Unpopular opinions! V2: I Don't like half life edition.
17,782 replies, posted
[QUOTE=HawkeyeTy;42751011]-GTA V words-[/QUOTE]
I agree, tbh. Although I like GTA V a helluva lot more than GTA IV (most disappointing GTA ever, imo) it just wasn't as good as I expected. Online was a major disappointment although I'm trying to tell myself, it's the launch, it's gonna be bad but damn.. it's just hard to like it.
Don't get me wrong, I like the map, I like the time, I like the music, I like the driving (fucking godsend from that godawful shit in IV) but everything else just isn't that good imo. I think Rockstar lost their touch in the story and characterisation department, especially when they released IV (as I've mentioned before, I hate Niko with a fucking vengeance because he's a god damn idiot and if he didn't have his war vet backstory, then everyone would hate him). But the gameplay is top notch and I think it's their best ever.
Maybe I just have rose tiinted goggles about the older games, but I never really digged the emotional/philosophical/constant moody trend they've been pushing with the HD era in their stories.
[QUOTE=Oizen;42751784]Also I remember tripple battles being incredibly awkward. As in they handled just like normal battles, except there were 4 more sprites on the screen, and turning the table to let another pokemon take the lead counted as a turn, so what was the point?[/QUOTE]
That was a rotation battle, exclusive to Black 1. Actual triple battles were a lot more enjoyable, and were only found in White 1.
[editline]4th November 2013[/editline]
This is probably more of a popular than an unpopular opinion, but Generation V of Pokemon is like the red-headed stepchild of the entire series.
[QUOTE=JDscar;42747914]The 2D and 2.5D Mario games is a more stagnate franchise than Call of Duty.[/QUOTE]
But tell me, for both call of duty and mario games, what would you change?
And remember, you can't piss off the original fanbase, or your ass is fired.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;42752457]That was a rotation battle, exclusive to Black 1. Actual triple battles were a lot more enjoyable, and were only found in White 1.
[editline]4th November 2013[/editline]
This is probably more of a popular than an unpopular opinion, but Generation V of Pokemon is like the red-headed stepchild of the entire series.[/QUOTE]
I'd say 5th gen is my second favorite, 4th is my favorite, there's only one pokemon in the fourth generation I don't like, that damn licky-licky
followed by 3rd, 2nd, and then 1st
I half agree with GTA V being not that great.
The story is fairly boring. Usually there's an overall narrative, but this one is pretty much one crazy event after another, until they just stop. The dialogue is usually really weird. I can't explain it, but it never felt like it was people talking (Which Rockstar are usually really good at).
The character motivations and inconsistencies are really distracting. Like when Michael and Trevor meet for the first time. Michael acts super tense and puts Jimmy behind him. I was pumped for a serious scene, but nope, 20 seconds later they're teaming up and off to save generic daughter from embarrassing herself on TV and having conversations that two people who haven't seen each other for 10 years would never have.
The ending was a bit of a cop out as well. All that build up only see either [sp]Kill Michael and end, Kill Trevor and end, Kill Devon and everyone is supermega happy[/sp]
The gameplay and map are fantastic. But I just did not care what was happening during the cut scenes at all.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;42750683]Micromanaging in games annoys the hell out of me. It's not fun, just tedious.[/QUOTE]
I think not requiring tedious micromanagement to play/win but creating the potential for amazing feats of micro is one of the hallmarks of a good RTS, but I've never seen a game that forces a lot of tedious micromanagement. Mostly it just enriches the game. There's nothing tedious about obliterating a superior force with awesome unit control.
Call of duty would be considered a realy good franchise if they'd have skipped over (or doubled the production time of) world at war, black ops( the first one), mw2.
Halo would have been much better if they had increased the production time of ODST and Reach. Skipped aniversary, didn't make halo 4 and made a Reach custom eddition (excessively modable) for the pc. ( a reach custom edition actually has the potential to be one of the most loved and long lived games of all time)
Skyrim would have been better with attributes and a perk system like fallout. They should have delayed a couple of months or so in order to make the gameplay better. Rather than dragons more effort should have been made on making the world larger and populating towns/dungeons better.
