Game Debate #5: Fortnite

[zeppelin03 | 314]

38 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said:

I also maintain that if this was instead a stripped-down version of itself that existed for N64 or Cube, people in this thread would be gushing over it as a retro classic.

That actually makes a ton of sense.  Like if Nintendo had made Smash Bros in the style of Goldeneye multiplayer instead of going the fighting game route.  I would still play a Nintendo Battle Royale. 

[Estil | 1,281]

1 hour ago, Reed Rothchild said:

I also maintain that if this was instead a stripped-down version of itself that existed for N64 or Cube, people in this thread would be gushing over it as a retro classic.

In about 10-20 years or so it WILL be gushed over as a retro classic!  I mean Donkey Kong Country sure wasn't a "retro classic" when I first saw this commercial for it during Channel One News back in 8th grade!   Take that Sega!  

 

 

And for some reason when I hear the name "fortnite" it reminds me of this:

 

[Nintegageo | 582]

12 minutes ago, Estil said:

In about 10-20 years or so it WILL be gushed over as a retro classic!

Not by everyone. I've never played the game admittedly, but to me a microtransaction game automatically dismisses the claim as a great game.

[Blitus | 24]

My 11 year old is really into it so I had played it a little bit, but then covid hit.  Since I didn't have to take the kids to school I had a little bit of free time in the morning before work but not enough to really get into most games.  However, a full match of Fortnite only takes about 20 minutes so playing 1-2 matches while I drink my coffee has kind of become my thing.  The motion controls on the Switch work very good for mid to long range shooting.

[Tekdrudge | 126]

I played it for about a month. I really didn't care for the building mechanic. But like most BR games to me, I lose interest after playing it for a month. Just glad they are free games, and I never buy any of the micro-transactions. Good time wasters.

[Omerta | 47]

My boys talked me into doing a match completely blind. I found a gun, snuck up on another player, used the gun on that player's back... only to have that person flip around, whip up an amazing monument, and dump me within seconds while I stood there with my thumb up my ass.

That was the beginning and the end of my Fortnite career. The boys tried to show me the mechanics of the building stuff, but I was never really interested any further. Now Fortnite isn't cool amongst their peers and they've all moved on to Apex and other stuff.

I respect Fortnite for its place in gaming history, but it wasn't anything special enough for me. 2/10

[Strange | 1,706]

I don’t play it but if this were out when I was in high school, my friends and I would have pulled a lot of all nighters with it. I’m sure of that.

I play Warzone. Same genre, but Call of Duty. I love Warzone.

[themisfit138 | 523]

Nope.

[guitarzombie | 929]

And you chose THIS over Doom? Shame on you, pal!

[Reed Rothchild | 9,675]

2 hours ago, guitarzombie said:

And you chose THIS over Doom? Shame on you, pal!

I'm getting deja vu from the early days of the music polls when certain people were up in arms because I did Babymetal instead of Metallica or My Chemical Romance instead of 'band x they really, really love.'

I guess early on they didn't realize I was trying to get a broad cross section of choices that would get different reactions.  Instead of just a laundry list of the universally beloved stuff...

I mean we could easily do Link to the Past, then SMB3, then Diablo II.  And regurgitate the same shit we already know.  But I think Minecraft and Mortal Kombat are better ideas.

[Strange | 1,706]

I have a feeling the reason most people our ages hate it is because Reddit and the rest of the internet told everyone they should. Remember when Minecraft was looked down upon the exact same way that Fortnite is now? The internet’s gamer-outrage hivemind shifted.

[Makar | 2,018]

I guess I'm one of the very few who actually enjoy this game. I love that it's cross platform, free, and actually on the switch. It's a solid game that they keep fresh with new updates every couple of months. I think a ton of people love to hate on this game even though they've never tried it. Squads is where it's at. Get some buddies and your mic and it's always a good time. Hate it all you want, I still enjoy it and will until they aren't running the servers anymore. 

[Makar | 2,018]

23 hours ago, Nintegageo said:

Not by everyone. I've never played the game admittedly, but to me a microtransaction game automatically dismisses the claim as a great game.

Why? I haven't paid a dime and have played it for over a year. This game will be a classic just like Pokemon go. You don't have to pay anything to play Fortnite. Nothing you can buy gives you an advantage in the game. 

Oh and for everyone who hates it because of the building, don't build. I suck at building but have won 27% of my over 500 matches I've played on squads. If you can't build, adapt your strategy, it's that simple. Maybe hide better, work better as a team, get good at aiming, crouch instead of full out running so you make less noise, etc.

[Nintegageo | 582]

13 minutes ago, Makar said:

Why? I haven't paid a dime and have played it for over a year. This game will be a classic just like Pokemon go. You don't have to pay anything to play Fortnite. Nothing you can buy gives you an advantage in the game. 

Just me personally, but when a game is built, maintained etc with microtransactions in mind; it usually means the game aspect is designed to encourage stupid spending. That means less time and [wo]manpower spent on the actual game's design, or even some intentional things put in just to encourage spending - whether they be to help you win the game or just to look cool.

Pokemon Go shouldn't be either. It was a phenomenon; a really cool thing to happen in the 'gaming' culture, but that's 'it'.

Just my opinion.

[Makar | 2,018]

1 minute ago, Nintegageo said:

Just me personally, but when a game is built, maintained etc with microtransactions in mind; it usually means the game aspect is designed to encourage stupid spending. That means less time and [wo]manpower spent on the actual game's design, or even some intentional things put in just to encourage spending - whether they be to help you win the game or just to look cool.

Pokemon Go shouldn't be either. It was a phenomenon; a really cool thing to happen in the 'gaming' culture, but that's 'it'.

Just my opinion.

I agree with you for most games. I hate microtransaction games if the only way to play the game without the experience being annoying is to throw some money at the game. Fortnite is not like that. There aren't any ads, and they actually do keep updating the game, fixing glitches, changing the map, add new weapons and vehicles, etc. For a microtransaction game, they sure do a good job of actually giving back to their gamers. And since the microtransactions are only for new character skins, I never feel like I'm missing out or need to buy stuff. It's a free game, without ads, and there's no benefit game wise to buy stuff, so I see nothing wrong with Fortnites microtransaction model. 

I never did get into Pokemon go so I can't speak to that one. However, plenty of people I know have spent real money to get more pokeballs and other items though because they don't want to wait for the free ones to replenish. One of my buddies who still plays Pokemon go always complains that they never introduce any new mechanics into the game. Just some new Pokemon here and there. 

Now something I really don't like is expensive dlc, especially if you can't try out a demo of it ahead of time, but that's another topic and debate for another day. 

[Andy_Bogomil | 816]

 It will definitely go down as a 'classic' and, just like we get nostalgic for games 25-35 years old, kids and teens of today will be doing the same thing down the road, no doubt. This forum is well outside the intended demographic for this game which is extremely obvious from the poll (and as Gloves immediately stated). I think it would be somewhat interesting to do an older, multiplayer shooter like Quake, Unreal Tournament, or even an early CoD game and I bet the results would be quite polarizing... not completely unlike we kinda saw with GTA III (creeping into the 'modern' gaming era).

 

 

Edited July 11, 2020 by Andy_Bogomil

[guitarzombie | 929]

7 hours ago, Reed Rothchild said:

I'm getting deja vu from the early days of the music polls when certain people were up in arms because I did Babymetal instead of Metallica or My Chemical Romance instead of 'band x they really, really love.'

I guess early on they didn't realize I was trying to get a broad cross section of choices that would get different reactions.  Instead of just a laundry list of the universally beloved stuff...

I mean we could easily do Link to the Past, then SMB3, then Diablo II.  And regurgitate the same shit we already know.  But I think Minecraft and Mortal Kombat are better ideas.

Im just gonna pester you ever time about Doom.

[AstralSoul | 506]

I really wanted to give this game a zero. But I guess it's worth at least a 2. I absolutely hate this game. Actually more than the game itself I hate the community of this game. But even if the community was cool I'd still hate the game m so, I guess double hate. And yes I tried it multiple times to see what the hype was about. I'd rather play Superman 64. It has a huge community so clearly I'm missing something and I can't give it a zero but if there's one game I hope to never touch again it's this one.

[MachineCode | 159]

I don't mind multiplayer online shooters, but I LOATHE the structure building element. That and it being such a blatant cash grab just really make me dislike this game.

[Makar | 2,018]

16 minutes ago, MachineCode said:

I don't mind multiplayer online shooters, but I LOATHE the structure building element. That and it being such a blatant cash grab just really make me dislike this game.

Do you loathe it because you're not good at building or because you find it hard to defeat enemies because they are building? And you don't have to pay a dime for this game, even for battle passes. Just play for a while, get 1000 free vbucks, buy the battle pass with your free vbucks, get 1000 more free vbucks from the battle pass, repeat next season. You can get skins for free this way.

[OptOut | 8,898]

This thread be all like:

MY LAWN.

GET OFF IT.

 

 

[MachineCode | 159]

14 hours ago, Makar said:

Do you loathe it because you're not good at building or because you find it hard to defeat enemies because they are building? And you don't have to pay a dime for this game, even for battle passes. Just play for a while, get 1000 free vbucks, buy the battle pass with your free vbucks, get 1000 more free vbucks from the battle pass, repeat next season. You can get skins for free this way.

