Any weird/controversial opinions? I’ll start. Before the remake, the best version of Resident Evil 4 was the Wii version. The Wiimote controls old Resi’s tank controls better than any other controller at the time. The PC version had a bunch of little bugs and detractors that the Wii version just doesn’t have.
I’ll extend this by saying that the Wiimote is actually pretty damn good for shooters, and particularly good for accessibility. Not having to cramp up my hands to press buttons is awesome for having arthritis. Aiming with the Wiimote and moving with the nunchuck just feel really natural, you barely have to move your fingers for anything.
Console support ruins games that otherwise could have been truly amazing games because they need to be watered down to support controller-based gameplay and weaker specs (see: Cyberpunk 2077).
I like random encounters in JRPG. Having enemies that I can avoid all the time (DQ11) removes the challenge and fun.
In earlier DQ games I enjoyed exploring new locations, taking the risks of being wiped by stronger enemies. In DQ11 there is no risk and no reward.
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
Yes. And I like that when the enemies are stronger, they actively chase you so you can’t always avoid the battles.
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).
Final Fantasy X has the best combat in the series, but gets hate because of the voice acting. If it didn’t have voice over it would be considered one of the best FF games
I don’t mind the voice acting, but I can’t enjoy the linear world connected by literal corridors.
And I hate blizball.
And I hate blizball.
Too far!
Naw, I get it. While it’s personally my favourite mini game in all the Final Fantasy games (triple triad has nothing on it), I can totally get it. It starts off really rough and it’s quite time consuming.
Triple triad could literally make the game easier to play if you converted your cards, blitz ball was only relevant to ffx because they forced you to play a game once. You could be a master at blitz ball and it has 0 affect on the game/story of ffx. Triple triad could make you invulnerable to any boss.
Ffviii is one of my favorites just because how intertwined every system within that game is. Gf’s cards magic and combat all could benefit each other, a brilliant system that has yet to be replicated imo
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’m ok with the 4 possible endings in ME3. Considering EA was running the show I am shocked we got that many choices.
deleted by creator
I stand by the theory that the ending/endings got leaked late in development (having read it, it was a great set of unique endings), and rather than release something that was already spoiled a higher up had a freak-out and told them to make something different, they ended up with the color swap nonsense.
It really fits EA
The popularity of skill based matchmaking decimated game design that allows people of different skill levels to play together and progress in a multiplayer setting. Most games actually punish you for playing with better players on your team instead of allowing you to help somehow without being a liability. And when you are, the game is no longer winnable and people get extremely pissed off ensuing you won’t get to play with them again.
Nintendo needs to release old-school versions of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid again, maybe hiring out an indie developer like Sega did for Sonic.
deleted by creator
XP leveling systems and fast travel are bad mechanics that make games worse for their inclusion.
Even though I always turn off motion blur myself, the people who complain about it making them physically ill or something along those lines cracks me up. Like dude, maybe drink more water or something idk. Same goes for the folks who have aneurysms over framerates less than 120
Gaming has been actually dead for almost 10 years.
Occasionally the body twitches, but virtually all of my purchases in the last long time are just catching up with all the great things created before the collapse.
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.
Bouncing babies on my IBM XT is just the way I likes it!
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.
When the western Roman empire fell, it was the Germanic people in the wilderness who came in to fill the vacuum, bringing new ideas and new vitality to what was a stagnant slave society (which is why it collapsed in the first place). In the same way, indie game developers are the ones bringing new ideas and vigor from the hinterlands. In one sense, the fact that indies are hitting so hard only proves that the industry has mostly collapsed.
What was the collapse?
If we consider the golden age of video games to be between 2007 and 2013, a lot of the stuff that caused that era to be so extraordinary was companies taking risks and succeeding at making something people had never seen before. Part of the fall from there was that companies stopped taking risks because they found massively successful formulas. Another part of the fall was companies realizing that video games could have a 10 year lifecycle. That meant that video games became an investment that had a far longer window for success or failure so the successes would pay off far longer and the failures would hurt that much worse, so staying with established formulas and making things more vanilla paid off more than taking risks.
Valve did a lot of smart things in focus testing and sanding off rough edges back when there were some really bad examples of rough edges breaking good games, but eventually everyone was sanding so much that everything was a fisher price toy.
If the formulas were so successful, everyone would be doing the same thing. I’d argue that Golden Age of Video Games is more so now than the far past. It’s an Age where anyone can make a video game and be recognized as being among the greatest games of all times.
Also, companies definitely take risks. They take a lot of risks, it’s just that a lot of those risks don’t necessarily play out and we never really hear about it. If you only focus on the largest companies putting their entire company on the line, then that company wouldn’t have been so successful in the past anyways. Risk doesn’t make a game good and honestly, with stuff like Game Pass these days, developers are way more likely to make riskier games when they don’t need to make a return on that game to actually keep going. For instance, Pentiment by Obsidian, in their own words, would have never been a thing if things were as they were in the early 2010s.
The Apple II is still the most fun I’ve ever had playing games. Even now, I will regularly go back and play games like Snake Byte and Swashbuckler in an emulator.
Older systems have much less delay between the controls and the screen than modern systems do. USB is slow. HDMI is slow.
That may be the case, but I just think that those simple ideas are the most fun. They didn’t have good sound or graphics, so they had to focus entirely on gameplay and they created a lot of games that are incredibly fun to play despite being very simple.
Yep. But old arcade and console systems can also have pixel-perfect gameplay not only because the pixels are big 'n chunky, but because the controls are extremely low-latency and entirely synchronized to the game processing and the display.
deleted by creator
OG Final Fantasy VII is the worst of the mainline games.
Now, I haven’t played II, IV, VI, XI, or XIV. But I feel pretty confident about this.
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.
I agree with you to a lesser extent when it comes to the 2D games. It’s so much harder to show emotion. I love V, but I feel like there are a lot of story beats that would land a lot harder in a game with good graphics.
Having said that, I prefer the gameplay of some of the 2D games to some like IX and XV. And the 3 I have played aren’t as grating as others like VII, IX, and XV. So while they can only be so good, they also aren’t as bad as some of the others get.
1 is nice comfort game. And honestly, beating the big villain at the beginning of the game and following the time loop would be subversive if it wasn’t the first game in the series.
My hot take: VR is an amazing technology, but it’s no good for games - at least not the best majority of games we originally developed for flat screens.
We need to create entirely new styles of entertainment to fully use this medium, instead of modding existing titles or bolting on VR modes.
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.
because in the game you are also just sitting down.
What? VR is fantastic for games. At least for first person games.
I played the original Doom’s hardest episode (Plutonia) entirely in a VR mod. It was fantastic.
Did you mean to reply to my comment? In a vr user myself and id agree with you, i was just pointing out, that for me, the most immersion happens when driving cars.
Oops no, sorry. Wrong comment, my bad.
I’m all for pushing the envelope and creating experiences that are only possible in VR, but I don’t see how you could play a good VR FPS and come to the conclusion that VR isn’t a good medium for playing this kind of game. I’ve gone back to flat screen FPS a few times over the last few years and I feel so disconnected from the game, VR has completely transformed gaming for me.
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.
Making eSports teams be a thing was not a sustainable idea. Standard sports have stable rules, steady attendance revenue. Electronic sports are at the mercy of each game’s developer and can’t attract as many attendants