The worst about Skyrim was the absolute basic rpg elements. There is no variety and depth into it. There was no strategy or tactic involved because you just increased some numbers. The weapons damage scaling is boring and doesn't allow for any variation.
Although even worse is the difficulty, dungeons filled with piss easy enemies but at the end you have to face a enemy that is a sponge. You just have to slash constantly at them without any hesitation. Enemies took way to much damage.
[QUOTE=The Jack;42754814]Call of duty would be considered a realy good franchise if they'd have skipped over (or doubled the production time of) world at war, black ops( the first one), mw2.[/QUOTE]
I really don't follow the series at all but weren't World at War and Black Oops considered some of the better ones?
[QUOTE=Alice3173;42755049]I really don't follow the series at all but weren't World at War and Black Oops considered some of the better ones?[/QUOTE]
They're my favorites, and BLOPS2 was good too. Treyarch makes some fine games.
The elder scrolls in one of my favourite series. But when you look at em objectively... Nothing is realy any good.
The action mechanics have always been shitty.
The Rpg mechanics get worse rather than better.
The story peaked at morrowind and declined after.
Swordplay sucks
magic combat is lackluster
Utility magic (levitation, lock, waterwalking) gets cut down rather than built upon
acrobatics isn't good
alchemy isn't fun.
armourer skills aren't interesting and smithing was broke.
thief playthroughs aren't fun.
Quests were only good in oblivion. Oblivion's best quest (whodunnit?) was only great because it took advantage of the shitty dialogue and ai in a way that was funny.
Enemies simply get stronger as you level up. it'd be more interesting if some became more numerous or more skilled... but they don't. They just hit harder and gain silly amounts of health.
Art style inconsistencies with the armours. the games tend to botch the last game's lore.
There are a lot of things that Rpgs do other rpgs do worse (like in divinity i can't decipher which armour is better with all the bullshit stats they offer)
As with cod... I did like the campaigns of all treyarch games. The tacked on MW features of World at war (aperture sights, Americans using russian guns on Okinawa and so on) Modern warfare 2 was shit. I can't remember mw3.
The thing I like so much about Elder Scrolls is the lore and large atmospheric open world. Exploration is heavily encouraged and I'm a sucker for explorable worlds. There is a lot to find.
[QUOTE=BananaFoam;42746208]Well, let's dredge up Ye Olde Overrated Games List.
[B]Halo Franchise.[/B] The whole reason I am posting is because of what Lord George said. I agree in the sense that Halo is overrated, but not for those reasons. My biggest gripe has nothing to do with gameplay or visuals or anything with he games themselves, its the fact that they have (or had) a fairly generic plot that people frothed in the mouth over like it was fucking Shakespeare. The plot got the job done but it wasn't terribly original and it didn't expand much on the "Scary Aliens invade Earf" stuff that we have seen time and time again. They tried to fit in a backstory about some precursor civilization that ruled the known galaxy and was mysteriously wiped out yadda yadda, but even that isn't very original or exciting. Basically, the plot was boring and fairly cliched. I do like the characters though (like the Arbiter, the Prophets, and Sergeant Johnson) but Spartan 117 is a shitty character because he isn't a character at all. He is like Gordon Freeman, a blank slate for the player to project, but everybody got a huge boner for him and now he gets crammed in all kinds of extended universe bullshit. He isn't an interesting character and the plot isn't particularly interesting, and all the "Expanded Universe" shit killed it for me like it killed Star Wars for me.
[B]Battlefield.[/B] I will never understand the internet's profound fascination with this series. The first few games were just alright in my opinion, kind of fun with all their vehicles and stuff but nothing I ever got that excited about. But the third installment seemed almost carbon-copied from Modern Warfare, a game everyone seems to hate. And yes, I know, Battlefield's concepts pre-dated Call of Duty by a longshot, but it felt like the mechanics got changed even more to make the game feel like its competitor. Saying that is guaranteed to stir up a shitstorm, but this [I]is[/I] the Unpopular Opinions thread (a fact many people seem to forget because actually unpopular opinions tend to get flamed or rated dumb like every other thread). I just don't get it. The 3rd game feels even more tacticool bullshit than Modern Warfare did, and the games are practically identical. Both have shitty tacked on singleplayers as well. It feels like you can take a few less bullets in Battlefield, which says a lot because in Modern Warfare you go down very easily. It just adds to my hatred of the "who sees who first wins" style of gameplay that more and more FPSs like Red Orchestra 2, Modern Warfare, and Battlefield are leaning towards.
