Twilight Princess VS. Skyward Sword: Comparison Review

Since I haven’t really written any reviews in over a year, I’ve decided to write these special kinds of reviews to help me practice. These comparison reviews are something I wanted to do years ago but felt that it was stupid and gimmicky…until now. Lots of the games I will compare to are games I’ve reviewed before, games I’ve considered but didn’t review, and games I will review in the future. Now, to make these reviews as short as possible – as I am reviewing two games simultaneously – I will avoid including any major spoilers like I did with all of my normal reviews.

Today we’re going to compare two iconic Zelda games that came out for the Nintendo Wii within its 6 year life span. While the former did have subsequent releases on the Nintendo Game-Cube and WiiU, I will only be analyzing the Wii version as that’s the one I’ve played. It would also be pretty unfair to compare the superior WiiU HD port to Skyward Sword so there’s that too. As you may or may not know, I bought both of these game at Wal-Mart back in 2011 and 2013 respectively during sales. These two games made me use my brain instead of reflexes to overcome challenges.


Motion-Controls (TP 1 – 0 SS)

Twilight Princess – One of the first games on the Wii to take advantage of the motion controls was in fact this Zelda installment. Instead of using the analog sticks to aim and the face buttons to use the sword and shield, aiming was assigned to the Wii Remote sensor and attacking was to both the Nunchuk and Wiimote’s accelerometers respectively. These two innovations allowed aiming to be much faster, sensitive, and accurate than traditional gamepad; along with adding realism to the combat system and reducing the symptoms of carpel tunnel syndrome.

So this definitley made Twilight Princess more fun and realistic than previous games in the franchise. Sadly, the aiming still pales in comparison to keyboard and mouse for PC gaming and simply shaking the Wiimote & Nunchuk were sufficient. It wasn’t realistic to the point where you actually had to swing the controllers as if you were holding actual medieval weapons. As mentioned before, the controllers only have accelerometers built in, which their motion capabilities are inferior to gyroscopes later used in Wii Motion Plus and the Wiii Remote Plus several years after.

Skyward Sword – Originally this game wasn’t supposed to use motion controls at all until Miyamoto was convinced to take advantage of the Wii Motion Plus. Unlike with Twilight Princess, you actually have to move your controllers the way you would with real weapons. This made it much more fun and realistic, although unfortunately it turned a lot of gamers off from playing Skyward Sword. In fact, it feels like I’m playing Prime 3 with all the puzzles that force you to perform motion commands. The community is mixed with this one as some hate it while others love it.

What ruined the motion controls for me and so many others was the fact that the sensitivity and calibration was so fucking horrible. After probably a few dozen minutes or so, the motion controls and sensor won’t respond which then you are forced to pause and then recalibrate the Wii Motion Plus. When you’re aiming, you literally have to point the Wiimote at the center of the screen, otherwise it won’t work properly even with recalibration! To be fair, you can just swing your Wiimote vertically a few times to instantly recalibrate it based on the advice of a NPC early on.

Ah yes, forgot to elaborate on solving the puzzles with the motion controls. In Twilight Princess, it was just like previous Zelda games where you use the control sticks and buttons to solve them. But this time around, most of them require motion controls which make it feel as gimmicky as Prime 3 but with unresponsive controls. It’s not just the puzzles, but the enemies and even bosses force you to use the motion controls whether you like it or not. If you suck at using motion controls or hate the concept, then just avoid this game and skip to Wind Waker HD or Breath of the Wild.

Verdict – Although the latter was more creative with the motion based controls by fully utilizing the Wii Motion Plus, I still have to conclude that Twilight Princess is overall superior. These controls are nothing more than a gimmick and a cool concept that Nintendo experimented with but didn’t keep as proven with BOTW. I don’t have to constantly recalibrate nor do am I constantly forced to use them to beat puzzles and bosses in Twilight Princess. In theory shaking is stupid, but in practice I never found it be lame nor gimmicky…oh, and the aiming was much better too.

Graphics (TP 2 – SS 0)

Twilight Princess – When this game was still green (pun intended), the graphics were considered to be very realistic and detailed for its generation. However, like with most older games, it sadly isn’t as aesthetically appealing as it was over a decade ago. Of course, the Wii version is what we’re reviewing and looks better than the Game-Cube port as it supports 16:9 widescreen support along with slightly better lighting and textures. I have to agree that the models, even to this day, are very accurate and look very good even after all these years…for the most part.

What sucks about Twilight Princess is that it suffers from very low resolution textures, something that past 3D Zelda games suffered except Wind Waker. They are realistic and detailed, but take a closer look, and some of them are pre-rendered images flattened on to a 2D surface rather than actual 3D polygons of in-game textures. I would also complain of it only running at 30 fps but consoles have different standards than PC gaming does. It’s consistent for the most part except when Link performs a spin attack to simultaneously defeat many enemies surrounding him.

The style of the graphics were made to resemble Ocarina of Time while also having its own twilight feeling to it. It does make the world of Hyrule look beautiful, and having different weather and times of day is an added bonus too. Unfortunately, majority of the colors are browns, greens, and grays; that is, by trying to resemble real life, the atmosphere mostly looks ugly, dull, and boring. After over a decade – yes time passes so fast – the graphics haven’t aged too well but it’s still tolerable. If you get the Wii U port or upscale to progressive scan, then it looks much much better.

Skyward Sword – Nintendo’s approach to this game’s art style was to make it look like a hybrid between the realism of Twilight Princess and cartoonish feel of Wind Waker. But had they only made it just cel-shaded, instead of trying to incorporate multiple art styles, I wouldn’t criticize the aesthetics as I do now. Sure, the polygon count, models, and lighting have improved, but the textures and resolution haven’t changed a lot. Skyward Sword still suffers from low resolution textures and for a game that came out in 2011 you’d expect it be at least 720p or as good as Brawl or Colors did.

In terms of aging, I’d have to say Skyward Sword aged a little better but only because of its cel shaded art style. In fact, I believe one of the main reasons that Nintendo made it that way was because they knew the Wii was limited with its weak hardware. The different art styles, such as background objects and landmarks looking like paintings come to life and character/weapon models that resemble the look of Twilight Princess, do look good but sadly aren’t combined well enough. Also the fact that the characters look nothing like they did in the artwork and the trailers.

Verdict – Although cel-shaded graphics do look better and were chosen in Wind Waker HD and Breath of the Wild, I still have to go with Twilight Princess. Nintendo did their best for TP to fully utilize the hardware to make the graphics look their best. TP was ahead of its time as it looked like a game from 2007, while Skyward Sword only looks slightly better with minor improvements. Since it failed to make many different styles work; only the polygon count, atmosphere, and colors improved; models, resolution, and textures look horrible, TP wins again but in terms of graphics.

