Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[Marshal Mannerheim]

Playing a Paradox game solely to turn everything into a meme just makes you look like a retard.

 

[Squandog Bunglepuss]

The problem with a lot of great, genre-defying games is that it's often the worst parts of these games that become popularized and imitated, instead of what made the games good.
Zelda: Ocarina of Time set the bar for amazing 3D level design and gameplay but made Navi-like "stop helping me" tutorial bullshit popular too.

Halo was renowned for its world building, enemy designs and gunplay but it seems the only thing other FPS developers took from it is the regenerating health and 2-weapon limit crap.

Half Life 2 was a masterpiece but it meant a ton of other FPS or adventure games included the same boring storytelling method of "stand still or slowly walk through a hallway while characters talk to you. Isn't this so much better than a cutscene!?"

 

[AlmightyMagichan]

I tried out Cyberpunk and had a good time. There were a handful of crashes that were annoying, but overall it wasn't too bad. I liked the story and characters, and had fun using the mantis blades and hacking into people. I'll definitely do another playthough once the DLC gets released.

Although I think the reason I'm no too hard on the game is because I played Kingdom Come Deliverance, which has a lot of the same technical issues.

 

[Captain Syrup]

I tried out Cyberpunk and had a good time.

Critics are competing to write the nastiest review. Even if the products deserve it, sometimes.

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

Super Mario RPG > Super Mario 64

And I love Super Mario 64

 

[Captain Syrup]

Super Mario RPG > Super Mario 64

Mario RPG is more self-referential. The new characters/villains are fun, the levels are unique for an RPG while still being grounded in the Mario universe. And Culex is the gold standard for easter eggs. Imagine you're playing Kirby Fighters and suddenly you're fighting Ornstein and Smough. 11-year-old me did not sign up for this shit.

The industry owes more to 64, plus the N64 didn't have a lot of good titles compared to SNES.

 

[Plank]

Dark souls 1 is a 9/10 game held back by 4/10 design decisions.
Blighttown, lava place and catacombs being prime examples of poorly designed areas that clearly didnt get enough time and effort to flesh them out.

DS1 is a perfect balance of difficulity most times i think as the game is as difficult as you want. You could blitz the entire game with pyromancy and blackknights haelbeard or you could stagger around with a poorly scaled longsword.
I dont think an easy mode is required but adaptive difficulty would be nice. There are some bosses where the game could just leave a bonfire right outside if you die 5+ times. The treck back to the tree of chaos or gwynn isnt challenging just tideous.

Ds2 on the other hand think difficulty is directly related to how many enmies it can throw at you.
Ds3 is so fucking bland and honestly kind of boring.

That is because Dark Souls was just a cashgrab by From.

From saw the unbelievable response by gamers to the masterpiece that was Demon's Souls and handed the engine and assets over to their B-team to crap out essentially little more than a clumsy repackaging of the original game.

The primary From developers went on to work on Bloodborne while the B-team continued to put out increasingly mediocre Dark Souls titles.

The Dark Souls games aren't bad, just dreadfully lazy compared to the original masterpiece Demon's Souls that was a labor of love by From to hardcore gamers who were frustrated with the casual/easy mode the gaming world had become.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

i genuinely think half life 2 is one of my least favorite games, i played through black mesa , hl2 , hl2e1 and about half of ep2 before giving up , black mesa was great but it was only released a year ago , 2 dragged on for so much of the game , the driving parts were easily the worst but all of it kinda sucked , ep1 was just the most boring gameplay of the base game over like a hour , and ep 2 was so boring i gave up after the ant cave part. Just to note i played the game with MMOD

Far Cry 5 would have been better if it was political.

There's a fascinating history of cults, both of a Leftist variety like Jonestown and of a White Identity flavor.

Far Cry 5 could have used its Montana setting properly and explored the Peggies' theology and the way they relate to the culture around them and exist at odds with it, the way that Federal policing escalates instead of resolves conflict when the government wants a boogeyman to fight, lot of ways it could have gone.

Instead all we got was a Montana that's just Mississippi with buffalos and a cult that's loldrugs with a shallow Christian veneer. There is nothing about the Peggies or Hope County that's interesting and it makes the setting feel wasted.

Far cry 5 would have been great if it just went hard into the setting instead of just being far cry 4 reskinned , give me a waco like segment , let me fly and get help from the army , i have access to planes and the peggys dont have sams or anything. im greatly worried about far cry 6 , im afraid its gonna be 5 but in cuba and with tanks.

 

[Captain Syrup]

Capcom should retire M. Bison. He went from possibly the greatest final boss ever conceived in fighting games, to the most wearisome.

Remember when he was an army officer with vague ties to Cammy and Guile? They haven't explored his relationship with Rose, either. Makes one wonder what the point of that twist was.

