Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Auto saves, especially how they are implemented in modern games is a symptom of everything becoming open world Ubislop with a bunch of downtime, played exclusively by the unthinking masses. Video games are the same as any other software where relying on auto save to ensure you don’t lose an entire session’s progress is a skill issue.
What about that one time I was playing Sleeping Dogs and my PC had an aneurysm while the game was autosaving? I had to replay 2/3 of the game because it only had one save slot. Can games at the very least have more than one save slot just in case?
 
They are, but most modern goobers see them as hard.

They didn't live back in my time as a kid, when finishing games was a hard-earned achievement, not a normal occasion.
I will say I think NG1 is harder than CV1, but they're in the same tier.

tbh NES Contra and Super C are the biggest difficulty frauds ever: they're both easier than NG1 or CV1 or the Mega Mans or lots and lots of other things, but they have this rep as some of the most difficult games ever because people put in the extra lives code and don't even try them the real way. They are genuinely pretty tame as that kind of game goes.
 
I will say I think NG1 is harder than CV1, but they're in the same tier.

tbh NES Contra and Super C are the biggest difficulty frauds ever: they're both easier than NG1 or CV1 or the Mega Mans or lots and lots of other things, but they have this rep as some of the most difficult games ever because people put in the extra lives code and don't even try them the real way. They are genuinely pretty tame as that kind of game goes.
Basically. It's like how most Starcraft players who played the game as kids went into the campaign mode with cheat codes on first, just to see the story. Many of them didn't beat the regular campaign fairly until way into adulthood.

I remember how my cousins considered beating NG1 as something special. But I'd say NG1 is easier for me because of Ryu's speed and wall-jumping, it makes dodging attacks and avoiding damage much easier, which then makes fighting the bosses easier when you get to them with more health.

The bosses themselves are also more predictable in NG1; the closest to real difficulty I've had was Jaquio, and once you figure out how to dodge his fireballs, it's over for him. All you need is patience, and you can whittle him down bit by bit.

Bloody Malth and the End Boss Demon are a bit of a toss-up, but I overcame the former by just constantly charging and attacking, while the latter, it's all about your luck in dodging the fireballs.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I forget, did Castlevania have respawning enemies?

Because the worst aspect of Ninja Gaiden's difficulty was the fact that the edge of the screen was near a monster spawn he would spawn back. Enemies on platform would essentially spawn while you were midair, this coupled with the ridiculous high knockback would almost certainly mean death. I died from HP so rarely in that game.
 
I forget, did Castlevania have respawning enemies?

Because the worst aspect of Ninja Gaiden's difficulty was the fact that the edge of the screen was near a monster spawn he would spawn back. Enemies on platform would essentially spawn while you were midair, this coupled with the ridiculous high knockback would almost certainly mean death. I died from HP so rarely in that game.
Depends. I remember some Castlevania games kept spawning enemies until you left the room. They'd even spawn from the ground, not just the edge of the screen.
 
Auto saves, especially how they are implemented in modern games is a symptom of everything becoming open world Ubislop with a bunch of downtime, played exclusively by the unthinking masses. Video games are the same as any other software where relying on auto save to ensure you don’t lose an entire session’s progress is a skill issue.
In contrast, the problem I always had with manual saves were me having to extend my play sessions just so I could get to the next save or I could hit a certain cap of progress during a play session. This was especially annoying in GTA SA where stuff like amphibious assault and saving uncle sam could eat up a lot of progress and no saves. Im not saying you should have the ability to save mid missions or have save scum abilities cause thats just gonna reduce difficulty. But I would like at least custom saves, where I get to save at the start of the mission and continue later. This avoids all the travel and bullshit meaningless shenanigans I have to do to get to the start.
I forget, did Castlevania have respawning enemies?

