Unpopular Opinions V5: "I still don't like Half Life 2." - General

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49093785]When do we draw the line of "real nature" anyways, is a question I've always had in mind[/QUOTE] Its kinda impossible with man-made climate change being a thing. [QUOTE=0x0000000C;49093585]Political Correctness is fucking cancer and it needs to go away for good.[/QUOTE] On one hand you have people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones saying genuinely racist things that they probably should be judged for going "its this political correctness" but on the other hand you have crazy radical regressive progressives that call everything racist and use the word to stifle debate. [QUOTE=Orkel;49093719] The government is cutting 200 million from already abysmal elderly care here. My city's hospital is also getting downsized to save money, so in the future if for example someone has to give birth, they're in for a 2 hour long car ride to the nearest hospital instead of just 5 minutes. Meanwhile they're increasing refugee moneys by 100 million more while it already is a 1 billion euro per year money sink. The refugees are spilling in from the Swedish border because your government is practically throwing them into trains to Finland to ease the burden on Sweden, fucking us both over. And closing the border would, of course, be racist.[/QUOTE] Using a post from another thread, people are afraid of being called racist. That word silences people because once somebody is called that they immediately have to go on the defensive and prove they aren't racist. Instead of talking about facts people just shout racist and dismiss you. Its basically like how certain people turn off their brain when presented with an idea just because somebody says communist.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49093749]Letting [I]actual[/I] nature decide would mean letting them die off.[/QUOTE] It's not "actual" nature if they're dying off due to anthropogenic causes. It's not their inability to adapt to their environment that's killing them off, it's us destroying their habitats. We can't just let species disappear due to our meddling, nobody knows the ecological impact that could follow.

[QUOTE=Talvy;49093645]Thanks for the heads up :glare:[/QUOTE] What? I'm making comments on the characters as a whole as they're established in the first episode. Does that spoil anything for you?

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;49091497]While we're talking about the Undertale circlejerk, that's one buzzword I never understood, "circlejerk". Like, people use it whenever there's a few people praising something in a thread somewhere. It just seems like a throwaway insult in the place of "stop liking things I don't like".[/QUOTE] it's when people are buzzing each other up over some thing to the point where they don't see its flaws

Windows XP is outdated as fuck and anyone who's still using that dinosaur should've upgraded by now.

I think grinding in some games CAN be fun if it's done right.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49093749]Letting [I]actual[/I] nature decide would mean letting them die off.[/QUOTE] Like I said earlier, before major human advances, they were a thriving species, their endangered status is pretty much entirely brought on by human activity.

Skyrim was the worst Triple A developed game that didn't receive immediate backlash ala Sim City 2013 or the likes. [editline]10th November 2015[/editline] Skyrim is the reason I have dim hopes for Fallout 4 and am not touching it until the modding scene develops or the hype dies down and I see the real reviews for how it is.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;49094748]Skyrim was the worst Triple A developed game that didn't receive immediate backlash ala Sim City 2013 or the likes. [editline]10th November 2015[/editline] Skyrim is the reason I have dim hopes for Fallout 4 and am not touching it until the modding scene develops or the hype dies down and I see the real reviews for how it is.[/QUOTE] I think that right now everyone that owns it is suffering from the effects of cognitive dissonance and they refuse to admit that they spent $60 on something sub-par. Personally, I loathe that they dumbed down the game for the FPS/Skyrim crowd. Getting rid of skills is downright fucking heresy. I don't care how "streamlined" it feels, you can't have an RPG without, you know, the RPG parts. I don't know if it's a good game or not (right now it seems to be), but it's not a fallout game and everyone just keeps pretending it is.

[QUOTE=joshjet;49094803]I think that right now everyone that owns it is suffering from the effects of cognitive dissonance and they refuse to admit that they spent $60 on something sub-par. Personally, I loathe that they dumbed down the game for the FPS/Skyrim crowd. Getting rid of skills is downright fucking heresy. I don't care how "streamlined" it feels, you can't have an RPG without, you know, the RPG parts. I don't know if it's a good game or not (right now it seems to be), but it's not a fallout game and everyone just keeps pretending it is.[/QUOTE] Yeah no, the previous formula for skills in Fallout are only good for the turn based RPG Black Isle Fallout and not the more fast paced post-Fallout 3. It has Vaults, BoS, Nukes, ghouls, sinister experiments, retro 1950s culture, that seems like a Fallout game to me.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49093690]Explain[/QUOTE] If I were to make an assumption, he means going overboard with it and being super super sensitive about it. But, I don't know what he actually meant, that's just usually what I see people really mean when they type something like that.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;49094748]Skyrim was the worst Triple A developed game that didn't receive immediate backlash ala Sim City 2013 or the likes. [editline]10th November 2015[/editline] Skyrim is the reason I have dim hopes for Fallout 4 and am not touching it until the modding scene develops or the hype dies down and I see the real reviews for how it is.[/QUOTE] Ahah what the fuck? How was it THE worst triple A game developed? Also from what I've watched and read Fallout 4 is a very good game.

