Trumpet_Boi_208

Share any unpopular gaming opinions here!

309 posts in this topic

Street Fighter as a franchise sucks!!!

Suikoden 2 > FF7. It's just a superior game in every way and no that doesn't mean I hate FF7. (Not at all)

FF13 isn't as bad as everyone says it is. It's not in my top 10 for the series, but if it were named anything other than Final Fantasy, I doubt it would get as much hate as it did.

True Crime > GTA (I said it!!!) Yes, I consider Sleeping Dogs part of the True Crime series.

Shenmue > Yakuza

Open to interpretation endings are lazy cop-outs that designers use when they're afraid of pissing people off.

Implying someone didn't understand or get something when they don't love a game as much as you do is a tell of how insecure you are about your own interests.

Hideo Kojima is a talentless quack..........no not really, that was my joke answer, cool those finger tips guys. The post said unpopular not suicidal.

Edited by Asmund89
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last of us is trash.

 

I didn’t like neither of the games. Some of the shittiest games in the resident evil franchise were more enjoyable imo. Such an overrated generic zombie apocalypse game. It isn’t even good. Not even close. I think it sucks altogether. I think the storylines were so forgettable, The characters were dull and boring, The enemies were so goofy looking and the factions mode was one of the biggest jokes of a multiplayer mode i have ever played. I cant believe it gets the kind of praise that it gets, its not even remotely close to how amazing people say it is. It is most certainly not one of the best games ever made, its one of my least favorite games i have played that gets massive praise for things I don’t see in it at all and couldn't hold a candle to many different others i have played over the years that still hold up today. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little late to the party so here goes (please go easy on me):

 

1. Silent Hill (1999) is the best Silent Hill & scariest video game ever made.

 

2. Red Dead Redemption (2010), while an excellent game is in fact a rip-off of a game called Gun from 2005.

 

3. Despite average reviews, The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) for 360, PC & PS3 is actually a pretty good game.

 

4. Mad Max (2015) is an excellent game.

 

5. The Warriors (2005) is the best video game adaptation of a movie.

 

6. Tekken 3 (1997) is the best fighting game ever. Period.

 

7. SEGA Dreamcast failed, 'cos of piracy.

 

8. Nintendo GameCube, despite being an excellent console was a failure.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot another one.

 

Maybe it's because I didn't experience any glitches, but I think that WWE 2K20 is a good game. It seems like people pretend to forget how bad and glitchy WWE 2K18 was, expecially with its terrible Career Mode... And this was never patched.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2020 at 0:52 PM, TheArcadeKid said:

 

Whether or not it's important to preserve doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of it won't be preserved. There's no evidence here to suggest the contrary. Preservation doesn't offer that kind of protection. In 100 years' time, no one will remember today's games as we remember them. And depending on how people evaluate today's games in 100 years' time, they can just as easily be forgotten. Once again, preservation in itself is no protection.

 

Preservation doesn't have to be perfect to be beneficial.

 

You're right — we won't preserve every game until the end of time. Many are already lost. People get their hair on fire about WE MUST SAVE EVERY BYTE OF EVERY GAME FOREVERRRRRR, NOTHING MUST BE LOST, RECORD EVERYTHING FOR ALL TIME, but that's not how it works.

 

But even if preservation doesn't turn into a heat-death-of-the-universe time capsule, even preserving something for 20, 50, 100 years can be a service to the recipients of that preservation. My nephew is a second-grader, but he's played games from before he was born, on systems that were manufactured before he was born. Heck, he's loaded savegames from before he was born. Those kind of things are valuable.

 

Will, you know, Crash Team Racing or Spyro change someone's life a century from now? No. Is someone going to go through and extract a gem of historical meaning from Battle of Hoth No. 27 or Normandy Landing No. 309? Probably not. But somewhere in the library of past games are things that will make life better. They'll lead to useful research, or spark creative thinking, or give someone a musical insight or a gameplay idea or spark some question that needed to be asked. People 5,000 years from now aren't going to need our library, but let's at least help out the people of 50 years from now!

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like David Cage or his games, although I play them when they're free/dirt cheap, because they're amusing in that B-movie way.

 

Try as I might, I just can't get interested in Cuphead. While the animation is very impressive, the game appears to focus on shallow memorization of boss patterns. Seems like one of those games that people put on a pedestal just because it's difficult, old school, etc.. Maybe if it had more platforming levels it would hook me.

