Gaming hot takes?

This is a good one, I salute you! RDR2 is one of my favorite games of all time, I had to clutch my pearls for a minute there!

Great world, terrible game.

I feel dirty for upvoting your objectively wrong opinion, but you earned it!

Games are designed like this because too many gamers still subscribe to the extremely flawed "dollars per hour = value" assessment. XP systems and bloated open worlds cater exactly to this fallacy, because more is always better...right?

Games like the Tony Hawk 1+2 remaster for example did not need an XP system shoehorned in (not to mention an "achievement" for reaching level 100). Games can have inherent value that isn't tied to how many hours you have to interact with them.

I posted a comment on Reddit talking about how disappointed I am hearing that the AC set in Japan is going to be made by the Valhalla people and I got destroyed for it. Like I wanted Japan since brotherhood and now I get this? I don't like the newer games because they just don't respect your time and that's a bummer for me.

I agree. I'm also a bit of a completionist by nature so it's doubly as painful since I can't just do the main story...

I have gotten a bit better about it in the last few years to be fair. Though sometimes I relapse and realize I've wasted 80% of my free time that day doing mediocre side content.

This is why Smash Bros is the goat.

Low barrier for entry but super high skill ceiling.

I've always wanted to get into fighting games but I never really have because of this exactly. It feels like a chore to learn all the combos and the fighting feels weird and stiff to me because of them.

I think the combos in Street Fighter are already too much.

How should I twist the stick to make the special attack for this character? Hold on, pause the game so I can look up. Oh, I filled up the ultra attack meter, let me check how to perform it for this character.

They should just adopt the control scheme they implemented for Ryu in Smash Bros. Forward + B for Hadouken, Up + B for Shuriyuken, etc.

I loved Final Fantasy Dissidia for this. Every character has the same basic controls, and the abilities are totally customizable. So I'd make general schemes the same across everyone.

Guilty Gear Strive and smash have these combos though, and just like street fighter they aren't required to do well at beginner levels(even at higher levels you can get by with basic bnb combos).

The main thing fighting games need to do better is teach new players, as it isn't clear what you should be learning as a beginner. That's probably why so many people think its combos they have to learn.

Fighting games should not be QTE

The other things you mentioned, “positioning, timing and improvisation” are all infinitely more important in every fighting game when compared to combos. Long complex combos don’t matter if you can’t land a hit.

If the only combo you know is a 3-hit combo that does 20% HP, and your opponent has a 15-hit combo that does 70% HP, then you just need to hit the opponent 5 times while avoiding getting hit 2 times. If your spacing, reactions, and adaptation are much better than your opponent’s, you can win consistently.

Of course there’s always gonna be different variables when it comes to stuff like specific game knowledge, but that’s usually not as much a skill issue as it is a knowledge check. In the end, stronger fundamentals will always reward you more in the long-run.

They're basically in an arms race against The Sims

That isn't a hot take though, everyone and their mother makes jokes about how many DLC there is for Paradox Interactive games.

Here's the real hot take -> I don't mind the amount of DLC on Paradox Interactive games. Every game of their I've played was really good on its own, and I only buy any DLC after I've poured tens of hours into the main game, usually not because I feel like anything was lacking from the main game, but just because I want an excuse to keep playing it. So for all I care, they can keep making all the DLC they want if the base games keep being this good.

Honestly whenever I see a game on sale for <$20 and I open it only to see 5+ DLCs that increase the price, I just close the page and move on without even bothering to research whether or not I should buy the DLCs. Fuck that mess.

I know this post is about games specifically, but this is so true about all media. It's wild how many people bemoan how "bad" movies/tv/music/etc is, when it's super obvious their only frame of reference is mainstream media that's mostly doing the same thing all the time. If they took a look just once at indie content creation, they'd see there's so much cool stuff out there. But their so locked into the "right" media that they don't consider anything else.

Getting back to games, I rarely ever buy AAA games anymore. There's so much cool indie stuff being released all the time, it's simply not worth it to me to deal with all the downsides that come along with AAA games.

Ugh you’re not joking. Many of my friends that game complain about the same thing, yet getting them to try any new game that isn’t League of Legends, Apex, Dead by Daylight or Destiny is like pulling teeth.