Atmosphere (TP 2 – SS 1)

Twilight Princess – I kind of already covered this before, but just to recap, Nintendo made TP have a realistic atmosphere similar to Ocarina of Time. They also made it have a dark and horror based atmosphere akin to Majora’s Mask with the whole Twilight realm and introduction of Midna and Zant. It looks so cool to enter those areas as they make them lack very little color and life which the realm is supposed to do, and little effects like the black particles and NPC’s becoming spirits also makes it memorable too. And during evening time in-game, it’s when it looks the most stunning and beautiful.

People may differ and claim that the Twilight realms look ugly and lifeless, but that’s the purpose it serves and the same can be said for Skyward Sword in one aspect too. When you enter the Twilight Realm (like actually different dimension) it does turn you off with so much ugly colors and sad music. But Twilight Princess also got its cheerful and colorful moments like when travelling through Faron Woods  or Hyrule Field. Although to generalize, Twilight Princess does suffer from trying to be too realistic when Zelda games are meant to be seen as medieval fantasy genre.

Skyward Sword – Now you may think I hate the game’s art style, but actually overall I like its cartoony look and being the alter “ego” of its predecessor. There’s just so much life and colors and happiness that it can lift your mood and truly let you escape reality after a long day at work and/or school. Compared to Wind Waker (not HD remake), the cel-shaded art style is even better than it was before and makes the graphics look appealing. The lighting and effects also add to the atmosphere along with the different styles even though its highly questionable at times.

What sucks this time are no longer different times of day and weather conditions with a few exceptions. Those few being that you can only experience day and night in the sky and manually through sleeping instead of it being automatic, along with it raining/thunderstorm during a few boss fights. Characters are also more helpful and alive this time with each different species being unique with their own personalities, rather than only a few characters standing out from the rest like in TP. While the cross between WW and TP wasn’t perfect, it helped make BOTW a masterpiece.

Verdict – It’s very obvious at this point that Skyward Sword has done much better in the atmosphere department than Twilight Princess. The predecessor tried too hard to seem very realistic, and although it was praised back then, looking back it aged badly as Zelda doesn’t take place in the real world. Had they added other elements to soften the atmosphere to balance out the darkness and sadness then it would be amazing. Yes, Skyward Sword isn’t completely perfect as it lacks different weather and times of day unless in some events, but still, it pulled it off better by taking risks.

Exploration (TP 3 – SS 1)

Twilight Princess – Known for having the largest overworld of any Zelda game (until Breath of the Wild surpassed TP), there was just so much to do and so many places to explore! Unlike in OOT and MM where every area was interconnected by Hyrule Field, Twilight Princess tends to have a more non-linear and open world approach. Emulating the exploration of Wind Waker, you were able to enter new towns and regions through multiple routes with Hyrule Field itself covering the entire kingdom instead of one grassy area. This makes it memorable and innovative even to this day.

The different areas themselves tend to be bigger with more space and small tight places to explore and find hidden treasures. What is the main benefit is also its main drawback, a double edged sword, as many of these open areas are too large and empty like barren wastelands. Still, its just breathtaking to see how gorgeous, detailed, and huge the world of Hyrule is in TP. Even places that aren’t open ended try to be non-linear as possible by resembling mazes and labyrinths so it doesn’t suffer like older Zelda games. If Nintendo had added more interactions and details then it would’ve been better.

Without spoiling too much, Twilight Princess also has the largest diversity of different geographic regions in any Zelda game…again except for BOTW. In addition to the woods, field, volcano, lake, and desert, there’s also snowy arctic mountain, underground caves, abandoned ruins, and even able to visit the past, sky, and another dimension! Usually, it’s only the dungeons that are this diverse but I’m glad that Nintendo made Hyrule excel in bot quality and quantity. Despite this though, you still have to backtrack to older areas later in the game while the newer areas are only explored once which sucks.

Skyward Sword – Although Skyloft and the entire sky may seem open-ended and non-linear, it is even worse than the emptiness and size of TP’s Hyrule Field. Literally you’re just flying with your bird creature through endless clouds and maybe a few…asteroids here and there that let you increase speed momentarily. There are some other islands but mostly for playing mini-games or only visiting them once or twice for the story. You might as well just hang out in the town, which sadly, is the only place that is worth exploring besides the dungeons in this installment.

Down below the sky are three main regions that have other sub regions unlocked later on in the game. But they’re so basic and generic it’s laughable and seems like an insult to Twilight Princess and other predecessors. The three areas are (without spoilers): forest, volcano, and desert, along with river/lake, interior of volcano, dried up sea now quicksand, and some gorge/valley area. You can also visit an alternate dimension similar to the Twilight Realm except even more lame and repetitive. So no tundra mountain, no haunted settlement, no underground caves, none of those.

Now that isn’t even the worse part of Skyward Sword – it’s actually the exploration and progression parts that are. The linearity (if that’s even a word) is so high that it feels like the game assumes we’ve never played any Zelda game before. Majority of the routes you takes are small long pathways with no alternate places to explore and very few open ended areas. When they’re are open areas, it’s just like the sky, or the game doesn’t allow you to freely explore because it thinks you’re a baby. Oh, and for some reason so many dungeon-like puzzles are added outside of the dungeons themselves.

Verdict – It’s very obvious even before I compared this category between these games which one was superior to the other. I understand that with Skyward Sword, they were trying to appeal to as much people as possible since this was an exclusive Wii title and motion controls were trendy back then. However, only Zelda fans and those into adventure games were the majority of consumers that bought it, so I don’t understand what went inside Nintendo’s minds when they thought going one step backwards with the exploration was good when that’s what made Zelda iconic.

Dungeon Design (TP 3 – SS 2)

Twilight Princess – Many of the dungeons in TP take inspirations from OOT and MM by combining old concepts with slightly new ones. This gives a sense of nostalgia for older Zelda fans but doesn’t seem too repetitive as it has its own unique puzzles, enemies, items, and bosses. The first three dungeons are the easiest and probably the most lame (no offense, they’re still fun) compared to the later ones you encounter. Later on is when the dungeons become much more innovative with design and creative with puzzles and enemies. Overall they’re not very gimmicky nor are they same old boring shit.

