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

LttP/RttP threads of still relevant games with fairly active threads once they're bumped REALLY get on my nerves, especially when they're just "So here's my opinion..." pieces.

I can see if it's a game that has been forgotten about because of sequels or new generations of consoles coming and going or if there's something worth sharing that you feel went unnoticed by fellow gaffers... But if you're simply going to reiterate a pro or con stance on hit game series "just because", don't.
 
Got a few:

- Mass Effect 3 isn't a good game with a terrible ending, it's terrible start to finish.

- The Half Life games don't have interesting stories and Alyx Vance is a stupid mastrubatory nerd fantasy.

- Metal Gear Solid 4 is just the worst. MGS 2 is the best in the series (Haven't played MGS 5 yet).

- Canon and intricate world building is terrible for story-based entertainment and RPGs should do away with eloborate codexes.

- None of the 3D Mario games, including both Galaxy games, come close to the 2D games.

- God of War is just average and the series got worse with every entry.

- GTA4 felt more special than GTA5.

- Even the 'best' video game stories are barely on par with the Oscar nominations for Best Picture in any random year. Looking at you The Last of Us.
 
A lot of the "indie community" (e.g. the concerningly tight-knit group of people who are in charge of many of the indie institutions in the US such as award shows, funds, etc.) seems to be on a self-serving path that doesn't really seem concerned about growing commercially. I'm of the opinion that, in the absence of midcore after its big dieoff last generation, affluent indies have a responsibility to somehow contribute to its reconstruction. The last thing we need is money pooling up away from it into an isolated market.
 
Personally, Sunshine is better than Galaxy.

Galaxy (2, I skipped over 1 because I heard they're p much the same) is honestly a fun game but I don't really think it's a good 3D platformer. A lot of the levels are based on gimmick powerups which just doesn't mesh well with me. I honestly just want to play a game with modern graphics and camera control that plays just like Super Mario 64. If that is ever given a proper HD remake I will buy whatever underpowered shit console Nintendo puts it on.
 
The 3DS is the worst thing that has ever happened to gaming in the console space.

If you had all just followed the Vita...
3DS is comfortably the worst gaming platform I've ever owned. The only game system I've ever regretted buying. Absolute garbage. Terrible hardware, both in terms of power, functionality and ergonomics. Super uncomfortable to use. And the games? I'll be honest. I've never liked the first party on Nintendo handhelds. 3DS is no exception. But the third party titles made the DS a great system for me. 3DS third party support is garbage in comparison and yeah for my tastes the lineup on 3DS is awful. The hardware is so bad that it can't even get indie support to make up for it. 3DS is a bad system from top to bottom. It deserved to flop.

Vita? Best handheld ever. The ultimate portable indie machine with a lineup of games that blows every other handheld out of the water. And obviously from a hardware point of view it's fantastic and very comfortable to use. And in the first year or so when Sony were actually supporting it the retail lineup was fucking killer. Because nobody bought the thing and the games, that was the last we saw of those type of games. Which is a shame because in an ideal world the Vita would have been the ultimate portable indie machine AND a continuation of portable AAA gaming like the PSP was. As it is the Vita is a fantastic system with an amazing lineup of games, but if people would have bought the thing we could have had even more and more years like 2012 in he retail space.
 
The 3DS is the worst thing that has ever happened to gaming in the console space.

If you had all just followed the Vita...

I bought the Vita at launch for £229.

Controversial on GAF, but I consider it pointless. Great hardware with no unique experiences & poor portability make it a terrible handheld for. I'd rather play handheld games on handheld devices, and console/PC games on my consoles/PC, and while I can see why others may want the reverse, I'm not one of them.
 
I'm glad that '90s-early 2000s PC game genres that had tons of micromanagement have simplified their gameplay, because most of that stuff served no real purpose besides providing busywork and overwhelming amounts of stuff to deal with.
 
A lot of indie games are nothing special.

But then a lot of them remind me of games I already played way back on the NES. A few are something special but for the most part it seems like a cheap and easy way to get a game out compared to the crazy cost it now takes games to get out on consoles.

Not saying they're wrong, cheap and easy is the motto many successful companies succeed by.
 
3DS is comfortably the worst gaming platform I've ever owned. The only game system I've ever regretted buying. Absolute garbage. Terrible hardware, both in terms of power, functionality and ergonomics. Super uncomfortable to use. And the games? I'll be honest. I've never liked the first party on Nintendo handhelds. 3DS is no exception. But the third party titles made the DS a great system for me. 3DS third party support is garbage in comparison and yeah for my tastes the lineup on 3DS is awful. The hardware is so bad that it can't even get indie support to make up for it. 3DS is a bad system from top to bottom. It deserved to flop.