The worst part is that most of those games have an endless grind or some sort of FOMO mechanics that encourage people to keep playing even though they’re having an awful time.

Completely agreed. Seriously, if anyone genuinely feels like gaming has become stale, go play Hi-Fi Rush and Pizza Tower (both having come out this year).

AAA games are more interested in keeping you on a virtual engagement treadmill than simply being fun.

I've never played a military shooter, but Battle Bit is piquing my interest.

I still don't know how to go about finding these. I've had so many bad experiences I hardly know what I like anymore. All I "know" is I'm not big on FPS games. But at the same time I loves The Last of Us.

What about simple graphics that still need a server farm to run correctly, or intricate graphics on a potato PC? Would you still say art style >> graphics?

I think this take got ice-cold shortly after Windwaker released.

The issue is that game developers have been using this as a crutch to do less and still charge full-price. Even with Windwaker, I always found the art style was inappropriate for the tone the rest of the game tried to set. It really felt more like they were trying to save time and money than actually having something that serves that art. That style worked pretty well in the handheld games, but I just don't think it holds up as well as Twilight Princess on a big screen.

I enjoy the occasional 16-bit style indie game, but I'm not paying $60 or $70 for that. I love Supergiant games, and they all look amazing, but even they know that art style can only push the price so far. There's also value in a game that is realistic and not stylized, especially in military shooters and racing games.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have AAA games from big studios selling for full-price that have neither. Look at GameFreak's Switch games: terrible quality textures, uninspired lighting, bad draw distance, terrible FPS, and they literally cut to a black screen describing what your character does instead of animating anything. And the art style is just the most generic anime-style imaginable. It looks like Nintendo too the Mii system and just made some minor updates and used that to make human models. This may be a hot take, but I think the models in TotK and BotW are the same. The devs create some fancy clothes, hair, and accessories, but the actual models are bland. It's essentially the Mii system.

Graphics and art style are not mutually exclusive. It's fair to ask for both in a full-price game.

Damn, you can voice unpopular opinions on Lemmy and be upvoted for contributing to the discussion. What a wild place this is!

I couldn’t get into DRG, but I’m willing to give it another try.

Holy hell do I disagree with this but I will kill every elf in this thread to defend your right to say it. Rock and stone.

*angry dwarf noises*

Removes mask They were a glyphid all along!

I very highly disagree but to each their own, of course.

Honestly, I think the hype is more for having one of the least toxic online communities.

Wow, I really disagree with you, but upvoted since that's the point of this thread. I love DRG, however I didn't love it the first time I played it. I had the same problem, I felt it was sort of shallow and I got lost, both literally in the maps and figuratively since I felt I had no goals and it felt repetitive.

When I tried the game again a year or so later it just clicked. I love the end game of getting overclock mods and trying new weapon builds. I love that each class is fun to play and I don't mind playing any of them. I love that I can relax with a lower hazard level mission or challenge myself with a higher hazard, but I don't feel forced to play either since I'm rewarded regardless. I love that the developer that respects their player base and doesn't have awful microtransactions.

And like others have mentioned I think having such a positive and non competitive community helps a lot. ROCK AND STONE

Same, couldn't find the fun in it

I think a big part of the hype is how in-tune with the fan base the devs are. It's just refreshing to feel like the devs are on your side. Rock and Stone.

Simon Tatham's puzzles are goated indeed

Bumped for Simon tathams puzzle pack.

Half the games in there I've marked as favorite. There's barely any better way to unwind after a day than a 60 point 'untangle' puzzle.

Just as a wild guess, it might be related to performance tuning on consoles. If you increase the width of the view frustrum, you're throwing more stuff on the screen.

I got bored after like 8 hours of looking for things to do before I just said "fuck it, I guess I'm killing Ganon." I don't know when I am meant to go find the Master Sword but I was able to get it without having a quest and just using my knowledge of Hyrule from past games ("sword in forest!") and I activated the 4 ancient machines; but then I couldn't find many side quests that weren't just fetch quests for things I already had in my posession.

TOTK actually has shit to do. I thought BOTW was a bit bare bones before, but given it was Nintendo's first go at it I just thought it was that. But TOTK makes BOTW look like an alpha build of a tech demo for TOTK.

