November 2016, I picked up a new laptop with an i7 and a GTX1070. Plenty of grunt so I've been catching up on - or replaying - games that would choke my older laptop. Generally 2007 - 2012 games, then, though I've also dipped into the 90s here and there. But yeah, mostly taking advantage of the giant leap in capability over the old GT555M rig I used before this one.

Q: gOg, obviously, has a lot of old games; some have aged well and some have not. How forgiving are you of game mechanics and/or graphics that are clunky by today's standards?

I am very forgiving if the game is good. I love the original Deus Ex (it looks fairly horrible, but it's amazing).

Question: What are your thoughts on games as an art form?

I feel like answering this. The age varies, but they tend to stay on the older side; in particular, I do enjoy playing games that were released in the 1980's.

I am currently playing Oblivion, which is unusually modern for me. I have recently played Ultima 3 and 4, both very old games. The newest game I've played is Wonder Boy: The Dragon's Trap, but I'm not sure if it counts (the game is a remake of a 1989 game, and it plays and optionally looks/sounds like a 1989 game as a result). The most recent game I've played recently, if you don't count remakes of older games, is Dust: An Elysian Tail (not counting my attempt at Hollow Knight, which had too much input lag on my system to be playable).

The next question asked was about how forgiving I am of old game mechanics and graphics. I tend to be more forgiving of them than I am to more modern gameplay and graphics. (With respect to gameplay, I tend to dislike skill point systems in RPGs; that's something that wasn't so common back in the day, especially if you look at JRPGs.) Also. I tend to prefer 2D to 3D; this is especially true if you look at early 3D. (Of course, I'm playing a 3D game right now; go figure.)

(I'll answer the most recent question in a moment.)

I think games work just as well as an art form.

One thing that differentiates games from other media is that you have gameplay mechanics, and they can be used to express oneself in ways that can't be done as well in other media. For example, if you want to express concern for invasive species, you can make a simulation game where you play as a weeder or hunter, and your goal is to keep the numbers of invasive species in check, which can be a problem if they breed like rabbits (I hear that rabbits are an invasive species in Australia).

Another example is how a game can reflect the creator's feelings about gender. In particular, there are some different options that the developer could do. For example:
* Only offer one gender option. Usually male, sometimes female, and rarely non-binary (Undertale is an example of the last category).
* Offer both male and female, but have one clearly superior to the other (1e AD&D and the CRPGs based on that edition favor male characters).
* Offer both male and female, and have them be different but (at least on paper) balanced. (Elder Scrolls series, for the most part, would fit here.)
* Offer both male and female, and have them be identical gameplay wise (see Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale).
* Offer a third option (Ultima 3 and Elminage Gothic), probably the most progressive option (except that Elminage Gothic unfortunately favors male characters with postgame equipment).

Since I mentioned Undertale, I could mention that that particular game works great as a work of art. There's the multiple routes through the game, each with its story differences, there's some tricky options (like leaving someone to die of thirst), there's even one route that can be rather disturbing (try farming random encounters before the first boss until something happens).

There are, of course, other examples that work well as great works of art, but this is the one that comes to mind.

Anyway, here's another question:

If you are playing a game on an emulator (this includes both official and unofficial releases here), would you prefer the emulation to be extremely accurate, or would you prefer to play with some enhancements? (Examples of enhancements are cutting out load times (particularly if the game was originally on a floppy disk) and playing the game in a higher resolution than the original hardware was capable of.)

I prefer enhancements in every example I can think of. I even prefer enhancements if they change the game experience.

Mainly, my experience is with emulating console/controller games on the pc and being able to use keyboard and mouse for controls.

Q: Talk about a game that "on paper" should really be a favorite of yours but which in reality you find boring, not fun, or just not interesting.

I love ARPGs.

I hate Dungeon Siege. It's boring and dull.

I love games that give you tiny bits of flavor through varying class names depending on your progression.

Dungeon Siege is a grind-fest to get anywhere, since it's a "skills based" game rather than level-based.