[B]Mass Effect.[/B] This for the same reasons as Halo. It wasn't terribly original but I didn't even like the characters as much. Just another glowy space opera about evul aliens wanting to destroy the Federation and whatnot. I mean, it is deeper than that but that would be the gist of it with the Geth and all this bullshit. I am really get tired of the cookie cutter plot points with an all-benevolent Federation battling some all evil aliens who were either built by the generic ancient precursors or want to carry out their wishes. The way information in this game is portrayed just kills me. Rather than trying to fit the world and fluff material into the gameplay like Halo or Half Life 2, they just give you a fucking in-game wiki. That just seems lazy. As with all Bioware titles, the pacing is all over the place and relationships are boiled down into "I do nice things and get rewarded with sex" with no real depth or complexity beyond that. The whole thing just feels by the numbers, and the gameplay bored me to tears. Maybe it just isn't my genre, and that could very well be the case, but I wasn't a fan of this games story, which isn't very good because that is the game's main selling point.
[B]Starcraft and Strategy Games in general.[/B] I don't like strategy games. Starcraft is just an example. A boring, cookie cutter Starship Troopers plot about an alien swarm fighting guys in power armor. Been there, done that. But unlike Mass Effect, Starcraft isn't sold on plot or story but on gameplay. This is just personal preference to me, but I very heavily dislike Strategy games where you have the manage an economy and gather resources. It just bothers me because I feel like it limits the tactics I can do with my units and boils it down to simple things like "rushing". It also ruins any sense of immersion because there is no way you would gather resources, build weapons, and fight all in the same area in any scenario. Most people can get over that, I cannot.
Undoubtedly I am getting ripped apart because I just bashed FP's 3 favorite games in the same post, but that is just my opinion.[/QUOTE]
I'm confused how semi realistic games like RO are in the same league as pure arcade shooters like BF and CoD? also your massively simplifying it, in RO it's not whoever sees each other first. It's whoever plays smarter. With how you die in 1 shot forces you to play smart or get killed constantly, like I don't understand why people hate that, I prefer that then shooting someone and he runs away to heal himself and come back perfectly fine. If I run toward a cap in RO without support from a sniper, tank, MG or arty strike then most likely your going to die, you need your team to work together or else nothing gets done. You can be on the top of the list killings tons of guys and come out with 100 kills and that still won't win you the game, you need teamwork and having it realistic that you die in one shot reinforces that or else people wouldn't care about teamwork and do everything themselves.
RO, especially the first one are the only games where I can consistently see in a public server people working and moving together to win the match because it's necessary.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;42753096]But tell me, for both call of duty and mario games, what would you change?
And remember, you can't piss off the original fanbase, or your ass is fired.
[/QUOTE]
Well for Mario, I think it would be the basic story. Instead of replaying thew same story over and over again, Nintendo could add to the story in away that satisfied returning players while allowing new players. I would also add more than a few more things every game and make the less frequently.
COD..... I'm not a big follower of COD I began and dropped it after MWF 2. But if I had to change it I would make it a pay once to play MMOFPS and have the story mode be its own thing so they can focus more on it. I think it would work best that way but what do I know.
[QUOTE=JDscar;42759345]Well for Mario, I think it would be the basic story. Instead of replaying thew same story over and over again, Nintendo could add to the story in away that satisfied returning players while allowing new players. I would also add more than a few more things every game and make the less frequently.
COD..... I'm not a big follower of COD I began and dropped it after MWF 2. But if I had to change it I would make it a pay once to play MMOFPS and have the story mode be its own thing so they can focus more on it. I think it would work best that way but what do I know.[/QUOTE]
That could easily push away players, making it into an MMOFPS. The story mode was actually pretty decent in black ops 2, much better than many other modern FPS campaigns at least, for the most part.
