Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.

Well, here's mine:

While Smash Bros as a series is a fun party game, it's not a fighting gam,e. Furthermore, as a spectator Melee especially is unwatchable trash, looks every single one of its years.

I dread it showing up in Evo yet again to bore me to tears, and so do most of the FG players I know.
matches run way WAY too long.
 
Ps2 graphics are good enough.

I like hi-res textures and detailed models as much as the next person, but I'm inclined to agree. I can go back to PS2 era games anytime and I don't mind them being less detailed.

Though I guess my controversial opinion on graphics would be that artstyle always beats the technical aspect. I recently picked Valkyria Chronicles on Steam and it's one of the most beautiful games I've ever played (and I don't even like anime style all that much) - and it doesn't look dated at all IMO, despite being what, 6 years old?
 
I've never been particularly fond of "Hard for the sake of hard" games in the modern era. I just wish they would all go away.

---

This isn't even just a call for hand holding to be the norm, and I do wish to 'get gud' on my own terms, but I feel that the toughest game we should ever play as a human is life itself, and our luxuries and recreation should not be beating us down any harder than our experiences outside of them potentially could.

This comes across as wishing everything in the world was made comfortable for your own tastes and only what you want out of life. Here's the thing. For some people, being challenged to the limit of their capability is recreation. Some people climb mountains when they could stay at home and sink into the couch after working a hard job. Some engage in the world's most mentally stimulating and stressful tasks for pure enjoyment, and because it gives context to their life they find desirable. Nothing is forcing anyone to engage in a particular recreational activity. There are levels of engagement to suit any temperament and personality.

As for the Souls games used in your example, the ethic behind those titles is that they echo the concept of a dungeon run. You delve, you die, you try again after having learned your lesson and you are quicker, cleverer, sneakier, the next time. That is why the most minor enemy is a real threat. You learn how to manipulate them, and in fact much of the games can be skipped with understanding. Some people find that extremely enjoyable, and it seems a bit petty to single the games out - as many do - in an era when most games are not designed that way.

You can get granular checkpoint games everywhere; designed to be played once and done, where no progress is ever lost, and a lower level of engagement is required for enjoyment. There are in fact comparatively few noticeably difficult games in the console world today. It's interesting that so many players still find the existence of even a few games built to offer certain kinds of challenge unacceptable, and attempt to rationalize that they are just made wrong, and shouldn't exist today.
 
The vast majority of Western AAA console games are crap, and have been crap since the third generation. Any that weren't crap, were pc games, and have since either been marginalized into oblivion, or turned into mindless moronic crap for consoles.

They are the same level of lousy crap as bubsy and Lester the unlikely, they have the same level of crappy design ethos, and the only thing that has improved has been the graphics and the marketing.
 
The vast majority of Western AAA console games are crap, and have been crap since the third generation. Any that weren't crap, were pc games, and have since either been marginalized into oblivion, or turned into mindless moronic crap for consoles.

They are the same level of lousy crap as bubsy and Lester the unlikely, they have the same level of crappy design ethos, and the only thing that has improved has been the graphics and the marketing.

Not really a controversial opinion, very few AAA games are great. A lot of AAA games are like Pop music, high production values and nothing more. Not to say over produced crap, cannot still be OK.
 
I prefer games with a strong central narrative in which your choices only somewhat impact the result of the game. In games that feature choice too heavily, I find the story isn't very engaging since it needs to accomodate too many variables, and that the notion of freedom as story doesn't resonate as heavily with me as it does with others. On the other hand, stories that feature no interactivity or variability are just watered-down versions of stories that other mediums can do better. Somewhere in the middle is the sweetspot.

yes I'm BioWare's lapdog, but this applies to things like Tactics Ogre/Walking Dead as well!

9 Hours, 9 Persons, 9 Doors
 
I'll be blunt here, at the risk of coming off as an asshole:

I don't know that I can ever respect the opinion that some people have regarding story/context in games. I'm talking about the people who say they dislike games with little to no story, because in their eyes they don't have a "reason" to keep going. I saw this critique being levied toward Super Mario 3D World. They said they couldn't get into the game because there was no story to speak of, that going through the levels wasn't doing anything for them with no advancement in any kind of plot. And I can at least respect opinions even if they're completely antithetical to mine, but in this particular case I don't think I can do it.