 

The modern multiplayer zeitgeist of battle royales and hero shooters doesn't appeal to me in the slightest, and I find the obsession with them baffling. Guess I just grew up in a period when MP was largely a simple, arena-based affair: what mattered most was raw gunfight skill, getting the map layout burned into your brain, and maintaining control over the respawning power weapons. I attribute this one more to me becoming an out-of-touch old person than the games necessarily being bad.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 2:07 AM, rdhight said:

 

Preservation doesn't have to be perfect to be beneficial.

 

You're right — we won't preserve every game until the end of time. Many are already lost. People get their hair on fire about WE MUST SAVE EVERY BYTE OF EVERY GAME FOREVERRRRRR, NOTHING MUST BE LOST, RECORD EVERYTHING FOR ALL TIME, but that's not how it works.

 

But even if preservation doesn't turn into a heat-death-of-the-universe time capsule, even preserving something for 20, 50, 100 years can be a service to the recipients of that preservation. My nephew is a second-grader, but he's played games from before he was born, on systems that were manufactured before he was born. Heck, he's loaded savegames from before he was born. Those kind of things are valuable.

 

Will, you know, Crash Team Racing or Spyro change someone's life a century from now? No. Is someone going to go through and extract a gem of historical meaning from Battle of Hoth No. 27 or Normandy Landing No. 309? Probably not. But somewhere in the library of past games are things that will make life better. They'll lead to useful research, or spark creative thinking, or give someone a musical insight or a gameplay idea or spark some question that needed to be asked. People 5,000 years from now aren't going to need our library, but let's at least help out the people of 50 years from now!

 

Only a very select few stand the test of time.

 

But even then, like your nephew, we indulge in things that were before our time. The fanbase for Marilyn Monroe is big, but there is barely anybody who is a part of it that was alive when she was around. So if anything, her sheer fanbase keeps her legacy going, even if she died over 50 years ago.

 

In contrast, many songs from the 80s and 90s lost mostly all popularity and have fallen into obscurity. Everybody knows Michael Jackson's "Thriller", "Billie Jean" and "Bad", but there are several artists from his time that made decent songs that are mostly forgotten today. MJ continues to inspire people even over 10 years after his death, so he has in many fashions, helped out people who came after him. Justin Timberlake is one of several people who was heavily inspired by MJ. And there are those who have taken a part of MJ's style and did their own thing, with great success.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2020 at 6:23 PM, TheBritishBaron said:

CoD is overrated, as a new release is spawned every year.

 

I'm not a CoD fan (or an FPS fan for that matter) but your statement makes no sense because CoD games are actually developed by two or more developer teams so they each have 2+ years for the development 🤓

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2020-10-24 at 9:15 PM, BRKs_Eagle said:

- I don't think Ubisoft's as bad as people make it out to be.

Agree with this 100%. They support their games longer than most do with free updates/expansions that add a good amount of content, acknowledge their fuckups (even mocked themselves several times), how siege was brought back from the brink of death into one of the best online shooters out there is commendable and although they don't exactly aim for innovation or groundbreaking features, they make good/fun games which is all that matter at the end of the day. Seems like they can't win no matter what even when they do good. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find The Witcher 3 and Red Dead Redemption 2 to be incredibly boring.

 

Resident Evil 4 is the best Resident Evil

 

Fallout 4 is the best Fallout game by far

 

Metro Exodus is unplayable

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lettmon said:

 

I'm not a CoD fan (or an FPS fan for that matter) but your statement makes no sense because CoD games are actually developed by two or more developer teams so they each have 2+ years for the development 1f913.png

 

Yes, two dev teams, Treyach and Infinity Ward, they stagger the teams and yea you are right the games are generally in development for 2 years. This is so they can release a CoD every year. Even if they are done by 2 seperate dev teams, its still CoD.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a couple 

1. Not sure if this one is unpopula4 but red dead redemption 2 is the best game ever in my opinion

2. The skylanders games are underrated. Unfortunately it is a cash grab with the figures but the character design and gameplay is great. Even if the games are pretty easy there fun as to play with a friend.

