Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
But better hardware is needed for games to advance and to do graphical things that weren't possible on older hardware.
That's the point though, I don't care about those new graphical things anymore. I could be interested in new gameplay possibilities that absolutely needed new hardware. Though if you could get the same gameplay on current hardware if you just tone down the visuals then I'd be fine with that.
Kanhir
Member
The PSP Go and the Kinect were both fantastic innovations that bombed because they were too far ahead of their time.
PSP Go would probably be more successful now that digital downloads are more mainstream, and a Kinect with lower input lag is exactly what the emerging VR market needs.
PSP Go would probably be more successful now that digital downloads are more mainstream, and a Kinect with lower input lag is exactly what the emerging VR market needs.
I liked it better than the abomination that was the N64 controller.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Oh, that I definitely can't comment on. I only played Vanilla which was crap.
The only mobile games I actually enjoy . Marvellous
Ok, that's fine, I see what you mean now.
Yep, hell I play N64 games with my Gamecube controller on an actual N64 as well and it makes such a difference playing FPSs.
Seldomly Jambon
Member
Just picked up Wolfenstein New Order on PSN sale after the seemingly unanimous praise I've seen it get and I have to say I'm a bit nopetimistic on it after an hour or so. This super finicky loot mechanic just fucking sucks. Sucks bad. Not sure I can be arsed with this at all. If you're gonna make a player press a button to pick up every. damn. thing... fine whatever, artistic choice and all that. just don't make the prompt aiming window annoyingly sensitive on top of that. It's a real shame.
Update: somewhat retracted. Turns out that controller was screwed ha. Liking it a bit more now. *shrug*
Update: somewhat retracted. Turns out that controller was screwed ha. Liking it a bit more now. *shrug*
Seldomly Jambon
Member
Also, I enjoyed the console civ revolution better than civ 5 on pc too.
Smokin' Sick Style!!!
Banned
Wonderful 101's control and camera ruin what could be a fantastic character action game.
Should be 3rd person with switchable weapons mapped to a single/two buttons.
Should be 3rd person with switchable weapons mapped to a single/two buttons.
Sir Ilpalazzo
Member
What you propose would make it impossible to instantly use any weapon you want whenever you want (and also make it impossible to use the multi-unite morphs, which are a huge part of the game).
Seldomly Jambon
Member
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Controversial opinions this time are replies to other people. Let's go with #1:
Every post I read about how derivative the AAA industry is makes me want to tear my hair out. Things are never going to be like they were when you first entered gaming, I'm sorry. I guess because they play like stuff you've already beaten. Which is fine, but most fiction only has a certain number of stories they can tell--why do you think gaming would be any different, even in terms of actual gameplay?
And as far as being "different", different doesn't always equal good. To me it feels like a lot of times Nintendo goes so far out there to be different that they pass good along the way.
But they would have bought the game, which is important because it means another one will actually get made. Controversial opinion #2: I'm kinda happy at what's happening with SF V right now. They catered to the most hardcore audience--there's a training mode to practice combos, and you can fight people online or in your house and that's just about it--and lost sales-wise to fucking Naruto.
I could see if the focus on the stuff that made casuals happy was actively detracting from your experience, but MK has a fairly large hardcore fanbase and still managed to sell millions to casuals because of all the other content it had--because the actual fighting was solid. Street Fighter V could have done the same but chose not to. Well, they chose to "get to them later", which is why unfortunately I suspect we'll see some form of Super Street Fighter V somewhere down the line, one with all the content from year one (at least) added in.
Every post I read about how derivative the AAA industry is makes me want to tear my hair out. Things are never going to be like they were when you first entered gaming, I'm sorry. I guess because they play like stuff you've already beaten. Which is fine, but most fiction only has a certain number of stories they can tell--why do you think gaming would be any different, even in terms of actual gameplay?
And as far as being "different", different doesn't always equal good. To me it feels like a lot of times Nintendo goes so far out there to be different that they pass good along the way.
But they would have bought the game, which is important because it means another one will actually get made. Controversial opinion #2: I'm kinda happy at what's happening with SF V right now. They catered to the most hardcore audience--there's a training mode to practice combos, and you can fight people online or in your house and that's just about it--and lost sales-wise to fucking Naruto.