[QUOTE=joshjet;49094803]I think that right now everyone that owns it is suffering from the effects of cognitive dissonance and they refuse to admit that they spent $60 on something sub-par. Personally, I loathe that they dumbed down the game for the FPS/Skyrim crowd. Getting rid of skills is downright fucking heresy. I don't care how "streamlined" it feels, you can't have an RPG without, you know, the RPG parts. I don't know if it's a good game or not (right now it seems to be), but it's not a fallout game and everyone just keeps pretending it is.[/QUOTE] RPGs are not RPGs because of skills. That's a silly idea. If I put skills in Halo, Halo would not be an RPG. Indeed, many FPS games like Far Cry have implemented perk and skill systems of a sort but I still would not call them RPGs. And while Fallout 4 feels much closer to Far Cry than perhaps I'd prefer it to be, I'd say it's very much a Fallout game, and still quite an RPG, and I say that as a huge fan of FO1 and FO2 and CRPGs in general. Arguably, FO4's perk system has so far been [I]better,[/I] in my opinion. Fallout 1 and 2, the skill system worked, but in FO3 and NV it wasn't really what it should have been. It was hard not to become a complete god at everything, and it was very possible to achieve an actually perfect character across the board. Skill honestly didn't make much of a difference, mostly just bumping up to meet perk requirements. By merging the two, I feel like it's focusing on what's actually important, the perks, and making those meatier. I kind of feel like skills are a little archaic in general. They're certainly not as complicated as RPG fanboys like to think they are. You pick your class, you pick the stats that benefit that class the most. How amazingly complicated is it really? Do you ever play a mage and think "Hmn, I wonder what attributes I'll be putting points in to? Could it be strength?" No, you don't, you pick mage and dump all your points in to intelligence, wisdom, willpower, whatever. Dexterity, agility, charisma for rogues. Strength, constitution, and defense or whatever the fuck for warriors. If available, you can (but you probably won't) pick a cross-class to get a watered down combo. See, what I like about Skyrim and FO4 is that Bethesda are breaking down those walls in a way that I feel makes the game more free, rather than less. By dropping classes, you allow players to play however they want to play. They see the mechanics they find engaging and pick them. It feels a lot more fluid than just picking a class and spamming shit in to it. It feels a lot more like I'm asking myself 'How should I get by here, what can I improve on', rather than 'What archetype am I going to be?'. What they need to improve on is making more and more playstyles possible and viable, rather than the archetypes that we've been seeing since like Dungeons and Dragons in [I]1974.[/I] Anyway, like RPG systems or not, to be perfectly honest, FO3 and NV's were [I]just shit.[/I] Gopher goes in to it very well here. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOOz_fHHt0o[/media] What's more controversial and takes away way more of what I feel makes an RPG than the merging of perks and skills, is their decisions with dialogue, voice acting, and backstory. I like to create characters and think as them. I've been able to do this with FO1, FO2, FO3, and NV, with somewhat varying success, but still. I don't feel like there's much room to create a character in FO4. You are (very early game premise spoilers) [sp]an army man or a lawyer lady with a son named SHAAAAAUN, from Boston.[/sp] How am I supposed to vary from that? I can't make much of a character around this, at all. [SP]A lawyer[/SP] was a [I]kind[/I] of character background in FO1, now it's my only damn choice. Sorcererdave is currently roleplaying in New Vegas as an American born, ethnically British man who is a complete stereotype of British gentlemen because that's what he thinks Brits are like, wandering around the Mojave Desert with a super mutant manservant named Bad Mothafucka (or Bert, his 'proper' name) who only says "motherfucker". You can't do that in FO4. You can't even get as far as a different accent in FO4. I guess I could kind of work around it, but, Fallout 3 showed your entire fucking childhood and I still felt like I had more room to create a character. Dialogue is now always 4 options, that boil down to the same 4 kinds of sentences. Good, mean, give me lore, sarcastic. That is shit, especially after how great the NV dialogue was. I'm really tired of RPG devs assuming that 'personality' equates to 'snark', and thus all they need is to throw in a snarky, sarcastic retort to everything and they're good. Even the writing has sank in quality from what I've seen so far (8 hours so here's hoping I'm wrong but holy shit the Minutemen are stupid), and that's a huge disappointment considering Skyrim was a step forwards for Bethesda's writing quality. Like, can we get some new writers at Bethesda, please? #BringbackKirkbride or something? Dude, imagine if Michael Kirkbride was the main writer of Fallout. I would pay money to see that shit.

I hate to be that guy, but can I hope for a summary?

[QUOTE=EliaMoroes;49095278]I hate to be that guy, but can I hope for a summary?[/QUOTE] Skill based systems in RPGs tend to be very basic in the first place, since often you pick your archetype and dump all skill points in your class appropriate skills, which really isn't complicated, intelligent, or in depth at all. Fallout in particular has been very basic and dumb (character never uses minigun, only uses bolt action rifles, still good at miniguns because has high guns skill). Bethesda's new classless system introduced in Skyrim and dropping skills with FO4 allows players to choose more what they want and be more fluid in the character's they create. Skills were ultimately shit and pointless and you became a god anyway. What's more bothersome is that the new dialogue system, voice acting, and defined character backgrounds are severe limits on your ability to roleplay, which I would argue is much more important to a [I]role-playing[/I] game than skills.