BotW was the first Zelda game for me, and it was such a massive disappointment. It's just open world without any redeeming qualities, with every single mechanic existing just to support open world. Felt more like a sandbox than a game. It's fun for about 2-3 hours, but then I just got really bored

I did finish it, because hey I paid for it, but it was not really something too fun for most of the time

EDIT: And I'm still mildly salty that BotW got GOTY in a year we got Nier Automata and Persona 5

Zelda games straight up have a very mediocre story. And often nothing about their world building makes much sense either. They're definitely a series built only for fun gameplay. Everything else is just glue to hold the gameplay together.

Personally, I love the gameplay and exploration, but you're definitely right about the story and voice acting.

PS: dodging should be the same as jump (x). Lock on with ZL and point the movement stick to the side you wanna dodge to, the jump. If you pull the stick back, you'll do a backflip. Whether you want to jump back or to the side depends on the enemy attack (eg, do they swing horizonal or vertical?). If you dodge juuuust before the enemy attacks, you'll get a slow motion during which you're prompted to spam y to rapidly attack. Especially useful for tough foes like lynels.

There's shrines near the start of the game that teach you to dodge & flurry rush;

While locking onto an enemy, jump while moving to the side or backwards at the last second before an enemy attacks-- if the timing is done correctly, you can flurry rush. The trick is finding the timing for each enemy type, though you start to get a feel for it.

It's a grindy mechanic, but I really enjoyed filling out the compendium once you upgrade your Sheikah Slate-- taking pictures of things became the focus of the game for a while, and I'm glad that TOTK improved upon that.

It's a decent game but once I beat it I'll likely never play it again

And it's so ok that I have a hard time getting back to it after breaking for a few weeks

Because modern games are expensive. And the hardware you need to run them are also expensive.

So if you buy a game, you expect it to work as advertised. When you're then presented with a buggy and glitchy mess, obviously you'll get angry.

Gamers didn't just become whiny, publishers became greedy and sloppy.

Imagine a trailer for a new movie. It looks cool. All the famous reviewers said it looked cool. So you pay to go see it at launch. And you're presented with one short action scene, followed by 2 hours of watching paint dry.

That's exactly what so many new modern, marketed games are like.

I think with media people tend to watch critics review entries that they can't keep up with and they adopt some of their habits. The thing is someone who plays every game is going to notice any aspect that's been done better before and point it out as part of their review. But the more positive reviewers will state that they did enjoy the game and that part seems to get lost sometimes.

I could spend an hour telling you things I didn't like about Tears of the Kingdom. Its still probably the best game I played this year.

I think of skyrim like Jay Leno.

No one would say he's the best comedian, or even great. But he's unoffensive and kinda funny to most people.

I think if you compare it to games from the last 10 years, then yes.

But at the time it was miles ahead of everything else. Most RPG's were incredibly unfriendly to beginners, throwing paragraphs of text to read, spreadsheets of numbers to understand, incredibly unfair mechanics, making the player make decisions without understanding them, and legacy mechanics that traced their routes back to tabletop wargaming. The marketing for RPG's revolved around hyping up bigger numbers of systems, skills, weapons, armor, items, spells, and whatever else you can think of. You can still go back and have fun, but the ethos of a lot of RPG's was quantity over quality. They were very difficult to get into, and most RPG's kind of had the assumption that the player already knew how to play RPG's.

It may seem silly to say that Skyrim was a break from that. After all, it has radiant quests, tons of NPC's, a pretty big map, tons of dungeons, etc. But it streamlined a ton and made it accessible. The quantity of voice lines was incredible for the time, and reducing the reliance on text made couch gaming easier. The leveling system is incredibly intuitive and fun, and IMO the best I've seen before or since. A lot of systems exist to allow customization of either the roleplaying or mechanical experience, but most of those systems are optional. You can just bash through the game with the equipment you get in Helgen if you want.

The game isn't perfect, but when I see criticisms it's usually that people want to add more systems or more complexity. That's the kind of thing that always sounds great in an armchair thinking about it, but when you actually put it in a game the game usually ends up bloated and tedious. It's great to add mods later after a couple playthrough, but it's easy to overwhelm new players with things like a spell creation system.

