I disagree. There are plenty of general threads with helpful, quality discussion about their subject. Borderlands 2 generals are usually very helpful. XCOM. MWO. There are a few offenders, though. SC2 and LoL to name a few, but just because some groups that frequent these boards shitpost doesn't mean you should shitcan the whole thing. Just moderate them more heavily.

If you want to discuss a specific aspect of a game, just do it on /v/, where it belongs and don't visit /vg/ at all.

>For the love of God, ban general threads and merge /vg/ back into /v/.

Don't you dare suggest this. some of the most quality threads/discussion I've seen have been on /vg/, where in /v/ it would have been torn apart by trolls in seconds. The system is fine the way it is.

General thread quality is usually very high during the first few weeks/months of a game's release. The problem is the general's quality degrades over time and ends up being a complete shithole.

Borderlands 2, XCOM, and Torchlight 2 general were all very helpful to me and had good discussion because there are still topics to discuss. Older generals like TF2, SC2, LoL, and KS general are filled to the brim with namefags/tripsfags/avatarfags that circlejerk and post off-topic constantly.

I feel like there needs to be more mods/janitors deleting off-topic posts and banning avatarfags or mods just need to ban certain general threads once they've reached the point where there is nothing left to discuss.

>>229431

That helpful, quality discussion could just as easily be found in a normal thread on /v/, though. All it would require would be a bit more wading through shitposts than in /vg/. In fact I think you'd have to wade through -more- shitposts on /vg/ than you would in /v/, given the generals that are constantly at the front page.

I see absolutely no reason to discuss Game X in /v/ and /vg/ at the same time, the only difference therein being that one has a longstanding community and the other doesn't.

It would not be torn apart in seconds on /v/, stop talking out your ass. /v/ is fairly civil most days, though there's been a slowly increasing amount of shitposting that Moot doesn't seem to want to address (and judging by the sticky on /v/ seems to be largely ignoring in favor of calling us idiots).

You're ignoring that all generals will eventually go the way of the older ones, i.e. LoL general- with nothing new to discuss and nobody willing to let the threads die, everyone talks about themselves and what they're doing. Frankly, I'd rather have a temporary thread about Game X that I'll get some information out of and maybe see again in a couple days than see Game X General up all day every day, slowly festering in its own bile thanks to the day-in day-out discussion of the same tired old elements once the initial topics dry up. They are an EXTREMELY temporary solution to a problem that wasn't too big to begin with. And they're certainly not enough to warrant a board.

File: 1349924534808.jpg-(48 KB, 748x464, 1349918995756.jpg)

>>229451
>That helpful, quality discussion could just as easily be found in a normal thread on /v/, though.

File: 1349924738946.png-(202 KB, 476x476, 1341088352842.png)

>>229457

You sure showed me!

>>229447
>General thread quality is usually very high during the first few weeks/months of a game's release
This, 24/7 generals just exhaust all possible discussion and more or less just turns into a chatroom for the regular posters to socialize. I find the general with a broad range of games instead of just one are much better off such as grand strategy generals. Fightan generals on the other hand is quite horrid which isn't surprising considering the main games are japanese

>>229468

>24/7 generals just exhaust all possible discussion and more or less just turns into a chatroom for the regular posters to socialize

That's the exact point I've been trying to make.

Just having the occasional normal thread would actually keep discussion moving for far longer. Having a constant thread up for it is just bad for everyone involved.

Well, I only visit /vg/ for Dwarf Fortress and Roguelike generals. These are always high quality threads without any circlejerking to be seen. These type of games are very complex and so there is always something relevant to be discussed. I imagine they also appeal to a more mature userbase than your average mainstream game.

tl;dr: don't throw the treasure out with the trash.

>>229481

They're the exception, rather than the rule.

They're the two gold doubloons in the entire landfill in your metaphor.

>>229481
Autistic hipster shit attracts a smaller crowd, and smaller crowds usually have fewer shitposters.

The games are pretty fun, though.

>>229422 (OP)
4chan itself exists as a longstanding community and generals were created as a means to keep on-going discussions going in a controlled and regulated manner.

Instead of having people create a new thread every time they have a stray thought about a game or show or comic, there is already one going where all interested people who would respond to a thread on the topic are already discussing the latest material, news, and updates.

>>229490

The generals are an extremely temporary fix, though.

What happens when the content dries up? The threads stay up despite the lack of new information thanks to the new mini-community, resulting in shitposting and off-topic discussion thanks to the lack of said information to discuss.

It's at this point that the threads should die out until new information is obtained, but judging by League of Legends General alone, that isn't how it works.

The entire point of 4chan was to make a thread if you had a stray thought you wanted to discuss. It seems like a good idea on paper to make one megathread to discuss all those stray thoughts, but with all the stray thoughts grouped together they all burn out.

Generals aren't a good solution in the slightest. It's like a company buying their own stock to temporarily inflate their scores and attract investors; it works for all of two seconds, then you're even worse off than you were before.

>>229486
>Autistic hipster shit

Precisely why I don't want us to have to go back to /v/. Back before /vg/ existed, DF threads were constantly "trolled" by shitposters stopping in to leave comments like that. On /vg/, everyone pretty much ignores us and our threads are peaceful with everyone just discussing the game.

File: 1349929875774.jpg-(17 KB, 400x300, sigh.jpg)

>>229422 (OP)
>It violates the very point of an anonymous chan imageboard. It shouldn't be accepted and should never have been accepted. It looks like a good solution to the problem of having multiple threads about the same thing at first, but it all goes to shit the very second discussion runs out for the topic-of-choice.
No.

>>229451
>That helpful, quality discussion could just as easily be found in a normal thread on /v/
Your experience is unique, OP. /v/ is a shitty board for talking about vidya and it'd be unfair to the users of /vg/ to force them to go back to /b/ lite.

>All it would require would be a bit more wading through shitposts than in /vg/.
We don't want to wade through shit to talk about our interests. It's a lot simpler to have one or two threads open in a tab with a notifier when new posts are made, than have to open the catalog and search for the threads we want.

>>229493
For many people, the general threads are unfortunately a source of content for the topic at hand. New ideas, fan art, and unfortunate other things come from these threads which turn into the topic for the General thread as it moves along.

I don't think this is a good thing by any means and I think any community, especially one which pitches its tent on 4chan, should be so eager for self-produced content.

I watched the pony threads go from a few guys saying they liked the show to self-congratulatory faggots talking about how productive and amazing their fandom community was and how it made so much great fan art and fan fiction (fan fiction is never great. Never.) they were producing.

In this way, some general threads become a gathering area for artists to get their dicks sucked by a collective of desperate fans, hungrily gobbling up any and all content that comes their way in between updates, hiatuses, and new shit.

However, I believe that this is a better solution than letting them run free, leaving drawfags to wander elsewhere, finding new ways to get easy praise, or simply trying to force them out. Not a good one, but it works.

Additionally, there is the tricky issue of determining the value of a thread in the first place. We're grading turds here. Everything on 4chan is pretty much worthless by default, after all. Insisting that a thread isn't good enough because it doesn't meet your standards opens the discussion to all sorts other bothersome topics. To many people who use general threads and set up home within them, they are just good enough. People to talk to, images to gawk at, things to be said about a topic that relates to the board they occupy, and in their eyes, that's nothing that should be removed, policed, or frowned upon.

File: 1349936050636.jpg-(20 KB, 626x471, 1348374745376.jpg)

>>229623
>fan fiction is never great. Never.
Retard. All fiction is fan fiction, the only thing that changes is how derivative the product is.

>>229626
Don't gimme that "Hero with a thousand faces" bullshit. Go actually read that book. That's not what it's about.

File: 1349936352561.jpg-(78 KB, 500x333, 1346292739449.jpg)

>>229628
Name something great and I'll prove to you it was plagiarized.

>>229630
My Five.

File: 1349938269002.gif-(805 KB, 500x375, Y2ZQL.gif)

>>229632
What the fuck's that? Sounds stupid.

>>229638
wow nerd u jus got pwn3d h4rd.

>>229490
Then go to a forum or textboard if you want long term discussion.
Threads on 4chan are supposed to die after a while for a reason.
The need to have a thread open all the time leads to pointless spam just to keep the thread alive and ultimately shitposting takes over and the thread.
There is also no official archive so you have to resort to third party websites if you want to catch up on such a long term discussion.

>>229691
>Then go to a forum or textboard if you want long term discussion.
No

>>229692
Then accept the way 4chan works and quit circumventing the system.

File: 1349945951446.png-(742 KB, 1024x768, 1346019957857.png)

>>229694
We're not

The 'very point' of 4chan is not anonymity, and never has been.

>>229695
Recreating a thread as soon as it hits the bump limit or prunes is against the intentions of the site.
Threads shouldn't stick to the frontpage all the time and discussion needs to die when it grows stale.
http://www.4chan.org/faq#bump
http://www.4chan.org/faq#prunedelete

Don't avatarfag. You can already be identified with your ID.

>>229461
No, he has a point. /v/'s hyper-opinionated culture leads to every single thread turning into some sort of debate instead of helpful or quality discussion.

>Weapons in vidya?
Katana argument

>Retro City Rampage?
hurrr may mays

>Dark Souls
ARTIFICIAL LOL

And so on.

Actual discussion is rare as fuck.

Borderland 2 generals were just fine even a week ago. STALKER generals are fucking great. The real shit ones are MOBA/strategy ones, which have degenerated into horrifying monstrosities.

File: 1349948307276.png-(69 KB, 190x167, fuck everything.png)

>>229699
Those links don't say that recreating threads that his the bump limit is against the rules.

>>229546

"No" is not an argument.

If people in /vg/ actually talk about video games then it'd be good for /v/ if there was a mass insurge of people that talked about video games, wouldn't it?

You already do have to wade through shit to talk about your interests if you navigate through /vg/ by first page.

>>229722
Because it's common sense and goes beyond mere rules.
/r9k/ doesn't mention in the rules that circumventing the robot is a bannable offense either.

File: 1349951368115.png-(156 KB, 290x274, krk krk.png)

>>229725
>It's not a rule
Guess that's settled then.

>>229723
>"No" is not an argument.
No.

>If people in /vg/ actually talk about video games then it'd be good for /v/ if there was a mass insurge of people that talked about video games, wouldn't it?
That's like saying it'd be good for /b/ if we deleted /mu/ and /co/ so /b/ would become a little more random. It'd be good for /b/ but the shitposters would still outnumber the quality posters and dominate the board.

>You already do have to wade through shit to talk about your interests if you navigate through /vg/ by first page.
No, I just use the catalog initially and then do other things while the thread updates in a new tab. If you didn't have general threads then I'd have to constantly look for new threads and wouldn't be able to multitask.

>>229744
Grade A narcissistic personality disorder, right here

>>229725
>It's how I think things should be, so it should be an enforcable site rule

a-fucking-dorable.

Nope, nada, nicht, nein, no, not gonna' let the thread fade into obscurity.

I was a stubborn ass when I was just against Homestuck General and I'm gonna' be a stubborn ass tenfold against all generals.

>>230314

Oh, shit, I literally didn't see that reply that was posted -two minutes ago-.

Sorry, everybody, I'm fucking stupid.

OP how do you propose what /v/ does with all the old generals coming back if you had your way with closing down /vg/?

>>230317
Considering you're arguing for the removal of:

>Roguelike generals
>STALKER generals
>An entire fucking board, which is STATED IN THE STICKY TO NOT HAPPEN
>Rance/Alicesoft generals
>Basically a type of thread regardless of the actual content or relatedness

>>230318
Obviously, they'll be banned for /v/ too, since Op doesn't like them so fuck you.

>>230318

Well given that if /vg/ was closed it'd most likely be because of generals being banned, so I guess /v/ would just have an influx of new/old-but-migrated-back-to-/v/ users.

>>230319

I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times the shit far outweighs the good. And no, the sticky for /q/ only says that requests for -new- boards won't happen.

>Unless we are explicitly accepting board suggestions in a stickied thread, board requests will be ignored.

People wanting to discuss roguelikes, STALKER, and Rance/Alicesoft games would have to go to /v/ if the generals were shut down. I fail to see how "Good things would get shut down, too!" suddenly negates that there's far more shitty generals than there are good ones.

I'm also pretty sure I've gone over why generals should be shut down in the first place, too.

I agree with you, OP. General threads are endemic of the festering, circlejerking, hugbox echochamber mentality that 4chan has always tried to avoid. That's the whole POINT of the anonymity. But it seems lately that the site has been making more and more capitulations to these kinds of people, and every time, they tear away another little piece of 4chan's spirit and purpose. Given enough time, there isn't going to be anything left. Nothing we'd recognize, anyways.

>>230319
They're all horrible and would not be missed. Kind of the point?

>>230318
considering they'd be banned entirely, I imagine people would eventually get tired of ban evading to make threads that end up deleted in short order. It wouldn't even make for good trolling.

Do any of you not remember the sheer autsimad that caused /vg/ to be made in the first place? Thread after thread was made screaming "GET THESE GENERAL THREADS OFF /V/!!!!!!", until Moot caved in and made /vg/. Can you imagine the shitstorm that would occur if /vg/ was shut down? /v/ would devolve into absolute anarchy.

>>230311
Where did I say it should be a rule? I said it's how the site works. The bump limit is not a technical limitation like the image limit.

>>230349
>Where did I say it should be a rule?

>goes beyond mere rules.

Point out the specific text saying general threads are against the rules, please.

>They're all horrible and would not be missed.

>Roguelike generals are horrible
>STALKER generals are horrible
>Alicesoft generals are horrible
>I DON'T LIKE THIS KIND OF THREAD! BAN IT! BAN THE BOARD!

I'm sorry, no. You do not dictate site policy. Generals are not against the rules or the purpose of the site.

>>230353
General threads are a breeding ground for cancer. You know this yes?

>>230353
>Generals are not against the rules or the purpose of the site.
The FAQ says otherwise.
>This method of post-limiting, while sometimes inconvenient, assures that content is kept fresh on the boards.

Do you need a rule that threads have to start with a picture or that you should link to posts you're replying to?

>>230354
But they are not cancer themselves. Posters post cancer - should we ban everyone, ever? Should we say no new threads can be made, because they might be cancer? Should we prevent any posting at all?

No, of course not, that's retarded. So is deleting a containment board and banning an entire type of thread.

It's clear you don't understand the positives that Generals bring.

>OP Pasta
Generally contains highly informative links and the like, like good roguelikes to check out or mods to use, that would never be seen in normal threads because "hurr spoonfeeding". However, in a General, it's usually right there to stop people asking.

>A convenient place to speak with like-minded enthusiasts about topic X without people coming into the thread solely to shit it up with "hurr x sux", which happens every single time in normal /v/.

If you want to get rid of shitposting, then report it, hide it, and move the fuck on with your life. Use recursive hiding/filtering for tripfags. Understand that some people enjoy or are entertained by the things you call "cancer", and stay off the board you hate so much, since it does not affect any other part of the site, ever.

Don't sit on /q/ and act like you are Mr. Grand Vizier Of Quality Posting.

>>230363
I still don't see anything saying "General, that is to say, repeated topics about the same subject, are not allowed", ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WE HAVE A WHOLE BOARD FOR THEM.

The anonymous Japanese boards 4chan is based on use generals all the time. You seem to be very confused about what the point of this type of board is.

/vg/'s generals made it possible to discuss video games on 4chan, and the boards introduction was an overwhelming success. Your only goal seems to be ruining everything, which is standard procedure for /v/.

>>230314
>>230317
This is everything you need to know about general haters right here.

>>230367
I didn't say we can't have recurring threads. I said threads shouldn't last forever and that the chan system is ill fit for long term discussion due to the lack of an (official) archive.

>>230371
Are you mixing up futaba and 2channel?

>>230374
They don't, even on /vg/. Thread turnover is about one or two days, at most four with slower ones.

File: 1349990625117.jpg-(9 KB, 183x200, 1318582265767.jpg)

>>230371
No, it made it possible to have masturbatory "get-togethers" for lonely people who are so desperate for anything even remotely approaching a friend that they are willing to turn a single shared interest into, well, what every General Thread eventually becomes.

Sometimes not even that, sometimes they come AFTER the General has already devolved, never even having an interest in the original subject and never talking about it to begin with.

>>230379
Go ahead and try to have a civil discussion about any of the following on /v/:

>Roguelikes

>Borderlands

>STALKER

>Dark Souls

>Pretty much any videogame, really

The only good threads in /v/ are ROB threads. I've yet to encounter anything approaching civility in any other thread - and janitors watch ROB threads like FUCKING HAWKS.

If I want to discuss, say, the viability of a Gaige build, I HAVE to go to the general, or else the thread will be 500 posts of HURR PONEES

>>230377
Generals try to keep threads alive by constantly bumping them and recreating them as soon as they hit the bump limit.
In some cases the new thread will even begin with replies to posts in the previous thread.
The original idea was to have something like a sticky that clings to the frontpage so that users who only refresh the frontpage won't start new threads on a specific topic.

The age of threads in /vg/ varies considerably. Some last over a month while others are "filled" in a matter of hours. But /vg/ isn't the only board with generals you can even find them on slow boards like /3/ or /u/.

>>230383
uh, I've had tons of great discussions about Dark Souls on /v/ without general threads? ALL of those things I saw discussed just fine on /v/ previously. You only get trolling on new games, once that dies down and things fall out of the spotlight, /v/ stops being contrary about it.

/vg/ is necessary, but the board obviously needs more aggressive moderation. All the posters really need is to learn not to post when there's nothing to say and the board will slow down to a point where it serves its actual purpose of containing discussion for games that have an active scene or community. /vg/ could potentially be a fine niche board.

However, the problem with non-/vg/ generals (as I have explained in previous threads about them) is that there aren't enough of them to justify their own board, nor do they contain actual board related, rule abiding content. They're almost exclusively shitposting and empty chatter about nothing.

I like /vg/ and the few times I feel the need to visit a general I find a lot of interesting points.

24 hour discussion is bound to stagnate but nobody is forcing you to go in those threads. Because /vp/ is filled with posters who already know everything about the game the generals are almost an excuse to talk about unrelated topics, but I see no problem with it because I don't bother with it

File: 1349998974301.png-(197 KB, 470x313, avatar-the-last-airbender(...).png)

>>230330
>I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times the shit far outweighs the good.
In your opinion.

>>230476

No shit, Sherlock Holmes.

File: 1350011698059.gif-(76 KB, 157x158, better-Toph.gif)

>>230587
I disagree. A lot of other people do as well.

>>230672

And there's other people that -do- agree.

Your point?

>>230672
>>230476
Do you use an avatar to devalue your point? Are you actually against generals and try to discredit them this way?

File: 1350036018348.jpg-(352 KB, 1532x1130, 1349988227584.jpg)

I agree with the OP, look at the Arsenal General on /sp/. It's just full of the same people shit posting day after day, with any real discussion extremely limited. Rather than making a thread when there is some news to discuss they just sit circlejerking until a piece of news comes out where they then pretend it's a sport thread.

Please mods, please kill the generals.

I honestly can't disagree with the OP points but I want a place where I can talk about games. Sometimes even trying to have a nice discussion on /v/ will have some idoit redirect you to /vg/.

Honestly imo /vg/ should become the new /v/ community and the current idiots on /v/ should have a worksafe /soc/ as that what they are using it as anyway.

Basically TL;DR: I agree with OP but only if the mods get strict as fuck on /v/ and ban everyone who really should be on /soc/ anyway. At /v/ current state though I honestly don't want it back. They can keep that shit pile.

File: 1350071404984.png-(97 KB, 180x253, toph3.png)

>>230983
If you don't like general threads, you should just ignore them. You don't have the right to ban them for all the people that do like them.

General threads should only be deleted if they become overwhelmingly off topic.

>>231461

I've found that people who're part of the problem are usually the ones saying "just ignore it, it's not a big deal", etc.

I don't have the right nor do I even have the opportunity to gain the right to ban generals. But the mods do, and that's why I'm asking if they can, at the very least, look into it, because generals invite far more shit than they do quality.

>>231467

Roughly half of all generals would go down the toilet, in that case. I can get behind it, keep the ones that're actually productive and shitcan the ones that don't talk about the actual topic anymore.

>>231480
>I've found that people who're part of the problem are usually the ones saying "just ignore it, it's not a big deal", etc.
That's self fulfilling and you're a twat.

>>231480
If /v/ is such a good board, why would you want to make it worse by merging it with general thread posters anyway?

>>231480

>I've found that people who're part of the problem are usually the ones saying "just ignore it, it's not a big deal", etc.

So the mods are the problem? Their message to combating shitposting is:

>Report, hide, move on

>>231492

If I thought it would make /v/ worse I wouldn't be crying about merging /vg/ back into /v/, now would I?

You've said as much yourself, there's plenty of good posters in generals. I'm against the -system of generals- due to it resulting in quickly beating the horse to death and then pounding it into the ground for a few months afterwards, not the actual content discussion.

>>231503

I suppose they could be considered part of the problem, depending on how you look at it.

File: 1350075502158.png-(100 KB, 204x245, toph2.png)

>>231504
Those good posters all want to post on /vg/, not /v/. They have no problem with the "system of generals". If you do, then you have the option to post on /v/, but you should try to take away that choice from everyone.

You know what I'd really like in /vg/?

Removal of tripcodes. I am absolutely sick of topics being derailed because every tripfag is jerking each other off in a general.

I know you mods are okay with trips, but there is literally NO reason to keep trips on /vg/

>>231524
We require trips for writefags and questfags who use /tg/

>>231526
I'm sorry but I see far too much circlejerkery in /vg/ due to trip users and it's very difficult to ignore.

There are several games I would like to discuss that are constantly shat on by various trip users, whether it be people complaining that they don't like the tripuser or them just posting irrelevant shit.

It honestly does not benefit from trips at all, and I don't even know what /tg/ has to do with it. I just think they should be disallowed on /vg/

I think forced anon with ID would go a long way to improving /vg/.

>>231528
I think you just needs to accept that Katawa Shoujo and Starcraft have shitty fanbases, and move on, at least if they use trips you can filter them, them being anon wouldn't fix anything.