Sadly, TP still suffers from only having items being used in their respective dungeons and never again until the last dungeon. Some puzzles and mini-bosses tend to be ripped off or inspired heavily by older Zelda entries which can turn some off. Unfortunately, I’m going to hold my promise of keeping the review as spoiler free as possible so I won’t mention specific dungeons and concepts that I enjoyed or disliked. Twilight Princess does have some of the best dungeons in any Zelda game, although it would’ve been better if the puzzles took more advantage of the Wii’s motion controls.

Skyward Sword – Unlike its predecessors, almost all the dungeons are very new and unique in its own way without ripping off from past games. Puzzles and enemies (sometimes even mini-bosses) do get repeated in future dungeons but they are slightly changed so to give extra challenge and prevent repetition. Skyward Sword makes good use of the Wii Motion Plus, so while enemies, puzzles, and bosses do seem gimmicky, it’s actually really cool once you adapt to the game’s dungeon design. Sadly, the first three dungeons range from mediocre to decent while later ones being awesome.

Taking risks paid off as the later dungeons take place in settings you’d never imagine would work, such as an abandoned pirate ship or Buddhist-style temple. Such designs make use of the new environments by making the rooms and routes different from traditional dungeons. This can make navigation more confusing and unpredictable but much more fun and interesting. There also exist what I call “mini-dungeons” or areas that resemble dungeons but don’t technically qualify as them. Those are pretty cool and better than doing stupid fetch quests as mandatory for progression.

This time around, they added lots of hidden paths and rooms that aren’t obvious even when looking at the maps. These can either lead to essential items and puzzles or can reward you with hidden goodies. Oh right, and getting to the boss requires you insert some kind of jigsaw thingie making use of the motion controls and not as boring as simply putting in a giant key to open the final door. Some dungeons lack mini-bosses or may have several of them to mix up the formula a bit which is cool too. Each dungeon also has its own “gimmick” that doesn’t always require items to use.

Verdict – At first I thought that both Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword would tie for this category but then after refreshing my memory I decided otherwise. Yes, both games have poor early dungeons with later superior dungeons, but the former simply rips off of older games (except for a few) whereas the latter is completely innovative in its own right. Also the fact that the design and progression was very predictable and linear so Skyward Sword has the much better dungeon design. I’m still not going to deny that some of Twilight Princess’ dungeons are superior to SS though.

Combat (TP 3.5 – SS 2.5)

Twilight Princess – Much like its predecessors OOT and WW, TP allows players to utilize the sword and shield as their main arsenal of weapons. Accompanied with those are bombs, arrows, hook-shots, and the like as well as newer items obtained from the dungeons. Defeating enemies is as simple as slashing your sword by repeatedly shaking the Wii Remote while using the shield as a defense. Stronger enemies and bosses require you to dodge and/or counter their attacks before being able to attack them for brief moments when there are openings (and use dungeon items too).

Later on in the game, you’ll be able to use special skills which are essentially advanced sword techniques used to easily take down hordes and bosses later on. Most of them are completely optional but you need to learn two of them to beat the entire game. You can also fight when you’re a wolf but it’s limited to just biting and clawing, although you’re able to have Midna insta-kill enemies within a short range after charging up her attack. Oh, and you can also fight on your horse which is a series first and definitely makes this feel more cinematic as there are some missions requiring Epona.

Skyward Sword – With the Wii Motion Plus as the main feature, players now have to actually swing the sword in different directions equivalent to real life sword-fighting. Enemies can no longer be easily killed by swinging your controller like a baby’s toy as that will just get you killed. Also, the shield itself can break after taking enough hits so be sure to take advantage of the shield bash, which allows you to push back enemies and their attacks to give you an opportunity to strike back. Many stronger enemies and bosses force you to strategically fight with the sword and shield.

Unfortunately, there are no advanced sword techniques and most of the dungeon items aside from bombs and arrows are used for puzzles and travelling. The stupid red bird also doesn’t allow you to fight enemies other than some weird diving attack, and it’s really hard to hit enemies unless you’re up close in the sky. Still, I’d say the combat overall is better since it’s not slash a few times or wait for opening and then attack like in past Zelda games. You can also charge up a special attack with your sword that shoots a beam of light to damage and later on kill common enemies.

Verdict – Honestly, I would have to say it’s a tie for this category since both Zelda games make up for what it lacks in the other. I do find the sword fighting in Skyward Sword vastly superior but Twilight Princess is better in every other way. However, since Twilight Princess is too easy (more on that later) I wouldn’t really declare the combat being completely superior to Skyward Sword either. I’ll decide whether to give both these games half a point each or not give them any at all later in this comparison review, but for now, both of these games tie when it comes to combat.

Story Progression (TP 4.5 – SS 2.5)

Twilight Princess – Depending on your preferences, you’ll either love the long introduction or prologue of this game or hate it completely. You have to spend at least an hour before making it to your first dungeon, and the first three dungeons are delayed by Twilight Realm, missions that feel like errands and mini-boss fights, and long cinematic cutscenes. Right about halfway, players find out who the true main villain is – Ganandorf – along with what to do for the next few dungeons. And the story takes a backseat until near the end but is replaced with sidequests locked in the beginning.

In terms of the plot itself without spoiling, I’d have to say Nintendo tried very hard to make it a story driven game and was mostly successful. I say mostly because they sort of rushed it near the end, which although was epic, had worse pacing than the prologue which was dragged on for too long. I dislike how the story virtually dies out in the later half of the game but just like Majora’s Mask, the side quests do reveal a lot about the NPC’s and makes you care about the people of Hyrule that you’re protecting. If the pacing and distribution of the story was balanced out then TP would be golden.

Skyward Sword – What the hell is wrong with Nintendo trying to emulate TP’s progression into this installment but make it worse? I have to spend at least an hour in the town before even attempting to gain access to the land below the sky. Even then, expect to spend 1-2 hours just reaching the first dungeon. Aside from the beginning, halfway point, and end, all other parts of the plot aren’t very cinematic and feel like an video game plot. Instead of going on errands, you have to do stupid missions like fetch quests or “helping” NPC’s by backtracking or travelling a lot.

Yeah, they really dragged on the story with this one as it feels like just when it’s almost about to finish, plot twist or stupidity happens and the story continues. You have to fight a certain boss multiple times which annoys lots of people, although I find it as a guilty pleasure since it doesn’t piss me off. After completing each dungeon, it’s literally the same thing where you almost meet up with Zelda only for her to leave you, or you’re able to complete your objectives with Fi dancing and singing. I would tell you about the plot but then that breaks my rule of avoiding in-game spoilers.

