Should games be fun?

>>714672752 (OP)
they don't have to be. it's up to the creator.

>>714673005
/thread make what you want
death to OP

>>714672752 (OP)
sometimes the fun is not in the moment, but in thinking about the experience later.

>>714672752 (OP)
isn't it weird the game is not fun but is enjoyable in a way either way, how do you word this

>>714673415
Type II fun?

Every time a dev makes a game that's not fun but "it has a message and a good atmosphere!" you look into them and they've literally never made anything good. Calling it art is how you cope with making crap.

>>714673415
>how do you word this
Engaging?

>>714672752 (OP)
That question is so stupid that it gets me thinking. If it's not fun, then why play it? I suppose it could be
>educational
>profitable (you're a pro player or a streamer)
but otherwise, yeah, it should be fun. Fun comes in many forms, but if someone wants to see more of a game, then they're having fun. If your game isn't high quality and interesting, then I won't play it.
I can have fun just browsing 4chan, so a game has to be pretty good for me to spend money and time on it.

>>714673415
Depends on whether you consider fun to describe anything that's enjoyable to do, or not. A lot of people do, just because if you're doing something willingly that isn't productive, it's probably because it's fun.

If not, there's "gripping", "engrossing", "exciting" etc, including just "good".

>>714672752 (OP)
Games should be engaging and immersive. It's why pathologic works, but movie games like TLOU don't.

>>714675608
They are both in my 3x3 grid (tlou2 and path2). they are different games with different aims on what kind of game they are trying to be.

>>714674304
You might be right, but it's not how most of us talk about other media. Movies are seen as able to good in more ways than just "fun". Music kinda has the same thing as videogames in that even people who like really abrasive, dissonant music will still describe it as "beautiful" because that's seen as what good music is, similar to how good games are "fun"

>>714672752 (OP)
No.

>>714672752 (OP)
Suffering can also be fun.
Mostly in retrospect.
I need to replay Pathologic 2 before 3 drops.

>>714672752 (OP)
Pathologic is fun though. I don't know why it's the go-to example when people argue over this topic. Yes it's jank but have you guys ever played Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines? Twice as janky and arguably worse written but it has better presentation so everyone loves it and quietly pretends that it's not jank.
An example of a truly unfun game that's "unfun" on purpose as a test of sorts would be one of the early Warriors games, or Ultima Underworld, or basically any of the streamer bait "ball bustingly hard" games that were popular in the late 2010s.

>>714672752 (OP)
Pic unrelated? They have spooky death clouds, and slow motion knives being thrown at you. Games should be fun, and Pathalogic has fun. If a game tries to keep something unfun going for more than half an hour it sucks.

>>714672752 (OP)
Making through every day by the skin of my ass everyday and struggling with doing anything in the second game was fun. But jurnos disagreed.

>>714676387
Because of the walking.

>>714672752 (OP)
No
Bing bang wahoos need not apply

I thought this game was fun.
Fun is subjective, but I also don't get what the appeal of just having something that never engages or challenges you is.

>>714672752 (OP)
It doesn't have to be fun, but if it's not going to be fun then it sure as hell better be interesting. If it's not fun OR interesting, then why would I spend my free time on it?