Not sure about ghosts though.
But really the main draw for call of duty is its very arcadey gameplay, if you want something more serious you'd play arma or battlefield, or something like that. Call of duty is just stupid fun
lasagna isnt that good
I'll eat it, its okay, but like....it's not something I'd ever order.
Battlefield 4 is the best game in the series so far, including anything before the Bad Company games.
The Steam Machines will likely require Valve to bribe console game developers if they want their boxes to sell.
[QUOTE=Niklas;42759635]Battlefield 4 is the best game in the series so far, including anything before the Bad Company games.[/QUOTE]
Battlefield 4 has a lot of improvements over 3, but I wouldn't really call it the best of the series.
[QUOTE=junker154;42755291]The thing I like so much about Elder Scrolls is the lore and large atmospheric open world. Exploration is heavily encouraged and I'm a sucker for explorable worlds. There is a lot to find.[/QUOTE]
I'd like to see a Castlevania (the 2d ones) style platformer that's on the scale of an open world game and encourages heavy exploration. Closest things that I know of would be Starbound and Terraria. And Terraria is lacking on scale and is more Minecraft-like still.
Unlike most people, I'm not really sick of zombie games. I am sick of GARBAGE zombie games (WarZ, Dead Horde, etc). I just wish there could be some good zombie games to pop out. Like a good, fun, and not shit DayZ that could be singleplayer or multiplayer, and you can do more than just wander around and find food or shoot strangers. Maybe an RTS-ish zombie survival game, or a zombie survival game where you build up a fort and do your best to stave off the unending hordes before they break in and kill you or you run away and build a fort somewhere else.
I dunno. I just want a good zombie game, but unlike most people I don't want zombie games to just disappear.
[QUOTE=Jrose14;42762891]Unlike most people, I'm not really sick of zombie games. I am sick of GARBAGE zombie games (WarZ, Dead Horde, etc). I just wish there could be some good zombie games to pop out. Like a good, fun, and not shit DayZ that could be singleplayer or multiplayer, and you can do more than just wander around and find food or shoot strangers. Maybe an RTS-ish zombie survival game, or a zombie survival game where you build up a fort and do your best to stave off the unending hordes before they break in and kill you or you run away and build a fort somewhere else.
I dunno. I just want a good zombie game, but unlike most people I don't want zombie games to just disappear.[/QUOTE]
Cataclysm is decent if you like it in Roguelike style.
[QUOTE=Jrose14;42762891]Unlike most people, I'm not really sick of zombie games. I am sick of GARBAGE zombie games (WarZ, Dead Horde, etc). I just wish there could be some good zombie games to pop out. Like a good, fun, and not shit DayZ that could be singleplayer or multiplayer, and you can do more than just wander around and find food or shoot strangers. Maybe an RTS-ish zombie survival game, or a zombie survival game where you build up a fort and do your best to stave off the unending hordes before they break in and kill you or you run away and build a fort somewhere else.
I dunno. I just want a good zombie game, but unlike most people I don't want zombie games to just disappear.[/QUOTE]
I don't mind DayZ's gameplay mechanics myself. I'll definitely be checking out the DayZ SA public alpha when it's out on Steam. Even the mod version feels like a farcry from most zombie-related games out there.
i think incest is kind of icky but there's nothing morally wrong with it and incest between two consenting adults shouldn't really be illegal
of course, using protection should probably be strongly reccommended due to the likelyhood of birth defects and such.
TF2 has lost it's fun factor.
Not the game itself, but the community and the somewhat lackluster updates.
[QUOTE=junker154;42755037]The worst about Skyrim was the absolute basic rpg elements. There is no variety and depth into it. There was no strategy or tactic involved because you just increased some numbers. The weapons damage scaling is boring and doesn't allow for any variation.
Although even worse is the difficulty, dungeons filled with piss easy enemies but at the end you have to face a enemy that is a sponge. You just have to slash constantly at them without any hesitation. Enemies took way to much damage.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget babby's first melee combat and how unsatisfying it is to hit anything in that game, every sword feels like it is made out of paper, just all of the melee fighting in general has all the weight and beefyness of throwing a leaf at somebody
[QUOTE=Rexxasaurus;42763761]TF2 has lost it's fun factor.
