Unpopular Video Game Opinions

[Zanreo]

4 hours ago, Mar said:

• Pokemon Red and Blue are not the best handheld Pokemon games.
• Generation 1 Pokemon are not the best, and Generation 5's are overly criticized.
• Pokemon Mystery Dungeon is a great spinoff franchise that can hold its own against the main series.

Agreed

 

[CandiBunni]

DOOM 3 (original 2004 version, not BFG Edition) is better than DOOM 4.

[BlazingCat83]

6 hours ago, Mar said:

1. The Classic aka 2D Sonic Games - 1, 2, CD, 3 & Knuckles - are all heavily overrated.
2. Jak X: Combat Racing is heavily underrated and deserved a better overall metacritic score/reception.
3. Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier is not as bad as Jak fans claim it to be.
4. Naughty Dog are very overrated game-developers.
5. Modern Sonic games objectively do not suck.
6. (The topic is like never actually discussed, but...) Jak is still Naughty Dog's best designed, strongest, and most developed main character of all the m.character's they've created.
7. Sonic Unleashed is a good Sonic game.
8. Pokemon Red and Blue are not the best handheld Pokemon games.
9. Generation 1 Pokemon are not the best, and Generation 5's are overly criticized.
10. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon is a great spinoff franchise that can hold its own against the main series.

My thoughts:

 

1. 3 and Knuckles were the best, but I liked 3D Sonic games up to Sonic Adventure 2. Sonic Forces looks cool, though.

2. Never played, so no comment.

3. See #2

4. Haven't done enough to comment one way or another

5. Really?

6. See #2 again

7. Disagree, but to each their own

8. I agree. Gold, Silver, and Crystal were the best with Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald being close seconds.

9. Depends on when you started

10. I've only played a few, but I agree.

 

As for myself? Though this sentiment is shared by older gamers, new games are overall too damn easy and don't really let you think for yourself anymore.

Edited April 9, 2017 by Torracat83

[Satoshi Ookami]

4 hours ago, Ratchet said:

The PS3 UI is bad, slow, and clunky.

I'm pretty sure everyone feels the same =D

Edited April 9, 2017 by Satoshi Ookami

[Zanreo]

5 hours ago, Torracat83 said:

9. Depends on when you started

Eh, I started with Crystal/2nd gen (and outside of the games, technically 1st gen since my first experience with Pokémon was watching the first anime seasons as a small kid... didn't try the 1st gen games before years later though) and I don't have much "nostalgia" for the first gen - overall I find them kinda "boring" and plain design-wise. 2nd gen is a mixed bag, but generally has more "interesting" designs I feel (though maybe that's just my nostalgia speaking haha)

[Jak]

14 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

You seem to have some trouble figuring out what the word "objectively" means, so here you go:

 

 

You're welcome. 

 

And you seem to have isses comprehending  From a game design standpoint, they objectively are not bad to the extent most people claim, obviously something you're not aware of (because it's digusting). People label all the games as bad, which is mechanically false, as if they were games like Sonic Boom, Sonic 2006, Ride to Hell Retribution, and so fourth. The level design, music, gameplay, and other game related aspects in the games OBJECTIVELY do not make them "bad" games, it makes them flawed at best. You will forever never be able to understand my argument, especially since you are one of those blind, bandwagoner Sonic haters, and obviously do not keep up with the franchises' over-backlash.

 

Objective because bad =/= flawed. Bad games are games that run poorly, have many glitches, poor designs, feel or are unplayable, have unresponsive controls, so fourth, something most of the modern games do not have or have enough of. My objectivity claim is aimed at the games' overall design, and created by the huge hatred of 3D Sonic games by many people. Comparing games (liking is entirely irrelevant, it's not about liking, it's based on mechanics and design) like Unleashed to 06 or Boom evidently shows a huge difference in quality. Were not getting games like Shadow, 06, or Boom (the worse in the franchise). At best, they'd be mediocre.

 

I edited my line though, it did need some more clarification. Sucks was misleading, I meant bad, since well designed games can actually suck, but bad is bad. And I had to seperate certain 3D games like Boom series.

 

14 hours ago, Ratchet said:

1. The Ratchet and Clank PS2 games are better than the PS3 ones 
2. Remasters aren't really as bad as everyone thinks they are. As long as they don't affect new games coming out people should welcome them
3. Digital > physical
4. Jak 1 is the best Jak and Daxter game. Jak 2 is trash and while Jak 3 was a big improvement over Jak 2 it's still not all that great (Has a pretty good soundtrack though)
5. The PS2 GTA games are trash when you take the nostalgia goggles off Even though they were groundbreaking in every sense of the word when they released. 
6. The PS3 UI is bad, slow, and clunky.
7. Gearbox are the masters of Looter shooters
8. Call of Duty going to the future was pretty awesome. Disappointed to see the series going back to it's roots this year. While the multiplayer for the past 3 cod titles have ranged from bad to decent the single player campaigns for all of them have been awesome. Advanced Warfare's campaign was especially awesome
9. Consoles should go in the same direction smartphones have gone. Rather than have console generations consoles should adopt the smartphone business model releasing a new console every 3 to 4 years while not forcing consumers to upgrade to a new console every 3 years. A nice balance where consumers don't have to buy a new console every 3 years, but are forced to upgrade every 6 years would be appreciated. With consoles most likely having the X86 architecture moving forward it should be fairly easy for developers to release their games on multiple consoles similar to what developers are doing right now with the PS4 and PS4 Pro. Also consoles going in this direction would ultimately guarantee us forward and backwards compatibility which would be great.
10. I wish Sony and Microsoft would stop charging for online and bring back online passes 

 

 

 

You know that's out of context. JaD has the best metacritic score, sold the best, and it's mostly agreed upon to be the best. Jak II is mostly agreed upon to be the worse (but by true fans is usually said to be the best - understandable because of more platforming than J3). Jak 3 is mostly labeled as Jak 2.5, and got worse ratings than J2. Sounds like you wanted to be petty or fire shots :Y

 

You know what though?

- The Ratchet & Clank franchise is clearly overrated.

Edited April 9, 2017 by Mar

[FlareXV]

While some people's gaming preferences do baffle me, I truly believe that no one here has an unpopular gaming opinion. I'm sure there's someone else that feels the same.

 

I would like to say that we might have hype up No Man's Sky a bit too much because while it's coming along nicely, it doesn't seem to have the same vision of the first pitch anymore (couldn't be anymore obvious).

 

 

15 minutes ago, Mar said:

 

And you seem to have comprehension issues From a game design standpoint, they objectively do not suck to the extent most people claim, obviously something you're not aware of. People label all the games as bad, which is mechanically false, as if they were games like Sonic Boom, Sonic 2006, Ride to Hell Retribution, and so fourth. The level design, music, gameplay, and other game related aspects in the games OBJECTIVELY do not make them actually suck or "bad" games, it makes them flawed at best. You will forever never be able to understand my argument, especially since you are one of those blind, bandwagoner Sonic haters, and obviously do not keep up with the franchise's backlash by people/fans

 

Lol, same thing happened with Banjo Kazooie Nuts and Bolts. People will insult a game and can't really explain why their dislike it.

Edited April 9, 2017 by FlareXV

[Jak]

On 4/9/2017 at 1:35 AM, Torracat83 said:

My thoughts:

 

1. 3 and Knuckles were the best, but I liked 3D Sonic games up to Sonic Adventure 2. Sonic Forces looks cool, though.

2. Never played, so no comment.

3. See #2

4. Haven't done enough to comment one way or another

5. Really?

6. See #2 again

7. Disagree, but to each their own

8. I agree. Gold, Silver, and Crystal were the best with Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald being close seconds.

