A bit of trolling is fine. As are shit-headed opinions, but if I absolutely had to defend my own drivel, I could.
Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
Why are they the least offensive? Some of their franchises have been around longer than I've been alive. To be fair, any company that could do what Nintendo does would -- but I'm thankful they can't. I mean I could predict like four or five of the big games for every Nintendo platform from now until the end of time.
Edit: DP
referring to posts like name calling people for simply enjoying something they dont
come on, that's inexcusable
This! The complete lack of it for Bioshock Infinite's audio logs killed them for me. Couldn't understand most of them. Subtitles are extremely important for my enjoyment of the game.
Buba Big Guns
Banned
Every FF after 9 is mediocre.
Batman and Robin (PS1) was a decent open world game for it's time.
Gears and Halo are extremely boring.
Burnout 3 is probably the best racing game ever made (not so controversial).
Also not a controversial opinion at all, but Diddy Kong Racing was one of the funnest games ever made. Nintendo are fucking stupid for never expanding this into a franchise and for having such a shitty online service.
And Left 4 Dead 2 was fucking awful and unplayable (at least on the 360)
Batman and Robin (PS1) was a decent open world game for it's time.
Gears and Halo are extremely boring.
Burnout 3 is probably the best racing game ever made (not so controversial).
Also not a controversial opinion at all, but Diddy Kong Racing was one of the funnest games ever made. Nintendo are fucking stupid for never expanding this into a franchise and for having such a shitty online service.
And Left 4 Dead 2 was fucking awful and unplayable (at least on the 360)
LightofRohan
Member
Amen.
The artist talents of those games far exceeds any Nintendo title. People often times take Whacky-against-norms to mean art and good art. But they are just too ignorant to understand that creating something realistic that has a sense of context and provides believability is a much much harder thing to accomplish than making a carrot with a snow-globe head flying around to different planets shooting sprinkles.
That shit is blue-skying and it's much easier than anything else. It is why I find most Japanese entertainment to not be as impressive... their gameplay design and polish however can be really well done.
NavyPharaoh
Member
Nintendo needs to make some mature games & quit the iteration of the same games hit that is their library
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
What's mature? I'm honestly curious of what others expect Nintendo to do.
They've funded the Wonderful 101, Bayo2, and are making X which seem like really cool games for the hardcore gamer. Donkey Kong is usually pretty good because it's aimed to mostly older generations, if they made a new Metroid and Star Fox I'd already be satisfied with "mature games".
oreomunsta
Banned
I fixed it for you =) But yeah, the Wii one was so goddamn terrible. I had no desire to move past 50cc once I saw all the shitty tracks it had and horrible controls along with horrible rubber-banding AI.
LightofRohan
Member
Messofanego
Banned
Wish you did, too.
Chairmanchuck
Member
Gone Home is as real as a games story can get and better written than a ton of games that you people like.
(That's not really my controversial opinion though, more of a reply to these comments about Gone Home's story being 'overrated'.)
But whats so good about the story?
You have this broken family, lesbian sister, parents that go to a marriage counseling instead of having a vacation and the story with the uncle.
Thats the same s*** you see in soap-operas. Still doesnt make the story a well-written one.
I really loved Dear Esther and Stanley Parable and before I played Gone Home about 2 weeks ago I thought I would kinda get the same. But I didnt. It was not a mature story and, at least to me, there was no special atmosphere conveyed. People tell me I need to be a 90s kid to understand those, but... I was born in 87 and I still didnt really understand what was special about this game. "Oh. A tape-recorder. So 90s!", "Oh, one of those magazines from the 90s. Yeah!!!"
ResidentDante
Member
Fixed that for you!
I agree with what you say. The story wasn't really anything special in my mind.
In fact, I'm going to be really controversial here:
I think the story would have been better if it had gone with the obvious(?) suicide pact ending that it seemed to be setting up.
-The "games that are mediocre/dull are more offensive than terribly made games" sentiment is toxic and killing the community
-Nintendo has wonderful studios doing great things within strict guidance but their refusal to change business strategies longterm is going to be their downfall (unless they Forest Gump their way into another surprise hit with the mainstream ala Wii)
-Open world games are largely awful, and people who clamor for "freedom of choice" frequently trade polish and refinement for the illusion of player agency. I am sick of having to play games that have been shoved into the sandbox genre where I have to run/drive for 10-15 minutes just to get to the next story mission that is actually interesting just because some idiots want to run around to "cause mayhem" or to do some generic quest that isn't compelling just for cash/xp.
-MGS4 is hot stinky garbage and craps all over the previous games so hard that it ruined the franchise for me; past, present and future. On a related Konami note, Lords of Shadow is a sad excuse for a God of War clone, and the only people who defend it as a Castlevania game are those who don't care about the franchise and don't normally play them (especially the quality DS entries).