The reason why is I think due to two factors: if we look at all other forms of entertainment, from literature to TV and movies, video gaming's outlook on what constitutes as "story" is pure garbage 95% of the time. Yes, you have instances like Shadow of the Colossus and early Silent Hills where the story is genuinely good and can stand up to story in other forms of entertainment, and they're made effective by the fact that they're interactive, but in the vast majority of cases that's not how it goes down. The vast majority of the time game stories are garbage, plotholle-ridden nonsense that, at the very best, simply provide a "context" to what you're doing. You're gunning down people in X corridor, why? Because this reason. That's it, if you think about it any more you realize how trash the story is.

I find it baffling that people not only attribute the inclusion of this as "good", but outright demand it. I can't in any way find a reason why this would be "required" for someone to "get into" a game. And here's where I go full-asshole: I don't know if those people who demand it 1) are gaming for the right reasons, and 2) have been gaming for very long. Maybe if you're young and Halo was your very first game ever, where you associate "game" with "story giving me context" you would think this is required. This is really the only reason where I think one could develop such a bizarre (in my opinion) requirement as to what constitutes a game you're interested in. But considering how bad these stories are that give people "context", I don't know if they even look at other forms of entertainment (e.g., good literature, good Television shows/miniseries) for them to realize that most video game stories are garbage and why would you even want to waste time on "context" when it's so garbage.

Anyway, that's my rant. I love story driven games as much as the next guy, but give it to me when it's warranted. If I'm playing some random shootbang I really couldn't give a shit what random "Russian superspy who killed your girlfriend" reason the devs scribbled on a notebook to give you some "context" as to what you're doing.
 
I just got home after a hard day working in a bunch of mud that really pisses me off, so I'm a bit late for all the news of the day. And what do I see? Hideo Kojima is leaving Konami. And my reaction? Big fucking whoop.

I'm not actually shocked at his impending departure or that this is an "end of an era", because frankly, his actual games (as director, anyway) were never really that good. They lived or died based on their story-lines, and given that it's always been known that he wanted to make movies but ended up drifting into games, I think it's kind of readily apparent.

Hopefully he moves on to making those movies now that he's got the name recognition to go with him wherever he goes, sure. I don't begrudge the man his dreams. But my controversial opinion for the day - at least insofar as I'm reacting to the general consensus of the news - is that the Kojima dick-riding is absolutely ridiculous. Holy shit. The day Konami died? Really? I know the company means so little to most people save for the Metal Gear series (and possibly those few straggling Silent Hill, Castlevania, or Suikoden loyalists), but this is not a death knell. And anyone spouting unjustifiably confident predictions about anything's demise like some kind of industry Nostradamus is as foolish as anyone making predictions based on silly fealty would be.

Can Konami flub this and crash and burn? Sure. But they could have done that while he was employed there. He was not the man with the magic touch, and I know it boils the blood of his fans to hear it, but the truth can hurt.

Today isn't the day Konami died, or the day Metal Gear died, or the day that marked the end of an era. It's Thursday, March 19th 2015.
 
Hotline Miami 2 is the better of the two games on every level. People are simply angry that the newer one is less easy to speedrun, since the first one gained a lot of traction through that community.
 
I think Nintendos next platform will flop unless it has VR. If it flops, it will be the last hardware platform from Nintendo, and they would rather develop for mobile than publish something on a platform they were beaten by.

In other words, I think in 5 years Nintendo will only be making mobile games. Their decision to give up on pushing the power envelope with the Wii was the catalyst for their inevitable console exit. They should have put more power into the Wii and take a loss on it. They would have sold to casual and kept the core too. Turns out they were just selling to casuals and the core left.
 
