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.
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.
Doing that would absolutely kill games like Ninja Gaiden Black and Demon's/Dark Souls. I don't think it's any fun just spamming against bosses like that (or even the individual stages). Cautiousness and precision is no longer rewarded. Regen health does the exact same thing in FPS/TPS games.
Red Dead Redemption was utterly terrible, and was essentially 'Grand Theft Horse' in a dull and lifeless world, supported by a terrible story.
Doing that would absolutely kill games like Ninja Gaiden Black and Demon's/Dark Souls. I don't think it's any fun just spamming against bosses like that (or even the individual stages). Cautiousness and precision is no longer rewarded. Regen health does the exact same thing in FPS/TPS games.
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.
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.
Exactly how I feel.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.
Interesting, I hated gta 4 but loved red dead.I'll always remember people recommending RDR to me even though they knew I hated GTA 4 to its core. "Honestly, it's such a better game on every level!" While I didn't hate RDR as much (exploring for treasures, plants, and animal ecosystem were great), it was still mechanically and design-wise too similar that I disliked the game. Uhh that linear mission design, where you fail a mission because your horse is not moving fast enough with other riders. Uhh the aiming system was still awful and only slightly slaved by Max Payne bullet time. Uhh can't get through a door because of tank controls + Euphoria. Story didn't do much for me because of the generic plot, unwilling errand boy behaviour, and lugoscabib discobiscuits.
Although I'll admit, having a bear chase you during thunder made for cool atmosphere. And lasso'ing assassination targets to catch them alive was appreciated.
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.
Every person who thinks that the DualShock 4 is an awesome controller/best controller ever is because probably they have used the same crap for more than 15 years.
It's simply a good controller.
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 like FFXIII a lot. The negativity around it has pushed me away from "JRPG GAF". They like to take every opportunity they can to scream loudly how much they hate that game. You can't talk about Final Fantasy anymore here because any thread will inevitably contain whining about FFXIII. I had to unsubscribe from the Final Fantasy community thread for this reason. If you hate the game so much, talk about all the other games in the series in that community thread instead of spending all your time talking about how much you hate FFXIII.Final Fantasy XIII is good.
The worst aspects of the games is its evolution. The fans know what I'm talking about.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.
That's kind of the point. Dark Souls punishes you heavily if you fail, but being patient and aware means you don't fail. It's not over-the-top difficulty with monsters that can survive 40 minutes of you continuously wailing on them, it's just keeping you on your toes so that you don't get hit. Once you get good at learning enemy behavior, you can go faster and breeze through areas that once took you a long time. The Undead Burg that once seemed to take forever can be less than five minutes. The entire game can be speedrun with no glitches in an hour.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 don't find Dark Souls a monotonous grind; I find it relaxing. If you find it tiring you, take a break.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.
Dark Souls has almost no one-hit kills. Even on an unleveled character, most boss attacks will still leave you with a sliver of health.The usually one hit deaths don't provide enough incentive to be cautious and precise?
Demon's Souls is infinitely better than Dark Souls. Aside from graphics, the series took 10 steps back. Too bad Demon's Souls 2 will never happen.
I agree world tendency is BS. I honestly think it should have worked in reverse; you should get more healing items and weaker enemies as you fail, but you should get harder enemies and more valuable items as you succeed.While I do like hard-ass and sometimes unfair games like Battletoads and Spelunky, Demon's Souls's Soul Tendency is kind of BS. It just makes backtracking to where you died more tedious. I'm normally okay with death setting me back a while, because usually I can breeze through that part and it reminds me how I've improved, which encourages me to keep trying. In Demon's Souls I want to kill stuff for the experience and so that nothing stabs me in the back later, but it ends up taking longer than the first time around since everything takes more hits.
Moe makes every video game better.
Every video game needs more moe.
Moe makes every video game better.
Every video game needs more moe.
Avatar quotesI feel the exact opposite
This might only be slightly more controversial, but... catering to the audience that buys body pillows of their waifus and drools over hot springs scenes is turning people away from games like it does anime and reducing the potential audience it would otherwise reach.Well, it is the controversial gaming opinion thread!
Most of its challenge comes through punishing your mistakes, but if you don't make mistakes, you don't get punished.
Haven't been keeping up with the news lately, huh?
That's like saying "if you don't play, you don't get punished".
20 minutes to go back to a boss while repeating the motions is an obvious design flaw. It's just that a design flaw on a masterpiece tends to be ignored.
Moe makes every video game better.
Every video game needs more moe.
Loving that I'm not the only one who struggles with Dark Souls on principle - "prepare to die" is its motto, and yet the price for death as previously mentioned is incredibly high. It's a flawed concept that for me is punishing, not enjoyable.
I applaud those who have the patience for these games....I just...can't...do it.
Outside of Zelda, Super Mario World, and Super Metroid, SNES is a garbage system.
Looks like I successfully made a controversial opinion. Yay.absolutely not
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.
Dunno if it's controversial but I think Civ 4 >>>>>>>>> Civ 5. I've owned, loved and fanatically played every single Civ game since the first came out and I absolutely can't stand Civ 5.
Not at all controversial. I didn't hate Civ 5, but it definitely isn't the best civ.
Civilization II Gold is the best civilization. By far.
You are in the right to dislike whatever you want
but what you've said is freaking ridiculous. You basically want a company to die because they don't cater to your taste. Isn't that selfish?
Also what the hell is up with that analogy?
Demon's Souls is infinitely better than Dark Souls.
Demons Souls is nowhere near as good as Dark Souls.