-Borderlands 2 is hilarious and if you think it isn't then you don't know sh*t about comedy and are a contrarian jerkwad who can't have fun.
-Nintendo has wonderful studios doing great things within strict guidance but their refusal to change business strategies longterm is going to be their downfall (unless they Forest Gump their way into another surprise hit with the mainstream ala Wii)
-Open world games are largely awful, and people who clamor for "freedom of choice" frequently trade polish and refinement for the illusion of player agency. I am sick of having to play games that have been shoved into the sandbox genre where I have to run/drive for 10-15 minutes just to get to the next story mission that is actually interesting just because some idiots want to run around to "cause mayhem" or to do some generic quest that isn't compelling just for cash/xp.
-MGS4 is hot stinky garbage and craps all over the previous games so hard that it ruined the franchise for me; past, present and future. On a related Konami note, Lords of Shadow is a sad excuse for a God of War clone, and the only people who defend it as a Castlevania game are those who don't care about the franchise and don't normally play them (especially the quality DS entries).
-Borderlands 2 is hilarious and if you think it isn't then you don't know sh*t about comedy and are a contrarian jerkwad who can't have fun.
derExperte
Member
Who do I have to pay to win in TF2, Dota or LoL?
oreomunsta
Banned
Holy crap... No. I'm sorry, but no. The Borderlands series is the fucking boring death of comedy in video games. Those jokes feel like they were written by a team of people who were rejected from both Spongebob and South Park. The games are all about shooting, nothing more, so when you get a character going "Lookie me, I shoot/kill and make joke about shooting/killing, now have da laugh" through a cutscene or godawful dialogue, it makes me feel like my IQ is dropping from an actual number down to rutabaga.. Oh lookie da, I make da new joke for Bordielans 3.
If I wanted some actually funny scripted humour, that's really hard to find in a game. Conker's Bad Fur Day is the only one that comes to mind, but half of its humour is situational. If I wanted a real laugh from a game, I'd play Saints Row 3 for its hilariously bad AI or multiplayer 3D World. Marcus "Oh you gun don' work? I shoot you in niicap. See, it work!" or the Borderlands 1 boss whose introduction was "Has 3 testicles" is the equivalent of listening to that one friend who doesn't shut up and is the only one who laughs at his own jokes.
oreomunsta
Banned
Haha fair enough. Borderlands is like a trigger for me, it is honestly the worst game series introduced this generation, in my opinion. I would rather stick my hand through a food processor or watch an hour of NBC comedy than play through one of those games completely.
What was wrong with Conker's though? =p
Wouldn't call it "utterly terrible" but yes, agree. It was one of the most tedious games I've ever played.
A good ambientation is worthless if you don't do anything interesting with it.
In terms of comedy writing, just about everything. I think the only people who really still appreciate it were tweens/teens at the time of release, it really hasn't aged well.
oreomunsta
Banned
No it hasn't aged well at all. But the meta and situational humour were great. Here you are, a cute little squirrel last seen in Diddy Kong Racing, and you have to fight raptors, Nazi teddy bears, and a hangover and then re-enact a bit of the Matrix.
Oh, and Lords of Shadow is a great game. Maybe it doesn't need to be a Castlevania, but the twist at the end wouldn't have been as great, otherwise
I could see this happening (procedurally generated stuff can really go either way), but for now I'm quite taken by the premise and footage we've seen.
That's fine that you feel that way, but to be honest I don't feel the combat was very finely tuned, the platforming was clunky, and the segments where they ripped off Shadow of the Colossus just plain didn't work.
It was so busy trying to emulate so many other better games it forgot to have any new ideas or personality of its own. Castlevania is better than that.
Harry Dresden
Member
Halo as a series, sucks balls. The game has had little to no evolution over its many entries. And for a series that claims it is 'combat evolved' it has not.
TheAngryMonkey
Member
A number of people don't value the Wii U beyond $100 but I'd buy the system again today at full price before I bought a PS4 or Xbox One for $100.
Nostremitus
Member
I don't know if I'd go that far, but I do think that most people who downplay the Wii U haven't spent much time with one.
Edit: The sales figures support this assertion.
No Backwards Compatibility on PS4 and Xbone irks me so much. Why? Because my launch PS3 just decided to quit on me. I still have at least 10 games I still want to play and even more games I want to replay. It being my only Blu-ray player sucks because now I have to watch rented Redbox movies on a dvd. This wouldn't be a big deal if PS4 was bc but nooooooooooo, now I'm stuck with either wasting money repairing my console or buying a new model.