Vita? Best handheld ever. The ultimate portable indie machine with a lineup of games that blows every other handheld out of the water. And obviously from a hardware point of view it's fantastic and very comfortable to use. And in the first year or so when Sony were actually supporting it the retail lineup was fucking killer. Because nobody bought the thing and the games, that was the last we saw of those type of games. Which is a shame because in an ideal world the Vita would have been the ultimate portable indie machine AND a continuation of portable AAA gaming like the PSP was. As it is the Vita is a fantastic system with an amazing lineup of games, but if people would have bought the thing we could have had even more and more years like 2012 in he retail space.

Honestly, when it comes to the whole "platform X has no games," I tend to immediately read that sentence as "platform X has no games that interest me." There was, of course, the infamous PS3 meme from last gen, but nowadays, I tend see this with the Vita, 3DS, and, to a lesser extent, the PS4 (at least in terms of exclusives). There's an entire thread dedicated to all of the Vita games coming out, but people tout the "it has no games" line because very few of those games actually interest them. The 3DS has plenty of indie and Japanese third party support, especially with regards to JRPGs, but you just aren't interested in those games (and the platform as a whole), so you seem to ignore them.

Apologies for singling your post out, but that is one of my bigger pet peeves when it comes to gaming.
 
Ocarina of Time, Resident Evil 2, Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy Tactics, Banjo Kazooie, Majora's Mask, Paper Mario, Silent Hill, Dino Crisis, Crash, Rayman 2, Klonoa, Symphony of the Night, CTR, Diddy Kong Racing, etc.

...are still amazing games, even if you'd play them for the first time nowadays (which I did in several cases). In certain aspects they might even stomp many modern games. I can't respect any hobby gamer who rejects Generation 5 games or calls classics like that unplayable by default today. If you do, you're the equivalent of pseudo movie buffs who don't wanna watch black and white movies. Some games do in fact age badly, in particular anything going for realism like yearly sports titles. But a gem in many cases stays a gem, even with (not even always that) bad graphics. And tank controls can be learned within an hour, after that you're set forever. If something is truly unplayable nowadays, it was probably average to begin with. Maybe I wouldn't recommend any of the above to casuals or only half-interested gamers, but any hardcore gamer mustn't shy away from classics before the HD era, even if it's 3D, nor shit on entire generations because of biased reasons.

That generation was a little spotty in terms of gaming in 3d. The following generation was a HUGE improvement.
 
That generation was a little spotty in terms of gaming in 3d. The following generation was a HUGE improvement.

The PS1/N64 era may have been the first to fully embrace 3D graphics, but the PS2 gen was the first to really get it right.

There were some truly awful growing pains on 5th gen consoles that keeps me from being as attached to it as the generations before or after.
 
I think Muramasa: The Demon Blade (admittedly including all the DLC chapters as they have more interesting characters and bosses) is the best game Vanillaware has made, and is a genuinely great action game. For some reason everyone seems to call Dragon's Crown the first Vanillaware game with good gameplay and I'm like "c'mooooon."
 
Mobas should of never gotten the attention they did. They start out pretty decent but then get ruined by changes that mess up the game and make characters so bad they are unplayable because the developers are too lazy to care. No matter what the community is they always yell at you or critique you for not knowing 100 percent of everything about the game.

Also on a side note I've never understood why that's the genre that's starting to get tv time, just replace it with fighting games because they are most of the time fun to watch and visually appealing.
 
I think Muramasa: The Demon Blade (admittedly including all the DLC chapters as they have more interesting characters and bosses) is the best game Vanillaware has made, and is a genuinely great action game. For some reason everyone seems to call Dragon's Crown the first Vanillaware game with good gameplay and I'm like "c'mooooon."

I played Odin Sphere the other day and I put that and Muramasa on the same level.
 
I genuinely think Ico is a terrible, terrible game that people claim to be a highpoint of art in videogames as they simply don't know much about art.

As a game it utterly fails. The puzzles are simplistic, the "combat" is so poor it barely is worth discussing and it has probably the worst camera I have ever seen in a videogame. With the mostly fixed viewpoint, having to run in the direction out of the screen, thus not being able to see where you are going, is ridiculous.

But hey, you hold hands with someone and there is a stereotypical Japanese videogame "emotion delivered with a sledgehammer" style cutscene at the end.

And because I am such an arse, I played through it, pretty much hating it, just so I could argue that it wasn't any good. I was pretty active on RLLMUK at the time (or maybe the Edge forum before that) and was disappointed, but not amazed, that people were fooled by the aesthetic. I started it, hated it, but people kept telling me that if I complete dit I would understand. So I completed it.

I still thought it was terrible.
 
So here's something entirely my own damn fault and problem. I am slowly realizing I have become a graphics snob this generation. Not saying I need like 4k, 120 fps but every time I look into an indie or a classic game to buy... I am just getting hung up on the graphics. It's like I need atleast Wii U, 360, and PS3 level graphics to commit to purchase.
 
