-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Those popular gaming opinions that you stubbornly just can't agree with.
- Thread starter NuclearCake
- Start date
"The Last of Us is a masterpiece".
Not in my book. I hate it.
"Bloodborne is the best Fromsoft game"
Dark Souls 3 is. Dark Souls 1 is better, and Sekiro too. Underwhelming soundtrack, underwhelming bosses, underwhelming difficulty. But great lore and ambient.
Not in my book. I hate it.
"Bloodborne is the best Fromsoft game"
Dark Souls 3 is. Dark Souls 1 is better, and Sekiro too. Underwhelming soundtrack, underwhelming bosses, underwhelming difficulty. But great lore and ambient.
Sorry OP but wut?
NSMBU - best NSMB game by a mile and arguably the best 2D Mario ever.
Mario Kart 8 - best Mario Kart ever and it's not even close.
BotW - again, best Zelda, maybe best game full stop, and not even close.
Tropical Freeze - best DK game ever, one of the best platformer ever.
Pikmin 3 - best Pikmin game ever.
3D World - personally I prefer the Galaxy games but many would say the best 3D Mario at that point.
Splatoon and Mario Maker - 2 new IPs that absolutely hit it out of the park, those two games basically kept me alive during a very dark year.
Then there's amazing 3rd party stuff like Bayonetta 2 and W101. Nobody counts the crap that came out in the last year. The Wii U sucked as a console, but the major games for it were a streak of quality like nothing else, and I won't hear otherwise!
NSMBU - best NSMB game by a mile and arguably the best 2D Mario ever.
Mario Kart 8 - best Mario Kart ever and it's not even close.
BotW - again, best Zelda, maybe best game full stop, and not even close.
Tropical Freeze - best DK game ever, one of the best platformer ever.
Pikmin 3 - best Pikmin game ever.
3D World - personally I prefer the Galaxy games but many would say the best 3D Mario at that point.
Splatoon and Mario Maker - 2 new IPs that absolutely hit it out of the park, those two games basically kept me alive during a very dark year.
Then there's amazing 3rd party stuff like Bayonetta 2 and W101. Nobody counts the crap that came out in the last year. The Wii U sucked as a console, but the major games for it were a streak of quality like nothing else, and I won't hear otherwise!
Popular? I mean, you have places where it is treated like trash (Era), but mostly people think it's a good FF, fun to play even if very flawed. It couldn't have been otherwise considering that game was essentially created in just 3 years.
I just can't agree with Bloodborne being treated like the second coming. It felt to me like a Dark Souls lite with a lore that didn't do much for me. I am not into Lovecraft and it honestly felt all samey to me in variety of locales. Also, way less build variety. It's weird to me that people are asking for build variety for a game like Sekiro that never ever was intended to have it, but don't care about really limited builds in Bloodborne compared to Dark Souls.
yeah, it adapted Children of Men and the Road for games, much like Logan did for superhero movies. i will say at least the stealth/gameplay is more involved and impactful than anything in uncharted. it's good but overrated, massively by some people
It's mostly just troll but honestly the pc market doesn't need "competition", anyone supporting the egs should be better off the hobby since they probably also bent over for paid online on console and the like.
Also porn game getting released on steam was a good thing.
Also porn game getting released on steam was a good thing.
2, 4 and Lost Legacy have some of the legitimate best level, encounter and AI design I've ever seen, and I say that as someone who is a massive fan of games revered for those elements (FEAR, Halo, Dishonored 1-2, etc). They only really shine on Crushing difficulty, but they are fantastic.
The actual physical shooting isnt much special but everything around the shooting combined with the mobility makes the combat greater than the sum of its parts
Note I only refer to 2, 4 and Lost Legacy here. 1's gameplay is weak and rudimentary while 3s was overambitious and relied on spectacle way more than the others.
I did not enjoy skyrim, the gameplay is grindy soporific singleplayer MMO mechanics and the world never feels like an open world because everything is covered in snow and all the towns look the same. Also it just feels deeply unoriginal because it's a viking inspired thing and thats done to death in fantasy. To me it's a lowest common denominator mega-hit but even otherwise discerning game journalists, e.g. the giant bomb guys treated it like it was a revelation.
I'd love to see folks here get their hands on the engine and actually make something better
Game design is fucking hard. It's like the hardest medium
Currently on metacritic, dragon age 2 has a score of 82 and 4.5 for reviewers and viewers.
Inquisition has 89 and 7.4. In my mind, dragon age 2 is the far better game.
I know not many RPGs came out in 2014, and people point to DA2 as the start of Bioware regressing. But holy FUCK, Inquisition was such a cookie cutter collectathon with one of the most bland stories I've come across. At least DA2 was trying something different.