9. Depends on when you started

10. I've only played a few, but I agree.

 

As for myself? Though this sentiment is shared by older gamers, new games are overall too damn easy and don't really let you think for yourself anymore.

 

1. That's fine, but my point is the 2D games are very overrated regardless if 1, 2, CD, or 3 & K were claimed to be the best. (It tends to be CD or 2, but it's irrelevant cause they're all overrated. The world either wants constant 2D games, wanting Modern Sonic to die entirely, or Adventure 3 and nothing else, and all 2D games are claimed to be better than all the 3D games to date.)

 

There's nothing impressive about Forces, at all yet. Nothing they've shown outclasses any aspect of the prior boost games except the addition of a 3rd character and the detailed animated stages via the background. So unless you like Colors and/or Gens (left out Unleashed because G/C refined the boost controllability and general control of Sonic), the "it looks cool" statement is questionable. Haha.

 

Spoiler

 

4. Until they make good non-3rd person shooters (other genres), that safe-comfort-zone they've stayed in for a decade, they'll always be overrated. Naughty Dog compared to companies like EA... yeah... I want to see them explore new genres, like an RPG, Action/Adventure without shooting mechanics, real Stealth, Hack n Slash, real Survivor-Horror etc. TLOU really showed how limited ND 's talents are with the mediocre stealth, and similar gamey feel to Uncharted. Their convulted/scripted gameplay, shallow combat, and emphasis on story OVER gameplay (though TLOU toned the latter down a bit) concepts needs to go. Been used far too long. They use multiple formulas over and over, consecutively, and it'll be contuining with TLOU2. Their innovation is like non-existent, and U4 also showed ND's limitations again with an over abudance of climbing (making up for lack of creativity aka padding), inferior character development than U3, both retcon brother plot and his forced existence being used to make a 4th game, and lolsy and pointless filler features like sliding and grappling hook (more padding), which the latter was clearly shoe-horned in and should have been a GP feature earlier in the series. All innovations U4 did (exc MP) literally should have already been present in the series earlier: driving, grappling hook, sliding, and extended climbing via piton tool. And none of it was impressive.

 

ND gets a pass, and their flaws are overlooked because of simplistically new game stories and polishness in simple core mechanics. Their lack of innovation, compelling gameplay (outside setpieces), and so fourth never hurt them the way it should and has other developers, even when U4 evidently felt tacked on, gameplay and story wise. Having ruined MP in all their critically successful games is irrelevant to (cause only campaign matters), the weak innovation is irrelevant (cause story is so good)... etc, sort of repeating myself here. Like look at all these flaws that are overlooked, it's sad as hell. All ND have to do is keep making entertaining stories and polish up animations, physics, graphics, and shallow combat, and they'll be best ever and win goty all the time. 

 

 

 

 

 

5. Yes really, I play the games. Theres nothing rational about "every Modern Sonic game is trash". They're at least average, which the world cant even agree to that, thus justifying my claim.

 

7. The Werehog... is but just one concept, and even then, the mechanics are agreed upon to be good (incase mechanics are your issue). The problem with the Werehog is simply its placement in a Sonic game because of its pacing. It's already agreed upon mechanically that it's fine. Aside from that, Generations nor Colors touched Unleashed in characterization (includes voice acting and humor), setpieces, script, story, main villain, atomsphere, graphics, game length, etc. Generations has a few superior aspects but not as much as Unleashed has over it. And let's not forget Gens had to pull old assets that were already successful to do well VS Unleashed brand new, CREATIVE concepts.

 

Bringing things into perspective more, 3D/Modern Sonic was his most indentible in Unleashed, because majority of the game was 3D. Generations decided to make 1/2 of the core GP 2D Exclusive via the only second playable character, and relied on it to sell the game. This was Classic Sonic, which ruined the brand indentity of Modern Sonic games, something crucial to franchises, and to which didnt happen in Adventure-Unleashed. It happened again in Colors where Modern Sonic-play contained more 2D segments than 3D... in a Modern 3D game, even when he was the ONLY playable char.

 

Going back to Generations, let's briefly compare them from 1 specific area (2nd playable characters). Classic Sonic as noted by the Sonic community wasnt as good in Generations as he was in his own games. His presence in the 3D games, on that engine, physics and so fourth, was never as polished as it was in his own games, making Classic Sonic his weakest in Gens and thus hurting his legacy (and GP in Gens). Werehog was a brand new concept, first time, and it had more engaging gameplay: combat, exploration, level design, more. Since it was new, it was able to get away with things, and it's only issue was simply its pacing. Werehog has all of the things ppl want and love in Sonic: platforming, alternate pathes, and exploration. Point: Werehog had better gameplay, Classic Sonic pacing was just fitting.

 

(Some Sonic videos to help explain my perspectives)

 

 

 

 

With this 3rd video, I forgot most of his points somehow, however, his point in regards to 2D vs 3D and the speed vs platforming is on point and why I linked it here. All 3 of these videos are essential for Sonic fans, esp non biased, to see.

 

 

 

The spoiler-tag is there just cause of length.

 

9. Regardless, Gen 1 is not the best just because it was the 1st. And Gen 5 is still overly criticized regardless of where ppl started, even Gen 5 itself, because OVERALL it's overly criticized.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Mar

[Shana Alter]

Spoiler

On 09/04/2017 at 9:04 AM, Mar said:

1. The Classic aka 2D Sonic Games - 1, 2, CD, 3 & Knuckles - are all heavily overrated.
2. Jak X: Combat Racing is heavily underrated and deserved a better overall metacritic score/reception.
3. Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier is not as bad as Jak fans claim it to be.
4. Naughty Dog are very overrated game-developers.
5. All Modern Sonic games made by Sonic Team objectively are not bad.
6. (The topic is like never actually discussed, but...) Jak is still Naughty Dog's best designed, strongest, and most developed main character of all the m.character's they've created.
7. Sonic Unleashed is a good Sonic game.
8. Pokemon Red and Blue are not the best handheld Pokemon games.
9. Generation 1 Pokemon are not the best, and Generation 5's are overly criticized.
10. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon is a great spinoff franchise that can hold its own against the main series.

 

1. Depends
2. Why does it deserve it if gamers see it as bad/average and even reviewers see it as bad/average then it will be treated as such
3. Jak 1 is the only decent Jak game
4. Ok, this I will agree with
5. Shadow, Sonic '06 and Boom would like to have a word with you
6. Jak... really... no
7. It is average at best
8. I'll agree here
9. Ignore this
10. I haven't seen anything bad said about Mystery Dungeon so...

13 hours ago, Mar said:

 

The spoiler-tag is there just cause of length. Overall, I always have several reasons for my opinions and statements (whether it be Sonic, Jak, Uncharted, etc), and they're never onesided or biased-to-the-bad-extent. Sure, I argue a lot, but for very good reason. I dont argue cause I like to NOR TO BE RIGHT. (Excuse any typos.)

 

I have seen your posts elsewhere and I can say you are not objective you are a real Jak & Daxter fanboy who acts like other's opinions are wrong and what you say is fact.

 

1. Last of Us is over rated
2. Turn based combat is still acceptable
3. Not all mobile games are bad
4. Skyrim, Fallout & GTA are far too over rated
5. The PSV has a good library of games

[Zanreo]

51 minutes ago, Kochiya Shana said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

1. Depends
2. Why does it deserve it if gamers see it as bad/average and even reviewers see it as bad/average then it will be treated as such
3. Jak 1 is the only decent Jak game
4. Ok, this I will agree with
5. Shadow, Sonic '06 and Boom would like to have a word with you
6. Jak... really... no
7. It is average at best
8. I'll agree here
9. Ignore this
10. I haven't seen anything bad said about Mystery Dungeon so...