I hate how everyone tries to name the best thing ever, or the worst thing ever!

Thread after thread of my game is the best/worst because "X"!
 
So here's something entirely my own damn fault and problem. I am slowly realizing I have become a graphics snob this generation. Not saying I need like 4k, 120 fps but every time I look into an indie or a classic game to buy... I am just getting hung up on the graphics. It's like I need atleast Wii U, 360, and PS3 level graphics to commit to purchase.

Funnily enough, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, an indie game, is one of the best looking games of this gen.
 
So here's something entirely my own damn fault and problem. I am slowly realizing I have become a graphics snob this generation. Not saying I need like 4k, 120 fps but every time I look into an indie or a classic game to buy... I am just getting hung up on the graphics. It's like I need atleast Wii U, 360, and PS3 level graphics to commit to purchase.
I am on the opposite side of the fence. I always liked 2D and/or simple graphics and I am starting to like them even more. I am playing Dragon Quest 5 (DS) and it is such a gorgeous game.

That being said, I can appreciate shiny modern graphics, too. Splatoon and Mario Kart 8 are gorgeous.
 
I don't if it is that controversial but I found The Witcher 3 mediocre due it gameplay... it is a game I will never back because the shit combat.

It is on my top list of worst games that I played in 2015... just a spot behind The Order.
 
Funnily enough, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, an indie game, is one of the best looking games of this gen.

I was eying that up recently. Oh, and yes I should have specified when I said indie genre - I meant specifically retro looking indies. I know it's a style choice and deliberate on the part of the developers. Maybe I'll get over the hang up or find a price I am comfortable with.

I am on the opposite side of the fence. I always liked 2D and/or simple graphics and I am starting to like them even more. I am playing Dragon Quest 5 (DS) and it is such a gorgeous game.

That being said, I can appreciate shiny modern graphics, too. Splatoon and Mario Kart 8 are gorgeous.

Totally cool and those old school games are amazing. I just can't get back into them... well mainly cause I already beat them and that's a whole other unique quirk with me. Once I beat something, unless it has a different second playthrough/perspective, I rarely play again. (unless new trophies/achievements are included...then I might bite)
 
I think game prices are too low at the AAA-level and I feel that low price points actively discourage experimentation on big-budget games because the return on "light" sales won't cover the costs of development/marketing. $60, 'fuck-yeah-AAA' games should ideally be ~$80 at this point.
 
I think game prices are too low at the AAA-level and I feel that low price points actively discourage experimentation on big-budget games because the return on "light" sales won't cover the costs of development/marketing. $60, 'fuck-yeah-AAA' games should ideally be ~$80 at this point.
They are too expensive, if anything. The majority of games shouldn't more than $40.
 
I think game prices are too low at the AAA-level and I feel that low price points actively discourage experimentation on big-budget games because the return on "light" sales won't cover the costs of development/marketing. $60, 'fuck-yeah-AAA' games should ideally be ~$80 at this point.

One of the issues is Video Games--much like Movies--are inflating their budget with marketing. Why spend $25m+ marketing a damn CoD game? The thing basically sells itself! A good game will essentially sell itself--I don't remember a marketing blitz for Minecraft when it came out...
 
One of the issues is Video Games--much like Movies--are inflating their budget with marketing. Why spend $25m+ marketing a damn CoD game? The thing basically sells itself! A good game will essentially sell itself--I don't remember a marketing blitz for Minecraft when it came out...

Minecraft was also made (initially) by one dude and was playable long before release. A 'AAA' game demands a marketing budget; if you can't get people interested outside of word-of-mouth, how will you sell a game to mainstream audiences?
 
Minecraft was also made (initially) by one dude and was playable long before release. A 'AAA' game demands a marketing budget; if you can't get people interested outside of word-of-mouth, how will you sell a game to mainstream audiences?

People are tired of being baited into buying games for $60 at launch when half of them end up shipping unfinished anyway. Does Activision really need to have Mt. Dew Gamer Fuel to get people to buy copies of CoD?
 
I was eying that up recently. Oh, and yes I should have specified when I said indie genre - I meant specifically retro looking indies. I know it's a style choice and deliberate on the part of the developers. Maybe I'll get over the hang up or find a price I am comfortable with.

Yeah, the indies with a retro look are a different thing. It just bugs me, that many seem to lump all indies together, when there's a vast variety of different kind of visual styles. Firewatch, for example, looks pretty damn amazing.

I'm with you on the visual barrier though, as I really have no desire to go back to past games, particularly those before the previous generation. When the generational shift occurs, I very rarely return to the old favorites. Silent Hill 3 was one of the exceptions, as it still looks pretty good.
 
Top Bottom