 

[Mary the Goldsmith]

I know the "X game is great its just not a good Y-like game" arguement is somewhat dumb, but I actually had fun playing Nuts & Bolts, being able to build the most retarded contraptions/vehicles my autistic brain could come up with was fun, it is a fun racing/crafting game sure it has its issues but it was I think a first of its kind back in 2008, the biggest problem is that it sucks as a Banjo Kazooie sequel

 

[Violence Jack]

I'm actually shocked people like Dark Souls II and III when both are haphazard messes that don't hold a candle to the greatness of 1 or even demon's souls. Here's a fucking essay on why they suck.

Dark souls II (I'm talking base game not Scholar of the First shit): A roll tax in a game with soul memory. PVP that's still a lag fest that sucks and yet people claim it has good build variety despite having the same fucking builds demon's and dark had. There are three actual builds in reality; hit things, shoot things, or shoot energy things. There that's the immaculate build variety everyone tears their foreskin jerking off to. Armor that looks like hefty bags covered in shit and fur with muddy textures (again this is throughout the whole game). The game needed DLC and a do-over where they didn't fix anything and add in a boring boss to spoon feed themes for idiots. I played this game first and despite what small minded individuals think, no I don't think it's the best one, Dark Souls and Demon's have worlds you traverse Dark Souls II is a mcdonald's play place where you put on your helmet and bash your head against other idiots.

The bosses suck and serve as filler much like Dark Souls III reveals, from soft just shuffles bosses around and puts them in places where they may or may not be appropriate. This was curtailed a bit in Dark Souls 1 but it still happened and you see overlap because of it. People like to shit on Dark 1 for reusing the fat asylum demon, but ignore that Souls II has some of the laziest encounter design that make both bosses and the zones boring as hell. Every zone in scholar of the first sin is lost izalith where they thought copy and pasting enemies was a cool and neat thing to do. The problem wasn't enemy variety it was the encounters were a slog to get through and didn't reward you for thinking.

Dark Souls III suffers from the same problems honestly, but at least Miyazaki was tard rangling his team by designing encounters that had clear intentions in mind. Ultimately however Dark Souls III suffers because it loses the quiet dignity that Demon's and Dark had. It enshews it in favor of bullshit set-pieces and verbose multiphase bosses that rely on quick movement while you move about as fast as DS1. I liked Bloodborne for everything it also did wrong, but DSIII is ridiculous in expecting anyone to play through it more than once considering there's only one build worth a damn anymore.

TL;DR all the games after Dark Souls suck except Bloodborne honestly. All so they can cater to a group of meming mouthbreathing idiots who wanna play a fighting game but with lag elements. So the world design and PVE fall by the wayside.

 

[LightDragonman1]

Here's another one.

As much as I respect it, Ocarina of Time is one of my least favorites in terms of 3D Zelda. While yes, its influence and legacy cannot be denied, in terms of gameplay and the like, I just don't think it has aged very well. Many of its once innovative and new features have since been done again and again in countless other titles, including later Zelda games, so their implementation in OOT just feels rather clunky. That's not to say I dislike the game, far from it, but I think it just gets way too much continued praise and top spots on "Greatest Games Ever Made" lists purely on how much it was a breakthrough for gaming at large, as opposed to its actually quality. While there are many games made decades ago that absolutely still hold up, I don't count OOT as one of them.

 

[AlmightyMagichan]

Here's another one.

As much as I respect it, Ocarina of Time is one of my least favorites in terms of 3D Zelda. While yes, its influence and legacy cannot be denied, in terms of gameplay and the like, I just don't think it has aged very well. Many of its once innovative and new features have since been done again and again in countless other titles, including later Zelda games, so their implementation in OOT just feels rather clunky. That's not to say I dislike the game, far from it, but I think it just gets way too much continued praise and top spots on "Greatest Games Ever Made" lists purely on how much it was a breakthrough for gaming at large, as opposed to its actually quality. While there are many games made decades ago that absolutely still hold up, I don't count OOT as one of them.

Makes sense of course that the gameplay feels clunky now, since this was such an early 3D game. I think it's still fondly remembered mainly because of the excellent presentation. This was the Zelda game that made Hyrule really feel alive and fleshed out. When the later games get compared to this one it's mainly the story elements and world building that are brought up.

 

[X Pac Heat]

Far cry 5 would have been great if it just went hard into the setting instead of just being far cry 4 reskinned , give me a waco like segment , let me fly and get help from the army , i have access to planes and the peggys dont have sams or anything. im greatly worried about far cry 6 , im afraid its gonna be 5 but in cuba and with tanks.

It's going to be worse than that I fear. It's going to be New Dawn but in Cuba with Tanks.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

It's going to be worse than that I fear. It's going to be New Dawn but in Cuba with Tanks.

Never touched new dawn , saw the borderlands like healthbars and noped out , how bad is it?

 

[X Pac Heat]

Never touched new dawn , saw the borderlands like healthbars and noped out , how bad is it?

I didn't play it either after seeing that but everyone I know who played it told me it was trying to push Far Cry into a shitty RPG/looter shooter route.

 

[X-Shaped Weeaboo]

One on fighting games.