I have seen your posts elsewhere and I can say you are not objective you are a real Jak & Daxter fanboy who acts like other's opinions are wrong and what you say is fact.

 

1. Last of Us is over rated
2. Turn based combat is still acceptable
3. Not all mobile games are bad
4. Skyrim, Fallout & GTA are far too over rated
5. The PSV has a good library of games

1. Kinda, though not my kind of game anyway

2. Agree, and in some cases I prefer it. Sometimes I just wanna be able to "take a break" between turns

3. Agree, even though I prefer console/handheld overall there's a few mobile games I enjoy. I have more of an issue with some of the business models than the games themselves

4. Kinda agree but also not my kind of games in the first place

5. As in Vita? Agree 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Zanreo

[Jak]

8 hours ago, Kochiya Shana said:

  Hide contents

 

1. Depends
2. Why does it deserve it if gamers see it as bad/average and even reviewers see it as bad/average then it will be treated as such
3. Jak 1 is the only decent Jak game
4. Ok, this I will agree with
5. Shadow, Sonic '06 and Boom would like to have a word with you
6. Jak... really... no
7. It is average at best
8. I'll agree here
9. Ignore this
10. I haven't seen anything bad said about Mystery Dungeon so...

I have seen your posts elsewhere and I can say you are not objective you are a real Jak & Daxter fanboy who acts like other's opinions are wrong and what you say is fact.

 

1.  

 

Spoiler

 

Before I reply. "Oh no, he's doing it again, forcing opinions down people's throats." Oh, but its ok for others to disagree with me, even when they dont put "imo"? K.

 

1. "Depends" is an invalid counter statement. All 2D games are clearly overrated... and are widely claimed to be the best Sonic has ever been (hence OR). You've misunderstood something there.

 

2. Really with this logic, really? You do realize you're saying every game deserves the scores they get at launch, right? This also means games that become better overtime are irrelevant. It deserves it because of its overall game design, im not going over that again. (Preserving wall of text.)

 

3. That is your questionable opinion. Metacritic says otherwise, and the then re-released HD Collection also says otherwise.

 

5. Yeah, I can see you're misunderstanding several things im saying, like others. Those games are irrelevant. My single point was, not "All Modern Sonic games" are bad, as people here and around the world claim to no day's end. There's a decent amount of bad, decent, and good Modern Sonic games. The point is not all are bad. Bad is a whole nother tier than flawed.

 

6. Because you dislike his games and/or dislike or don't care for his character, it must be no, right? This is actually true, especially since Jak has more games, abilities humans cannot compete against, and strives on characterization. 

• Design: Jak's character design as of Jak 3 depicts him as a strong hero. He carries a jetboard, a transformation, and guns with him at all times since Jak II to. Nathan's design consist of generic, bland real life clothing, and is only able to carry a few grenades and two guns. (Jak carries more - that seamless weapon wheel tho.) Prior to U4, guns just attached to his back magically, whereas Jak's guns were always realistically carried in a gun pocket. As of U4, he has an extra climbing piton, grappling hook, and can drive buggies (and horses since U3). Jak can literally drive anything he touches (including animals, flying crafts, buggies, etc) and his abilities can outclass anything Nathan can do. Joel's design is simplistic like Nathan's. He has way more weapons than Nathan, but they're still outclassed by Jak's.
• Strongest: Clearly Jak. Aside from physical output, the stories of his games are actually connected to him, so this makes him a vital, important, and memorable character in his own games naturally. He's also the heir to powerful bloodline, likely the strongest character of his type in his universe (unlike Joel and Nathan... lul that Nadine fight), is a demi-god, and has been requested help by the gods of his universe. Joel and Nathan have came close to death, maybe Jak has to, but he escapes his threats legitmately like a badass and with less scratches than J/N. Nathan may be memorable to, but his legacy does not outmatches Jak's. Jak 3 is  the culprit for this. Jak is gifted with being a quick learner and good at anything he does, unlike J/N.
• Development: Obviously technology itself has allowed ND to better PRESENT strong development in U and TLOU over the Jak games, but strong development certainly exist in Jak games. Most of Joel's and Nathan's development relies in the emotional department, they learn to care for someone (Elena, Ellie) or put them first before anything (Elena, Sam, Ellie). Getting the easiest out the way first, Ellie nor Joel can touch Jak, as they mostly had just one big development aspect, as oppose to several. Nathan goes through marriage and some other stuff , but overall, he loses to. He's always already pre-set with existing knowledge, and anything else just pertains to strengthning bonds with other characters. Nathan was at his best in U3, development wise, and the struggle that went on with the Lost Sand city was just the same rehashed development from U2, the struggle with Sully was moreso of delusion/deception (hence U3 title), and leaving Elena, when he wanted to keep her safe. 

 

Think that's a good enough cover. Trying to say an avatar like character is inferior to 2 generic human beings whom hardly developed dynamically, is just crazy. Its like ppl have to like a char or series in order to ever give them credit anywhere. Lara herself even outclasses Nathan (and Joel).

 

7. Average? With that good voice acting, characterization, innovated character limits of Super Sonic for first time, great use of character design (unlike most present games), very quality and indepth beat em up system that merely doesnt belong in a Sonic game, the most innovative Sonic game at the time, high production values, one of the best graphics of its time,  etc. No. Average is an understatement. COLORS is average since gameplay is like its only good aspect. Humor, animations, etc were done better in Unleashed. Unleashed at the very least is GOOD. To say Unleashed is average with the existence of Gens and Colors, with their weaker plots, graphics, animations, stactic cutscenes, poor characterization (disservice to Sonic's character), etc is pure nonsense.

 

9. What exactly is that suppose to mean?

 

10. I have, and while I have seen some praise for it, it"s still decently overshadowed by the main series. MD is hardly ever actually discussed in non-specific MD forums/topics/boards.

 

All of my points are based on what I know and seen in many communities, everything from onesided Gen 1 Pokemon fan-people to biased and bandwagon 3D Sonic haters (A LOT of which havent even played the games) to Naughty Dog are Naughty Gods (smh) and being labeled as best developers plus the "they make the best games" and "all their games are my goty" statements to Jak X is shit (even with its loud minority saying otherwise), etc. Ive been in many communities: Sonic, several Pokemon, Naruto, Playfire, Gametrailers, PSNP, Youtube, many more. Ik how how most people feel about franchises I know well or love.

 

"I have seen your posts elsewhere and I can say you are not objective you are a real Jak & Daxter fanboy who acts like other's opinions are wrong and what you say is fact."

 

That's pure ignorance and yet another exaggeration.. my god. You obviously have only seen a limited amount of post of mine, and you're probably one of those ppl who've read what ppl have said about me and made that your own opinion. Let alone when I actually go over mechanical facts. When someone says Jak II is best Jak game, I can see why they'd say that, despite J3 being my favorite. Same for the first game. But once you say the first game is the only good, let alone 'decent', Jak game then ofc a fan is going to reply. Like wtf? You can dislike a game all you want, but labeling a game bad JUSTIFIES my 2 cent, especially when bad is a hyberbole, as Jak is clearly a flawed but not bad franchise, and when you choose to make your damn opi ion public. Yet again, im a technical person, so if you say "bad", yes ill bring out the big guns. Literally no-one actually tries to listen to my points, it's sad. Inb4 you dont listen to others. Ok.

 

Make a TLOU, Uncharted, or Metal Gear Solid critique post/thread and watch how many arguments start. People just get salty cause im the only Jak fan who decides to attempts countering or partaking in arguments/disagreements.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Mar

[MMDE]

I love my 2D platformers, but I'm no fan of Sonic. In fact, I rather dislike those games quite a lot, all of them, even the 3D ones.

[Shana Alter]

9 hours ago, Mar said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Before I reply. "Oh no, he's doing it again, forcing opinions down people's throats." Oh, but its ok for others to disagree with me, even when they dont put "imo"? K.