Because the worst aspect of Ninja Gaiden's difficulty was the fact that the edge of the screen was near a monster spawn he would spawn back. Enemies on platform would essentially spawn while you were midair, this coupled with the ridiculous high knockback would almost certainly mean death. I died from HP so rarely in that game.
The NES ones had respawning enemies. All NES games have respawning enemies cause there were tech and memory issues with trying to hardcode enemies so they just made them respawn (especially if they were off screen). It was also done to inflate difficulty. I dont remember if SCIV had respawning enemies, I dont think it did.
I will say I think NG1 is harder than CV1, but they're in the same tier.

tbh NES Contra and Super C are the biggest difficulty frauds ever: they're both easier than NG1 or CV1 or the Mega Mans or lots and lots of other things, but they have this rep as some of the most difficult games ever because people put in the extra lives code and don't even try them the real way. They are genuinely pretty tame as that kind of game goes.
CV1 is not that difficult, at least until the death boss stage. NG1 gets fucked on the third stage onwards, from the snow peaks area. Even mega man is a bit easier than that.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Since you guys were talking about GTA, I’m just gonna say it: GTA 5 was dog shit.

The driving was great. Cars, bikes, planes, all of it felt fantastic. But, that’s about the only thing I liked. The gunplay was clunky, the story felt like it went in circles for half the game, and almost every character was unlikable or boring.
 
Something's been bugging me for a while so here it goes: Vidya "Analysis" is fucking gay. For almost two decades by this point Halospergs have been taking note of every single little thing from the games. The ammo count, the velocity of the player how certain elements had certain sandboxy characteristics. The same happened with the Soulsborne fags. They go into extensive detail of every little hair follicle on every single character's ass and end up with nothing in return but with a messy wiki article in video form. When good videogames are good because there's this esoteric quality to them than makes them worthwhile. That's why gaming today is fucking gay, the retards that grew up with this shit ass videos are now old enough to be in the industry. That's also why most indie games are just as shallow as the next AAA sponsored by doritos thing.
 
Something's been bugging me for a while so here it goes: Vidya "Analysis" is fucking gay. For almost two decades by this point Halospergs have been taking note of every single little thing from the games. The ammo count, the velocity of the player how certain elements had certain sandboxy characteristics. The same happened with the Soulsborne fags. They go into extensive detail of every little hair follicle on every single character's ass and end up with nothing in return but with a messy wiki article in video form. When good videogames are good because there's this esoteric quality to them than makes them worthwhile. That's why gaming today is fucking gay, the retards that grew up with this shit ass videos are now old enough to be in the industry. That's also why most indie games are just as shallow as the next AAA sponsored by doritos thing.
I get where you’re coming from, but I think it depends on the subject. I’m not nearly as into gaming as I was when I was younger, but I’ll still watch a video breaking down Halo’s weapon balance or Dark Souls Lore. At the same time, there are plenty of video essays that are just hours of pretentious nonsense made by faggot’s who love hearing themselves talk.
 
When people talk about their favorite indie game, they're talking about the few good games like Pizza Tower or another title that their favorite publisher/youtuber brought up. They're not talking about the titles with less than 1000 steam reviews that you have to hunt for.
Because word of mouth means those 1000 player indie games tend to get lots more players.

For example. Scritchy Scratchy, which is like Digseum with scratch cards. And Digseum itself. Balatro is likely more famous. Eventually, they go from obscure to a large enough critical mass that a YouTuber covers it, then it explodes.


That ties nicely to a tax: I disagree with the idea that once an indie game goes mainstream, it should do the mainstream AAA thing. I've seen complaints about Schedule One that it should've started doing weekly content drops to drive YouTube traffic and stay in algorithm. That seems like a horrible idea for that game, and tells me that those YouTubers only see it as a way to farm content, not as a game they enjoy.

You had games which were woke for their time, shitting on what was acceptable in the eyes of polite company, and yet they still became classics or did well enough to warrant sequels.
Because those targets had it coming. eg. The 90s conservative fuddy duddies saying GTA and Doom would turn people into killers. The key difference is they weren't blacklisted from the professional industry for doing so.

