forums.marpirc.net

Hi guys,

I found a very interesting article in NY times.

http://amadeus.uprm.edu/~dvicens/nytimesgames.htm

It makes me wonder about 3 things:

1- Why do some arcade games (specially the ones from the Golder Era of Arcades) make the player "start over" after they die (meaning, NO continues allowed)?
2- Does this say something about the purpose of the games and the user population? If so, what is it?
3- How are the users from the online gaming community different?

Definitelly a good article to read. Don't miss it!

The article kind of remind me that I played Quake III online one time. Too many good players playing online and always keep harrassing other gamers that they suck or bunch of losers who doesn't know how to play the game right.

I'm not a big fan of online games although it is kind of fun to watch them play.

Back to your question, Kasht.

1. In Golden Era, it's better to die and start all over to build up high scores nor experience playing certain game. Why spoil yourself playing games to continue to find out the ending or not.

I remember the MK/SF2 series where everybody play against each other and wasting money to become a better player. Although, I still remember the younger generation playing TMNT and wasting their money so fast so they could see the ending. No skills from there, either.

2. I don't know the answer for that.

3. Online gamers is very different than video game gamers. They can use or define their own controllers, joysticks, keyboards, mouse or whatever they feel more comfortable, than others don't have. Beside they can be a real a$$hole while playing online. Although, I can't tell whenever they may cheat or not. Just my opinion. Let hear what others say about this....


Later,

NotMan