 

1. "Depends" is an invalid counter statement. All 2D games are clearly overrated... and are widely claimed to be the best Sonic has ever been (hence OR). You've misunderstood something there.

 

2. Really with this logic, really? You do realize you're saying every game deserves the scores they get at launch, right? This also means games that become better overtime are irrelevant. It deserves it because of its overall game design, im not going over that again. (Preserving wall of text.)

 

3. That is your questionable opinion. Metacritic says otherwise, and the then re-released HD Collection also says otherwise.

 

5. Yeah, I can see you're misunderstanding several things im saying, like others. Those games are irrelevant. My single point was, not "All Modern Sonic games" are bad, as people here and around the world claim to no day's end. There's a decent amount of bad, decent, and good Modern Sonic games. The point is not all are bad. Bad is a whole nother tier than flawed.

 

6. Because you dislike his games and/or dislike or don't care for his character, it must be no, right? This is actually true, especially since Jak has more games, abilities humans cannot compete against, and strives on characterization. 

• Design: Jak's character design as of Jak 3 depicts him as a strong hero. He carries a jetboard, a transformation, and guns with him at all times since Jak II to. Nathan's design consist of generic, bland real life clothing, and is only able to carry a few grenades and two guns. (Jak carries more - that seamless weapon wheel tho.) Prior to U4, guns just attached to his back magically, whereas Jak's guns were always realistically carried in a gun pocket. As of U4, he has an extra climbing piton, grappling hook, and can drive buggies (and horses since U3). Jak can literally drive anything he touches (including animals, flying crafts, buggies, etc) and his abilities can outclass anything Nathan can do. Joel's design is simplistic like Nathan's. He has way more weapons than Nathan, but they're still outclassed by Jak's.
• Strongest: Clearly Jak. Aside from physical output, the stories of his games are actually connected to him, so this makes him a vital, important, and memorable character in his own games naturally. He's also the heir to powerful bloodline, likely the strongest character of his type in his universe (unlike Joel and Nathan... lul that Nadine fight), is a demi-god, and has been requested help by the gods of his universe. Joel and Nathan have came close to death, maybe Jak has to, but he escapes his threats legitmately like a badass and with less scratches than J/N. Nathan may be memorable to, but his legacy does not outmatches Jak's. Jak 3 is  the culprit for this. Jak is gifted with being a quick learner and good at anything he does, unlike J/N.
• Development: Obviously technology itself has allowed ND to better PRESENT strong development in U and TLOU over the Jak games, but strong development certainly exist in Jak games. Most of Joel's and Nathan's development relies in the emotional department, they learn to care for someone (Elena, Ellie) or put them first before anything (Elena, Sam, Ellie). Getting the easiest out the way first, Ellie nor Joel can touch Jak, as they mostly had just one big development aspect, as oppose to several. Nathan goes through marriage and some other stuff , but overall, he loses to. He's always already pre-set with existing knowledge, and anything else just pertains to strengthning bonds with other characters. Nathan was at his best in U3, development wise, and the struggle that went on with the Lost Sand city was just the same rehashed development from U2, the struggle with Sully was moreso of delusion/deception (hence U3 title), and leaving Elena, when he wanted to keep her safe. 

 

Think that's a good enough cover. Trying to say an avatar like character is inferior to 2 generic human beings whom hardly developed dynamically, is just crazy. Its like ppl have to like a char or series in order to ever give them credit anywhere. Lara herself even outclasses Nathan (and Joel).

 

7. Average? With that good voice acting, characterization, innovated character limits of Super Sonic for first time, great use of character design (unlike most present games), very quality and indepth beat em up system that merely doesnt belong in a Sonic game, the most innovative Sonic game at the time, high production values, one of the best graphics of its time,  etc. No. Average is an understatement. COLORS is average since gameplay is like its only good aspect. Humor, animations, etc were done better in Unleashed. Unleashed at the very least is GOOD. To say Unleashed is average with the existence of Gens and Colors, with their weaker plots, graphics, animations, stactic cutscenes, poor characterization (disservice to Sonic's character), etc is pure nonsense.

 

9. What exactly is that suppose to mean?

 

10. I have, and while I have seen some praise for it, it"s still decently overshadowed by the main series. MD is hardly ever actually discussed in non-specific MD forums/topics/boards.

 

All of my points are based on what I know and seen in many communities, everything from onesided Gen 1 Pokemon fan-people to biased and bandwagon 3D Sonic haters (A LOT of which havent even played the games) to Naughty Dog are Naughty Gods (smh) and being labeled as best developers plus the "they make the best games" and "all their games are my goty" statements to Jak X is shit (even with its loud minority saying otherwise), etc. Ive been in many communities: Sonic, several Pokemon, Naruto, Playfire, Gametrailers, PSNP, Youtube, many more. Ik how how most people feel about franchises I know well or love.

 

"I have seen your posts elsewhere and I can say you are not objective you are a real Jak & Daxter fanboy who acts like other's opinions are wrong and what you say is fact."

 

That's pure ignorance and yet another exaggeration.. my god. You obviously have only seen a limited amount of post of mine, and you're probably one of those ppl who've read what ppl have said about me and made that your own opinion. Let alone when I actually go over mechanical facts. When someone says Jak II is best Jak game, I can see why they'd say that, despite J3 being my favorite. Same for the first game. But once you say the first game is the only good, let alone 'decent', Jak game then ofc a fan is going to reply. Like wtf? You can dislike a game all you want, but labeling a game bad JUSTIFIES my 2 cent, especially when bad is a hyberbole, as Jak is clearly a flawed but not bad franchise, and when you choose to make your damn opi ion public. Yet again, im a technical person, so if you say "bad", yes ill bring out the big guns. Literally no-one actually tries to listen to my points, it's sad. Inb4 you dont listen to others. Ok.

 

Make a TLOU, Uncharted, or Metal Gear Solid critique post/thread and watch how many arguments start. People just get salty cause im the only Jak fan who decides to attempts countering or partaking in arguments/disagreements.

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

1. Depends as in the Adventure games are just as if not more over rated
2. Who said anything at launch? And yes the game deserves what it gets from people with different tastes and opinions and if that makes it lower than what your opinion is tough luck
3. I presented mine as an opinion not an "objective fact" so doesn't matter
4. ---
5. When I can run full speed and then fly off into the distance in a different direction something is wrong not to mention poor choices like 30-45+ minute werehog stages in certain games the games are bad for the most part this does not mean they can't be enjoyed, your bias is showing
6. Wait you are seriously saying "Because Jak has superpowers he is better!" I don't think you know what makes a good character... I don't even like the Uncharted games and I can tell Drake has a better character which isn't just feats or appearance but personality as well as strengths and flaws and Jak is some weird freakish elf thing
7. Good voice acting... plots... you are serious? and Unleashed had a lot of flaws/bugs a fun game but by no means a good game it was average, Generations and the Advance games are far better in terms of GAMEPLAY the plots and characters are for the most part easily ignored. If the Unleashed Werehog battle system is your version of in-depth...
8. ---
9. I am ignoring that what else does it mean I have no opinion on it 1 way or the other
10. ---

Oh wow, you really haven't read your own posts in the PS4 Jak thread have you that is 9,001% fanboy it is your "objective facts" and everything else said by anybody not you is false...

Mechanical facts... oh so your opinion and not fact like you calling the Werehog battle system in-depth which is laughable with Musou games being more in-depth than that and they are just button mashers. 

You jump in and white knight Jak at any turn it is like you can't admit the games are not that good, I can play and enjoy the Neptune series but no way am I kidding myself they are 9-10/10 games like you seem to feel your precious Jak is he is at best a 6/10 if we have to give a stupid number rating to get the opinion across.