Killer Instinct is how modern fighting games should be designed. Too much emphasis on big-dick, million hit combos ends up with boring neutrals and repetitive gameplay that doesn't have a lot of reward or incentive to play outside of esports factor. Rather than having an emphasis on combos, Killer Instinct's auto-combos means the game can focus on individual interactions between each character, give them unique tools to handle different situations, and place an important on understanding the game's pacing and mechanics.

The brain is a muscle, and actively using it in the middle of matches rather than just memorizing repetitive combos for hours on end is more skill-intensive than people give it credit for.

 

[StraightShooter2]

So I just finished the Super Mario Galaxy games for the first time.

Some people criticized the plot of the games and said that it was confusing or made no sense - but to me it made sense enough. Here's the summary:

"Mario defeats Bowser (in SMG1) and takes his last Grand Star, but this causes Bowser's galaxy to explode. Rosalina and the Lumas use their power to save Mario and Peach, however this causes some type of "rift" in the "time-space continuum" and sends everyone back to the Mushroom Kingdom as though the events of the game had never happened. (Mario is the only one who remembers Rosalina or any of the events which had occurred.

In SMG2, the festival occurs and Bower's plot plays out again as though the events of SMG1 hadn't happened, however the adventure plays out slightly differently due to Rosalina's power having altered time and space."

 

[Bender]

So I just finished the Super Mario Galaxy games for the first time.

Some people criticized the plot of the games and said that it was confusing or made no sense - but to me it made sense enough. Here's the summary:

"Mario defeats Bowser (in SMG1) and takes his last Grand Star, but this causes Bowser's galaxy to explode. Rosalina and the Lumas use their power to save Mario and Peach, however this causes some type of "rift" in the "time-space continuum" and sends everyone back to the Mushroom Kingdom as though the events of the game had never happened. (Mario is the only one who remembers Rosalina or any of the events which had occurred.

In SMG2, the festival occurs and Bower's plot plays out again as though the events of SMG1 hadn't happened, however the adventure plays out slightly differently due to Rosalina's power having altered time and space."

I just thought the plot was "Mario rescues peach from Bowser" both times. It's such a simple concept that it doesn't really get old, to be honest.

It's what I like the most about Mario games, that there's no real exploration of the story until you go out of your way to find it, but usually it's "rescue the princess".

 

[Smaug's Smokey Hole]

Despite it having a really dumb storyline and one of the most stupid plot twists in all of gaming, I actually think the 2009 Bionic Commando game was extremely underrated. At the very least, its swinging mechanics were quite thrilling, and it had a really awesome soundtrack.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=_vdSDM9715U

The swinging was fun because it took skill and the player had to pay attention to the surroundings, but it could also feel a bit bullshit at time.

That game was plagued by development issues. Things were always changing, the lead game designer had a new idea that meant redoing things constantly. This made it plagued by delays and it cost Capcom a ton of money until they set their foot down and forced a release date on them. GRIN had very talented developers so they actually managed to wrap it up but you can feel that the game is a bit undercooked.

Halo was renowned for its world building, enemy designs and gunplay but it seems the only thing other FPS developers took from it is the regenerating health and 2-weapon limit crap.

You forget the grenade and melee buttons and very generous auto-saving checkpoints instead of manual saves. Regenerating shields was a necessity for these kinds of checkpoints, it's a really bad idea to lock people into a sliver of health and they have to run into a room full of enemies.

If you want to play a game that did it the wrong way then play Bungie's Oni. It had a very similar checkpoint system(the guys that programmed the system for Oni was actually moved over to do the same in Halo CE which was a worrying sign) but Oni didn't have regenerating health. And it didn't always consider the current situation when saving. In one section I had no health and jump-kicked my way through a door hoping to get the drop on whoever was in there and it was the boss who punched me out of the air and I died. It auto-loads me into mid jump-kick going through the door and the same thing happens, endlessly, it loops a 1-2 second sequence where I die and couldn't do anything about it. That was the last time I played Oni.

I know the "X game is great its just not a good Y-like game" arguement is somewhat dumb, but I actually had fun playing Nuts & Bolts, being able to build the most retarded contraptions/vehicles my autistic brain could come up with was fun, it is a fun racing/crafting game sure it has its issues but it was I think a first of its kind back in 2008, the biggest problem is that it sucks as a Banjo Kazooie sequel

Nuts & Bolts was fun but it really clicked and became fantastic when I realized that just because everyone is using car-likes in this race that doesn't mean that I have to do it. I can potentially just build some barely controllable flying boat and play it my way. It's much more a very creative DIY Diddy Kong Racing than a B&K sequel.

Makes sense of course that the gameplay feels clunky now, since this was such an early 3D game. I think it's still fondly remembered mainly because of the excellent presentation. This was the Zelda game that made Hyrule really feel alive and fleshed out. When the later games get compared to this one it's mainly the story elements and world building that are brought up.

Metal Gear Solid was released before it and it still plays well. They are very different games of course but both it and OOT had lots of new ideas when it comes to gameplay ideas and presentation.