.  And I can play two games in a row, in that exact same environment, one of which I don't enjoy at all, and another that I absolutely love.  The only (material) difference in the two being the game I'm playing.