Verdict – Ok I don’t even have to tell you which game has better plot progression as it’s so obvious by now. Neither of them have good progression (they both have amazing plots but that’s another debate) so it’s all about which one has the lesser flaws. I hope to the three goddesses of Hyrule that when I play Breath of the Wild on the Wii U in the far future, that it better not repeat the mistakes of Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword. I understand with Twilight Princess trying so hard to be Ocarina of Time 2.0, but seriously, why is Skyward Sword copying so much off of TP if it didn’t go so well?

Music & Sound (TP 4.5 – SS 3.5)

Twilight Princess – As always, Zelda never fails to deliver with its memorable and awesome soundtrack, which unsurprisingly, has many remixes of old tracks to please older Zelda fans. Despite having orchestrated music in a few trailers, the actual game itself failed to have any (but it did have some that sounded like it). This isn’t to undermine the already fantastic music, in which even newer Zelda games can’t fully surpass…unless they’re orchestrated. TP uses as much instruments and genres as possible to make the soundtrack very catchy and diverse.

Unlike with most of Nintendo’s games, the music presented in Twilight Princess tends to “atmospheric” as to not distract the player. It fits well into the background and blends in with the white noise of the environment that Link explores. Only boss fights, side quests, and specific missions have music in the traditional sense which intensifies the gameplay to make it more epic. Besides lacking orchestrated music, Twilight Princess tends to reuse a lot of sound pieces and those from older Zelda games. Sometimes it’s better to come up with new music instead of reusing it over and over again.

Skyward Sword – For the first time since the Mario Galaxy games, SS features a full on orchestrated soundtrack! Early pre-orders and editions of this game came with an album with nostalgic pieces remastered into orchestrated soundtrack to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Zelda. Not only has the music significantly improved with orchestrated music but also with innovative and “lively” music that isn’t atmospheric. On top of it, the sound quality has upgraded since it was built for the Wii instead of being a Game-Cube title ported over to the Wii with little graphical optimization.

Quality over quantity is strong with this installment because while most entries are forgotten, the few that stand out surpass Zelda games that came before it. The epic music isn’t limited just to boss fights this time – even dungeons and geographic regions also have beautiful music that is a bit distracting but well composed nonetheless. I thought the ending credits theme for Twilight Princess was awesome, but the credits for Skyward Sword blew me away and my expectations. I hope that when I come to play Breath of the Wild, the soundtrack is good in both quality and quantity.

Verdict – This is also another obvious match between these two Zelda games, as it’s clearly known that Skyward Sword is superior to Twilight Princess with music. I was going to originally also analyze and critique the voice acting, but both games don’t have any acting except for Link’s side chick (Midna and Fi) who both speak gibberish. Also the fact that TP’s sound quality was mediocre since it was a Game-Cube port. I really don’t have much else to say other than the fact that this comparison review may result in a tie so I’m gonna have to make a tiebreaker real soon if that happens.

Challenge (TP 5 – SS 4)

Twilight Princess – I don’t understand why Nintendo decided to make this Zelda game so freaking easy! Of course, being my first Zelda game that I beat (my first was Wind Waker), I did struggle a lot and often resorted to walkthrough guides but those were only limited to one or two complex puzzles per dungeon. I had no problem defeating the bosses…except that mini-boss in the mansion and Ganondorf…despite having next to no experience and skill. Never did I ever have to resort to using the stronger potions and after acquiring enough Heart Pieces, I didn’t worry about damage.

I did struggle and die a lot while playing in the Twilight Realm, but that’s to be expected for anybody since this was a first in the Zelda franchise. However, actually doing quests were pretty easy and was usually the mini-“bosses” that killed me. The side quests were also all very easy except for a few challenging ones later on in the story. Overall, I didn’t really struggle and find it to be a walk in the park, which is probably why I constantly go back to this and even attempted a few speed runs. Maybe being a title for the Wii, Nintendo decided to dumb it down for the casual audience sadly.

Skyward Sword – Much better than its predecessor, we finally get some decent and even brutal challenge not only from the puzzles but also missions and bosses. Implementing the Wii Motion Plus forces players to move the controllers as if they were actual weapons. Many of these challenges require you to use motion controls, which isn’t simply performing a few easy actions like in Prime: Corruption. Expect later bosses to be almost as hard as what you’d expect in Dark Souls (no joke). Also, instead of losing a quarter of health per average hit, you lose one whole heart!

Oh but wait, being a Wii game Nintendo decided to make this playable by idiots as well. If you’re struggling, you can visit a certain statue in Skyloft and watch very short walkthrough videos. That is probably almost like the game playing itself and defeats the purpose of solving the puzzles with your own brain. You can obviously ignore it but it’s just an insult that Nintendo would ever think of adding this to Zelda. You can also craft or buy specific items to also help you “cheat” at the game if you suck so much. Way to go Nintendo, literally playing the game for people who can’t play themselves.

Verdict – I would’ve chosen Skyward Sword as the victor in this review category, but that feature just made it even worse than Twilight Princess. Yes, you can ignore it although the fact that it’s there in the first place makes the game a joke. At least with TP I had to go online and find a walkthrough guide and read it before attempting to play again. Also, if I did allow Skyward Sword to win this round, both games would tie and I would have to make a tiebreaker anyways. The winner of this category, and this review overall, is none other than The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess for the Nintendo Wii.


After quickly analyzing all the different categories of criticism for both Zelda games without major spoilers, Twilight Princess takes the spot of being superior. It just barely beats Skyward Sword as both games have major benefits and flaws with one another that make them so similar. Ok, this review I began writing in mid August but didn’t finish it until today because I’m lazy and was preparing for university. I’m writing these comparison reviews not only as filler for the PC reviews, but also to help me regain the writing skill and passion that was lost for over a year.

My next few comparison reviews will be Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, and also Super Smash Bros. Brawl & Super Smash Bros. for Wii U. I intended on reviewing the most recent console Metroid games (Prime 4 is being developed so sssshhhhh…) however they’re way too different and Prime 3 is clearly better.  I’m also going to edit my first three reviews by changing the formatting and pictures as they’re outdated and some images are missing. Once I begin my PC reviews, I’ll start with Portal 1, Left 4 Dead, and Counter Strike: Source and we’ll go from there.

Advertisements

First Person Games Aren’t So “Realistic”

This blog post was originally something that I posted on my now discontinued Nigga Nintendo Nerd site that existed a few years ago. I’ve decided to reboot and retcon such a post now that I have more experience with shooters and first person games in general, so I can give a more detailed analysis. For those that are new, I used to have another WordPress blog prior to MRN back in the summer of 2014 but I cancelled it for many different reasons. One was the layout, another I was just desperate at writing, I wanted to write reviews, and because my classmate stalked me online.