Whenever I see people talking on the Internet about trying Skyrim for the first time, I see a lot of other players recommending to start with mods. I also see a lot of people saying they bounced off of Skyrim, and I think there's a correlation. I ran into similar experiences with Civ and Cities Skylines: it's tempting to add in tons of stuff to try to get the best experience possible, but sometimes it's better to start simple.

Skyrim has bugs, but most of them are either just visual, hilarious, or can be fixed by re-loading the area or the game.

It's not perfect, but overall I think it's fair to include Skyrim in the conversation for... Idk, top-20 ish games of all time.

This is facts. I'm a zoomer. AAA games haven't meant shit to people my age for the most part. The 3 undebatable most important games of my generation are Minecraft, Five Nights at Freddy's, and Undertale. Talk to any gamer under the age of 25-30 and they will likely agree with at least 2/3 of those. All those games started with one person dicking around. We're fully in the era where the formula is starting to stink like piss because it's so stale. We're going to see a "crash" of sorts soon, the infinite growth these shitty publishers have seen off games as a service isn't infinite

What do you mean, AAA games expand upon the formula...

When small indie studios create unique smash hits and then all we see from AAA studios are clones of that game with more monetization. If that's not capitalist innovation, then I don't know what is.

Yup. As an adult with less time to play, you really notice how much AAA games are just copy and paste with a new area on a map or same mission, but different npc.

I just picked up the 2022 remaster of Pacman World from 1999. The game design in that game is so nice. Each level has new enemies and new platform mechanics. I feel like only indie games bring innovation like that today while AAA is just rinse and repeat. (For the most part anyway...God Of War and Zelda are good examples of companies doing it right)

Back then AAA meant the game had budget, scale, graphics, polish.. Nowadays all of these qualities are present in AA devs, and plenty of indies as well.

I feel like the only real differences the AAA has is 1) very detailed and realistic graphics (which does not equal good looking or good art direction, mind you), and 2) a lot of overhead management and investors. These investors are all looking to make returns on investment, which is probably why they so strongly discourage taking risks by deviating from the pre established formula, and strongly encourage absurd monetization practices.

Not to say there's no good AAA games nowadays, Fromsoft is amazing with their souls borne series, and Zelda is pretty solidly designed imo.

Upvoted for providing one of the few real hot takes in this thread. I'm a huge MGS fan, but I can see why people wouldn't like it. MGS plays with realism a lot, all while also playing with ideas from Hollywood. It makes for a very strange mix.

Now this is a hot take - I tend to agree with you. MGS has always felt like more B-movie than game, featuring a convoluted story that doesn't justify the enormous amount of cutscenes. The stealth gameplay that's there pales in comparison to titles like Splinter Cell too.

Personally, the best Metal Gear game in my mind is Rising: Revengeance, and it's not even close. Highly recommend you play that one if you haven't already.

Mad respect my dude. Got any recommendations? ;D

I'll give my two cents for the classic CoC, and the shockingly good story of The Last Sovereign.

This reminds me of a fake quote attributed to Hideo Kojima:

It says "Try not to cum", but the point of the game is obviously to cum. So yes, I would call that bad game design.

My dream is to make one of those. One day...

Hubie Pop

That is honestly one of my favourite things about Saint Row 3 and 4. If you want to go balls to the wall with an infinite ammo, instant reloaded rocket launcher, while running outside the enemies range. Just get to level 50 and go nuts.

This is tangentially related to inventory management, encumbrance, and other mechanics that often come across as tedious. Does it make sense that the character is sitting down and taking a while to decide how much & which stuff to carry, which gems to socket, which items to upgrade? How much is the game supposed to be about resource management vs. about swinging swords at skeletons or solving puzzles?

If you want a game that not only allows you to break it but encourages it and it doesn't ruin the fun, try Noita. Very unforgiving and secretive. It's kinda like a roguelike where the thing you're building up between plays is knowledge of how the game works. Sometimes you'll find an ability combination that makes you a god, other times you'll find one that kills you before you understand the implications of what you're trying to do.

It's fun but just be aware that any specific fun you start to have will be fleeting, but you'll find other kinds of fun while chasing that last one.

Go back to your lawn, Morrowboomer.