Jeez, did I strike a nerve insulting your precious game? So the only reason people may not like something is due to not being any good at it? As if it's so objectively amazing that nobody could possibly dislike it without there being something suspect about that individual? Were you that person who thought anyone not against gay marriage must have been gay themselves too? Take it down a notch pal. It's an incredibly mild opinion about a game clearly directed at children.

 

If you must know, I don't like that mechanic because I am not much of a fan of competitive world building as a gameplay mechanic in general. You know what is possibly my least favorite genre going back to mid 90's PC games? Real Time Strategy! So perhaps it makes sense that someone who doesn't like a genre that is centered around world and structure building in the face of opposing forces may not like that mechanic being mixed in as a large part of a game in different genre that he's already lukewarm on at best.

 

The cash grab comment was due to the fact that it initially relied on loot boxes before switching to the vbucks model after the practice was criticized. But even in the vbucks model, they still pull artificial scarcity by randomly rotating skins in an out of availability to try and get players (mainly kids) to impulse buy $20 skins because they may no longer be available soon. It's designed to play on the same psychologically addictive impulse that gets gamblers coming back to the casino time and time again. But designed to do so while appealing to children, which IMO is a bit sleazy on the publisher's part. And then on top of it, they'll turn around and devalue this super rare gotta have limited edition skin by randomly throwing it back up again. So yes, there are some very cash grab type elements to the game. It's not really a controversial opinion or some hot take and it's not as though I'm suggesting the game should exist, be banned, or censored in any way.

 

The point of the thread was to ask why you like or dislike this game. I kept it very short in my initial comment and stated why I personally disliked the game. I'm not rallying against its existence but merely choosing not to participate. I downloaded it, played it for a few weeks and didn't like it. Tried it some more at some friends' houses who were more into the game, and still didn't like it. I don't like it so I don't participate. I also don't waste my time worrying about whether or not other people do because, *GASP*, people sometimes enjoy things that I may not and vice versa. Shocking, I know.

[Makar | 2,018]

8 hours ago, MachineCode said:

Jeez, did I strike a nerve insulting your precious game? So the only reason people may not like something is due to not being any good at it? As if it's so objectively amazing that nobody could possibly dislike it without there being something suspect about that individual? Were you that person who thought anyone not against gay marriage must have been gay themselves too? Take it down a notch pal. It's an incredibly mild opinion about a game clearly directed at children.

 

If you must know, I don't like that mechanic because I am not much of a fan of competitive world building as a gameplay mechanic in general. You know what is possibly my least favorite genre going back to mid 90's PC games? Real Time Strategy! So perhaps it makes sense that someone who doesn't like a genre that is centered around world and structure building in the face of opposing forces may not like that mechanic being mixed in as a large part of a game in different genre that he's already lukewarm on at best.

 

The cash grab comment was due to the fact that it initially relied on loot boxes before switching to the vbucks model after the practice was criticized. But even in the vbucks model, they still pull artificial scarcity by randomly rotating skins in an out of availability to try and get players (mainly kids) to impulse buy $20 skins because they may no longer be available soon. It's designed to play on the same psychologically addictive impulse that gets gamblers coming back to the casino time and time again. But designed to do so while appealing to children, which IMO is a bit sleazy on the publisher's part. And then on top of it, they'll turn around and devalue this super rare gotta have limited edition skin by randomly throwing it back up again. So yes, there are some very cash grab type elements to the game. It's not really a controversial opinion or some hot take and it's not as though I'm suggesting the game should exist, be banned, or censored in any way.

 

The point of the thread was to ask why you like or dislike this game. I kept it very short in my initial comment and stated why I personally disliked the game. I'm not rallying against its existence but merely choosing not to participate. I downloaded it, played it for a few weeks and didn't like it. Tried it some more at some friends' houses who were more into the game, and still didn't like it. I don't like it so I don't participate. I also don't waste my time worrying about whether or not other people do because, *GASP*, people sometimes enjoy things that I may not and vice versa. Shocking, I know.

Lol wow. I think I struck a nerve with you. I totally understand why people hate this game.

I never build in the game unless absolutely necessary to build a ramp up a mountain or something. What I was trying to get at is you don't need to build in Fortnite to win or be good. In fact I don't like it because strategically, building a structure gives my position away. 

Also, not sure how gay marriage got brought up in a Fortnite thread lol. That was really random. If you want to go rant about that do it somewhere else like the political thread.

[G-type | 2,664]

My kids love it. I tried it and I can understand why it's popular, but it's not for me.

Edited July 14, 2020 by G-type

[fcgamer | 4,801]

Never played it, never had an interest. Some of my students love the game though, maybe I should play it so that we can relate better.