I really enjoy games with non-linear exploration with sweeping maps that let you choose the direction you go.

Dungeon Siege's maps are uninspired and vast with a lot of travel between any interesting points with few monster skirmishes.

Chris Taylor's generally known as a good designer, and he was lead for Dungeon Siege. But it just wasn't that good.

On paper, I should've liked Dungeon Siege (and I still dust it off every few years to try again...), but I don't.

Q: What a game you'd like to (re)play, but can't, but for a dated, obtuse, or otherwise bad UI? What parts of the UI make it not workable for you?

I can actually mix that question with the previous one.

Witcher 1. I love RPGs, I adore Aurora engine -loved NWN1 and NWN2- and I absolutely love the Witcher character, story and lore. So on paper, it is everything I ask for but I feel like it is dragging me when I am playing it because I could never get used to that terrible save system and interface. Feel like something is wrong with me since everyone else seems to be ok with that. :(

Q: What is the longest time you spent on a game with only taking small breaks like eating or bathroom. Above 24 hours perhaps?

While not spending 24 hours on it, there was this one time I spent almost an entire day playing X-Men Legends 2 with my cousin years ago, until like 3 am or something which for us as kids was pretty awesome.

Have you ever wished to buy merch related to a game only to find out such merch doesn't or rarely exists? What was the game?

Quite a few years ago I really wanted to go as Hell Cake from Illbleed for Halloween. Not a hope in hell of finding that costume.

Q: How important is story for you in a game? Also, how much does genre effect the "need" for a good story in a game for you?

For me, it generally has negative importance; I prefer a game without a story (or one with just an excuse plot) to one with a story. This is especially true if it's a game I am just starting; for me to be interested in a game's story, I have to get into the game's gameplay first. I also don't like having to sit through cutscenes. If a game is to have a story, I prefer it to be something that can be consumed independently of the gameplay, rather than something you need to sit through to get to the next bit of gameplay.

The nature of the story also matters, to some extent. In particular, I prefer it when there isn't a straight romance, since I can't relate to such things, and they are way overdone. On the other hand, if the game contains positive representation of LGBT characters, then I will like the game more, even though I don't usually care about story.

As for genre affecting the need for a story, I find that the only games that really need stories are things like kinetic novels, particularly since there really isn't anything else. (A kinetic novel without a story is like a pure platformer without any platforming.) Visual novels, being closely related to kinetic novels, could also benefit from a story, though I could see a story-less visual novel existing. (Note that kinetic novels strain the definition of "game"; since they consist solely of cutscenes and no gameplay, it is perfectly reasonable to consider them to not be games at all.)

One other thing: I find story to be especially bothersome in RPGs. When I get a new ability, for example, I like to be able to use the ability right away, and not have to worry about story here. I mention this genre in particular because it seems to be particularly infested with heavy non-interactive stories; JRPGs are particularly bad at this (including Final Fantasy 7-10; 6 at least opens up eventually, but is bad at this for most of the game).

How important are graphics and sound for you in a game? Also, how much does genre affect the "need" for good graphics and sound in a game for you?

Graphics - not that important to me. I still sometimes play a few text games. Arcanum, one of my all-time favorite games, cannot be said to have good graphics.

On the other end of the spectrum, I am not so impressed by the graphics that are considered cutting edge. I think the people in The Witcher 3 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided look like plastic puppets. To my eye, not quite out the other side of the uncanny valley quite yet.

Landscapes are touted in some games as gorgeous and breathtaking, but I find them like amateur photography: too much HDR, oversaturated colors, lens glare everywhere - the picture equivalent of melodrama or soap opera.

The most realistic looking games to my eye are the big AAA car racing and customization games. But I haven't liked a racing game since Wipeout.