I like Morrowind, but I think you should consider Oblivion's writing. No it's not perfect, the main story is absolutely ass but everything else? Oblivion Theifs Guild and Dark Brotherhood absolutely SHIT on the Morang Tong. The gray fox, Lucienne, Lex, just absolutely insane! Not as immersive as Morrowind, however I'd say that the blend between the open world and the linear story is just paved perfectly in some of the Oblivion's quests

I have sort of an inverted souls hot take. My least favorite part is the souls games are boss fights, and eldin rings open world made the game's exploration and non boss progression too easy.

Yeah, I think most people in general are fine with Nintendo exclusives, since it's nearly the only console maker on the market that doesn't ship out what is essentially just an optimized pc. Especially since the Nintendo emulation scene is so incredibly thriving, games being exclusives there is generally only true on paper.

With that said: Fromsoft I am begging you release Bloodborne on PC I need my 60+ fps no motion blur game that is wetter than a crushed tomato and edgier than London's knife bins' contents. I want to replay it but I don't have the magic box anymore goddamnit..

Exclusive optimisation is amazing. Some of the games they squeezed out of some consoles is amazing. I can't believe tears of the kingdom runs so well on the switch. There was also an amazing PS2 game called "black".

IMO the industry overall is in a truly horrible place, but only the AAA and part of the AA space. Indies have been and continue to hold up the industry by themselves.

I haven’t seen what you’re talking about, so I can’t even fathom what “death of gaming” could possibly mean. It’s dumb enough that music genres get declared “dead” just for being less popular than they used to be, and it seems even dumber to say it about a hobby that, as far as I understand, is more popular than its ever been.

IMO the industry overall is in a truly horrible place, but only the AAA and part of the AA space. Indies have been and continue to hold up the industry by themselves.

I overall disagree because in average they are putting more thought into their visuals than many triple-A studios that never see an end to their skin pore-delving levels of realism. But I find it very funny how many indie horror games use VHS effects for no reason as if playable VHS had ever been a thing.

First game I remember with it was Hotline Miami, where it worked quite well for the game. I'd say the tape rewind from that game is iconic. But yeah, it's normally just cheap points for le epic retro gamers

Everyone i play games with gets the "sbmm is one of the worst things to happen to video games" rant every single time i play a game that has it. I dont play them often thankfully

I mean how else is Bethesda supposed to justify charging $60 for the same game reskinned?

I've been playing totk and at one point I had to turn off motion control to get more precision (ironic, I know, but gyro induces too much sway for when you need a near pixel perfect positioning) for building a hover bike. I had no idea how much I subconsciously used gyro aiming. For instance I wanted to pick up one of the fans. So I tun the stick to move the camera to target the fan like I always do, but this time I end up just short of actually targeting the fan. Turns out I instinctively also turn the controller to have the gyro assist the aiming, but because gyro was off that last step of targeting was now missing and I kept missing my targeting. It felt super weird to pick them up without the gyro.

I absolutely recommend any skeptic to turn it on, play with it regularly for let's say 20 hours and turn it off. You will feel the difference. It becomes so natural that you won't even notice yourself using it.

No gyro on Xbox, so only PS and Switch (and Steam Deck, I guess?) would get to enjoy this.

League of legends is 14 years old but still has a huge following and gets regular updates and content.

Is the age of a game really an issue in this live service era we're in?

You need to back this opinion up with games you think are better.

Great hot take. I sort of agree for something like Pokemon. But I'm surprised you think this way for all Nintendo games. In the world of 3D platformers for example, I'd say it's pretty hard to find something better than Mario Galaxy, or 3D World. Same goes for Mario Kart. It's got crisp controls, and the last game in particular had great track design. I wouldn't say Wipeout is a very apt comparison given it's not a kart racer.

I would disagree, as someone who didn't grow up with Nintendo and very recently got a switch. The games have a very distinct feel and artstyle that isn't very common. They also have great scores and are generally quality games.

Yeah, my kid loves Mario Odyssey, like the way I loved Mario World.

While I'm a huge fangirl of the series, they are blatantly "JPRGy" and are always very full of the numerous JRPG tropes, which can definitely give a cliched feeling.

Admittedly, overly complicated isn't a way I'd describe most of the games, but that definitely fits many of the more recent entries (especially 16). IMO, 7-10 and 12 are the peak Final Fantasy games. My personal favourites being 9 and 10. And even they have some cringe moments that I pretend don't exist lol (for 9, everything involving Quina or Eiko; for 10, stuff like most of the outfits and the utterly bizarre laughing scene).