I could see if the focus on the stuff that made casuals happy was actively detracting from your experience, but MK has a fairly large hardcore fanbase and still managed to sell millions to casuals because of all the other content it had--because the actual fighting was solid. Street Fighter V could have done the same but chose not to. Well, they chose to "get to them later", which is why unfortunately I suspect we'll see some form of Super Street Fighter V somewhere down the line, one with all the content from year one (at least) added in.
Triscuitable
Member
Agreed. Give that designer a medal.
Ryouji Gunblade said:
I like how between Halo CE and 3, the Forerunners retroactively got really into Tron.
Smokin' Sick Style!!!
Banned
It would clearly require redesigns to accommodate the improved camera and input controls.
It's what I wish it could be, not what can be implemented with the existing mechanics.
Bakkus
Member
First off, no because that game has a lot more going for it than sorting blocks so it has far more to take into account. Also it seems we have a different definition of what a perfect game is. For me it shouldn't be about how popular it is after so and so many years like you at least come across thinking.
Correctomundo
Member
I don't see what that has to do with it. Are you saying variation in gameplay within a single game is of greater importance than, well, virtually any other consideration?
Obviously. Subjective interpretation will do that.
You're not quite understanding what I'm getting at by asking about longevity. I don't conflate popularity with any perfection metric, rather, as evidence of perfection.
Now clearly you don't see it that way, and that's fine. I just think that when it comes to defining perfection, I don't allow aspects that have proven themselves to be of contemporary importance to dictate it.
What that means is that while most people are going to define perfection as being something that has "perfect" graphics, or a "perfect" story, or a "perfect" multiplayer community, or a "perfect" amount of gameplay variation (or combinations of those aspects), I think these aspects are inevitably superseded by another game down the line, and serious play diminishes over time as the overall player base moves on to better looking, better written games with more active mutliplayer communities and more varied gameplay.
So what is your current pick for perfect game? What about this game makes it perfect?
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Obviously something being merely "popular" isn't a failsafe metric of something's "perfection." But longevity speaks volumes about a work, and that's true of music, movies, TV, poetry, books and everything in between.
Back on topic:
Back on topic:
- I think Spyro I was a better (or at least more fun) game than Super Mario 64.
- The rise of the anti-preorder circlejerk more often than not misses the point.
- I love the less "negative" part of the industry (like GT used to be), but the pushback against cynicism (a la GiantBomb) is also overblown. There's a lot to be cynical about still.
- Xenogears deserved a remake more than Final Fantasy VII.
- The best eSports to watch are 1v1 games.
- David Cage is not a hack.
Sleeping Dogs is a more fun game than the Witcher 3.
1. It respects my time. I can jump into the game and have fun within 2 minutes. The Witcher 3 is by design dialogue heavy with a lot of exposition for minimal gameplay. It also takes a long time to get places because it is a big wild world.
2. It has the perfect balance of reward. I am always building a bit towards a level. In the first few hours of play, you're likely to find a collectable every 15 minutes, and you're getting in game currency at an acceptable rate. In the Witcher 3, it takes forever to initially level, you're poor for much of the early game and there is just too much damn stuff to pick up.
3. The combat is simple, fluid, and rewarding. It forces you to change up your style of you're going to build face. In the Witcher, you find a tactic that works for that enemy and use it again and again. More importantly, I feel like I am in significantly more control of the combat in Sleeping dogs than in Witcher 3.
4. The interface is way better. Twenty hours into the Witcher 3 and it still feels like I am fighting the menu system. I barely notice the Sleeping Dogs menus. It goes beyond the fact that one is a more convoluted inventory and crafting system. It is how they nest the menus and how easy it is to move within them. Also, loading takes forever on the PS4 for the Witcher 3.
5. The story is more interesting. Totally subjective, but I can understand the motivations of the characters in Sleeping Dogs way better than the Witcher. So far, they are more complex and interesting too.
Never thought I would be putting down a giant open world RPG for a GTA like clone.
1. It respects my time. I can jump into the game and have fun within 2 minutes. The Witcher 3 is by design dialogue heavy with a lot of exposition for minimal gameplay. It also takes a long time to get places because it is a big wild world.
2. It has the perfect balance of reward. I am always building a bit towards a level. In the first few hours of play, you're likely to find a collectable every 15 minutes, and you're getting in game currency at an acceptable rate. In the Witcher 3, it takes forever to initially level, you're poor for much of the early game and there is just too much damn stuff to pick up.
3. The combat is simple, fluid, and rewarding. It forces you to change up your style of you're going to build face. In the Witcher, you find a tactic that works for that enemy and use it again and again. More importantly, I feel like I am in significantly more control of the combat in Sleeping dogs than in Witcher 3.