3. And the one I know is unpopular, I don't like the last of us ( haven't played second and don't plan on it) I proably didn't give it enough of a chance but I doubt I'll ever play it again. I didn't even get far enough to get a trophy but yeah oh well those are my unpopular opinions.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. EA and Ubisoft are great developers despite all the hate they get
  2. Mass Effect andromeda wasn't a bad game
  3. The Last of Us 1 and 2 are overrated and way too much overhyped
  4. People with 1 'really hard' platinum trophy are better than people with 100+ 'easy' platinum trophies
  5. Call of Duty and FIFA games should have died years ago
  6. People who don't like trophy hunting/ finishing games are the same people who start a movie and don't watch it until the end

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, its_ArchroniX said:
  1. People who don't like trophy hunting/ finishing games are the same people who start a movie and don't watch it until the end

That's a strange comparison. A movie is usually 1.5 to 2.5 hours long while platinuming a game takes tens and sometimes hundreds of hours.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lettmon said:

That's a strange comparison. A movie is usually 1.5 to 2.5 hours long while platinuming a game takes tens and sometimes hundreds of hours.

 

I have a friend who has almost double the amount of games on his profile as I do (I have 118 at the moment) and he refuses to complete a single one of them or platinum them just because he 'doesn't like completing games' (his words not mine). Everyone to its own of course but if you buy a game and know on beforehand you're not going to finish it and get everything out of the game you possibly can then why would you even start playing in the first place?

Hence the comparison with the movie. Why start watching a movie when you know you aren't going to finish it anyway? Why go to a music concert when you're not going to stay till the end anyway? And yes, a movie takes about 1.5 to 2.5 hours, but so do some games. Trophy hunting isn't for everyone and I get that but it's just weird to me how you can spend your hard earned money on something you're not going to finish...

Edited by its_ArchroniX
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most dangerous thing for a healthy gaming industry is a monopoly of the Microsoft Game Pass.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 5:55 PM, kenseizenkai said:

Little late to the party so here goes (please go easy on me):

 

1. Silent Hill (1999) is the best Silent Hill & scariest video game ever made.

 

2. Red Dead Redemption (2010), while an excellent game is in fact a rip-off of a game called Gun from 2005.

 

3. Despite average reviews, The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) for 360, PC & PS3 is actually a pretty good game.

 

4. Mad Max (2015) is an excellent game.

 

5. The Warriors (2005) is the best video game adaptation of a movie.

 

6. Tekken 3 (1997) is the best fighting game ever. Period.

 

7. SEGA Dreamcast failed, 'cos of piracy.

 

8. Nintendo GameCube, despite being an excellent console was a failure.

 

Is #8 really unpopular? Seems more like the generous consensus on the GameCube.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, its_ArchroniX said:
  1. EA and Ubisoft are great developers despite all the hate they get
  2. Mass Effect andromeda wasn't a bad game
  3. The Last of Us 1 and 2 are overrated and way too much overhyped
  4. People with 1 'really hard' platinum trophy are better than people with 100+ 'easy' platinum trophies
  5. Call of Duty and FIFA games should have died years ago
  6. People who don't like trophy hunting/ finishing games are the same people who start a movie and don't watch it until the end

1. They certainly have quite the legacy. I don’t really keep up with the publishers recent titles, but I love the games they made during the 6th generation.

3. They might be a bit overrated, but I still love ‘em. Everything is top quality and the combat is very fun on higher difficulties.

4. No need to gatekeep for what is essentially a pointless hobby (it is addicting and rewarding going after harder trophies though lol)

6. I mean some games are 100+ hours long. Can’t expect everyone to play thought the whole thing, especially if it no longer interest them. Also some games are just bad. If I don’t like it I won’t bother finishing it.

Edited by xHydroBoltx
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Asasssin's Creed III was more interesting than the previous games. Connor was a more compelling and "personal" protagonist than Ezio. The theme of a child of two worlds finding his place was cool to watch as it unfolded. I'll admit that the game is bloated, and was probably the beginning of the series being overstuffed in each new game. But I really liked it. I think part of the reason it connected with me was the early American setting (I'm American) and the fun look at historical figures that I was more familiar with than the ones in the Ezio games (especially Benjamin Franklin the horndog). I was also fortunate enough to visit Paris and London several years before Unity was announced, and when I finally played it (after most of the glitches were patched out), I enjoyed the Paris scenery more than I probably would have otherwise. I had a similar experience with Syndicate.

 

2. I'm not sure if this is an actually unpopular opinion, but open world games have turned into a tedious, sometimes boring, de facto approach to financially successful games. I think the AAA industry needs to shake itself up to bring in some innovation. There are of course some occasional highlights of creativity, but it seems that it has mostly become slight tweaks on the same formula, over and over. The only open-world formula games that I find myself enjoying are the games that feel fresh because they're a first time approach (e.g. Breath of the Wild was the first open world Zelda game), or games that make full use of the setting or license (e.g. Spider-Man leaning into the Marvel lore).

 

On 10/24/2020 at 1:45 AM, insane2201 said:

I just don't find Nier: Automata fun.