Don't get me wrong I planned on buying them eventually but there's nothing on either of them that makes me want to have them this year. With my PS2 there was nothing on that console until Onimusha Warlords hit but it was okay since I had PS1 games to play. What if my 360 breaks? Same situation same problems. No Backwards compatibility at least with previous the previous generation is stupid.
Now I got to make some calls to see what is more cost effective. Come at me GAF.
Don't get me wrong I planned on buying them eventually but there's nothing on either of them that makes me want to have them this year. With my PS2 there was nothing on that console until Onimusha Warlords hit but it was okay since I had PS1 games to play. What if my 360 breaks? Same situation same problems. No Backwards compatibility at least with previous the previous generation is stupid.
Now I got to make some calls to see what is more cost effective. Come at me GAF.
If by full price you mean $300 Zelda bundle, then yeah for sure if I didn't have one I'd get it over the PS4 or Xone. But if PS4 was $100...of course I'd buy that. I'd buy any console at $100 (except for the Ouya).
But it did evolve the genre. Every modern shooter since then basically plays and has ripped mechanics straight from Halo.
southerncross
Member
Well, Super Meat Boy trivialized most of its challenges with checkpoints every 20 seconds, so it hasn't got much in common with Dark Souls.
By that same token, making the punishment for being killed by ridiculously powerful enemies a 15 - 20 minute back track, depending on how much resistance there is between you and the place you died is not good design.
There are great games that are challenging without being over the top. Dark Souls is over the top.
Which brings me to my controversial opinion: Beating Dark Souls doesn't necessarily mean you're a hardcore gamer. It just means you're more patient than the rest of us.
I agree with all of this.
While I haven't played Dark Souls and can't speak to its difficulty, I completely agree with your point that some games excuse bad design as "punishing" or "hardcore" to paper over the real issues. I like a challenge like most people. I don't like failing over and over again for reasons that have less to do with my own faults and more the game's.
As for controversial opinions, I can't get into 3D Zeldas. I love aLttP and the Game Boy versions but I've still never beaten a 3D Zelda.
By this same token: I do not like games like I Want to Be the Guy or any other "trial and error" platformer. Super Meat Boy, and maybe N, are the only exceptions and that's because they at least show their obstacles up front instead of hiding an insta-death trap in a spot where there's no reason to be one. It's frustrating, unfair, and shitty game design.
il Diavolo
Banned
This is what turned me off from the souls games. It's not fun going through the same repetitive areas for the 20th+ time, to only die and have to retread 20 mins of progress before you have to repeat the same thing over again. It's not that the game is hard, it's that the penalty for death is so fucking high. That kind of difficulty infuriates me. I don't mind spending an hour trying to defeat some crazy hard boss, as long as when I die I'm able to immediately try again. Spending an hour to defeat a semi challenging boss because it takes you 20-30 mins to get back is not fun.
Also, I don't see what's so great about the combat. I find it extremely dull and boring, and most of the enemies are complete pushovers devoid of any kind of intelligence.
TheAngryMonkey
Member
My post is just a specific form of a pet peeve I have regarding how people place a value on something and ignoring that somebody else might value different things. I can see why someone might value the PS4 or Xbox One more than a Wii U but that isn't controversial, many people agree that the PS4 and Xbox One are "worth more." I place more value on being able to play 1st party Nintendo games.
Another, perhaps better, example is Apple vs PC. Personally I'd rather buy an Apple computer (especially laptops) for all the qualities a lot of other people gloss over. The trackpad, battery life and reliability, OS X, display quality, build quality and numerous other small features. I know I'm giving up raw performance, gaming abilities and paying more. But I value the things Apple machines have far more than what I'm missing out on. Plus I really dislike Windows.
Now I can appreciate that someone might not feel the same way about an Apple computer but what bugs me is that so few people will accept that someone might choose otherwise.
Dark Souls is basically trial and error. You can develop strategies for fighting the bosses but you WILL fail often, which may or may not discourage you about the reliability of your strategy and forces you to start over, again and again, not even accounting human errors that will happen and will lead to your death.
And that in turn inevitably leads back to my original statement, with the long, monotonous grind back to where you were to have one more opportunity to get it right by accident. I'm sorry, but that is not fun, and if your game isn't at least fun while also being challenging, you're doing it wrong.
InfiniteUnrest
Member
Halo always felt like a step back for me, but that's probably because I came from playing FPS on PC, and playing Tribes and Tribes 2 competitively (to this day I've yet to play a modern shooter than even came close to the same feel for finesse, speed, and action that Tribes and Tribes 2 provided). Halo felt slow, like you were moving through molasses, and seemed to take away some of the finesse of playing a modern FPS, so that people could enjoy it on a console.
I still enjoyed Halo, but mainly for the single player campaigns.
Also, I liked Zelda 2.