Without further ado, I’ll get right into my “rant” and analysis on how and why first person games, and to a certain extent shooters, aren’t as realistic as they are marketed by the publishers. It’s not just about the view and perspective of first person games, but also the mechanics that are implemented. I know that video games aren’t simulators or VR (unless marketed and designed as such) so they shouldn’t be taken that seriously. However, it still makes me disappointed that people actually are naïve and stupid enough to believe that such games are very realistic and actually emulate reality very closely.

First Person “Perspective”

What really pisses me off about games that take place from a first person perspective is how much they fail at trying to copy real life. Yes, I can look and move around in all directions, although when I look down below me I see only the ground. Re-read the last part of the previous sentence, and you’ll know exactly what’s wrong… is that you can’t see any parts of your body except for hands and arms! So the developers think that having players see through the eyes of the protagonist is indeed realistic, but not including their body in first person mode isn’t?

When we all look down we can see our legs, crotch, stomach, arms, hands, and sometimes even our chest. But in many first person games you see none of that when looking down so it’s as if we’re playing as a floating head with arms and hands. Look, I get that you can’t really program the character to move their eyes and see their nose and parts of their face. It’s just really awkward when I enter a vehicle in first person mode and then it looks as if it’s driving itself or I’m using telekinesis, since I’m not using (able to see) any hands to maneuver the vehicle.

Now this wouldn’t be a problem for older games released on systems with hardware limitations or games that aren’t marketed as being realistic. Nevertheless, newer games and those especially promised to emulate reality shouldn’t fail to captivate consumers by not adding such a small detail that should be common sense. Not just the fact that such games and their developers technically broke a few laws, but also fails to deliver the realistic experience that was promised. Kind of like how the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X aren’t true native 4K resolution despite advertised as legitimate 4K.

Another characteristic of first person mode that isn’t close to its real life counterpart is the FOV or field of view. That’s basically how much you can see within your range of vision (which is your television screen or PC monitor). We humans tend to see our environment in a 180 degree angle whereas you can only see roughly 90 to about 110 degrees of the FOV in first person games. Also, we also view reality as a curvy “dome” and video games are displayed on a flat 2D surface. Some monitors are designed to be curvy but those are very rare and many games aren’t optimized for it.

The view model is the final and last feature of first person perspective that isn’t even close to how it is in real life. This is how close or far away the body parts are positioned from the screen. Many shooters depict players holding the gun with their hands so close to the screen and only being able to see a little past the wrist area. With the exception of pistols, I cannot even believe how developers can convince people to believe that people actually hold guns like that in real life. This is just nitpicking, but when looking in a mirror our characters aren’t replicated 1:1 to their reflections.

Problems Playing In FPP

So what’s wrong with not having an accurate first person perspective other than breaking minor laws and ethics/morals you ask? It makes the game a lot harder in specific situations or areas, especially those in the action and platform genres. Say I have to jump over to a far ledge and I have to do it quickly, but then because I can’t see the rest of my body I can’t properly distance how far I am from falling. I then either make it due to poor collision detection, pure luck, or just fall and fail simply because I couldn’t see my legs. And many games have platforming segments no matter what.

Or say I’m fighting a fuck ton of enemies or a boss that sends a thousand projectiles at my way. The reality is that I can only fend off those that I can directly see within my limited range of vision and somewhat with my hearing. To counter such limitations, developers usually add arrows or colors to areas where you’re getting hit off screen so you can react properly. I don’t know…maybe if you idiots allowed us to see more than just what’s in front of us and not have invisible bodies, then maybe, just maybe we could react before and/or faster instead of buying better monitor(s)?

Another issue is something that is specifically relevant mostly to shooters. Why can’t I ever use the sights of guns that have them attached to have better accuracy? If the developers are going to add the sights to guns like the M16 and AK47 to emulate the designs how come we can’t use them to make it more “realistic”? It’s not the same as a scope where we can use them to zoom in and aim at enemies from extremely far distances. And having a crosshair for aiming isn’t so realistic as only snipers and scopes have them, and you need training to even aim with guns due to recoil.

I can’t believe I forgot about this until now – collision detection is also another issue with first person games lacking visible bodies. I often think I bumped into a wall, obstacle, or enemy when really I didn’t and other times when I’m so far away I still somehow manage to touch them. This sort of inconsistency could be solved with better programming or by simply having a visible lower body. Sadly, developers don’t implement neither of these solutions and is more of a pet peeve than a difficulty spike for veterans compared to those of beginners and noobs.

Gameplay Mechanics In FPP

Let me discuss about the different mechanics that developers add into first person games to make it seem more realistic when it only makes it more fictional. First is the speed of movement and different ways to do so (crouching, walking, and sprinting). Why the hell is the default speed not aligned with the sounds of footsteps? How can developers actually think they can fool us thinking that we’re speed-walking but it sounds like we’re only walking? I know this might seem nitpicking though developers intentionally market such games as realistic so I’m going to criticize them for being so fake.

Also when crouching or crawling, it looks like the character is at a very low altitude; however, compare it to the height of nearby objects. Then you’ll notice they aren’t actually crouching and crawling, rather they’re just slightly ducking which gives slightly better accuracy when jumping and shooting. If you look at enemies crouching or crawling, it looks very ridiculous and makes them more visible targets in shooting games. Maybe if the developers actually made them crouch and crawl much lower it would be harder to be detected by enemies and be more realistic?

When it comes to walking and sprinting, you become as slow as a snail with the former and become Usain Bolt with the latter. Shouldn’t walking be a…little faster and sprinting be a little slower or at least with stamina to hinder it? Anyways, strafing is something that you wouldn’t normally do even when shooting in real life as it looks ridiculous and also isn’t effective when making turns. Speaking of Bolt, shouldn’t the characters ever tire out after awhile, especially those carrying heavy ass guns and equipment? And how come characters can jump high enough to go over hurdles?

I don’t understand how switching from first person to third person in some circumstances is acceptable as realistic? Like can I suddenly make my eyes teleport so that I can see from a third person perspective? I know it’s just video games, but how is it realistic to simply crouch for a few seconds and then regenerate? I find it more believable to heal from pills, med-kits, energy bars, or even hearts even though those defy logic and science too lol. Regenerating health and respawning upon death makes many shooters like COD and Battlefield very fake and not realistic.

