>This feels like the modern bathroom book as a game. Fun but just enough to be over when you have finished something more worth your time. Sometimes that's just what you need. Vampire survivors is my go to for when I burnt out from work and don't want to think anymore but need something to do.

Oh for sure. I actually discovered vampire survivors after finding its mobile clones and liked them all but for 20 minutes at a time. Once I tried to play the OG I just couldn't help but think of it as a passive game though and it lost my interest for long term play sessions. I think it's an import point that they are passive.


No I didn't request anyone else to stop having fun I am just pointing out my interpretation of the games and the name I use for them. Why does my opinion on it make you think that I am demanding you stop playing unless you care what others think about your own free time? I just like it differently and am voicing that. Your take as an attack means you feel a need to defend it preemptively, and over assume I care about you playing it.

>Have any of you ever tried risk of rain or heck even cuphead? You can have rapid gameplay and a point to it. This feels like the modern bathroom book as a game. Fun but just enough to be over when you have finished something more worth your time If you don't understand how that paragraph sounds judgmental then I don't know how to help you.

Yeah it's not something you play all day. I usually pick one or two of the challenges to do and by then I'm either de-stressed enough to do something else or I just go to bed.

Oh sure. It's a pointed jab at asking if people have tried games I enjoy while being a little condescending of a genre I find to be best at filling short moments. It just doesn't match that comic cause that's not demanding people stop enjoying something they like. If people can't separate criticism of a genre as not criticism of them I can't help them either.

Nice, yeah I get it. I keep struggling to play my much slower games when it's that late part of night and have decided to beat all my Roguelikes I have, but I can't help but admit I'd rather be playing Katamari Damacy. Now that's how I destress. But that's very passive.

>It’s a pointed jab at asking if people have tried games I enjoy while being a little condescending of a genre So you came into a thread talking about the classification of a genre with admittedly the sole purpose of making condescending jabs at people who enjoy said genre, (and notibly not contributing meaningfully to the actual discussion at hand) but you did *NOT* tell people to stop having fun. You were just telling them they were having fun wrong. Glad we cleared that up.

No. Pretty much exactly not that and I see you also suffer the issue. None of that is correct. And directly against what I just said. And I contributed a name.

Then you have expressed yourself poorly. Some of that may come from the fact that you came to a post about "How should we classify X" to complain about how you don't like X, which isn't relevant to the classification and no one cares.

No you immediately took criticism of a genre as a personal attack because of your own issues. You take it as poor communication because of your own interpretation and the pushback I am giving for your misunderstanding of my point. I have been consistent with saying it's a short term fun game for me and that I find other games to be more rewarding. Don't blame others for being offended by other peoples opinions. I added to the conversation with an offer of classification of _passive horde survivor_ and an explanation of how I got there. I'm even having a pleasant conversation about that right next to yours where you have been antagonistic. I don't even expect anything from you other than to stop insisting I care if you have fun playing a game I only mildly enjoy.

"It wasn't a *personal attack*, it was *condescending jabs*!" Okay? I never claimed you were attacking anything but the genre, and my point was no one cares and this isn't the place for it. >I’m even having a pleasant conversation about that right next to yours Yup, do you notice how the conversation goes better (and you stop receiving downvotes) when you stop with the condescending jabs? Maybe start there next time.

> So you came into a thread talking about the classification of a genre with admittedly the sole purpose of making condescending jabs at people who enjoy said genre, > I never claimed you were attacking anything but the genre Seriously dude? Also who cares about Lemmy downvotes. I saw someone downvote a question and upvote an absolutely false answer. People are called lemmings here. And you are most of the downvotes between you and me as I am yours for not adding to a conversation in good faith.

Okay, I guess I did claim you were taking jabs at people. That totally justifies your unprompted condescending jabs at the genre somehow, and retroactively doesn't make your initial post sound judgmental _at all_. Or we can just say you swayed me in your argument that you weren't criticising people, just the genre, and the rest of my criticism to your post still stands. (Note how the guy in the comment is also criticising the game and not the players).

You have the worst apologies for being a jerk. In fact you still haven't. This is a conversation about the genre. Where else to talk about the genre. It may not have been the conversation you wanted on it and didn't like that I didn't enjoy it your way and then made a bunch of incorrect statements on my point and then on putting words in my mouth. Oh good though I swayed you into barely conceding and that you still think you can control other people into not having conversations you don't like about a topic you like by being rude about them not enjoying it your way. Sorry I'm not you.

> You have the worst apologies for being a jerk. In fact you still haven’t. Correct, I wasn't apologizing at all. There is so much projection here: >being a jerk If you don't like people reflecting your energy don't give out that energy in the first place. >Sorry I’m not you. That's rich from the person who unprompted came in with condescending jabs because a genre they don't like exists and has some popularity. >This is a conversation about the genre. Where else to talk about the genre. This is a conversation about classification. Imagine if someone had an AskLemmy post asking "Are tomatoes fruits or vegetables?" and someone replied with "How about we call them bland nutrition? Tomatoes have seeds and are slightly savory. Have you ever tried a strawberry? You can have seeds and have flavour. This feels like the ancient version of empty calories. It will fill your stomach until you find food more worth your time." What does that have to do with the question being asked and who cares that this rando doesn't like tomatoes?

Hey. No.