 

And honestly debating you arguing with you is fairly pointless as I saw in the PS4 Jak thread, I would get a a far better clash of opinions with a wall which wouldn't be so blindly bias.

 

Not all licensed games are bad(will agree most are though).

[Jak]

6 minutes ago, Kochiya Shana said:

  Hide contents

1. Depends as in the Adventure games are just as if not more over rated
2. Who said anything at launch? And yes the game deserves what it gets from people with different tastes and opinions and if that makes it lower than what your opinion is tough luck
3. I presented mine as an opinion not an "objective fact" so doesn't matter
4. ---
5. When I can run full speed and then fly off into the distance in a different direction something is wrong not to mention poor choices like 30-45+ minute werehog stages in certain games the games are bad for the most part this does not mean they can't be enjoyed, your bias is showing
6. Wait you are seriously saying "Because Jak has superpowers he is better!" I don't think you know what makes a good character... I don't even like the Uncharted games and I can tell Drake has a better character which isn't just feats or appearance but personality as well as strengths and flaws and Jak is some weird freakish elf thing
7. Good voice acting... plots... you are serious? and Unleashed had a lot of flaws/bugs a fun game but by no means a good game it was average, Generations and the Advance games are far better in terms of GAMEPLAY the plots and characters are for the most part easily ignored. If the Unleashed Werehog battle system is your version of in-depth...
8. ---
9. I am ignoring that what else does it mean I have no opinion on it 1 way or the other
10. ---

Oh wow, you really haven't read your own posts in the PS4 Jak thread have you that is 9,001% fanboy it is your "objective facts" and everything else said by anybody not you is false...

Mechanical facts... oh so your opinion and not fact like you calling the Werehog battle system in-depth which is laughable with Musou games being more in-depth than that and they are just button mashers. 

You jump in and white knight Jak at any turn it is like you can't admit the games are not that good, I can play and enjoy the Neptune series but no way am I kidding myself they are 9-10/10 games like you seem to feel your precious Jak is he is at best a 6/10 if we have to give a stupid number rating to get the opinion across.

 

And honestly debating you arguing with you is fairly pointless as I saw in the PS4 Jak thread, I would get a a far better clash of opinions with a wall which wouldn't be so blindly bias.

 

Not all licensed games are bad(will agree most are though).

Spoiler

 

1. Again, wrong. The Adventure games dont touch the 2D games, they're just the best rated 3D games, not Sonic games of all time. Im a fan of the franchise, I actually know whats going on.

 

2. This irony is also present in more of your statements, vaguely using objectivity and dismissing my points/feelings. Quite hilarious. From what Jak X contains, the 70 rating is a delusion. You cant argue against me because you dont have sufficient experience with the game. This is a great opinion, leave it at that. Even if you were right, you have no creditable authority to argue over me till you've spent time playing it. You cant just prance your way in here saying im wrong without knowing what you're talking about. I will exploit the holy hell out of the opinion card if its played again.

 

3. Nice job hypocrite (see your 2.)

 

5. Ha, the ignorance alone warrants a no comment from me, no offense. Wait.. bias? How is my bias showing? My only claim is the game is at least good, not great, not amazing, very polished, etc. Your poor judgment is what's showing.

 

6. Re-inserts your bias claim, and re-inserts my claim of your lack of knowledge.

 

7. Omg... I cant do this with you anymore. Its like arguing with a 10yr old. Your points are so ridiculously flawed all around throughout your post (especially that hypcoritical, biased "I dont like Uncharted (barely played them at all) but Ik Nathan's a better char than Jak" remark. Seriously though?).

 

9. Ok.

 

You like to call me biased when youre delusional as hell for thinking I only care about my comments and that only mines are right. You CLEARLY did not read that thread carefully as I easily made good counterpoints and well defended my statements mostly. (But again, because you already dislike Jak and even me, my actual points are irrelevant and wrong, because of your prioritized bias. This is illogical as nothing I say technically matters.) Stop exaggerating the false idea of my arguments being 100% narrow sided and completely biased. That's simply false, period.

 

Mechanical facts are facts, simpleton. No they are not opinions, SMDH.

 

Your IQ must be low because the Werehog system does have depth, something you clearly dont know the meaning of. (Obviously your "it's Sonic so this cant ever happen" mentality has kicked in. Shallowness is things like TLOU melee combat, theres varied animations, but the depth of melee combat is shallow. Werehog has a multitude of mechanics, dozens and dozens of combos on ground and in air, and more I dont feel like saying -_-.

 

I CAN admit the flaws in Jak games (I can give you a list for all 4 games), Ive done it multiple times, and I JUST told you this. Stay delusional. WHAT BASIS do you have for me thinking Jak is a 9/10 or 10/10? I never, ever call them or hint at them being the best of all time, I merely point out some things it does that still outclasses ND's newer games, and try to clear up misconceptions and overlooked opinions like "rolling into a guard triggers an alert". That's your opinion, you can KEEP trying to force your clear personal opinions of Jak down my throat, but it does you no good. Mechanical facts are facts... to. 

 

I dont care what your favorite Jak game is, I dont care which you prefer and like less, I dont care if they bore you (got that so far?). I only care about direct claims and labeling. You only like Jak 1? THAT'S FINE. Jak 1 is the only decent game or game worth playing? Now wait a minute. Dont like what I or others have to say? Then dont share you opinion in public, duh. You seem to expect your opinions to be safe, guarded by angels, and can never be argued over. That's immature and naive.

 

Im definitely not the wall here, and you can go ahead and test me if you want, with logical statements.

 

 

Ok.

[Shana Alter]

On 4/11/2017 at 2:37 AM, Mar said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

1. Again, wrong. The Adventure games dont touch the 2D games, they're just the best rated 3D games, not Sonic games of all time. Im a fan of the franchise, I actually know whats going on.

 

2. This irony is also present in more of your statements, vaguely using objectivity and dismissing my points/feelings. Quite hilarious. From what Jak X contains, the 70 rating is a delusion. You cant argue against me because you dont have sufficient experience with the game. This is a great opinion, leave it at that. Even if you were right, you have no creditable authority to argue over me till you've spent time playing it. You cant just prance your way in here saying im wrong without knowing what you're talking about. I will exploit the holy hell out of the opinion card if its played again.

 

3. Nice job hypocrite (see your 2.)

 

5. Ha, the ignorance alone warrants a no comment from me, no offense. Wait.. bias? How is my bias showing? My only claim is the game is at least good, not great, not amazing, very polished, etc. Your poor judgment is what's showing.

 

6. Re-inserts your bias claim, and re-inserts my claim of your lack of knowledge.

 

7. Omg... I cant do this with you anymore. Its like arguing with a 10yr old. Your points are so ridiculously flawed all around throughout your post (especially that hypcoritical, biased "I dont like Uncharted (barely played them at all) but Ik Nathan's a better char than Jak" remark. Seriously though?).

 

9. Ok.

 

You like to call me biased when youre delusional as hell for thinking I only care about my comments and that only mines are right. You CLEARLY did not read that thread carefully as I easily made good counterpoints and well defended my statements mostly. (But again, because you already dislike Jak and even me, my actual points are irrelevant and wrong, because of your prioritized bias. This is illogical as nothing I say technically matters.) Stop exaggerating the false idea of my arguments being 100% narrow sided and completely biased. That's simply false, period.

 

Mechanical facts are facts, simpleton. No they are not opinions, SMDH.

 

Your IQ must be low because the Werehog system does have depth, something you clearly dont know the meaning of. (Obviously your "it's Sonic so this cant ever happen" mentality has kicked in. Shallowness is things like TLOU melee combat, theres varied animations, but the depth of melee combat is shallow. Werehog has a multitude of mechanics, dozens and dozens of combos on ground and in air, and more I dont feel like saying -_-.