I'm a fan, but even I can admit that they can be fairly 'typical fantasy saga'. What kinds of videogame stories do you like?

X has the best story of any game I ever played. IV and VI have good stories as well. The rest didn't pique my interest.

I mean, how many other games were tackling climate change, imperialism, genocide, and deindustrialization in a single game in 1998. I’d say some of the story beats can be cliche in FF, but the stories are pretty unique. Unique AND over-complicated.

That said, I live Final Fantasy. I’ve played most of them. I have never really liked the combat in any of them. Not the real time or turn based combat. It feels tedious, and the rock paper scissors mechanics get tiring after a while. I still replay them way too often,

I think that it's good for flight sims.

Hardcore flightsimmers were putting together multi-monitor setups to do their thing well before VR goggles were around. They already had a bazillion controls, and trying to also handle head movement with the hands was a pain.

I didn't really get into Elite: Dangerous as a game, but when I did play it, I did appreciate how the aim was to create a really spectacular, immersive experience surrounding someome sitting in a chair, how the aim was probably the VR experience.

Do yourself the favor and play a racing sim with vr and a wheel. Its crazy how immerser you get, that does not work as well on flat screens.

I mean, if you have 3 arms, I'm sure it's amazing.

I haven't played multiplayer competitive games in many years. The last time I did so much was Quake 2-based Team Fortress-style mods.

But on some of those, the team size was large enough that it didn't matter much if someone was just goofing around, because it didn't make a huge difference. If you have 12 players on a side, someone is a single-digit percentage of the effort.

But if you're playing something like, I dunno, Dota 2, then you're a quarter of the team, and that's impossible.

Maybe it's an argument for games designed around larger teams.

Dots 2 permits for synergies among characters, like one character to buff others, but maybe one could cap that, say that only four players of twelve or something can be leveraging synergies.

Dude amen, I hate the ideology of "I just want to have fun who cares if we win" ...your teammates do. Thank goodness for skill based matchmaking and ranked although they tend to slow down the experience at times.

Games should have "carefree" lobbies for people who want to "just relax and play"

Super Mario Galaxy has amazing orchestrated soundtrack that must be experienced with the innovative gameplay and beautiful art design.

I can't imagine playing this game without the music.

I soooo strongly agree about the audio. I regularly hear people talking about how good a game's soundtrack is, but most games don't stand out at all where soundtrack is concerned. I can list on one hand how many games have had songs so iconic that I can remember them. That's not to say I don't care for the audio. I recognize a lot of the audio is fantastic and feels just so natural that I don't even notice it as a stand alone piece, but an intractable part of a scene. But I certainly am not gonna go listen to most games soundtracks.

1. Persona 4 - that town/school theme is insanely catchy and burnt into my head. I also can recall the title theme being so good I'd always let it play in full when I started the game.
2. Persona 5 - tons of absolute bangers. Rivers in the Desert is perhaps my single favourite piece of video game music ever. I also love the city theme (I forget the title, "I'm a shape shifter, at Poe's mascarade").
3. Weirdly enough, FFXIII-2 - I specifically recall how good Noah's theme is. It's this somber piece that plays in a dead world setting and is just haunting.

There might be some others I can't remember. But my point is that most game music is not nearly memorable enough that I can even draw it to mind. Let alone have it caught in my head or be able to recognize it later. Even for games I've played a ton of, you could probably play something and I wouldn't recognize it.

But I was talking about music. Non music? Ugh, that's usually worse. My biggest dislike is menu blips. You know, where every time you move the cursor in a menu, it makes a chime noise. In a lot of older games, I find it's so bad that I refuse to play the game with sound on.

(Side note: I'm told that Fallout's music is great, but I'm embarrassed to say I've almost never listened to it, in part because IIRC, the radio feature where all the good stuff can be heard is actually audible to enemies, making it incompatible with stealth.)

I agree....but I gotta say I did love the last few chapters of Halo 3, especially the last bit where you drive away while everything explodes.

And now it's all Third Person pseudo RPGs and the FPS genre is pretty small...

Console support had nothing to do with the LITERAL huge holes in the game.