4. The interface is way better. Twenty hours into the Witcher 3 and it still feels like I am fighting the menu system. I barely notice the Sleeping Dogs menus. It goes beyond the fact that one is a more convoluted inventory and crafting system. It is how they nest the menus and how easy it is to move within them. Also, loading takes forever on the PS4 for the Witcher 3.
5. The story is more interesting. Totally subjective, but I can understand the motivations of the characters in Sleeping Dogs way better than the Witcher. So far, they are more complex and interesting too.
Never thought I would be putting down a giant open world RPG for a GTA like clone.
Dr. Black Jack
Member
i love video games more than anything
but
most people who like them as much as me are embarrassing as fuck
so it's like i'm in teh closet about the fact that i buy game boy games and know what Hatoful Boyfriend is
but
most people who like them as much as me are embarrassing as fuck
so it's like i'm in teh closet about the fact that i buy game boy games and know what Hatoful Boyfriend is
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I agree with this. People on this forum say we shouldn't be afraid to show our hobby in public, but the truth is I'm less interested in escaping judgement and more concerned with avoiding other "gamers."
That isn't true of just games though. Fans of other things can be cringy as hell.
Your other points definitely have merit to them, but IMO The Witcher 3 absolutely respects your time once you're past the introductory couple of hours (1% of the experience).
I reached a point - pretty much between hours 4 and 100 - where every single FRAME on my screen was enjoyable. I could boot it up for 5 minutes and just walk into a new village and say 'fucking hell LOOK at this place', turn the console off and be totally satisfied. The game's level of satisfaction and fun factor goes up and up the more you play it and get immersed in the world, for tens upon tens of hours.
Also probably 40% of the game's quests take 5-10 minutes to complete. Maybe you havent reached them yet, but there are countless quests which are brilliantly written and turned over very quickly. Visit any small village or yellow exclamation mark for a short, simple, fun quest.
The only prerequisite for that is that sometimes you have to embrace fast travel (which is INSANELY fast).
Sections of a quest definitely don't take too long. However, I don't find the small sections to be a satisfying bite. Ride a horse, have some dialogue, and earn a tiny bit of gold or xp or maybe get something to craft into something to craft into something you can use five levels later.
If I have an hour to kill, I get the wow factor of riding into a village, but if I have 20 minutes, it is all map and minimap focused to conplete the next objective.
It's totally a function of my situation. Outside of the combat and travel the Witcher does seem more robust then Sleeping Dogs, but I'm not in a position for that stuff to be fun.
I feel exactly the same
Totally empathise. I hate those times when you just have to put down a game which seems really great for a week/month/year or two just because you don't have time.
FYI - there are entire quests in TW3 which literally take 5-10 minutes, that was more my point. But yeah, the meat of the game is the longer quests, which you can't really make a dent in without 1-3 hour sessions.
Terareflection
Member
You know, I think some here wouldn't complain as much about fighters having too little content if the devs would just include a decent tutorial.
Preferably embedded within the story mode.
Preferably embedded within the story mode.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
The thread about MGSV's story made me think of this one:
MGSV's gameplay isn't nearly all that it's cracked up to be.
MGSV's gameplay isn't nearly all that it's cracked up to be.
ROUGE_BLOCK
Member
In all honesty yeah I would like BJ to be more like quick talking, quirk smirking, gun loving sunnvabitch rather than serious action hero man with a twisted and tormented psyche. As a shooter it was satisfying to play with some great weapons but came to be sort of a snore to me, and I felt the serious tone permeate through the gameplay as the narrative took full force. I have yet to play the Old Blood, I should revisit it the main game then play through the DLC. Maybe I will need to take a second look at it.
Jangowuzhere
Banned
The modern Tomb Raider games are complete trash.
They're the most derivative video games in the medium at the moment. I simply cannot understand why people like these games. They're the culmination of pretty much all modern video gaming cliches, but done poorly.
Michael Bay of video gaming to put it simply.
They're the most derivative video games in the medium at the moment. I simply cannot understand why people like these games. They're the culmination of pretty much all modern video gaming cliches, but done poorly.
Michael Bay of video gaming to put it simply.
Zepp Twofist
Member
I like them because I haven't played most of the games they are derivative of, but I won't pretend that they are doing anything innovative. It's the same reason I don't complain about the ubisoft open world formula - I don't really play that many of those games, so they don't feel that stale to me.