Tbh skills aren't even a thing role playing games [I]need[/I], they're just a way of delivering the idea of making your own character and being able to choose how you play and how your character progresses, there are plenty of role playing games that still allow this without using skill points or levelling up or some shit.

[QUOTE=EliaMoroes;49095278]I hate to be that guy, but can I hope for a summary?[/QUOTE] Basically only someone who has an intellect denser than a slug can has the same opinion about the removal of skills from fallout that Joshjet has. Which means Joshjet is a fucking retard for thinking that the removal of an already outdated gameplay mechanic is making a game bad.

[QUOTE=iAmaNewb;49095376]Basically only someone who has an intellect denser than a slug can has the same opinion about Fallout that Joshjet has.[/QUOTE] Oooooh, this is going to be good!

As long as there's depth to gameplay I'll be fine, but seeing as how Skyim was mechanically deep as a pan of water I have my doubts about Fallout 4.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;49095414]As long as there's depth to gameplay I'll be fine, but seeing as how Skyim was mechanically deep as a pan of water I have my doubts about Fallout 4.[/QUOTE] You should look at the Fallout thread then, everyone seemed to be having a lot of fun with it.

Fallout 3's skill system was such garbage that I was actually surprised to find out that people were against removing it if you didn't max out intelligence you were fucking yourself over utterly and the 1-100 scale was pointlessly arbitrary (especially when critical skills like Science only really functioned along 25-point jumps) skill systems in general are shit; they're always either frustratingly specific (wow that's a cool axe you just found, too bad your mastery of swords does not carry over whatsoever and you'll never use it) or so ubiquitous as to be meaningless (the "guns" skill from the video above) representing learning milestones with perks is both intuitive for the player and easy to balance skyrim's problem was that they fucked up the perk system by making all the perks shitty, boring, and contrived

Late to the Undertale discussion, but I think it's fantastic and has a lot of heart that I rarely find in other games. It's also mostly made by a single guy, so that's really saying something. You can't deny that the soundtrack had a lot of effort put into it what with all the different styles and tones, ranging from soothing and nostalgic (Home) to true hell (Your Best Nightmare) Maybe it's not the best game of all time, but is that what a game has to be in order to be acceptable these days? I love it and replaying it for the different endings surprisingly makes me enjoy it even more. The attention to detail is remarkable. I also don't see a lot of Undertale content unless I'm actively searching for it. I guess there's been some in LMAO Pics but everything ends up there anyway. People just use it as an excuse to complain about things they don't like. Maybe it'll get worse over time, but that doesn't make the game any worse. If anything it's a testament to what the game inspires in people.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;49094748]Skyrim was the worst Triple A developed game that didn't receive immediate backlash ala Sim City 2013 or the likes. [editline]10th November 2015[/editline] Skyrim is the reason I have dim hopes for Fallout 4 and am not touching it until the modding scene develops or the hype dies down and I see the real reviews for how it is.[/QUOTE] imo skyrim isn't a bad game on its own, but its a fucking terrible RPG and/or TES game [editline]11th November 2015[/editline] also the no skills in fallout 4 are just fucking dumb no matter how you wanna see it "skills never belonged in rpgs in the first place" like lmao really if you wanna see an RPG done right, look at NV. It's probably one of the best if not the best cRPG's of the 21st century. That's not really a surprise though with the people who were behind it. the skills were so balanced that it made you play a role for the first part of the game, and only in lategame with the DLC's you could broaden your horizons a bit you got both, playing a role and satisfaction out of being powerful, in a very well balanced manner

Affirmative Action is a lazy way of trying to solve an important issue

What about Morrowind?

Don't like Indie games at all, haven't seen one that was even remotely appealing.

[QUOTE=Rudevinny;49095743]I'm a bit on the fence about the whole skills/no skills thing. The skill system of New Vegas had some flaws. Though it wasn't as easy as in Fallout 3, you could still become the master of all trades with little effort and even if your character had the strength of an Auschwitz victim, you could hold and fire a minigun so long as you were good at capping raiders with a sniper rifle from afar. Thankfully all that can be fixed with modding.[/QUOTE] Yeah, granted it has some flaws. But it should be carefully revamped while remaining true to it's roots instead of what fo4 did [editline]11th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;49095741]Nope. Still not a fan. Haven't played the first two, though.[/QUOTE] Don't bother with Arena, it hasn't aged terribly well. Daggerfall has an that special something to it, but I'm not sure if you're gonna like it if you're not into any other tes. Then again it's fairly different than the later games.

[QUOTE=Rudevinny;49095768]a Fallout 1/2-style [B]low fantasy[/B] RPG with a lot of [B]court intrigue[/B][/QUOTE] Wait, what?

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;49095741]Nope. Still not a fan. Haven't played the first two, though.[/QUOTE] Arena is awful but Daggerfall is a pretty good RPG has aged pretty well IMO after you use DaggerfallSetup (or that fanmade port to Unity) to fix the bugs

I have little to no interest in Fallout 4 now since basically every aspect has been explained to me even when I don't want to hear about it.