On release, you could literally find unfinished areas the size of chunks in minecraft and drop through the map.

Some buildings were literally missing sides.

Not saying the original claim about console support kneecapping some games, but cyberpunk was just a bag of lies and hot shit on release.

To maybe take this a step further. I think console (or PC or Mac for that matter) exclusives are fine for sone of the reasons you outlined. I see a lot of hate for this primarily among redditors. I do not feel like a console company paying a game developer or buying a studio to develop a game exclusively for them is bad for the industry. Especially if they're doing it well. I recognize that there are companies out there that are using this method and harming the industry.

Sony has been killing it in the exclusives department for years now and it's honestly great to see. I have a buddy who works for one of their studios and it seems pretty good on their end too. They're pretty hands off. The model seems to be to have talented developers put their vision on the Playstation and stay out of the way.

For context. I don't need to play EVERY amazing game. Nor do have the time.

I do think the difficulty aspect of games like Dark Souls is played up too much, to the detriment of how good those games actually are.

Tedious is probably a fair assessment, tedious things can be fun though

Everyone enjoys something different and its fine

What's a static game?

A lot of people misinterpret the infamous laughing scene. They think it comes out of left field and is out of place... And that's what it's trying to do. It's supposed to be awkward. Tidus is trying to help Yuna release her anxiety by goofily laughing like a lunatic. Does this make the voice acting suddenly great? Nah not really. Also FFX's combat is the best. Being able to see who's turn is next, as well as which abilities might delay a turn. Really fun!

I don't mind the voice acting, but I can't enjoy the linear world connected by literal corridors.

And I hate blizball.

I think you can take the "sony" out of that sentence...although exclusives can potentially be healthy to avoid monopolies and grant competition between makers.

Second half is a bad take. Uncharted on the highest difficulties is fucking brutal.

I’ll be a Devil’s Advocate here and will try to rationalize the decision to include Chromatic Aberration in so many video games.

Most of the games that have Chromatic Aberration are games that also got releaaes on consoles amd therefore for the majority of the time will be played on TVs. On monitors, I get you, the effects are shit. However, when you play it on a TV, I can see it being better. Having low pixel density really helps with the effect.

Power isn't just about graphics though. It's also about scope and general performance.

Pokemon scarlet isn't going for realism, but it's junky as hell.

Even botw and totk get noticeable frame drops and those are also not trying to be realistic

RIGHT? It's so much more intuitive. Last time I played, I played on an OG steam controller and that was better than a regular controller, but Wiimote for RE4 is unbelievably great. I've gotten so much flack for this, but with the game's semi-tank controls, the Wiimote is perfect for it!

ULTRA HOT TAKE.

…I also enjoyed Mystic Quest. It was universally hated.

Is borderless always better? And why?

Eh, I think it's fine for fights to have certain requirements to succeed. Many things in games are basically a puzzle, and figuring out the puzzle is the purpose of playing.

I do agree to a point about the stun thing. I wouldn't say it has zero place in games, but it does general just become a feel-bad moment, leaving the player feeling helpless. That said, I'm not sure what exactly would need to be done to make it appropriate.

God, bosses that have i-frames drive me up the wall in any game

I totally agree with the immunities thing. It's a common issue in RPGs. Eg, games will have countless status effects but none of them work on tougher enemies, making them basically useless. I think a lot of more modern games have understood this issue and tried to fix it.

Eg, for all it's flaws, FFXIII did status effects really great. Poison is actually very potent and a legitimate way to kill even the toughest bosses. Similarly, the death spell was useless in a lot of older games (where it was just a chance of instant death), but was extremely useful in FFXIII because it just straight up dealt heavy damage with a chance of instant death. Spamming it was a valid strategy for a lot of moderately difficult enemies that would otherwise be annoying to whittle down.

Elden Ring?

I disagree, but what AAA game did you consider good released in 2016?

Nothing will beat VI for me. I both wanted to marry Kefka and BE Kefka.

It's definitely not the worst. But I consider it overrated (considering how it's perhaps the most popular). Hands down I'd put 9, 10, and 12 above it. I'd maybe even put 8 above it depending on my mood.

