!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
This is just inherent to the history of games stemming from arcades. If you "finished" the game you had to insert more coins again, basically every game was structured so that if you "won" you kept playing until you finally lost, setting a high score.
Basically any rogue like game.
The original roguelike
Rogue came out in 1980, while Tetris came out 4 years later in 1984. Some nice bit of trivia there.
TIL i’m in my “back in my day” phase of life because it seems video game origins have gone from common knowledge to lore.
It does have an ending tho. And until recently, when a 13 year old kid managed to do it, the end of the game was only achieved by machines/AI. Tho, to be fair, the ending is basically just going so far that the game stops working.
Isn't it a lot more like a capitalist treadmill? Work hard to make number go up! It is in fact beatable in the sense that the number can't actually go up forever, eventually the system crashes.
the ending is basically just going so far that the game stops working.
Seems even more appropriate for a game from the Soviet Union.
Truly reaching singularity is the end goal
Tetris as a commentary on transhumanism.
That's a very old-school gaming style. Every game I played on my Atari 2600 was like that. You never win, you just play until you lose. I used to wonder about the possible mass side effects of this - were we subtly conditioning people to accept being losers?
the reason they were like this is that arcade machines were the progenitors of video games and the point was to keep people pumping quarters into them.
And if you were on the scoreboard you'd be pumping more than quarters!
This guy obviously never played B mode on the Game Boy. My space ship was best space ship.
Weren't high score games a staple of arcades long before tetris?
Yeah, that post tried maybe a little too hard to portray high score games as always losing. You win, if you get a better score than before or whatever score you're happy with. Of course, this requires setting challenges for yourself on which to grow, so it could only ever have come from turbo-capitalist 'Merica ...or something.
The whole reason to put ASS in the scoreboard, so yes.
I am ASS.
TIL Tetris is from USSR. Aswell as that the pieces in it are called tetrominos.
Did you never play with sound?
Response: What do mean? It plays the Tetris theme.
That's the ussrs anthem.
And here I thought I'd be fine not adding "/s"
But you get really good at packing stuff so the skill translates to real life.
Welcome to every arcade game of the era
I mean, what even is the point of winning a game? Ah yes, now I get to click through half an hour of dialogue and cutscenes, so that I can then not play the game anymore, because I've 'completed' it. Really, completing a game sounds like a scam invented by Big Game to sell more games. Like, oh yeah, we've made our game so fucking boring that players want it to be over with, so they can buy another of our boring ass games and play that to completion instead.
Different people like different things, believe it or not.
Well, I was hoping my comment would be ridiculous enough to make it clear that it's in jest, but apparently not. 🫠
I mean, I do strongly prefer a gameplay loop you can (want to) play forever over story-driven games, but I am very much aware that this is a personal preference.
Tetris 99. It's like racing side by side with 98 other Sisyphuses to see who can get their boulder up the hill most efficiently.
God that game was such a letdown. I heard "Multiplayer tetris" and thought I could play with friends.
Nope.
I was with them until the last sentence, like what a weird takeaway.
Right? A lot of games have no win condition it was just to see how far you could get. Already saw some good examples on the comments, but pacman is another one. There is the kill screen but that's just cause the game wasn't made to go that long.
But it was actually made in the Soviet Union. Don't trust me though, I'm terrible with history.
And space invaders... Fight until you die.