Inquisition has 89 and 7.4. In my mind, dragon age 2 is the far better game.
I know not many RPGs came out in 2014, and people point to DA2 as the start of Bioware regressing. But holy FUCK, Inquisition was such a cookie cutter collectathon with one of the most bland stories I've come across. At least DA2 was trying something different.
Yeah inquisition was another single player MMO in the vein of skyrim. they even straight up lifted the minimap and crafting materials collectathon from WoW, a game which launched a decade before Inquisition. also supposedly the story is buried in the DLC but i was so burnt out by the end that I couldn't be arsed at that point. At least it had a variety of zones which skyrim didn't bother with.
WoW mechanics influencing single player games was a terrible development. WoW is mindless but at least you could shoot the shit with your friends while doing the meaningless tasks. Developers cynically hybridized their single player RPGs with timesink mechanics deliberately designed to be addictive because they were pioneered by Blizzard to get people hooked on a service based game.
WoW mechanics influencing single player games was a terrible development. WoW is mindless but at least you could shoot the shit with your friends while doing the meaningless tasks. Developers cynically hybridized their single player RPGs with timesink mechanics deliberately designed to be addictive because they were pioneered by Blizzard to get people hooked on a service based game.
That The Witcher 3 had bad combat. I strongly disagree with that. I played on death march and was totally new to WRPG, and I found the fight system rewarding, deep enough without being too cumbersome, challenging and fun. It's no Bloodborne (which I played and come to like much later), but none else is
lol
I'll remember your keen insight next time I dare to critique something.
"MGS4 is a good game"
I don't care what anyone says MGS4 is garbage. At least it's crap story made it easier to look past the stories in Peace Walker & MGSV and just enjoy the gameplay.
I don't care what anyone says MGS4 is garbage. At least it's crap story made it easier to look past the stories in Peace Walker & MGSV and just enjoy the gameplay.
Agreed. The games look nice but they are pretty boring to play.
Last edited:
So is my job yet I invite everyone to criticize it. I mean, come on, nobody argues the merits of a designer's opus, but the product itself is highly debatable. If not this wouldn't be a forum, just a dogmatic church.
I only ever make posts like that when it feels like people are saying (through implication or suggestion) that the devs are somehow incapable (be it lazy, unskilled, derivative, etc).
Basically it feels like such posters have no respect whatsoever for the achievement or skill that is seen in games like this and diminish the role of the developer to basically a "hack".
Where did I say it should be free from criticism? I'm just saying ease the fuck off and have some respect. If you think parts of the design are flawed/erroneous don't act like the developers barely worked on it or thought about it. Flag it up and discuss it, you don't need to imply the developers are shit.
God of war 2018 being a masterpiece.
God of War is great, but not amazing.
I enjoyed playing it, but I wasn't blown away or anything.
God of War is great, but not amazing.
I enjoyed playing it, but I wasn't blown away or anything.
I agree with your sentiment of how sometimes even on ERA the "lazy devs" rethoric shows its face and it isn't adecquatw or acceptable. But I hope we can agree that the specific post you wrote wasn't nearly as civil or as well put as this one. Which is, by the way, remarkably clear.
Color Splash is a fantastic game, so I'm really not sure OP has actually played it.
Sega making millions of people genuinely believe Sonic was ever a possible Mario killer is incredible to me. I mean, classic Sonic isn't bad, but everything from the aesthetics to the level design always looked and felt like an incoherent mishmash to me. Like Sega actually had something on their hands and could actually deliver a solid Mario-like platformer but ultimately decided that making the character fast and giving him an attitude would be enough (well, that did the trick, I'll give it to them). Classic Sonic looks like an early 90s PC platformer, only it plays so fast you can't get bored as easily. The Genesis had so many good games, I hate that Sonic is what made people ultimately care about the console.
Also the unfettered hype around anything From Software is really, really jarring. Sekiro is a good game but it's very, very far from the variety of enemies, situations and gameplay of the Souls games. It's not going to have a fraction of the impact Dark Souls had on gaming, and for good reason.
"Nintendo Games" as a tag has to fucking die already. I swear, except for platformers there isn't a single genre where a Nintendo game can be compared to all the others without someone going "oh but that doesn't count, it's a Nintendo game". The "Smash Ultimate is the best selling fighting game ever" couldn't go 10 posts without the obligatory "Party game, but yeah" comment.
Sega making millions of people genuinely believe Sonic was ever a possible Mario killer is incredible to me. I mean, classic Sonic isn't bad, but everything from the aesthetics to the level design always looked and felt like an incoherent mishmash to me. Like Sega actually had something on their hands and could actually deliver a solid Mario-like platformer but ultimately decided that making the character fast and giving him an attitude would be enough (well, that did the trick, I'll give it to them). Classic Sonic looks like an early 90s PC platformer, only it plays so fast you can't get bored as easily. The Genesis had so many good games, I hate that Sonic is what made people ultimately care about the console.
Also the unfettered hype around anything From Software is really, really jarring. Sekiro is a good game but it's very, very far from the variety of enemies, situations and gameplay of the Souls games. It's not going to have a fraction of the impact Dark Souls had on gaming, and for good reason.
"Nintendo Games" as a tag has to fucking die already. I swear, except for platformers there isn't a single genre where a Nintendo game can be compared to all the others without someone going "oh but that doesn't count, it's a Nintendo game". The "Smash Ultimate is the best selling fighting game ever" couldn't go 10 posts without the obligatory "Party game, but yeah" comment.
Outside of Naughty Dog, I don't enjoy most Sony exclusives nor care for most.
I'm a huge PlayStation fan, btw. Owned multiple versions of each their consoles, including portables, but the draw for PS systems for me has always been the excellent 3rd party support, not the 1st party catalog.
I'm a huge PlayStation fan, btw. Owned multiple versions of each their consoles, including portables, but the draw for PS systems for me has always been the excellent 3rd party support, not the 1st party catalog.
The first act (or is it 2?) show the potential of what the game could have been. It smartly builds on the excellent mechanics of MGS3, especially with infiltrating a conflict zone and playing off both sides against one another.
... then it ditches all of those brilliant mechanics and becomes a terrible semi-interactive piece of fan service.
A lot of people seem to think Halo 5 was flat out awful, but I found it to be an improvement on Halo 4 in many important ways:
- Campaign levels much less linear, with more options for traversal and approaches to encounters. This makes Halo 5's campaign a lot more fun to replay than Halo 4's.
- Greatly improved enemy designs. Every Promethean unit has clear weak points and identifiable classes. And no more bullet sponges!
- More Covenant spread all throughout the campaign.
- The best weapon balance in the series. Best variety too. Absolutely everything is useful.
- Significant additions to the base mechanics in the form of Spartan abilities. And miraculously, they don't interfere with the core mechanics that were there since Halo 1. Great work.
- Savvy and well placed extended lore references in the campaign. Ironically 343 did a much better job of acknowledging the scale and history of Halo's universe than Bungie themselves.
- A lot more of the tone of Halo comes through. The whole presentation of the campaign, scene to scene, feels more like Halo. The non-combat missions add fantastic texture to the world. There's just enough humor peppered throughout the game, and it hit the right notes. And Dr. Halsey has a larger role like she deserves, and is portrayed more like the troubled genius of the Nylund books versus that ridiculous demented war criminal angle that doesn't square with her earlier characterization.
- A major course correction for the competitive multiplayer design. Fixes almost everything that Reach and Halo 4 did to move the gameplay away from its roots. At the same time, Halo 5 rejuvenates the formula with the well implemented traversal options, and other mechanics, tweaks, and smart additions.
- Better art design than Halo 4. Not quite as impressive as Bungie's iconic Forerunner aesthetic, and the new Pelican is weird, but pretty damn good. The campaign is full of great scenery that feels more like Halo compared to 4.
Halo 4 really lost me, as a fan of Bungie's campaigns. The only thing about it that really succeeded was Chief and Cortana's interaction. So I was hugely relieved when Halo 5 arrived and the game felt great to play, and gave me a lot more of what I was looking for as a player who endlessly replays Halo campaigns.
- Campaign levels much less linear, with more options for traversal and approaches to encounters. This makes Halo 5's campaign a lot more fun to replay than Halo 4's.
- Greatly improved enemy designs. Every Promethean unit has clear weak points and identifiable classes. And no more bullet sponges!
- More Covenant spread all throughout the campaign.
- The best weapon balance in the series. Best variety too. Absolutely everything is useful.
- Significant additions to the base mechanics in the form of Spartan abilities. And miraculously, they don't interfere with the core mechanics that were there since Halo 1. Great work.
- Savvy and well placed extended lore references in the campaign. Ironically 343 did a much better job of acknowledging the scale and history of Halo's universe than Bungie themselves.
- A lot more of the tone of Halo comes through. The whole presentation of the campaign, scene to scene, feels more like Halo. The non-combat missions add fantastic texture to the world. There's just enough humor peppered throughout the game, and it hit the right notes. And Dr. Halsey has a larger role like she deserves, and is portrayed more like the troubled genius of the Nylund books versus that ridiculous demented war criminal angle that doesn't square with her earlier characterization.
- A major course correction for the competitive multiplayer design. Fixes almost everything that Reach and Halo 4 did to move the gameplay away from its roots. At the same time, Halo 5 rejuvenates the formula with the well implemented traversal options, and other mechanics, tweaks, and smart additions.
- Better art design than Halo 4. Not quite as impressive as Bungie's iconic Forerunner aesthetic, and the new Pelican is weird, but pretty damn good. The campaign is full of great scenery that feels more like Halo compared to 4.
Halo 4 really lost me, as a fan of Bungie's campaigns. The only thing about it that really succeeded was Chief and Cortana's interaction. So I was hugely relieved when Halo 5 arrived and the game felt great to play, and gave me a lot more of what I was looking for as a player who endlessly replays Halo campaigns.
Last edited:
That Xbox Live was ever a good thing. They made us pay for things that we already had access to before for free on both PCs and the older consoles and turned it into a subscription service. That was a terrible path that now the entire industry is following. If it were never for Xbox Live I doubt any of the big 3 would have sub services now to just play with other people.
TF2 once they started adding more weapons completely destroyed what made the game good. It removed a lot of the major nuance of how the classes interacted by giving classes who were weak to certain things ways around those weaknesses. The hats I didn't care about, but the weapons ruined it.
TF2 once they started adding more weapons completely destroyed what made the game good. It removed a lot of the major nuance of how the classes interacted by giving classes who were weak to certain things ways around those weaknesses. The hats I didn't care about, but the weapons ruined it.
I don't necessarily disagree with that, in the same way that there are a lot more silver bullions out there than gold. It's still quite an event when you find either one lying there. :)
Heh I don't necessarily agree with that comparison.
I think the frequency is more like gold bullions vs copper wire, but maybe that's just my bias speaking.
That souls game have good gameplay.
Their animation system is antiquated, characters are weightless when moving, the camera is tragedy, every encounter is based on memorization and very rarely requires creativity, skill or anything related to play. As an action-RPG their only saving grace is a diversity of character paths to follow and their amazing world. Also, somehow souls games invented environmental storytelling and object descriptions are the most amazing story medium to ever exist. Usability is for casuals. Etc.
There are so many double standards with these games that I usually just stay away from these threads. Live and let live.
Their animation system is antiquated, characters are weightless when moving, the camera is tragedy, every encounter is based on memorization and very rarely requires creativity, skill or anything related to play. As an action-RPG their only saving grace is a diversity of character paths to follow and their amazing world. Also, somehow souls games invented environmental storytelling and object descriptions are the most amazing story medium to ever exist. Usability is for casuals. Etc.
There are so many double standards with these games that I usually just stay away from these threads. Live and let live.
OP
OP
I wouldn't say anything about it if i didn't play it. It's no joke, one of the most boring games i have ever played and i doubt anybody would really care about it, if it didn't have the Paper Mario skin layered on top. I can't fathom how gameplay could be so boring and simultaneously broken in a Paper Mario game. Both the exploration and the combat aspect fall flat on their face. It's i guess a fitting swan song for the Wii U in a sense because it's the definition of a pretty looking but shallow game that is worse than the previous entries in it's franchise.
It's crazy to me that the games producer feels that they hit the peak with CS, as far as it could be improved, because they have done nothing to improve the core gameplay from Sticker Star and in fact they just made a shit ton of things even worse. It's like they ignored all the negative responses that Sticker Star got. Unbelievable. Playing through this game felt like torture and really i wanted so badly to like it but i just couldn't. A good game needs to have at-least some engaging gameplay and CS delivers none of that. It a game that you could experience at it's fullest by just watching a YT playthrough. The only things that hold it together as a package are the visuals and the writing and both can be experienced completely by watching the game instead of playing it. Not sure how i can ever call something like that "a fantastic game"
It's bottom of the barrel trash as far as Nintendo's output on the Wii U.
I'll grant you the camera can be awful and frustrating at times, but how do you justify the rest? The animation work in Soulsborne is almost universally praised, the weight/encumbrance system in the Demon/Dark Souls series directly affects your character's mobility and the animations for walking or sprinting clearly sell the feeling of grounded movement as opposed to skating across the surface, and I can't even begin to imagine what you mean by the combat not requiring skill.
TTYD did not improve on every aspect of Paper Mario, and had noticable regressions in level design and challenge. The expanded combat options were great, but the enemies didn't scale high enough in difficulty to match so it's moot.
I also prefer the original's cute charm to TTYD's comedic charm, but that's much more subjective.
I also prefer the original's cute charm to TTYD's comedic charm, but that's much more subjective.
Nintendo 64 is easily Nintendo's worst home console.
- Most Games haven't aged well
- Clunky Controller.
- Carts over Discs.
- Most Games haven't aged well
- Clunky Controller.
- Carts over Discs.
I'm pretty sure this was a popular opinion before the Wii U.
Mipha should have been the main character in botw and it sucks because of it. If they just patched her in, we wouldnt need these threads anymore
I'll never agree that random encounters are inherently worse than visible encounters in RPGs.
They're just different, and can be fun in their own way. They make you change your strategy a little bit because you're not sure what to expect next. They also make exploring more relaxed because you don't have to worry about explicitly dodging enemies, or trying to surprise them from behind or whatever.
One thing Etrian Odyssey series does well with random encounters is that it has a meter which gradually fills to show you how close you are to the next encounter. This helps you make decisions like whether you can make it to safety before the next encounter.
They're just different, and can be fun in their own way. They make you change your strategy a little bit because you're not sure what to expect next. They also make exploring more relaxed because you don't have to worry about explicitly dodging enemies, or trying to surprise them from behind or whatever.
One thing Etrian Odyssey series does well with random encounters is that it has a meter which gradually fills to show you how close you are to the next encounter. This helps you make decisions like whether you can make it to safety before the next encounter.
"Twilight Princess' double clawshot is a great item"
No, it's stupid. Instead of standing in one spot to aim your hookshot, now you can hang in place to aim!
No, it's stupid. Instead of standing in one spot to aim your hookshot, now you can hang in place to aim!
Not the most uncommon answer in this kinds of threads, but it would be Life is Strange being so great.
I mean it's not terrible and there are things I like about it but overall after finishing it I have no idea why so, SO many people love it so much, I really can't see it even if I try, it just has too many issues imo, especially notorious for me after recently finishing Steins;Gate, which while of course very different in many areas has a similar premise and a very similar message but overall much better excecuted.
I mean it's not terrible and there are things I like about it but overall after finishing it I have no idea why so, SO many people love it so much, I really can't see it even if I try, it just has too many issues imo, especially notorious for me after recently finishing Steins;Gate, which while of course very different in many areas has a similar premise and a very similar message but overall much better excecuted.
You can rotate on a dime, for example there is nothing whatsoever to make the character's feet behave realistically. There are no physics, no constraints (and no hitboxes and basic character collision detection do not even remotely make a character animation system) This is the same kind of animation we had in games from gen 5 and 6. Animations are the same way, they just happen with no blending or reactivity to what's happening, the character just snaps into it. The way the character moves slower with encumbrance is just the animation slowed down. It's all completely archaic. The foot sliding in souls games is abysmal, the animation's only redeeming features which you misappropriate to the systems is their art and style.
I could go on but this is a thread where I'm supposed to be allowed my opinion so you'll forgive me if I don't want to spend more time explaining myself. I hope this at least makes you see where I'm coming from in talking about the double standards applied to these games. When you examine these games with a critical eye, you quickly see that they are riddled with flaws and design problems.
That a game being the first of it's kind makes it automatically great, i'm sorry, i am sure some old games were really damn creative and technically impressive a while back...and that means it didn't age because?
Seriously, i swear i have seen retro gamers or people put games on "best of all time" lists that i just find average or bad nowadays because many games in the genre have added to it or surpassed, and all because they were great at the time.
A game doesn't age badly if it's good to begin with, and i kinda agree with that, but come on, nowadays, why should i care if X game in Y platform did something amazing or was impressive for it's time if it's not fun now?
Seriously, i swear i have seen retro gamers or people put games on "best of all time" lists that i just find average or bad nowadays because many games in the genre have added to it or surpassed, and all because they were great at the time.
A game doesn't age badly if it's good to begin with, and i kinda agree with that, but come on, nowadays, why should i care if X game in Y platform did something amazing or was impressive for it's time if it's not fun now?
Eh, different strokes. I liked it a lot. Gameplay doesn't have to be original or stellar if the whole package is good and I think CS is so full of ideas and witty writing, I can take the somewhat repetitive gameplay. The latest Mario & Luigi games seem to offer more battle options but are just as repetitive and way too long for their own good. I'll take CS over those any day.
Okay, here's my 2 cents.
Time constraints in games are never fun and therefore TLOZ: Majora's Mask is easily the worst in the entire franchise.
Edit: not counting the CDI games.
Time constraints in games are never fun and therefore TLOZ: Majora's Mask is easily the worst in the entire franchise.
Edit: not counting the CDI games.