Octavianus
Banned
Persona 3 and 4 are shit and I wish Atlus would go back to doing something similar to Innocent Sin and Eternal Punishment but with a better battle system.
thepenguin55
Member
YES. The Toxicity of some of the gaming community is, what I feel, has held this medium back for so long. Every community for anything is going to have some of that but it seems so much more prominent in the gaming community than any other.
They are all wrong. It is the Best sandbox game ever
SatelliteOfLove
Member
People who continue to purchase games from a studio that has repeatedly disappointed them in the past confuses me, especially in light of other similar titles that are much better recieved critically (both professional and user).
That was the yawning void of apathy, rather. Many decried sales underperformances are better attributed to that rather than controversy (which is by turn less noticed to cause the opposite).
That was the yawning void of apathy, rather. Many decried sales underperformances are better attributed to that rather than controversy (which is by turn less noticed to cause the opposite).
Bakkus
Member
No i'm saying it's very important all by itself.
I don't think I can agree with this. There are multiple games over 10 years old which has unique entertaining gameplay which no other game have stolen said idea from (and if it have, then it's rather loosely). I'd also say that (I hate this term) AAA and AA games released during DC/XBOX/GC/PS2 era had more creativity to them than they do now where there's too much focus on making it cinematic and stuff. Don't think those type of games are really making an effort to superseding many of the quirks from back then.
Funnily enough this argument can actually be used against Tetris. Since many believe later released games like Tetris Attack, Meteos and Lumines takes the Tetris style Puzzle genre to bigger heights with more deeper gameplay while still making it addicting.
I don't think any game is 100% perfect. The reason I said what I said is because Tetris is often on this forum used as an antidote to that argument and is widely accepted for being such which is why my opinion belongs in this thread.
I wish I wasn't cringy but I am >_>
Also I kind of agree with the fact that gamers are awful (or at least too hateful and bigoted, I don't care about how "cringy," or awkward they are because I am too), but at the same time there isn't much in life I enjoy other than video games (and yes I've tried other things and go into them with an open mind) so I don't really have a choice when it comes to showing what my hobbies are.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Are we talking about the same thing? I don't mean the psuedo-tactical third person shooter that it eventually became, I mean the first-person shooter that inherited more than a few creepy queues from BioShock.
KOMANI
KOMANI
I'm with you
Every Attempt at reinventing and evolving Final Fantasy since XI has only served to disenchant my interest with the series.
Adding to that, the Remake of Final Fantasy 7 does not need to be an Action game. Fans of the original who loved it and gave it popularity deserve to see the game remade with care and respect to the original. Changing the game to appeal to more people (i.e. Action Game. Episodes. Adding EU elements) cheapens and hurts the product in my eyes. ATB can be used, can be adapted to be new and flashy, fun quick and well animated.
That's all I guess... I got more but man... I feel this the most.
Adding to that, the Remake of Final Fantasy 7 does not need to be an Action game. Fans of the original who loved it and gave it popularity deserve to see the game remade with care and respect to the original. Changing the game to appeal to more people (i.e. Action Game. Episodes. Adding EU elements) cheapens and hurts the product in my eyes. ATB can be used, can be adapted to be new and flashy, fun quick and well animated.
That's all I guess... I got more but man... I feel this the most.
Gouty
Bloodborne is shit
Assassins Creed is worse. At least TR has solid cover and shooting mechanics with mild exploration and puzzle solving mixed in. AC is literally just push up always until its times to press X to stab.
The Witcher 3 had a great story and characters that made me care about them. With that being said, I felt the gameplay was overrated as hell and only served as a vehicle to move the plot along. It being praised as the greatest WRPG ever and such is ridiculous to me and I greatly enjoyed it.
Feel the same, shit got repetitive fast and Afghanistan is SO boring
ill say that tartarus in persona 3 is a big blight on an otherwise solid game. too much grinding with fuckoff large difficulty spikes on bosses. i say this only for tartarus, many of the main bosses you fight on full moons are great.
persona 4 made smart changes to things that made 3's gameplay so terrible, but i still dont like the system at all.
thepenguin55
Member
Ninja Gaiden 3 on the other hand is pretty rough!
wild wild rice
Member
Definitely not. Great controls, though!
SatelliteOfLove
Member
People just didnt care other than "why?" The only aged IP reboot that garnered less was Syndicate.