1. Nintendo consoles have become absolute rubbish. Both wii consoles remind me of iOS gaming. I dont think they will be in the console market much longer.
2. Even tho i game mostly on my high end pc, i feel ps4 has held the graphics crown since launch
3. bf3 >>>>>>>>>>>bf4
 
Metroid Prime is a good game held back by lots of frustrating design decisions mainly the lack of saving whenever you want. This wouldn't be such a big problem if it wasn't for the fact that save points are not easy to come by, they could be over an hour of gameplay away from the last one, which means if you die 90% in, you may have lost over an hour of your time. I hate Phazon Mines.

I've yet to play Echoes, because i've heard it is even more frustrating when it comes to this.
 
HAL Laboratory Inc. should create new IP titles for Nintendo. They are capable of incredible things that is beyond a pink puffy ball.
 
Punch Out!! is the best gaming franchise of Nintendo. Of all time.

Modern day graphics are ugly. Mostly what`s used in 3D games with realistic, detailed environments.

WWF Superstars and Renegade have the most satyisfying combat system ever, and the best graphics you can ask for.

Modern, slick, "shiny metal" technology design is ugly as hell.

ZX Spectrum games with black backgrounds and comical, colorful characters have beautiful graphics.
 
I had more fun playing the Zelda G&W than, say any other Zelda. Really, I consider it one of the best Zelda games. Also I liked the Oracles a lot. Very underrated games.
 
Ps2 graphics are good enough.

Agreed, I've been happy with graphics since the Dreamcast. Though I'd say its preferable to have these assets rendered at a native resolution of current screens but I don't think anything else is necessary. So PS2 level polygon counts and textures are fine with me. Just look what emulators can do with those assets.
 
The "story" that follows Metal Gear Solid is some of the most pretentious, nonsensical shit I've ever experienced.

Turtle Rock is the only studio out there doing DLC correctly.
 
Hotline Miami 2 is the better of the two games on every level. People are simply angry that the newer one is less easy to speedrun, since the first one gained a lot of traction through that community.

I'll second that.


I think that the Zelda series hasn't been good since A Link to the Past.

Final Fantasy VII is the most overrated Final Fantasy ever.

Whenever I need a help sleeping I just pop in any of the Assassin's Creed games.

God Of War sucks.
 
I love Assassin's Creed Unity, LittleBigPlanet 3, and The Order: 1886.

I think Halo started out as a subpar shooter, only a novelty because many console gamers had never played a proper FPS prior to that. It did grow into a solid shooter though.

MOBA DOBA's are boring and tedious.
 
I don't give two shits about anything from Sony's studios, but I do like the games they publish from outside developers (Rime, Bloodborne, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, Resogun, Journey, etc). The only thing that might change my mind is the sci-fi RPG from GG.

If Zenimax can get Fallout 4, Dishonored 2, and a reboot of Prey 2 from Arkane Austin (if that's even a thing) out at E3, they win by default.
 
-Centipiede is unplayable and these who praise it are super-humans. No actual earthling should be able to correctly control that.

-Double Dragon 3 isn`t hard and in fact, it`s one of the best beat em` ups.

-"Modern" Egg in G&W Gallery 3 has better chances tan anything to be the most addictive game of all time.
 
-Centipiede is unplayable and these who praise it are super-humans. No actual earthling should be able to correctly control that.

Centipede like the arcade console or just the game itself? I'm not great at the arcade game but I find the game itself with a regular d-pad a bit more manageable.
 
I've got a couple:

I prefer to game on a handheld at home, and Remote play is amazing (I just wish it would work better). In fact, if I ever got a Wii U, I probably would never play on a TV, just via the control pad's screen.

It bothers me when people say that mobile can just replace portable/handheld gaming, because the games I like to play (RPGs, Strategy games) SHOULD work on mobile, but frequently don't.. the best example I can think of is Final Fantasy Tactics: tWotL, Final Fantasy III/IV, and Dragon Quest VIII and both I would rather play on anything else. Seeing Nintendo explore the mobile space has me worried that in the future all I will be playing is old games on ancient handhelds...
 
I'll be blunt here, at the risk of coming off as an asshole:

I don't know that I can ever respect the opinion that some people have regarding story/context in games. I'm talking about the people who say they dislike games with little to no story, because in their eyes they don't have a "reason" to keep going. I saw this critique being levied toward Super Mario 3D World. They said they couldn't get into the game because there was no story to speak of, that going through the levels wasn't doing anything for them with no advancement in any kind of plot. And I can at least respect opinions even if they're completely antithetical to mine, but in this particular case I don't think I can do it.