 

I CAN admit the flaws in Jak games (I can give you a list for all 4 games), Ive done it multiple times, and I JUST told you this. Stay delusional. WHAT BASIS do you have for me thinking Jak is a 9/10 or 10/10? I never, ever call them or hint at them being the best of all time, I merely point out some things it does that still outclasses ND's newer games, and try to clear up misconceptions and overlooked opinions like "rolling into a guard triggers an alert". That's your opinion, you can KEEP trying to force your clear personal opinions of Jak down my throat, but it does you no good. Mechanical facts are facts... to. 

 

I dont care what your favorite Jak game is, I dont care which you prefer and like less, I dont care if they bore you (got that so far?). I only care about direct claims and labeling. You only like Jak 1? THAT'S FINE. Jak 1 is the only decent game or game worth playing? Now wait a minute. Dont like what I or others have to say? Then dont share you opinion in public, duh. You seem to expect your opinions to be safe, guarded by angels, and can never be argued over. That's immature and naive.

 

Im definitely not the wall here, and you can go ahead and test me if you want, with logical statements.

 

 

Ok.

 

 

Spoiler

I see much more of the Adventure series hype and requesting another but oh no I better submit to your "objective and mechanical facts"...

 

Oh god what the Hell mess is this...
So I need to have played the game which looks like a mess to me to give an opinion so watching gameplay and such doesn't count but going by your statements of "objective or mechanical fact" I'd be wrong no matter if I play it or not... I also find it funny how you say even if I was right I'd be wrong, the fanboy is strong in this one...

 

Oh so sorry but I am not an idiot throwing the MADE UP term of mechanical fact or butchering the term objective fact you are voicing your opinions as fact and sorry if you're going down that road prepare to be made a fool though that has already happened in other threads believe me.

 

Since it seems Unleashed is your basis for a good modern Sonic game and you call it very polished that is a joke right, the werehog alone disproves that not to mention various bugs and such and having the platinum I know what I experienced as a slight tap should not send me flying through the air at a speed and distance I couldn't jump normally in Holoska. Polished, right...
The only decent - good modern games are Rush and Generations from what I have played as I can't comment on Colours and unsure if Advance series qualifies.

 

Oh no barely playing I guess I can't comment on a game where I have earned the platinum before...
You are sounding as bad as DmC fanboys who claimed I couldn't have an opinion before playing it and after getting the platinum my opinion still didn't matter, you really want to deny being worst than a brick wall?

 

Have you messed the numbering up or what as you've mixed the points up it seems?
This is about Sonic being what you claim and I say what i experienced to prove you wrong on polish and you turned it into Jak and tried claiming I have barely touched Uncharted...
I would say you fail here but you'll throw objective/mechanical facts around saying how anybody who disagrees with you such as in the PS4 Jak thread or in the new Uncharted thread are wrong and you're right...

 

You made good counterpoints... and are unbiased...
I'd like to see you make that claim in the other threads, I predict you'd be called a very blind fanboy might want to take those I Jak glasses off for a moment.

 

Mechanical facts... Objective facts... I can not find any definiton on mechanical fact either my English isn't as good as I thought or since google doesn't even give results for that term and your use of objective is clearly wrong your using these terms to sound more intelligent than you actually are...

 

Having played DMC, NG, BlazBlue, Guilty Gear, various Musou I can say I know what an in-depth system is and Werehog's clunky as Hell system does not compare. The stupid Werehog was badly done and you are probably the only person to think it was so well done... Day stages were good but they were riddled with bugs and control issues especially with the jump not to mention other issues with the werehog like not following prompts to grab poles and such during platforming...

 

You seriously haven't read your own posts have you... Jak is better than anything else from Naughty Dog, Jak was Naughty Dog's greatest work of all time... I haven't forced my opinion, I voiced it you are forcing your's down a LOT of people's throats again go reread all your posts in the mentioned threads. 
Though I am anticipating a but "MMDE and BillyHorrible are forcing their opinion I am just correcting them with facts because they are wrong" as a response...

 

Oh wow, I voice an opinion and it clearly struck a nerve on you as you act like I am crying for safe spaces but seems to me like you don't want anybody to say anything that makes your precious Jak look bad or sound boring and trust me there are more than just me that think Jak is not a good game does that opinion hurt you in some way?

To end this I am done as opinion and fact are lost on you as anybody with a differing opinion is wrong... not to mention seeing your posts in other threads

Edited April 12, 2017 by Stevieboy
Removed unnecessary gif

[damage_6-9]

On 21/02/2017 at 3:45 AM, xZoneHunter said:

 

I would agree with you here, if there was a valid refund system in place. Stuff like Life of Black Tiger is just on there to trick people in to buying a mediocre product. No matter how much you want to stress the subjectivity of 'liking' a game, there is a special category for games that nobody likes.

 

My unpopular opinion would be the fact that Nostalgia doesn't make a game good, nor has it aged well because of it. 

 

Ah Nostalgia,.... it's not as good as it used to be ?

[Jak]

2 hours ago, Kochiya Shana said:

 

I see much more of the Adventure series hype and requesting another but oh no I better submit to your "objective and mechanical facts"...

..... For the 100th time, the 2D games are still lauded as the best by the world. Why are you being so stubborn about this? You seem to think nothing is truth unless you've seen it. I am a follower of the franchise.. im actually aware of what the other fans are saying, not to mention sale figures, and Sonic Team's design choice to hur durr incorporate 2D sections in all their 3D games (which is a staple feature BTW), unlike the Adventure titles.

 

Oh god what the Hell mess is this...

Literally only I can say this, which Ill be proving how further down...

So I need to have played the game which looks like a mess to me to give an opinion so watching gameplay and such doesn't count but going by your statements of "objective or mechanical fact" I'd be wrong no matter if I play it or not... I also find it funny how you say even if I was right I'd be wrong, the fanboy is strong in this one...

You can't be serious... you can't have a full conversation with a person about how bad a game is if you didn't play it. Who has more credibility, a person who beat and played the game extensively, or someone who played a little bit of it or watched gameplay videos on Youtube? I LIKE how immature your mindset is. You claimed a single point for a game you don't know well at all, if you were right, it would be because of a guess, because you DID guess. You still can't argue with me over a game I've played extensively that you haven't even touched or barely played much of. It's merely just a matter of.. you're not the adequate person for the job. 

 

Oh so sorry but I am not an idiot throwing the MADE UP term of mechanical fact or butchering the term objective fact you are voicing your opinions as fact and sorry if you're going down that road prepare to be made a fool though that has already happened in other threads believe me.

You're killing my brain cells. It's not meant to be a word, it's simply just an alternative way of saying consistent game mechanics that happen via game-play . YOU don't have the audacity to call me an idiot, when you're a better example of that. How many times do I have to say I used a combination of facts AND OPINIONS?

 

Since it seems Unleashed is your basis for a good modern Sonic game and you call it very polished that is a joke right, the werehog alone disproves that not to mention various bugs and such and having the platinum I know what I experienced as a slight tap should not send me flying through the air at a speed and distance I couldn't jump normally in Holoska. Polished, right...
The only decent - good modern games are Rush and Generations from what I have played as I can't comment on Colours and unsure if Advance series qualifies.

It's not my basis, the subject is about Unleashed  (you replied to my unpopular opinion that stated "Sonic Unleashed is a good Sonic game"). Dear fucking god, you twist EVERYTHING. Polished as in certain features, as I said, not the whole entire goddamn game. And yes it's technically considered polished compared to a game called Sonic Boom and Sonic the Hedgehog 2006. Polished as in a better story, polished as in a better representation of Sonic's character (model wise - animations - and characteristics), polished as in better graphics, polished as in better humor and voicing, but obviously not everything, as Gens and Colors refined the controls and Sonic's maneuverability.