3. Agreed. I was disappointed in Nier: Automata. I kept reading about how it was one of the best games ever, and as a fan of previous Platinum games I was looking forward to tight, fast-paced, exciting combat. I haven't played them all, but I enjoyed Metal Gear Rising, Bayonetta, Legend of Korra, Transformers Devastation, and the Wonderful 101. I liked what I played of Astral Chain but I haven't finished it, and TMNT was okay from what I played of it. I played Nier: Automata somewhere between about 5 and 10 hours, getting to experience a few boss fights and a fair bit of regular combat. That part of it lived up to my expectations. The story seemed interesting too. But the rest of the game was an ugly (the drab environments), boring slog of walking around, trying to find out how to navigate around buildings that blocked my path, and lots of backtracking. At the age of 40, one of the biggest sins a game can have is to be boring and to waste my time when I could be having more fun with another game. I think there is a core of a great game here, but it's wrapped in too many unpleasant trappings. I finally decided to move on and traded in the game. I'd rather go replay any of those games I listed above than spend more time with this game. The weird thing is that I play a lot of JRPGs and I don't hate grinding, as long as the combat is engaging and I'm seeing frequent rewards (e.g. leveling up and getting new abilities). So I'm not completely opposed to my time being "wasted". But all the running back and forth in Nier: Automata didn't give me any feeling of reward. It reminded me a little bit of No More Heroes, which was designed to be purposely annoying in between main levels because Suda51 is a dick (I say this halfway seriously).

 

 

19 minutes ago, its_ArchroniX said:

 

I have a friend who has almost double the amount of games on his profile as I do (I have 118 at the moment) and he refuses to complete a single one of them or platinum them just because he 'doesn't like completing games' (his words not mine). Everyone to its own of course but if you buy a game and know on beforehand you're not going to finish it and get everything out of the game you possibly can then why would you even start playing in the first place?

Hence the comparison with the movie. Why start watching a movie when you know you aren't going to finish it anyway? Why go to a music concert when you're not going to stay till the end anyway? And yes, a movie takes about 1.5 to 2.5 hours, but so do some games. Trophy hunting isn't for everyone and I get that but it's just weird to me how you can spend your hard earned money on something you're not going to finish...

I agree with you about "finishing" games, at least if they are games with a story that can be finished (as opposed to something that is more of a sandbox game). I always do that unless a game really annoys me and I decide to drop it. But getting the Platinum is usually far more extensive than finishing a game (unless we're talking Telltale adventure game and similar games). To use your movie analogy, Platinum hunting is the equivalent of watching the movie, then watching 2 different audio commentary tracks, then all the bonus DVD/Blu-ray features, and then going back to rewatch several scenes to look for details you missed the first time around. Those things increase the enjoyment of the movie for some people, but they're not for everyone. And that's okay. "Finishing" and going for the Platinum are usually very different experiences. I own lots of movies that I have watched multiple times, but I have not gone through all the bonus content for more than a small fraction of my collection. That doesn't mean I don't love those movies or that I'm missing something in my enjoyment. You have to draw the line somewhere; even getting a Platinum isn't the most you can do with a game. Some people want to replay their games over and over and never move on. :)

Edited by MosesRockefeller
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Hideo Kojima has never made a good game

 

I really want to say this is an awful take, but most Kojima experiences for me involve skipping about 75-80% of the game in cut scenes...

...

...except for Peacewalker. That game was awesome from start to finish.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Hideo Kojima has never made a good game

Which of his games did you play if I may ask?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Hideo Kojima has never made a good game

As a MGS fan who drew the line at Death Stranding (I refused to try what appeared to be Kojima with nobody there to reign in his more excessive tendencies, and almost everything I've read about it confirmed my choice), I'll allow it. I have enjoyed his games but I'm not a fanboy. I don't believe that all of Phantom Pain's issues were Konami's fault either.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed all of his MGS games and gotten swept up in them, but it's a bit of a love-hate relationship. I can appreciate an extreme negative response to the guy.

 

One of my big frustrations with MGS2 and 3 was the inability to pause the cutscenes (at least on PS3, and I don't think the originals had the feature either). I was so happy when MGS4 included that ability. If nothing else, we owe him our thanks for helping to make it a standard feature... by creating extremely long cutscenes that demanded it. 😜

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mafia remake is equally as boring as the original.

 

Remasters are completely pointless if you own a PC.

 

Nintendos last 3 consoles have been a joke unless you like 3 games.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.