The reason why is I think due to two factors: if we look at all other forms of entertainment, from literature to TV and movies, video gaming's outlook on what constitutes as "story" is pure garbage 95% of the time. Yes, you have instances like Shadow of the Colossus and early Silent Hills where the story is genuinely good and can stand up to story in other forms of entertainment, and they're made effective by the fact that they're interactive, but in the vast majority of cases that's not how it goes down. The vast majority of the time game stories are garbage, plotholle-ridden nonsense that, at the very best, simply provide a "context" to what you're doing. You're gunning down people in X corridor, why? Because this reason. That's it, if you think about it any more you realize how trash the story is.

I find it baffling that people not only attribute the inclusion of this as "good", but outright demand it. I can't in any way find a reason why this would be "required" for someone to "get into" a game. And here's where I go full-asshole: I don't know if those people who demand it 1) are gaming for the right reasons, and 2) have been gaming for very long. Maybe if you're young and Halo was your very first game ever, where you associate "game" with "story giving me context" you would think this is required. This is really the only reason where I think one could develop such a bizarre (in my opinion) requirement as to what constitutes a game you're interested in. But considering how bad these stories are that give people "context", I don't know if they even look at other forms of entertainment (e.g., good literature, good Television shows/miniseries) for them to realize that most video game stories are garbage and why would you even want to waste time on "context" when it's so garbage.

Anyway, that's my rant. I love story driven games as much as the next guy, but give it to me when it's warranted. If I'm playing some random shootbang I really couldn't give a shit what random "Russian superspy who killed your girlfriend" reason the devs scribbled on a notebook to give you some "context" as to what you're doing.

Right there with you on this one. The only thing I can think of, like you, is it's a generational thing. I started gaming when no one gave a flying fuck about a story. Is the game fun to play? Yes? Okay, well then the game is awesome. Done.
 
-Centipiede is unplayable and these who praise it are super-humans. No actual earthling should be able to correctly control that.

-Double Dragon 3 isn`t hard and in fact, it`s one of the best beat em` ups.

with a track ball or dpad? with dpad its super easy

dd3 is really easy all you got to do is walk up and down and the ai wont attack you theyll stand there and let you hit em the only thing that fucks me up in that game is the death pits on the final stage
 
This generations reliance and appetite for 'remasters' from late last gen, is making it the most uninteresting generation in the history of gaming.
 
This generations reliance and appetite for 'remasters' from late last gen, is making it the most uninteresting generation in the history of gaming.

this is why I'm still on last gen (got a wiiu tho)
I can easily wait til the library is more mature and the prices drop
 
Gamers are missing out some of the very best video gaming experiences because they don't play score attack games. Eg Shmups, Pacman DX+, Xotic.

-Centipiede is unplayable and these who praise it are super-humans. No actual earthling should be able to correctly control that.

If you have a 360 buy the XBLIG game Bad Caterpillar, it's a fun take on centipede.

this is why I'm still on last gen (got a wiiu tho)
I can easily wait til the library is more mature and the prices drop

Same here, I'll be buying a PS3 soon (to play all the PS2 collections)
 
I'll be blunt here, at the risk of coming off as an asshole:

I don't know that I can ever respect the opinion that some people have regarding story/context in games. I'm talking about the people who say they dislike games with little to no story, because in their eyes they don't have a "reason" to keep going. I saw this critique being levied toward Super Mario 3D World. They said they couldn't get into the game because there was no story to speak of, that going through the levels wasn't doing anything for them with no advancement in any kind of plot. And I can at least respect opinions even if they're completely antithetical to mine, but in this particular case I don't think I can do it.

The reason why is I think due to two factors: if we look at all other forms of entertainment, from literature to TV and movies, video gaming's outlook on what constitutes as "story" is pure garbage 95% of the time. Yes, you have instances like Shadow of the Colossus and early Silent Hills where the story is genuinely good and can stand up to story in other forms of entertainment, and they're made effective by the fact that they're interactive, but in the vast majority of cases that's not how it goes down. The vast majority of the time game stories are garbage, plotholle-ridden nonsense that, at the very best, simply provide a "context" to what you're doing. You're gunning down people in X corridor, why? Because this reason. That's it, if you think about it any more you realize how trash the story is.