Not the game itself, but the community and the somewhat lackluster updates.[/QUOTE]
Eh I've prolly harped on about it a million times but Valve shot themselves in the foot with TF2 and it's updates. They really pissed around with the spytech/government conspiracy/cold war theme and turned it into a silly cartoony juvenile mess that's just full of pop culture references and memes. I mean, yeah, it had pop culture references when it was released but at least they were written in well and were tongue-in-cheek.
Words cannot express how much I dislike the backstories (namely, the comics and other things. But don't get me wrong though, Makani does a great job with the art) because I think they've just ruined the mystery and suspense of the whole story. I think Valve is at their best with storytelling when it's minimal. When it's in the little details. Nothing was explained to us when the game got released and we just speculated. There were little things in the maps that made everything seem not quite right. But now we're just told up front, THIS IS BAD AND THIS IS WHY.
It's like if the G-Man's identity was revealed in HL2; Suddenly, we know who the Announcer is, we know what she looks like, we have a bunch of characters that we don't give a shit about. Valve attempted to solve a problem that no one asked for, because they got too out of hand with the updates. The characters acting like little shits instead of psychopaths rubs me the wrong way too. Example, hurhur Heavy is fat let's make domination lines where they mock him for being fat hurhur. Yeah it was somewhat funny.. when I was 16.
But if I try and point this out to anyone, it's just a "NAH TF2 WAS LIKE THAT BEFORE". No, it wasn't. Valve has this style of writing that I'm fond of, and TF2 nowadays was definitely NOT like it was on release.
The game is still fun though. I enjoy the customisation, but holy shit, everything else is just a clusterfuck. It's sad, because this was the first Valve game to really get me into.. well, other Valve games and I thought it was the prettiest, most vibrant and unique looking game ever. And to see it as a former shell of itself is saddening.
Nightmare House 2 is the scariest game I've ever played. I don't care if people say jump scares are cheap, because they still fucking work.
And on the flipside, I don't get why everyone thought Amnesia: The Dark Descent was scary. You're in dark rooms solving puzzles while the occasional floppy vagina-faced monster chases you down to kill you by flailing its arms at you like a downs kid. In most of the videos I watch about the game, it's too damn dark to see what the player is doing half the time, and I just don't see what warrants the fear so many people have when they play. Jump scares do a much better job than thrillers.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;42763879]Nightmare House 2 is the scariest game I've ever played. I don't care if people say jump scares are cheap, because they still fucking work.
And on the flipside, I don't get why everyone thought Amnesia: The Dark Descent was scary. You're in dark rooms solving puzzles while the occasional floppy vagina-faced monster chases you down to kill you by flailing its arms at you like a downs kid. In most of the videos I watch about the game, it's too damn dark to see what the player is doing half the time, and I just don't see what warrants the fear so many people have when they play. Jump scares do a much better job than thrillers.[/QUOTE]
Jumpscares are cheap, if your horror game revolves around nothing but jump scares you have failed as a game designer
My toaster can jump scare me
[QUOTE=NoaJM;42763874]Eh I've prolly harped on about it a million times but Valve shot themselves in the foot with TF2 and it's updates. They really pissed around with the spytech/government conspiracy/cold war theme and turned it into a silly cartoony juvenile mess that's just full of pop culture references and memes. I mean, yeah, it had pop culture references when it was released but at least they were written in well and were tongue-in-cheek.[/QUOTE]
I just think the worst thing Valve did with TF2 was give the community complete creative control over everything. There was at least some quality control before, now it's just rubbish and just about every hat/item update is useless.
Also the pyro is overrated
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;42763893]My toaster can jump scare me[/QUOTE]
Due to the way I handle volume with my computer when I open a page that's unexpectedly making sounds (that one screamer someone has linked in their title is a really freaking good example) I have that shit happen. The aforementioned title about made me fall out of my chair at about 3am because I wasn't paying attention to the url. In fact I jumped so hard at it that it kinda rather actually hurt...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.