I can honestly go on and rant about how unrealistic these games are so I think I’ll just end it here since you guys should understand my point now. There actually are lots of first person games that do try to be more realistic by adding lower body (Left 4 Dead), following the physics of actual shooting (CSS & CSGO), and having realistic FOV and view model (most Valve games). I can’t believe games like Zelda and Metroid implement features that are fake but still seem more realistic than what you use in typical fake shooters played by kids and man children living with their parents.

Never Going To Use Steam Forums Again!

This editorial will probably be the last one before I start publishing reviews again for the time being. I know this is more of a rant than anything else, but since it personally affects me and involves matters that caused me to start blogging in the first place, I think it’s important to write it here on MRN. Due to the Steam moderators being extremely corrupt, rude, and egotistical, I will no longer be using the official Steam discussions although I will still be using game hub forums and Steam feature discussions. The title of this editorial is sort of click-bait so I apologize now.

Anyways, I’m sick and tired of these mods who go after innocent people who try to get them punished for corruption while others like me that don’t show complete obedience to them. We’re not your slaves, you don’t put the food on our tables, and you aren’t executive staff at Valve – you are equal to us. I don’t understand why you assholes have to abuse the authority (not power) given to you simply because other people make fun of you or they hurt your fragile ego. It’s always those that have authority that get the ego thing up their fucking asses.

I almost never see people with power (except for egotistical thin-skinned politicians) abuse it the way those with authority do. They aren’t going to stoop to the level of people that insult and criticize them and exact retribution to boost their egos. They have other more important matters and problems to worry about than a bunch of common folk roasting them. Actually, if such people did abuse the power they would immediately regret it since their reputation has been damaged so they’ll avoid it to save face. But authority figures just don’t seem to care…or do they?

Oh wait, they actually do care about losing face so to prevent that, they’ll delete all the evidence along with punishing those involved to silence them. And even after being exposed, more often than not their higher-ups will just let them get away with it or the punishment they receive will be a slap on the wrist. I noticed all moderators are like that, but for some reason it’s the Steam moderators that are the absolute worst. Only a few mods and admins I met in GameSpot and other sites were extremely corrupt and egotistical about people exposing and insulting them.

Simply put, I’ve made this decision a few days I’ve been banned for the 4th time on Steam for a minor infraction. They would rather go after people like me, but not trolls that constantly violate the community guidelines. If being a moderator is just volunteering, why do they go out of their way to go after people that undermine their authority? Well I already answered my own question so from here on out, I’m just going to post in the alternative forums as mentioned before, or simply finally move on and join Reddit for the first time in my life.

Likewise, all other forum sites aren’t innocent either as they too have their fair share or corrupt and/or egotistical moderators and admins. Back then, I constantly got warnings, bans, then permabans for the stupidest or unfair of reasons. Lots of times the admins permabanned me weren’t even because of trolling! The only forums where I’m still safe from being punished are GameFAQS and Super-Cheats which I don’t even use and haven’t logged on for years. If they aren’t going to do their fucking jobs properly, they may as well restrict or eliminate the forums altogether.

Yes I know, in the rules it specifically states for all forums that mods and admins can modify, transfer, or delete any posts/threads that they feel are inappropriate within their own discretion. But such a rule is extremely vague and basically lets such corrupted lightweights do whatever the hell they want. It’s basically the developers’ or site publishers’ way of giving the users the middle finger, saying “Fuck you guys! This is our site, our rules, and you obey them like you’re our bitches.” There’s essentially no existence of freedom of speech in these forum sites.

Some of you are probably going to tell me that freedoms and rights are bullshit and site creators can decide how they want to run their sites. I agree with that but only to a certain extent, because while there are limits to freedoms if abused, they must still be allowed as the site creators must follow the laws of the countries and/or continents that they operate in. Sorry but if they don’t want to comply with the law, then their website will simply get blocked by the government or the companies will suffer from lawsuits by government agencies to punish them for disobeying.

And Valve has had many incidents of being sued or threatened by such agencies for violating laws time and time again. Like when they refused to issue refunds in Europe even though European Union law states that consumers can refund products whenever they want for whatever reason even if they just don’t feel like it. Or how about when they were threatened by a Washington agency for allowing gambling sites for CSGO to exist and flourish for minors? That wasn’t specifically relevant with corrupted mods but it still applies since nobody is above the law.

To sum it all up, I’m no longer using the official Steam discussions even after my temporary ban expires and only using alternative forums after. I tried appealing to Steam Support but they were just as passive aggressive and useless like before, just like when they offered no solutions to the malfunctioning l4d2 servers. I would often visit Reddit months before I even joined Steam and loved how the way it was structured and allowed people to discuss very controversial topics. I learned through experience is that the grass really is greener on the other side of the fence.

What If I Owned A PS3 Back Then?

Let’s just say I discovered how to time travel, and not only would it not create alternate timelines, but changing my past would allow me to relive it as well. One of the things that I would choose to change is the video game consoles that I grow up with. Instead of starting off with the Nintendo Game-Cube, then the Wii, and trying out PSP, GBC, GBA, DS, 3DS, Wii U, PS2, PS3, before finally transitioning to mobile and PC; I would grow up with the N64, Game-Cube, Wii, Wii U, PS3, PS4, GBA, DS, 3DS, PSP, PC, and try out mobile, GBC, PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS4 Pro, and the Switch.

Sadly, such events would never happen as it has been scientifically proven that time travel is impossible with current technology and way physics work. Even if time travel was possible, it would result in alternate timeline being created with the original unaffected. Also, time travel to the future is definitely possible when the technology allows it while travel to the past would break the laws of physics. I’ve always thought of how things would be better if I was simply born into a family with loving, functional, intelligent, young, richer, and competent parents.

Okay, if I were to narrate the story of how my childhood would be if I had all of those systems we would be here all day. Rather I will simply explain how my life would turn out if I grew up with the PS3 and then go from there. Of course, it would lead me to getting the PS2, PSP, and PS4 in this what-if scenario as I have a huge interest and passion for gaming. Since I’m not a psychic take these hypothetical events with a grain of salt and remember this is only for entertainment purposes. As always, I’ll try my best to make the article shorter than it needs to be.

Transitioning To Next-Gen Consoles

Obviously since at the time the Nintendo Wii was released, I would still inevitably gotten and played it since that was the rage during 2006-2010. But with peer pressure and my curiosity in just about any new product, I would have gotten the PS3 by my hypothetical loving parents in exchange for getting high grades in middle school. From there, I would begin playing major third party titles that my friends played and what the internet recommended (Mass Effect, Borderland, COD, etc). Since PSN was free back then, I also would’ve enjoyed playing online for the first time in my life.

