Hacker News Reader

Comment by na85 | Hacker News Reader

Conversely, I can't fathom how people can enjoy long stretches of singleplayer.

I occasionally play a bit of Cities Skylines every few months, but if there isn't another human involved, games just can't hold my interest.

Where's the satisfaction/fun come from if you're just beating some silly algorithm?

View on HN

For me it is not about competing or beating anything.

I do play alot of simulation games, like Cities Skylines or Stellearis.

When I play first person shooters, I just like to run around and blow things up, I rarely "finish" the campaigns, for example Borderlands, Just like to run around the world and see how much destruction and havoc I can cause before I die, then start over...

I am not a completionist, I have no strong urge to "win" or "finish" the games....

I is just a way for me to turn my brain off for a few hours and escape the real world

Not all games are about "beating" something.

Can you name one game, electronic or otherwise, that doesn't involve "beating" something, whether it's the other player, the rules, or even just random chance (dice rolls)?

I honestly can't think of any. If there are no goals (and goals imply obstacles to be overcome in pursuit of them) then you've got a toy, not a game.

They may not be "games", but titles like Gone Home are still video games, they aren't about "beating" something, and they aren't simply toys either.

>They may not be "games", but titles like Gone Home are still video games

They may not be games, but they're still games? I think whether or not Gone Home can be considered a game is highly debatable. I haven't tried it, but it seems that the elements that make a game a game are missing.

That it's available on Steam is completely orthogonal to whether or not it's a game.

The expression "video game" came to be understood as much more than "games played through a video system". Even titles like Skyrim, RDR2 and Uncharted thrive much more on the role playing fantasy or on the narrative than on beating a system. These aren't just dressings anymore, like the medieval motifs on Chess, they are the reason we play those games. So yeah, the word "game" expanded its meaning, this kind of thing happens with language.

I'd strongly recommend looking into the Aesthetics of Play[1][2]. It's a framework that talks about eight primary reasons why people play video games, and only one of those reasons is "Challenge" (i.e., beating a goal). Games like Gone Home, Animal Crossing, The Sims, Minecraft, etc all reflect different play aesthetics, and are intended for people who enjoy different things than pure Challenge.

[1] https://youtu.be/uepAJ-rqJKA

[2] https://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-1-eight-kinds-of-...

I'm curious what you are trying to get out of gatekeeping what a game is? Would you not consider children pretending to be someone else to be playing a game? What bout LARP [0]?

However Gone Home would even satisfy a definition of a "game" that requires there to be challenges. Much of the information is hidden throughout the house, requiring the player to find it and reconstruct the whole story. There are even locked off areas that you need to find keys for.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_action_role-playing_game

You said yourself, Cities Skylines

I've definitely seen it argued that SimCity-alikes (and The Sims) are not games. Whether nor not this is true is IMHO beyond the scope of HN comments.

Suppose it's a game: Cities Skylines is open-ended and has no formal win condition, but you can certainly lose. Your city can go bankrupt, etc.

You're playing against the simulator algorithms. If you succeed then you've beaten those algorithms.

> Your city can go bankrupt, etc.

I play city skylines (and sim airport) in sandbox mode, money is meaningless. The only way you lose is to define yourself as losing.

you are not playing "against" the simulator. you are playing "with" a simulator.

the definition of game is "an activity that one engages in for amusement or fun." => it does not require win-conditions. i prefer games that allow me to be creative. having lose-conditions interferes with that.

While games like Day of the Tentacle and Monkey Island could be won, they couldn't be lost.

Minecraft Creative. Lots of people play that without even sharing their works.

See, I think that's more akin to electronic Lego. It's a toy, not a game.

I mean, at this point you're just trying to mess around with definitions. Colloquially, sandbox games like Minecraft are considered video games.

Huge games like Skyrim/Fallout/GTA are less about beating NPCs than experiencing the world, characters and story.

Minecraft creative mode. I love building out huge glass towers full of water, long roads made of sea lanterns just under the ocean connecting the landmasses, hollowing out trees putting beacons in the center, etc. None of that involves scores or defeating opponents and it’s one of my all time favorite gaming experiences.

"The Stanley Parable" and even more so its followup, "The Beginner's Guide". Both are technically video games, but actually more like interactive movies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com