Sound -
Very important to me. I do quite a bit of gaming with the sound down (I have 4 kids). But, when the sound is on, it matters a lot to me. And the actual sound design of the game matters more to me than the soundtrack. I find that in most games I can turn the music off while leaving voicing and other sounds on. But, voices (if the characters are voiced) matter to me - there's only one of the original Baldur's Gate main character voices that I can stand. And, especially UI sounds - I play lots of big long RPGs, and if the sound of selecting something in my inventory sets my teeth on edge, I will not like the game.

Q: Is there a genre you came to late? Like, you never played it in your youth, but you discovered it later on? And liked it?

As I've flirted with probably every genre there is to play, throughout my many gaming years, please forgive me for answering your question in reverse, so to speak.

I bought a copy of Ultima Online on holiday in the USA, during it's first year of full release. Back home in the UK (where I'm originally from) and even with my dial-up internet connection of the time, I immediately fell in love with the game and its concept. The community of people that I interacted with were excellent, and were truly what made the experience so unique and memorable. A good story and narrative has always been the most appealing aspect of any RPG for me, but in UO, we made our own.

When the world of Britannia in UO was truly open, it was possible for players to have characters that were murderers (known as PK's or Player Killers), who thrived on PvP and didn't care who they killed, should some poor unfortunate cross their path. There were other players who sought to counter-balance that by hunting them down and claiming bounties, or helping to protect other non-combat oriented players as they travelled between towns. Those tradesmen were also a vital part of the community, making what were originally some of the best weapons and armour in the game. I played as all of those and more, often interacting with other players who never actually knew the same real-life person was behind each character I played.

Sadly, once the involvement of Richard Garriott was but a distant memory and as numerous changes were introduced, the game lost its lustre and much of the elements that made the community. Many of the changes introduced actually eroded the community, because there was less reliance on interaction with other people as players could have several characters on one account, becoming entirely self-sufficient. UO also turned into more of a theme-park like many of MMO's that followed it and became more popular, meaning that UO made changes that also made certain character types worthless and irrelevant, and some of those character classes were amongst the most interesting in the earlier years.

I am still in regular contact with several friends around the world, who I met playing UO. Interestingly, and some twenty years later, not one of us have played another MMO, because trying to recapture the magic of what made UO unique and special at the time, would be impossible. We still reminisce about our UO adventures and some of the most entertaining things we got up to, all those years ago, such as thirty or more guild members heading off to battle our way through some dungeon or other, or PvP guild wars that also had remarkably intricate strategies amongst players.

In summary, the MMORPG genre that UO had a large part in shaping, is one I discovered early (rather than late), but which no longer holds any interest to me. I've not 'discovered' anything that could replace or rekindle the UO experience 'of the time' or that I could imagine myself liking, more's the pity.

---

Q: What is the single most memorable moment in any game you've played?

The one that comes back to me is playing Doom onboard our ship while on a short "make sure shit still works" cruise. The old sub tender liked to roll a lot and the Caribbean was pretty gentle, so the ship had a nice slow roll to it that was great for sleeping. So great, in fact, that you'd be otherwise wide awake and find yourself nodding off.

That roll, however, does not match the head bob as you're running around in Doom. Your eyes are telling you one thing and your inner ears are saying something else. And then your stomach has a couple words of its own. Sometimes we'd play just a few minutes before having to let someone else play - we'd get really queasy really fast. Step outside for a few minutes and then go back at it when the other player got queasy.

Q: Is there a particular UI innovation that was a game-changer for you?

Skipping the obvious of "mouse" (yes! I played many games pre-mouse...).

Tool tips seriously improved strategy games. When you can hover and get details (and, in some games, hover longer for MORE details), it makes the game a heck of a lot better. Fewer need for screen switches/reports (but reports are still important for decision making, too!), and especially to learn nuances of certain features. And I mean, full-detail tool tips that higher-resolution displays made reasonable, not just early RTS "here's the shortcut button" tool tips.

And a more niche answer: within the ARPG genre, auto-loot-tisplay (and, more recently, loot filtering, e.g., "always highlight items on the ground, but only those that are rare or better").

Q: What sound effect really gets to you, irritates you, gets under your skin?