But then after a few years, things would actually get pretty boring for me and I’d go back to the Wii and experience its rare gems too. If I had loving parents, not only would they have bought me new systems that I wanted so long that I did well in school, they also would have let me play whenever and how long I wanted. Yes, it’s quite embarrassing to admit this, but due to the anonymity of the internet , I might as well go ahead and reveal this. In my entire childhood, my strict parents refused to let me play during the weekdays and only allowed during weekends and holidays.

Even then, I was unfortunately severely limited by how much time I could spend during those non-school days. I had to constantly argue and manipulate my dysfunctional parents in order to get more playtime during weekends and holidays. At first, I was only allowed to play 30 minutes a day, then to 1 hour, after to 1 hour 30 minutes, and then 1 hour 45 minutes, eventually getting 2 hours. Now do you see why I played so little games and am very inexperienced with gaming in general? Of course, ever since entering university I played whenever and as long as I wanted.

Back to the hypothetical scenario, after years of enjoying my gaming journey on both the PS3 and Wii, I would move on to next-gen consoles. Again, so long as I maintained high grades, my (sadly fake) loving parents would then purchase Wii U and eventually PS4 too. Unlike my teenage years wasted on playing only a few dozen Wii games with only a few considered “AAA quality,” this altered past (if only it were real) would be much better. The experiences would be extremely similar if not the same as what I experience when I first started getting into PC gaming via Steam.

First thing is I would be blown away by the amazing graphics and hardware in the next-gen systems. Another is how much the online “platforms” for both PS4 and Wii U have improved from their predecessors. Of course these impressions I would also get from playing the PS3 for the first time; however, it wouldn’t be as extreme since the graphical difference between the Wii and PS3 wasn’t noticeable until around 2009. Sadly, after several years of playing the latest and greatest titles, I would come to another sad truth about the gaming industry like I do now.

The reality of modern video games is that most of them are the same old shit we’ve been playing for years with only graphics and extra content being different. And when the developers do try being innovative, they take things to the extreme and fail so they go back to older roots and play it safe. That would then result in me on longer being very interested in gaming and allows me to have complete self control with that hobby and be able to do other more fun and/or productive tasks. Sadly, it is in my current life that I still haven’t gotten over my “addictive” gaming phase yet.

Experimenting With Other Platforms

With this alternate reality where my gaming life isn’t inhibited, I also would want to try out and play handheld, mobile, and PC gaming. Having played on so many consoles, beaten probably hundreds of games over the course of a decade, and being able to balance it with school and other important tasks would convince me to go further. My hypothetical understanding parents would certainly buy me the GBC, GBA, and DS as a kid to be happy, while getting the 3DS, PSP, and mobile devices through the achievement of high grades and other useful accomplishments.

Since I wouldn’t be limited by when and how much I can play, eventually I would easily get over the addiction phase and have complete control. That along with being a successful child would convince my sadly fake loving parents to believe that I am more than capable of having these extra gadgets for fun. Never again would I be bored (as having normal parents would also enable me to enrol in extra circular activities and attend much more social events) and be seen as a gaming addict. Hell, they’d probably even try out gaming as a way to bond with me as well.

By the time I reach college, I would have already played so much games on so much systems that I wouldn’t be the semi-failure that I am today. Yes, gaming so much in university sort of lowered my GPA (there were other legitimate factors) and it made me lose motivation in doing other things. With this summer being over halfway completed, I have managed to get over the “addictive” phase as well, and this coming fall I will be able to have total control. Anyways, since PC gaming is extremely expensive and me ceasing to be a minor, my parents would no longer fund my gaming hobby.

Unlike my current situation where I started with a low end potato PC (and still am, albeit a better one), I would save up enough money for a gaming laptop. Instantly skipping low end hardware and starting off right with mid range PC, I could for the first time in my life experience how PC gaming is superior to consoles without the limitations that I face in my real life. I would then no longer want to go back to them and most likely sell almost all my systems and games to save up even more money so that I can immediately assemble a super high end gaming PC upon graduating.

But due to my nostalgia, I wouldn’t completely abandon consoles and try out the PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Xbox One X, and the Nintendo Switch. Having way more knowledge and experience in this alternate reality, I’d decide to no longer buy these consoles although I would play them with friends on their systems. So there you have it, the hypothetical alternate reality of what my gaming life would be like had I been born into a loving, functional, intelligent, competent, richer family. Not just my gaming life would change, but so would my social, educational, and personal life also.

Other Changes In What-If Scenario

I’ve already mentioned how I wouldn’t have the limitations that I have in my current pathetic life so let me elaborate it in detail. Sure, I would still be limited in playtime as a kid and sort of as a teenager, but when I begin and continue proving I have good grades and other achievements, my fictional parents would be proud of me. They would increase the limits and let me play much more often until eventually I virtually have none since they have enough trust that I can control myself. I’m honestly getting emotional just thinking about how pathetic my life is.

By doing other activities and actually being engaged with other people, my alternate parents wouldn’t be concerned about gaming so much. Therefore, having so much systems and games shouldn’t make me seem like a loser and is necessary to obtain self control which would help later throughout my life. Speaking of addiction, since my hypothetical awesome parents would be the complete opposite of my dysfunctional irrational ones, I wouldn’t turn out to be so obsessed with gaming and be able to be very successful in university and also in getting a job.

Actually having a part time job also contributes to the savings I collect to eventually not only fund my PC gaming “career”, but also other things such as dating, taxes, bills, renting, textbooks, eating, transportation, etc. I’m not really get too personal about how my life would be different, but anybody with decent amount of logic/reasoning can deduce that I wouldn’t turn out to be the loser that I am today. Okay, I might seem too harsh on myself but it was to make you readers understand how better off I would be if I had functional superior loving parents.

In my current life, I have only barely had complete control after overcoming my “addiction” with gaming in university. I still am trying to buy even more games and trying to save money so I can not only buy a mid range gaming laptop, but also a high end workstation PC, all the consoles and handhelds I ever wanted, and all the games I ever wanted and more. Childhood is the time when you get to be truly yourself and not have to worry about consequences and responsibilities. What pains me is that had I had better parents, my life wouldn’t be a load of shit like it is for me now.

 

Debunking Common Gaming Myths

If you’re like me, chances are your parents are of a much older generation and have never been exposed to video games when they were young. Human nature dictates that we tend to fear the unknown; what we don’t understand, we come to both have an irrational fear and hatred for such things and concepts. My parents have always had a “phobia” for video games – completely believed in the negative stereotypes, tried everything they could to limit me from gaming, and would constantly belittle and ridicule me for having an interest in them.