 

Oh no barely playing I guess I can't comment on a game where I have earned the platinum before...
You are sounding as bad as DmC fanboys who claimed I couldn't have an opinion before playing it and after getting the platinum my opinion still didn't matter, you really want to deny being worst than a brick wall?

I don't even know what this is about

 

Have you messed the numbering up or what as you've mixed the points up it seems?
This is about Sonic being what you claim and I say what i experienced to prove you wrong on polish and you turned it into Jak and tried claiming I have barely touched Uncharted...
I would say you fail here but you'll throw objective/mechanical facts around saying how anybody who disagrees with you such as in the PS4 Jak thread or in the new Uncharted thread are wrong and you're right...

No. I didn't mix up anything, I've literally re-read the post multiple times. You clearly brought Jak into this though. Oh god.. stop making up terrible lies and assumptions. Youre exaggerating to hell to.

 

You made good counterpoints... and are unbiased...
I'd like to see you make that claim in the other threads, I predict you'd be called a very blind fanboy might want to take those I  Jak glasses off for a moment.

I don't even know how to reply to this BS as well. I'm not even close to being a "blind fanboy". That immature and petty Jak glasses statement has no context whatsoever. How old are you? I have to yet again state that I have and can list multiple flaws with all 4 Jak games; none of the games are perfect, but Jak 1 and X come the closest to it. Jak 3, gameplay wise, went the furthest away from it. You're owning proving to me that im clearly talking to a kid who literally is not understanding any of comments whether it be clearing up misunderstandings, making opinions, stating facts, etc. (Oh no, he said stating facts.)

 

Mechanical facts... Objective facts... I can not find any definiton on mechanical fact either my English isn't as good as I thought or since google doesn't even give results for that term and your use of objective is clearly wrong your using these terms to sound more intelligent than you actually are...

I already went over this. Last line is absurd, obviously.

 

Having played DMC, NG, BlazBlue, Guilty Gear, various Musou I can say I know what an in-depth system is and Werehog's clunky as Hell system does not compare. The stupid Werehog was badly done and you are probably the only person to think it was so well done... Day stages were good but they were riddled with bugs and control issues especially with the jump not to mention other issues with the werehog like not following prompts to grab poles and such during platforming...

For a Sonic game and for Sonic Team doing it for their first time.. it's actually pretty damn good. Do I need to take pictures or screenshots or something? You obviously do know what gameplay-variety is. Werehog has tons and tons of ground combos and aerial combos, a shield, grabbing mechanics, special finishers, a power-up mode, when you grab something, you have the option to sling it around, slam it, or throw it, there's a blocking feature, there's status effects, etc. That is OBJECTIVELY game-play variety. Stop with your BS remarks, the game's design proves that it has depth and variety. This isn't about comparisons to other series, it's about what the Werehog itself contains.

 

Holding down circle enables automatic-grab on platforms of any kind that are grab-able. There was nothing wrong with Sonic's jumping on day stages. His character was simply just stiff because of the emphasis on speed.

 

You seriously haven't read your own posts have you... Jak is better than anything else from Naughty Dog, Jak was Naughty Dog's greatest work of all time... I haven't forced my opinion, I voiced it you are forcing your's down a LOT of people's throats again go reread all your posts in the mentioned threads. 
Though I am anticipating a but "MMDE and BillyHorrible are forcing their opinion I am just correcting them with facts because they are wrong" as a response...

You seriously can't read to begin with, especially for thinking I confused a numbered point when it was clearly related to what you said. Ok... you know what, quote me where I ever said any of those things :))))))))))) I am not forcing opinions, I am doing a combination of clearing up misconceptions and battling with my own opinions.

 

Oh wow, I voice an opinion and it clearly struck a nerve on you as you act like I am crying for safe spaces but seems to me like you don't want anybody to say anything that makes your precious Jak look bad or sound borin

You've.. clearly.. done way more than that. You've insulted me and outright exaggerated to hell about things Ive done. K. I thought I was going to be able to do this but I was wrong. 

 

I also took the liberty to underline all of your ironic and hypocritical points. It's clear that when I disagree with someone, only I am the one who is wrong and forcing opinions down other's throats, even when I don't insert any "objective" words during my arguments. But if I also go so far as saying "clearly" or "fact (proven in game)", im forcing my opinion down other's throats.

 

Again, I underlined everything in your post that I've said some of in my arguments, and is what I am bashed for. But it's wrong when I do it.

 

OT: The 1st Generation of the Pokemon Anime is overrated.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Mar

[starcrunch061]

My own unpopular opinion: 

• Games are not art. They might have artistic aspects, but they are not art. In fact, they aren't even to be considered as folk art, for that matter; at least folk art might still possess some timeless aspect. The Sistine Chapel was painted in the 15th century. I don't think anyone would ignore it today simply because it was "old". But consider the "art" games of today. What sort of "timeless aspect" is present there? The fact is, most of these "art games" are little more than provocative stories matched to tech demos. In fact, I would argue that the whole "gaming is art!" shtick is little more than a ploy to get people to pay good money for what otherwise would have been given away. That's not to say that all of the creators are criminals or con artists. They're just deluded. Further, a poisonous critical element has been introduced to video games due to this phenomenon. I remember a critical review of Dark Souls which rued the game's length, citing the fact that the artistic acheivement could easily be digested in 10 hours, rather than the 100 necessary. What?
• You do not need to complete a game in order to review it. This artificial designation really sticks in my craw, if only because it makes no sense. Plenty of people can't finish Super Meat Boy, because it's very difficult. Does this mean that they aren't allowed to review it? What an absurd notion. The fact is, with only few exceptions, you know that you like or dislike a game long before you complete it, and that opinion isn't likely to change. Why, then, must you put up with slop in order to say that it's slop?
• Each gamer is the center of his own universe. Simply put, everyone has a right to enjoy games in whatever capacity s/he wants. I don't get the idea (promulgated often here) that a gamer's tastes aren't an appropriate way to enjoy "gaming". In fact, I hate the noun "gaming" altogether, because it's come to embody the kind of closed-mindedness that I had hoped to escape in the first place. I mean, in what context do you hear the word "gaming"? Usually, it's some 3rd-person entity, often accompanied by some turn of phrase to insult a particular gamer, by saying that his/her views "aren't good for gaming". Screw that noise.

 

 

[Dragon-Archon]

Here are some of mine:

1. Ni No Kuni is a boring game with a predictable plot, lots of recycled side quests, and terrible RNG. It doesn't deserve all the praise it gets.
2. Assassin's Creed II was the best one I've played so far, all the others are mostly meh. AC4 should've been named Pirate's Creed.
3. Sly Cooper Thieves in Time is a good addition to the Sly series, even though Penelope's part made no sense at all.
4. Spyro 3 is my favourite one out of the original Spyro trilogy. Same applies to Crash Bandicoot 3.
5. Ratchet & Clank 1 + 2 are among my least favourites. R&C3, Tools of Destruction, and A Crack in Time are my top 3 favourite R&C games. Nexus is a good addition to the series, though it's way too short.
6. Jak 2 and Jak 3 are a lot more fun than Jak and Daxter, though Jak X really is the worst out of these 4 games.
7. Uncharted 2 is my favourite and Chloe should've been the female lead in Golden Abyss.
8. Competitive multiplayer shouldn't be forced into games that have a focus on single player just for the sake of having mp to attract the masses. I'd rather see competitive mp be separated completely from single player games.
9. Turn-based RPGs are fun too, it adds a strategic part to battles and doesn't rush players.
10. Overlord Raising Hell and Overlord II are really fun and underrated.
11. Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal are the best, as it has 2 regions to explore and added lots of great pokemon. From Gen 3 onward the designs took a turn for the worse, though Gen IV had some nice ones. Revisiting Kanto and seeing how it changed since Red/Blue/Yellow was great. Also being able to catch both Lugia and Ho-oh in any version was a nice addition. 