The first game is probably the worst. It's very basic. Arguably it's unfair to compare it to later games, given it's age (as an aside, I've only played the GBA remake of it -- I probably wouldn't be able to stand the true original). I'd say 1 < 3 < 2 < 5 < 4 < 6 < 15 < 13 < 14 < 7 < 8 < 12 < 9 < 10. And honestly I could drop 15 a lot further down depending on my mood. I'm clearly biased against the 2D games.

I don't really get why 6 is so popular (there's even another person replying to you mentioning it). It's the best of the 2D games hands down, but I didn't find it as good as really any of the later games. I think I put a lot of weight in the ability for graphics to be able to show emotion and make settings more interesting. I utterly adored the cutscenes that began with the 3D games.

People were SO unfair to RE6 back in the day, in my opinion. I bet if it had not been associated with the series, it would be remembered as a ridiculous bombastic cult classic in the same vein as Metal Gear Rising. It may have issues but come on, it managed to have a super fun, super unique, super deep take on TPS gameplay, it is wonderfully over the top, it has stupid amounts of content...
But because it was called RE and didn't fit whatever mold the titles in the series should fit in the eyes of some, it was panned. Thankfully it has been looked at with different eyes in recent years.

That's a big claim when the Steam Deck exists

I love my Switch SO much, but I find myself playing Switch games on my computer way more than my Switch now…

Now that's a hot take!

I find it incredibly uncomfortable to play on. Games are way too expensive too, and the console is massively underpowered. To each their own though.

Raft solo, garbage. Raft with friends, wasn't to shabby. But there's no replay value. Most of the fun, is the fun you and your friends create, not the game itself (which is true for so many games)

The cake is a lie, anyhow.

People dismiss it because it's part of the NSMB series, but it's basically Super Super Mario World.

I like the system of Earthbound where enemies need to touch you to start a battle and if you're overleveled, the battle is skipped and you still gain exp and items

I think this sometimes, too. But at the same time, I gotta admit there is some feel of convenience with not having random encounters. It can be tedious sometimes when you're just trying to do something and you have to keep doing battles at regular intervals. Eg, revisiting a low level area would be soooo boring because the battles are absolutely trivial and unrewarding and just get in the way.

Perhaps something to be said about the hybrid systems like Persona 5 have, where the battles aren't random, but rather there's enemy indicators that you have to touch to start a battle. So you can avoid battles, but if you're not careful, you'll still end up in a battle. In fact by preemptively accepting the battle, you can gain an advantage (and inversely, if you're not careful, you'll get ambushed).

If only i could upvote you several times. I agree with every point, and was already called a Nintendo Hater, and now i say it with pride. Nintendo is just extremely anti-consumer, anti art preservation, anti community (even their own fans), actively erasing gaming history, and taking advantage of ignorants and ideologically confused fanboys in shitty deals, products and services. If this company were founded today, they would be dead in less than 3 years, but they successfully milk the nostalgia from their golden years from the 80s to early 2000s. Can only say this: It is ethically good to boycot Nintendo, do piracy emulation and buy from other places.

Latest twitches for me: Dave the Diver and Rogue Legacy 2. Incredible games.

Many stellar games also go unnoticed. The Forgotten City didn’t get nearly the amount of love it deserves. The Hex is basically an unknown game, overshadowed by the same dev’s excellent Inscryption.

…I loved Inscryption… but I found myself walking away from The Hex loving it EVEN MORE. If anyone is interested, go in blind. Ignore the graphics, they’ll make sense. Playing Pony Island first isn’t necessary, but it’s two hours long and does make the experience even better.

@SJ_Zero @LeylaaLovee Maybe this can be said for the tripple A space, but indie devs have been firing on all cylinders the last 5-6 years.

These types of comments remind me of that Douglas Adams quote.

“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”

If there has been anything I've seen in the last 30+ years of gaming, it's that people always think games used to be much better.

What was the collapse?

Fast tarvel are optional in most games so if immersion is your thing just don't use it. I am not gonna hold w key for 10 mins to go to a different area, that simply is a waste of time to me. I wish fast travel are available even for shorter distances.

Agree with fast travel, but XP? That's a staple of RPGs

Agree on fast travel if immersion is your thing.

Older systems have much less delay between the controls and the screen than modern systems do. USB is slow. HDMI is slow.

Yeah, the erosion of the Actiblizzking monstrosity can't not feel like good news.