PCGamer: What's the most unpopular gaming opinion you're willing to stand by? - Games

I guess you have a fair point. I guess I should've said 'not so unpopular among facepunchers'

* Watch Dogs 1 was more fun than Watch Dogs 2; the sequel's forced cringy memes and edgy characters made completing the game a chore. * RTS games are more fun with single player campaigns / missions. People who play RTS games online are post-human IQ 300 tier gods and I will never be able to match their intellect or beat them. * The 'share' button was the dumbest thing ever for the PS4. I have an existential crisis on the rare occasion I accidentally hit the button - I don't have friends, I don't want to share my gameplay with myself. * 30FPS isn't unplayable Regenerative health is inferior to having medkits or other means of regaining health, if at all. Collectibles are the worst. I don't have OCD but find that if I know there are collectibles, I'll waste some time looking for them before accepting that there's no point in getting them. I can't see any appeal in competitive games (albeit I prefer single player and coop games even if I have no friends to play coop with). I'd occasionally fire up Counter-Strike or Battlefield E-sports is a joke. Memes are never funny Speedruns, 'Let's plays' and other video game review style Youtube videos are silly - I find certain video game Youtube poops hillarious though. 60 FPS is enough - I've never owned a higher framerate display but don't see any urge to get it. Similarly GSYNC and FreeSync are pointless. 4K gaming is pointless unless you're sitting 30 centimetres away from a 50"+ TV - although admittedly I'd like to upgrade my 1920x1200 27" monitor to 2560x1440. I am okay with the amount of cutscenes in games such as MGS4. There's no appeal in replaying games unless they haven't been played in years - e.g. Deus Ex What? They're unpopular opinions right?

Odyssey was alright. People seem to believe it's the best Mario game ever but it was a good game at best. Frankly I think it has some of the weakest boss fights in the entire franchise, and Mario has never really had fantastic boss fights to begin with. I really hate how the franchise has a habit of rehashing the same boss fight 2 or 3 times throughout the campaign.

-Dead Space 3 was fine and I wish the franchise didnt fucking die -Sleeping Dogs is the best open-world "GTA" style game -Despite hating nearly everything about it otherwise, Halo 5 has a strangely compelling and tight multiplayer mode -Dead Rising was never great -The PS4 sucks, Sony's attitude this generation has been fucking abysmal and I think if they weren't still riding that nostalgia wave from the PS2 days where they were on top of things they would be a better company.

While I think you're right in that, overall, competitive games are more popular, looking at a Top 10 most played list on Steam for evidence is kind of silly. Of course it'll hold more competitive games as they are played more. Once you've played a single player game, you're not going to return to it daily, unlike a multiplayer game. As for my own unpopular opinion, Mass Effect 2 is the worst in the series by far. It's gameplay is boring and won't allow you to feel insanely powerful towards the end like the first one, and the third one's combat is just better. Everything wrong with 3's writing was already present in 2, and in fact most of the dumb shit in 3 began with 2. The Suicide Mission is a neat idea, but it's execution isn't good at all. Also, the video game "community" is too toxic and competitive. Liking something doesn't make it good and disliking something doesn't make it bad. Average isn't bad and most games are honestly above average, as boring and uncreative as a lot of them might be.

Sleeping dogs was great, but the story kinda felt rushed. Gameplay was a blast though.

I wish True Crime: Hong Kong was released instead of Sleeping Dogs. Sleeping Dogs is a hell of a lot of fun, but if it had the meaty features of the True Crime games, it would be GOTY material.

They generally just look shit anyway.

ultrawide is better and more useful than 4k

The Last of Us didn't deserve the massive amounts of praise it gets, incredibly forced emotional scenes and piss-easy gameplay boiling down to hiding behind cover and pressing X to execute. Most of the puzzles in the game involves pushing Ellie over water on a raft so she can pull a lever to open a door, nothing really tries to involve the player more than common button pushing. people really liked the characters involved but they just all came off as plastic people to me. When i try my best i just can't recall any other characters besides Joel and Ellie. I just don't see why everyone went apeshit for such a common Patient X story, most people regard it as an innovative masterpiece of storytelling still to this day. But we've had stuff that pushed the boundaries way further in the past, it's not a bad game. But it doesn't deserve the pedestal it's been on for years. That game getting 10/10 across the board was really a joke to me, i get that some people really connected to the story. But even with that considered the rest of the gameplay just boils down to one incredibly plain cover shooter.