[Satoshi Ookami]

32 minutes ago, Dragon-Archon said:

Ni No Kuni is a boring game with a predictable plot, lots of recycled side quests, and terrible RNG. It doesn't deserve all the praise it gets.

I'm pretty sure neither of these were the reason why the game is praised =D

It's praised because of Ghibli art =D

[Dragon-Archon]

50 minutes ago, Satoshi Ookami said:

I'm pretty sure neither of these were the reason why the game is praised =D

It's praised because of Ghibli art =D

Sure the art was nice, but lots of people told me the story was amazing and would even bring tears to my eyes.

[Lars]

Some of mine here:

 

1. Collectibles are fun, if they are trackable, i maybe have a system that would make it more fun but also still doable, i'll post it below the small list.

2. Sly 2 is a really boring game

3. Call of Juarez The Cartel is a fun game

4. Non grind multiplayer trophies are not bad at all

5. Gameplay in general is more important then the story

 

In general i agree with most things said about games and gaming in general but above mentioned things are some that most don't agree on.

 

For the collectibles though, i believe a game should tell you from the beginning in which area they are, not exactly where they are. In a lineair game you could see it as the way Uncharted does it, a clear way to track them with each of them been given a name so you can exactly tell which one you've unlocked, that's how it always should be in my opinion. In an open world game you could make some grids across the map, and tell how many of them are in each grid. You can buy upgrades in a game to make the lineair games have more sections so it is easier to determine where you miss the collectibles, in the open world games the grids become smaller, so the search area becomes smaller and smaller, but you still have to find them yourself, and if the game shows them where they are they should do it the way Far Cry 4 does it with the Yalung Masks, they are shown, but when you approach them they disappear and turn into a search area, this still requires you to search them and that's what i believe a collectible should always do

[Jak]

2 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

My own unpopular opinion: 

 

• You do not need to complete a game in order to review it. This artificial designation really sticks in my craw, if only because it makes no sense. Plenty of people can't finish Super Meat Boy, because it's very difficult. Does this mean that they aren't allowed to review it? What an absurd notion. The fact is, with only few exceptions, you know that you like or dislike a game long before you complete it, and that opinion isn't likely to change. Why, then, must you put up with slop in order to say that it's slop?

 

 

 

This is true, but it's redundant by the fact that reviewers who don't complete games can't be taken entirely seriously - since they're reviewing part of the game - and that their experience to review is limited by their lack of exposure to everything the game has to offer. There is also definitely certain replay aspects in some games that are missed out on or not considered due to not beating the game or getting far enough. So reviewers can only review up to what they've played, which is technically an incomplete review also.

 

2 hours ago, Dragon-Archon said:

Here are some of mine:

1. Ni No Kuni is a boring game with a predictable plot, lots of recycled side quests, and terrible RNG. It doesn't deserve all the praise it gets.
2. Assassin's Creed II was the best one I've played so far, all the others are mostly meh. AC4 should've been named Pirate's Creed.
3. Sly Cooper Thieves in Time is a good addition to the Sly series, even though Penelope's part made no sense at all.
4. Spyro 3 is my favourite one out of the original Spyro trilogy. Same applies to Crash Bandicoot 3.
5. Ratchet & Clank 1 + 2 are among my least favourites. R&C3, Tools of Destruction, and A Crack in Time are my top 3 favourite R&C games. Nexus is a good addition to the series, though it's way too short.
6. Jak 2 and Jak 3 are a lot more fun than Jak and Daxter, though Jak X really is the worst out of these 4 games.
7. Uncharted 2 is my favourite and Chloe should've been the female lead in Golden Abyss.
8. Competitive multiplayer shouldn't be forced into games that have a focus on single player just for the sake of having mp to attract the masses. I'd rather see competitive mp be separated completely from single player games.
9. Turn-based RPGs are fun too, it adds a strategic part to battles and doesn't rush players.
10. Overlord Raising Hell and Overlord II are really fun and underrated.
11. Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal are the best, as it has 2 regions to explore and added lots of great pokemon. From Gen 3 onward the designs took a turn for the worse, though Gen IV had some nice ones. Revisiting Kanto and seeing how it changed since Red/Blue/Yellow was great. Also being able to catch both Lugia and Ho-oh in any version was a nice addition. 

 

See... now how is this an unpopular opinion? I'm pretty sure you know nearly no-one praises this game above the prequels. Sales, fans, players, reviewers, and ratings clearly point towards the commonly agreed upon opinion that Jak X is the worse game in the main line-up, even though many people are excited about it coming to PS4 (as can be seen on PSB and Youtube videos).

 

I want to touch upon why I disagree however. We know JaD1 succeeded in being the (1st) Fully 3D, Seamless Open-world, Platformer, Collect-a-thon game that it was aiming to be. This is what makes it a nearly perfect game in terms of execution and concept.

 

Long story short, Jak II and especially Jak 3 had some trouble with the execution of their new additions (one major for both games: Jak II's flawed shooting mechanics, Jak 3's reliance on having a large amount of mini games to add length to the campaign... regardless because the game was rushed).

 

However, with Jak X, similar to TPL, it only had one major genre to focus on -- racing. Because of the pure racing concept, the game-sequel didn't have any remote similar amount or addition of issues that JII and J3 had. It, actually, refined and tightened the driving controls of the partially flawed driving physics/gameplay with J3's Buggies, and improved upon every other racing related elements that J3 brought with the buggies. There were no steps backwards. It's only goal was to be a racer. The final product, was a great racing game with about the same amount of issues as the first Jak game  

 

Jak and Daxter 1

• Easy and telegraphed boss fights
• Lack of general difficulty -- weak combat
• Non-skippable cut-scenes 
• Bland protagonist (Yooka and Laylee are being criticized for the same-thing, except only Jak was criticized in JaD1, Daxter was praised however) 
• Etc

Jak X

• Potential best weapon pick up when in earlier places
• Leftover currency that isn't used, isn't stored
• No Light Eco implementation
• Slightly non-balanced dynamic-scripting via 1st place
• Etc

Spoiler

 

 

I just really love this objective based or styled review.

 

 

Unlike J2 and J3, JX's gameplay didn't have multiple concepts that were just passable or limited. It's faithfully a well designed racer - good track design, good drifting mechanics, good control, good car customization, good game-play variety - thoroughly. So as far as execution and concepts go, Jak X, like JaD1, did a great job as well, better than the full designs of J2 and J3.

 

Just want to stress this is completely different from which J.games are the most fun and best games (too many people misinterpret my points). Just because of J1&X's more concentrated design consistency, doesn't necessarily make them the best games in the series, my only points were stating how 1/X are the better designed games from a concept (genres) and execution perspective.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Mar

[Lucas]

6 hours ago, Dragon-Archon said:

Here are some of mine:

1. Assassin's Creed II was the best one I've played so far, all the others are mostly meh. AC4 should've been named Pirate's Creed.
2. Uncharted 2 is my favourite and Chloe should've been the female lead in Golden Abyss.
3. Turn-based RPGs are fun too, it adds a strategic part to battles and doesn't rush players.

Are these really 'unpopular opinions' though? I think most people will completely agree with you on these three opinions .

[MMDE]

Out of the games I've played in the Uncharted series, Uncharted 2 is the one I like the least. Great, you like the online, but I don't play that. For me it was a repeat of the first game, just worse plot twists and small tweaks to gameplay.

Edited April 12, 2017 by MMDE