Now with this article I’m not going to list and debunk every single lie about video games that baby boomers have. Instead, I will list down the myths that many parents, especially my own, seem to possess and prove them wrong. I’ll try to keep this compilation of myths and realities as short as possible, as we live in an era where youth tend to have extremely short attention spans and won’t bother reading anything as long as a very short essay. Here are all of the common myths parents believe about gaming and the comforting truths to debunk them:

Myth -> Video Games Rot Your Brain

Parents believe that video games require little to no mental concentration and usage of the brain. They reason that since it is for entertainment, the player is essentially losing their intelligence to such a mindless activity. However, they don’t seem to make the same negative claims when it comes to watching TV and movies…

Reality -> Video Games Improve Your Brain

Not only are those assumptions false and offensive, video games require high amounts of concentration and usage of the brain. Video games are classified as a mentally demanding activity unlike that of watching TV or movies. As with games like chess and poker, one must focus and be sharp in order to win.

In addition, numerous studies conclude you become better at problem solving, hand eye coordination, greater tenacity, and other skills that can never be obtained by watching TV or listening to music. Doesn’t it make the parents a bunch of hypocrites when they makes those claims about video games but not TV shows?

I’m not going to lie but video games is what kept my sanity and logic/reasoning in check throughout my childhood. It also prevents me from becoming the stupid man-child they believe I am from gaming so much. I get tired a lot after playing video games because it’s mentally demanding, kind of like when I study a lot for exams.

Myth -> Video Games Are For Youth

Parents believe all games are targeted towards either children, teenagers, or the general audience with some exceptions. Those exceptions they find are too violent, sexual, controversial, or inappropriate in other ways for kids. People who are adults that still game are seen as outcasts of society in their eyes.

Reality -> Video Games Are For Everyone

Although that myth was true back then from the late 1960’s to mid 1990’s, after that was when games were targeted to older audiences. As of the year of 2017, majority of gamers are in fact adults with the median being those in their mid to late 30’s.

Games that are too inappropriate for children are geared towards this audience. It surprises and shocks me to realize so many parents are still completely ignorant of the rating systems put in place for video games.  They exist so that consumers can be notified whether it is appropriate for specific age groups.

If you choose to buy a M rated or 16+ rated game to a minor you are not just letting them play “disgusting” games, but you are also breaking the law. Think about that before buying the next GTA or COD game for your child.

Myth -> Video Games Makes You Anti-Social

I can’t believe some parents (including my mom) still believe in this myth but they believe you get alienated from others when gaming. You decrease whatever social skills you already have and become very anti-social. Eventually you’ll refuse to interact with others and become a loner or socially awkward at work/school.

Reality -> Video Games Makes You Social

Oh how those few ignorant parents are so fucking wrong. Starting with the late 90’s and early 2000’s, gamers were introduced to online multiplayer. Consoles as early as the Play-Station 2 and the original Xbox had them which allowed random people to play games with one another from around the world.

Eventually with newer systems like the PS3 and Xbox 360 (as well as platforms like Steam), gamers were able to participate in virtual communities. Gamers were able to trade items, post user-generated content, display their own social profile, and do other things similar to social networks like Facebook, Twitter, and WeChat.

On top of that, players could communicate in-game and outside of them through voice chat and/or texting. So playing video games now a days actually makes you even more social and increases your social skills which benefit youth.

Myth -> Video Games Are Wasteful

Parents believe video games are mostly or completely waste of time and that you could be doing better things with your life. They find it just as immoral and time consuming as say doing drugs, banging prostitutes, and joining gangs. Most parents don’t have such extreme beliefs and state everything is to be done in moderation.

Reality -> Video Games Are Helpful

To the parents that believe too much of anything isn’t good and balance is needed, more power and support goes to you. Anyways, they have benefits that I previously mentioned that are proven by scientific researchers.

Such skills can help you get and succeed in jobs such as surgeons and video content creators. They can also help those suffering from stress, dyslexia, poor vision, autism, and so on to improve and reduce of those problems. So no, it’s not just better hand eye coordination that are beneficial in gaming.

Obviously if the only thing you’re doing besides mandatory stuff like eating, sleeping, bathroom, and going to school/work is gaming then you have issues. Unless you’re like me and stuck in a suburbs for the summer with nothing else to do since you lost connection with high-school friends.

Myth -> Video Games Require Gamepad

Now this myth applies more heavily to PC gaming rather than console gaming. Thing is my parents (and most likely others) believe that it is impossible to play video games without using a gamepad controller. Only mobile, arcade, and handheld devices are played using other means to interact in video games.

Reality -> Video Games Require Nothing

Even on consoles, more modern systems such as the Wii, Wii U, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, and the Nintendo Switch have other types. From touchscreen tablet controllers and motion based remotes, to arcade joysticks and steering wheels, to even just a typical keyboard and mouse set, there are many options to choose.

Hell, even on much older systems like the NES and Xbox had all sorts of gimmicky non-traditional controllers to play with. This past summer I’ve been mostly spending my time on my laptop just playing games from Steam, yet my parents assume I’m just browsing the internet simply because I’m not using a gamepad controller.

Most parents are already aware of the non-traditional controllers for consoles and arcades, but completely ignorant to other platforms of gaming. It pains me to see that such people still believe in these negative and old myths.

Myth -> Video Games Lead To Hospitalization

I can’t believe that my parents still believe in this bullshit because of testimonies from colleagues and from the mainstream dishonest media. How people still believe that playing video games for over 50 hours can kill you with a heart attack, or how constantly gaming can lead to “hand surgery” is beyond me.

Reality -> Video Games Are Not Toxic

Unless you have severe gaming addiction and/or have health conditions prior to getting ill or dying from too much gaming, you honestly won’t die or get ill. As an experiment, I played video games for one week straight back in university just before exam time to experience the negative affects or prolonged gaming.

I still did take bathroom breaks, cook and eat my own meals, and sleep for 6-8 hours every day.  But I skipped out on a few meals, neglected other responsibilities like studying (just for a week), and did nothing else but gaming in my spare time. And here I am still alive and healthy with no problems!

Well, the only problems I suffered was minor carpel tunnel syndrome in my right thumb and left marriage finger. I also became extremely tired due to the fact that video games are as mentally demanding as studying for exams. I honestly didn’t get addicted after that since I went back to studying and not gaming so much.