Something's been bugging me for a while so here it goes: Vidya "Analysis" is fucking gay. For almost two decades by this point Halospergs have been taking note of every single little thing from the games. The ammo count, the velocity of the player how certain elements had certain sandboxy characteristics. The same happened with the Soulsborne fags. They go into extensive detail of every little hair follicle on every single character's ass and end up with nothing in return but with a messy wiki article in video form. When good videogames are good because there's this esoteric quality to them than makes them worthwhile. That's why gaming today is fucking gay, the retards that grew up with this shit ass videos are now old enough to be in the industry. That's also why most indie games are just as shallow as the next AAA sponsored by doritos thing.
It has a purpose. The problem is idiots using that language and ideas for the wrong reasons.

I remember a Halo designer once said his approach to combat design is to think of it like designing a puzzle. A game journo took this literally and said that he doesn't like Halo single player because he "solved that puzzle already". Or the other extreme, Crowbcat using the Halo vidoc about how much work they put into the aiming system to get it feeling good on console as an insult, framing it as dumbing down FPS games.

That's assuming it's even true. I still remember one Silent Hill 2 video (that is either lost deep in YouTube, or deleted) that talked in depth about how each characters outfit what a representation of their personality and inner blah blah blah. Only years later for it to turn out the characters were dressed that way as a Con Air reference.
 
Looks like the new Star Fox isn't getting the most rosy reception from reviewers:

Because those targets had it coming. eg. The 90s conservative fuddy duddies saying GTA and Doom would turn people into killers. The key difference is they weren't blacklisted from the professional industry for doing so.
That's because the media apparatus at large also made fun of said conservatives. Moral majority types were a favored punching bag of the media.

That, and gaming in the 90s was still a niche market. It had nowhere near the dominance it would later have in the 2000s.

Since you guys were talking about GTA, I’m just gonna say it: GTA 5 was dog shit.

The driving was great. Cars, bikes, planes, all of it felt fantastic. But, that’s about the only thing I liked. The gunplay was clunky, the story felt like it went in circles for half the game, and almost every character was unlikable or boring.
This is why I have no expectations for GTA6. If it turns out to be good, then great. If not, I won't lose any sleep over it.

Something's been bugging me for a while so here it goes: Vidya "Analysis" is fucking gay. For almost two decades by this point Halospergs have been taking note of every single little thing from the games. The ammo count, the velocity of the player how certain elements had certain sandboxy characteristics. The same happened with the Soulsborne fags. They go into extensive detail of every little hair follicle on every single character's ass and end up with nothing in return but with a messy wiki article in video form. When good videogames are good because there's this esoteric quality to them than makes them worthwhile. That's why gaming today is fucking gay, the retards that grew up with this shit ass videos are now old enough to be in the industry. That's also why most indie games are just as shallow as the next AAA sponsored by doritos thing.
Most of the time, the stuff they spend hours poring over are things the devs barely gave a crap about. A lot of these spergs became the gaming equivalent of those Warhammer 40K lore channels that memorize decades of lore that Games Workshop doesn't even see as Canon.

I remember a Halo designer once said his approach to combat design is to think of it like designing a puzzle. A game journo took this literally and said that he doesn't like Halo single player because he "solved that puzzle already". Or the other extreme, Crowbcat using the Halo vidoc about how much work they put into the aiming system to get it feeling good on console as an insult, framing it as dumbing down FPS games.
The OG Halo designers were people trying to create balanced games that they themselves would like to play. Modern Halo devs are just dudes putting out someone else's homework and adding new tinsel to it.
 
Halo was a lot like Diablo. Games designed to be one thing and then turned into something else by accident. Diablo was more of a straight forward modern (for the time) take on Rogue that was gonna be turn based. Someone had the idea that it being in real time would be more fun so the designer did that quickly to disprove it and then had a "Oh no this is actually fun" moment. For Halo it was just gonna be a futuristic take on Myth, but people just liked moving around one of the characters on a vehicle so they turned into a tps and then fps. In both cases the designers found out what was fun and then capitalized on it. For some reason this is exceedingly rare in video games
 
Since you guys were talking about GTA, I’m just gonna say it: GTA 5 was dog shit.