ND in general gets way too much praise. the uncharted games were ehhhhh, and the writing can be borderline okay majority of the time.

dark souls 2 is better than 1 and 3

Haven't given a shit about ND since Jak series ended tbh

- DmC was an ok as a game even if the story and characters were terrible. - Smite is still a fun game (even if its subreddit would love to argue otherwise by showing things like "they added added extra new player rewards only useful for newbies so "they have ruined the game forever and spit on all their vetertan players' faces". No, really that actually happened...) - Overwatch is overrated (and will never have any of its serious issues fixed (like the horrendous maps) because OW 2 is already in development).

Battleborn was a pretty decent game that was taken too soon.

Taken too soon? It never really took off. I liked the twist it had on mobas, it was similar to SMNC in a lot of ways but different enough to justify existing. I loved playing as Benedict. But it had shit marketing, terrible character design, cluttered UI and particle effects, cringe voicelines, and was badly optimized. It also split the (already small) player base into different maps and different modes. It should've focused on one F2P mode from the start and have a paid story mode.

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/57978/efc77075-5be7-4660-b3ab-c1c0d1e60358/Battleborn was a parody of itself.jpg I have this image saved as "Battleborn was a parody of itself".

I think the game is good, but the only reason it for 10/10's across the board is that video game stories are so trash that something like The Last of Us can get amazing scores.

There's been plenty of games with amazing stories going as far back to the DoS era though, that's my main gripe. People talk about that game like it's the first one to actually do something with a plot, when all it did was make a poor mans hollywood flick.

agreed. 3 was a boring brown slog with all of 2's best features stripped out, and 1, while good, was simply not as good as 2 on the PvP front

On the topic of Souls games: As great as Bloodborne is, it's thinks heavily overrated.

Also on Souls games, I preferred the pace of Dark Souls 1 and 2 to the lightning fast pace of bloodborne and 3, but I wouldn't go so far as to say 2 was better than 1. I also thought the copious references to 1 in 3 were obnoxious. At least 2 had a brand new world with brand new armor, enemies and characters.

RPGmaker is not an shit engine and can do some amazing things with it. Does that count?

Jet Set Radio has a great art style and music but the gameplay fuckin stinks

Best thing in Nier Automata is music. Rest of the game is mediocre. I guess it's only popular because of character design.

I'm not sure 'woven into' is the right choice of phrase here. 'Pummeled into' or 'forcefully inserted' might be a better fit.

Here's a hot take: People need to be patient with the development of Star Citizen. It's trying to push the boundaries on almost every aspect of the features of a game in the space sim genre, and that kind of comprehensive effort takes time. The whole point of going crowdfunding instead of a publisher was to avoid being forced to cut features and rush to release on a deadline -- and rushed, unfinished games shat out to deadline are something FP generally agrees are cancer -- and with the development actually taking that time it needs and not rushing to shit out a release with barebones features and nebulous future update promises, the Internet-wide meme has somehow become that SC is the forever in-development game and is hopelessly lost at sea, replacing DNF in infamy. Yeah, the scope did increase significantly as the crowdfunding money poured in which extended the timeline and that's why a lot of people give SC shit, but the whole pitch from the start was that Chris Roberts was back to make the space game and he was calling on the gaming public to help him bypass publishers and take the time to do a space sim the right way. So people poured money on him, and now he's taking the time to do it the right way. Now, I want to differentiate taking necessary time pushing boundaries versus fucking up and wasting time having to redo work, because CIG sure have fucked up enough in the past such as the Illfonic debacle. They're by no means perfect nor can they predict the future. There are many legitimate criticisms to be made about SC's development over its lifetime, but so many people are specifically hung up on the fact that it's taking "too much" time on necessary things. It might turn out to totally suck and the whales who've sunk enough to buy a real car get to deal with their bad bet, but people should at least give the project the time it needs to bake in the oven. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Supporting Steam was a mistake in the long run, they've abused the power we've all given them and now there are no viable alternatives

Star Citizen reminds me of another game that had its creator get so ambitious with adding things to it that he forgot to actually release the damn thing and whose release date got shifted to 'whenever'. Except when that one came out, it bombed so fucking bad it murdered the franchise it was from. Considering relatively recent history, I'd say people are right to shit on Star Citizen.

NMA was right about the new Fallout games (sans New Vegas). I genuinely hated them back in the hayday of Fallout 3 because they just seemed like a hivemind of partypoopers who didn't want to like the new game. Over the years however, I really started to dig deep into the lore (the lack thereof and the unnecessary additions) added by Fallout 3 as well as 4, and I started to agree with them more over time. Not just the lore, but the gameplay, the storytelling, almost everything about them sucks rotten ass. I would know, I've probably logged at least 300~ hours in FO3, and nearly 700~ in FO4. I've spent too much time to look at them and think they're genuinely good in more ways than just being good ways to kill time on a boring day.