I said before that it is difficult to say that it is a game objectively but I saw that there is only one thing for a game not to be considered as bad
A game has to be perfect and that's impossible, it doesn't have to make mistakes and do one thing wrong, that's enough reason to say it's a bad game:
If your game has bad graphics but good gameplay: it's a bad game!
If your game has good graphics but bad gameplay: It's a bad game!
if your game has good graphics and gameplay but is difficult: It's a bad game
if your game has classic mechanics like the mask or door: It's a mediocre and boring game.
If your game does everything right but the game controls are done in a different way like: shift to light the hallway and F to light the camera: IT'S A BAD GAME.
This makes me wonder, is it really enough for one detail to make your game 100% bad and make the good things look like they are non-existent?
If so, it really worries me because that means that almost all fnaf fangames are bad.
I even started to doubt my own games, are they bad?
but for me what is not right is to hate the creator of the respective game and say that ''all his games are the same'', when the people who say that haven't even seen what all his previous games are like in reality.
(this happened to me)
And my question is already for a mistake already makes the game objectively bad? really? and if so then great that means that most games are bad because following that logic.
TRTF 2 Winter wonderland is mediocre for having the mask and hallway lighting mechanic.
FNwFroggy's 2 is bad because it has combos and is difficult.
Ultimate Custon night is bad because it has ''uncomfortable'' controls.
things like saying that it's a problem of the game because ok that's normal and understandable it's hard to make a game is perfect but to say that automatically makes it a bad game ..... is that I do not understand
Maybe there's something I'm missing and that's why I don't understand this, so you can correct me in the comments if you want but with respect
1 comment