I find it baffling that people not only attribute the inclusion of this as "good", but outright demand it. I can't in any way find a reason why this would be "required" for someone to "get into" a game. And here's where I go full-asshole: I don't know if those people who demand it 1) are gaming for the right reasons, and 2) have been gaming for very long. Maybe if you're young and Halo was your very first game ever, where you associate "game" with "story giving me context" you would think this is required. This is really the only reason where I think one could develop such a bizarre (in my opinion) requirement as to what constitutes a game you're interested in. But considering how bad these stories are that give people "context", I don't know if they even look at other forms of entertainment (e.g., good literature, good Television shows/miniseries) for them to realize that most video game stories are garbage and why would you even want to waste time on "context" when it's so garbage.

Anyway, that's my rant. I love story driven games as much as the next guy, but give it to me when it's warranted. If I'm playing some random shootbang I really couldn't give a shit what random "Russian superspy who killed your girlfriend" reason the devs scribbled on a notebook to give you some "context" as to what you're doing.

Go play more mobile games. They've got the story-less experience you're seeking.
 
Every BF since Battlefield Vietnam has been nothing but steps backwards.

And, serioulsy, Halo?? Starsiege Tribes was lightyears ahead of those shitty Halo games.

Seriously, Halo has to be the most overhyped series ever, every single one of them sucked in one way or another, but I guess people bought into the marketting.
 
Ah I love this thread. Collectables and unclockables are fine in games, If you don't like them, don't do them. Nobody cares if you didn't get all your trophies.


There's no irrational backlash against linear games, that was like 5 years ago, get with the times. currently it's way more trendy to badmouth open world games, for no real reason either. They are fine, especially open world racers.

iOS gaming is straight up amazing. iOS is a better platform for gaming than either current Nintendo console and definitely light years better than the Xbox one.

Remasters are great if you can't tolerate low fidelity last gen releases or shitty long load times. Don't like em? Don't buy em.


That about does it for this week.
 
I don't get the praise that Spec Ops: The Line gets. It's a garbage game that has worst of TPS with
"oh noes we are the monsters"
. Multiple endings were kinda nice, but illusion of choice and extremely mediocre gameplay kills it for me. I never cared for stories that much, but decided to give it a try, and boy I were disappointed.
 
Too many modern games miss out on loneliness.

Admittedly, I haven't played a lot of the big releases lately, but I have noticed an overall trend of making the protagonist a character amongst a group of peers.

Examples:
Metroid Prime vs. Corruption (group of bounty hunters)
Infamous vs. Second Son
Half-life 1 vs. Half-life 2 (Alyx, Antlions, etc.).

Now, I think that the experience of being part of a bigger world is a good thing and I think the "chosen one" heroic narrative can be overused, but I really miss the loneliness that characterized a lot of early games. I don't see it as often and I'd like it to come back.

It made Morrowind seem big. It made Jedi Knight seem threatening. It made Half-life seem mysterious.
 
with a track ball or dpad? with dpad its super easy

dd3 is really easy all you got to do is walk up and down and the ai wont attack you theyll stand there and let you hit em the only thing that fucks me up in that game is the death pits on the final stage

The problem with Centipiede is that you don`t have room to do anything once the bug comes down. The bug keeps regenerating himself and you can`t do ship.
 
Everyone who says "Nintendo gonna Nintendo" although they think they're saying "Lol Nintendo so wacky and unpredictable and foreign and random" are actually saying "I don't have the first fucking clue about the industry I'm armchair quarterbacking"
 
Everyone who says "Nintendo gonna Nintendo" although they think they're saying "Lol Nintendo so wacky and unpredictable and foreign and random" are actually saying "I don't have the first fucking clue about the industry I'm armchair quarterbacking"

Or like me, they just question every strange decision Nintendo seems to be making nowadays.

Edit: that might not be what you meant :v
 
Top Bottom