The driving was great. Cars, bikes, planes, all of it felt fantastic. But, that’s about the only thing I liked. The gunplay was clunky, the story felt like it went in circles for half the game, and almost every character was unlikable or boring.
It's one of the most boring pieces of shit you could ever play, and it's why I've stated in this very thread, that I have no fucking interest in GTA 6, that shit'll be for fucking retards.

On that note, Red Dead Redemption 1 is also a boring snoozefest piece of shit.
 
For some reason this is exceedingly rare in video games
I think it's budgets and committee design. AAA games with 1000+ people working for 8 years can't really do that, especially when things like marketing are decided months or years in advance. Indies can do it, but finding honest playtesters is tricky, and as a solo dev you don't have that melting pot of ideas.

Supposedly Sim City came about when working on a helicopter game, they found making the levels more fun than playing them.
 
It's one of the most boring pieces of shit you could ever play, and it's why I've stated in this very thread, that I have no fucking interest in GTA 6, that shit'll be for fucking retards.

On that note, Red Dead Redemption 1 is also a boring snoozefest piece of shit.
I disagree with you on Red Dead 1, but I’ll admit I enjoyed Undead Nightmare more.
 
CV1 is not that difficult, at least until the death boss stage. NG1 gets fucked on the third stage onwards, from the snow peaks area. Even mega man is a bit easier than that.
Castlevania 1 is a game once you memorise is very easy to beat on repeat playthroughs. The death level is a cakewalk if you manage to keep the holy water you get in the first screen. The knight enemies are programmed to keep a certain distance from you. If you throw the holy water in front of them and walk back. They'll go right into it. Plus you can use it to stunlock death. CV is constiant, unlike NG that has more than few moment where you can fuck yourself over with a minor mistake.

On that note, Red Dead Redemption 1 is also a boring snoozefest piece of shit.
It's a issue I’ve always had with rockstar. They're sandbox games with very little to do. It's fluff, that's pretty to look at, but you can barely interact with it. All the YT videos you see point at all the minute details the artists put in, but none of it matters to the gameplay. In terms of depth, it's no different to a cinematic sony game, except you can explore a giant, mostly empty open world inbetween missions.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I think it's budgets and committee design. AAA games with 1000+ people working for 8 years can't really do that, especially when things like marketing are decided months or years in advance. Indies can do it, but finding honest playtesters is tricky, and as a solo dev you don't have that melting pot of ideas.

Supposedly Sim City came about when working on a helicopter game, they found making the levels more fun than playing them.
I miss when games impressed you with ideas, not just graphics. Half-Life ran on a modified Quake engine that went on to become Counter-Strike and Team Fortress. Today it’s mostly just bloated budgets and photo realism.
 
I'll give Rockstar/Take Two this. They know that everybody would want to install GTA VI at once, so their forward thinking was to allow pre-loading a week before launch to prevent leaks and spoilers. Most importantly, it can help with preventing server overload. That's smart; I see where they're coming from. While not having a physical disc in a physical release sucks, it's necessary to make sure that everybody experiences it at once.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I disagree with you on Red Dead 1, but I’ll admit I enjoyed Undead Nightmare more.
To each their own
It's a issue I’ve always had with rockstar. They're sandbox games with very little to do. It's fluff, that's pretty to look at, but you can barely interact with it. All the YT videos you see point at all the minute details the artists put in, but none of it matters to the gameplay. In terms of depth, it's no different to a cinematic sony game, except you can explore a giant, mostly empty open world inbetween missions.
My thing isn't the fact that it advertises itself as a sandbox game, it was the pure fact that the main core design of the game was, as I've mentioned in this thread, "drive to this area, shoot these retards, then rinse and repeat" I don't know how the hell anybody wouldn't be bored playing that kind of gameplay where it has nothing else to offer than just shiny new cars, graphics and etc, when there's literally nothing else to it.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole