Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

I don't know if this is the right thread for this, but since it's predominately video game-related I guess here is better than anywhere else.

I think LootCrates are the dumbest fucking things on the planet. They're trash, and they're absolutely not worth the money even at the ridiculous "$13.37" price point. Every month I see Ashens do his unboxing of one and it makes me happy to know that someone else sees them with at least as much general derision as I do.

I think the shirt designs are mediocre at best and a lot of the "loot" inside looks like tat that developers hand out as promos at conventions or the kinds of crap you get for preordering a game at GameStop. Also, codes for downloadable content for random games is just worthless filler and a total cop out. I distinctly remember Ashens getting sheets of stickers from YouTube celebrities which I think is probably the most pathetic merchandise ever. I also think giving out blind bags is crap because there's no guarantee you'll get anything remotely interesting and it comes off as a ploy to buy into a bunch of sketchy IP cash-in "collectibles". Speaking of collectibles, I think the "POP!" figurines are some of the ugliest toys I've ever seen and the LootCrate people seem to just throw one of those things into every box as the "big ticket" item.

There have been very few things stuffed into the LootCrates that are remotely interesting to me and the only one I can think off of the top of my head is the stress reliever shaped like a 20-sided D&D die. I don't even like D&D, I just think it's cool because I like math and geometry. I can get one of those for about five bucks on eBay if I really wanted one.
 
Bulbasaur isn't considered "bad". It's more so considered a crutch since it's essentially playing the game on Easy mode. Wheras Squirtle forces you to train a partner to fight Misty and later Surge. And Charmander forces you to raise one for Brock.

I thought it had more to do with grass types being offensively lacking.
Charizard can get fire blast/flamethrower
Blastoise can get hydro pump and ice beam/blizzard
Venusaur's gen 1 moveset only had two notable grass moves, razor leaf (much weaker than all of the above) and solarbeam (takes 2 turns)
 
I thought it had more to do with grass types being offensively lacking.
Charizard can get fire blast/flamethrower
Blastoise can get hydro pump and ice beam/blizzard
Venusaur's gen 1 moveset only had two notable grass moves, razor leaf (much weaker than all of the above) and solarbeam (takes 2 turns)
Right but even still the major difficulty in playing these games is always the start. Once you get to level 30-40 I never had to worry about combat with any of the starters. The only time I remember dying all that much was at the beginning and at the Elite Four.
 
Bayonetta is extremely underrated. I still can't believe it sold so poorly. I think some people took it way too seriously.
Totally.

Between the fast paced and crazy comat with a shit ton of combos, the creative list of enemies, the gorgeous environments, the slick and responsive controls, the upbeat music, and Bayonetta herself, that game is definitely one of my favorite action games.
 
  • Bioware games after Mass Effect 2 suck.
  • Many aspects of oldschool MMORPGs are dated and should not be brought back today. There's shit like corpse runs, exp loss or group experience debt (your dipshit healer dies? Your own XP will be slower, too!) etc. They would not fare well on today's market. You get a lot of oldschool EverQuest 1/2 fans and stuff who are like WE NEED A REAL MMO IT WILL KILL WOW.
  • I am fucking sick of Five Nights at Freddy's.
  • I don't like roguelikes. Nothing against the genre but it's not my style.
  • People give many game companies shit but if Nintendo did the same thing people would eat that up.
  • Fuck zombie games. I modded L4D2 until it wasn't coherent anymore because fuck zombies.
  • I like John Wick in Payday 2.
 
I personally can not understand why so many people like Secret of Mana. I find it to be clunky and boring and I love classic SNES RPGs.
 
Sonic games were never good, not even the first one. Specifically I want to talk about how the first one is shitty. And I'm not even talking about the fact that Sonic was just a Sega's attempt to get into the Mario-style platformer genre, or that the storyline makes no sense.

The mechanics of the game are just shitty. The whole game is about a hedgehog that goes fast, but in order to actually progress in the later stages, you have to take your time and go slow (you know, like a real platformer) otherwise you literally have no time to react to hazards. Since Sonic is in the dead middle of the screen, it means you only have the front half of the screen to work with in it comes to spotting out enemies.

If Sonic is traveling at his optimum level-ground speed, you literally have 8 frames (Or 1/4th of a second) to jump before you're hit. Pretty much impossible for the human eye to spot it and react in time. So you're FORCED to slow down to avoid this shit. In a game about going fast. So in order to actually make people think they're doing something, they had all those loops, corkscrews and buttons to give the illusion of speed under control. But the game is essentially playing itself in those stretches. You're waiting for Sonic to do his thing while you just watch him go fast and look cool

The level design is counter intuitive as well. There's all sorts of hidden areas and little places you can go back to and find, which is great and all, but in a game marketed for speed...it makes no sense to have levels that require you to slow down and look around.

In conclusion, Sonic is fundamentally flawed and the only reason he's famous is because Sega's marketing campaign was brilliant. Sonic was chosen to be their mascot. But that's why it's hard for Sega to crank out a decent sonic game today, because the core concept is flawed.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Sonic games were never good, not even the first one. Specifically I want to talk about how the first one is shitty. And I'm not even talking about the fact that Sonic was just a Sega's attempt to get into the Mario-style platformer genre, or that the storyline makes no sense.

The mechanics of the game are just shitty. The whole game is about a hedgehog that goes fast, but in order to actually progress in the later stages, you have to take your time and go slow (you know, like a real platformer) otherwise you literally have no time to react to hazards. Since Sonic is in the dead middle of the screen, it means you only have the front half of the screen to work with in it comes to spotting out enemies.

If Sonic is traveling at his optimum level-ground speed, you literally have 8 frames (Or 1/4th of a second) to jump before you're hit. Pretty much impossible for the human eye to spot it and react in time. So you're FORCED to slow down to avoid this shit. In a game about going fast. So in order to actually make people think they're doing something, they had all those loops, corkscrews and buttons to give the illusion of speed under control. But the game is essentially playing itself in those stretches. You're waiting for Sonic to do his thing while you just watch him go fast and look cool

The level design is counter intuitive as well. There's all sorts of hidden areas and little places you can go back to and find, which is great and all, but in a game marketed for speed...it makes no sense to have levels that require you to slow down and look around.

In conclusion, Sonic is fundamentally flawed and the only reason he's famous is because Sega's marketing campaign was brilliant. Sonic was chosen to be their mascot. But that's why it's hard for Sega to crank out a decent sonic game today, because the core concept is flawed.

Kinda agree.

I first played the original game via Generations and I thought Green Hill Zone was fun, but the zone afterwards was such a jarring shift in terms of level design. We go from running across a large green field filled with loops to a cramped underground area where you have to stand around on a platform slowly going across a pool of lava.

Personally, I kinda feel the sections in the Rayman Origins games where you have to speed up are better handled and more satisfying than most of the Sonic games I've played. I know that's a pretty lofty claim to make. I just happened to had more fun with those parts in the game than I did with whatever Sonic had.
 
Sonic games were never good, not even the first one. Specifically I want to talk about how the first one is shitty. And I'm not even talking about the fact that Sonic was just a Sega's attempt to get into the Mario-style platformer genre, or that the storyline makes no sense.

The mechanics of the game are just shitty. The whole game is about a hedgehog that goes fast, but in order to actually progress in the later stages, you have to take your time and go slow (you know, like a real platformer) otherwise you literally have no time to react to hazards. Since Sonic is in the dead middle of the screen, it means you only have the front half of the screen to work with in it comes to spotting out enemies.

If Sonic is traveling at his optimum level-ground speed, you literally have 8 frames (Or 1/4th of a second) to jump before you're hit. Pretty much impossible for the human eye to spot it and react in time. So you're FORCED to slow down to avoid this shit. In a game about going fast. So in order to actually make people think they're doing something, they had all those loops, corkscrews and buttons to give the illusion of speed under control. But the game is essentially playing itself in those stretches. You're waiting for Sonic to do his thing while you just watch him go fast and look cool

The level design is counter intuitive as well. There's all sorts of hidden areas and little places you can go back to and find, which is great and all, but in a game marketed for speed...it makes no sense to have levels that require you to slow down and look around.

In conclusion, Sonic is fundamentally flawed and the only reason he's famous is because Sega's marketing campaign was brilliant. Sonic was chosen to be their mascot. But that's why it's hard for Sega to crank out a decent sonic game today, because the core concept is flawed.
Oh the sonic series is totally shit. I mean even sega knew no one would actually play the game itself, so that's why they went out of their way with all the merchandizing and giving sonic the stereotypical 90's cool guy personality. And the whole speed aspect of the game was just a lazy attempt at trying to prove it wasn't just a furry Mario bros rip off.
 
fallout 3 was better than new vegas.

it ran better, had less crippling bugs, guns felt better (I SAID IT), and felt more desolate without being empty. the quests were more interesting, the song selection better, and the companions were more interesting. the story may not have been as solid but at least it felt contained and directed, whereas nv was simply all over the place.

vegas was an ugly, buggy mess. the dlc's were better but i'm not going to deem a game objectively superior because you managed to top mothership zeta.
 
and the companions were more interesting.
image.jpg


F3 had some of the most boring and two-dimensional companions ever.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Indie developers need to stop making 8-bit inspired games. The first few were creative, but now every other game is a sidescrolling platformer and it's getting old.
Oh my yes. I liked SMB back in the 80s. They're not doing anything you couldn't find in a bargain bin, and the only notable aspect is the fact that it's not from a big company.
 
Indie developers need to stop making 8-bit inspired games. The first few were creative, but now every other game is a sidescrolling platformer and it's getting old.

That's what pains me the most about indie games. Nowadays we have some pretty impressive technology and the most I see from indie devs is 8-bit games. It just feels like a waste of resources to me. I feel like they're just trying to appeal to the nostalgia crowd.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Indie developers need to stop making 8-bit inspired games. The first few were creative, but now every other game is a sidescrolling platformer and it's getting old.
That's what pains me about indie games. Nowadays we have some pretty impressive technology and the most I see from indie devs is 8-bit games. It just feels like a waste of resources to me. I feel like they're just trying to appeal to the nostalgia crowd really.
Unfortunately I believe it's due to most indie devs either being inexperienced or uninspired. Sidescrollers are typically the easiest game projects to make (apart from point and clicks and turn based rpg). The more ambitious indie games tend to be done by either current or former game devs that have jobs in the industry (Paper's Please was done by ex Call of Duty developers).
 
fallout 3 was better than new vegas.

it ran better, had less crippling bugs, guns felt better (I SAID IT), and felt more desolate without being empty. the quests were more interesting, the song selection better, and the companions were more interesting. the story may not have been as solid but at least it felt contained and directed, whereas nv was simply all over the place.

vegas was an ugly, buggy mess. the dlc's were better but i'm not going to deem a game objectively superior because you managed to top mothership zeta.
I agree, I keep the radio off when I play Vegas. The music is just too country for me. And playing on PS3 I have run into that nasty lag people talk about. But I do like the Blackjack table.
 
Duke Nukem: A Time to Kill is a forgotten gem of the PS1 and one of the best games for the system. It's a Tomb Raider clone, but it freaking works. The non-linear level designs of Duke Nukem 3D translated well to a 3rd person exploration game. While non-canon, it's far, far superior to DNF.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole