Unpopular opinions! V2: I Don't like half life edition.
17,782 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Atlascore;46208393]I think this recent push for 4K is utterly stupid, I mean we're still having issues getting everything to work at 1080p, the benefits of 4K just don't seem worth it when you consider the fact that the resources required to download & watch movies and play games at these super high resolutions is insanely high.
For movies and TV 4K is just a pipe-dream, at least for the next decade, no one has a 4K TV, the vast majority of people can't stream 4K video, downloading a single 4K video on the average connection would take an eternity, and finally 4k is completely inaccessible to anyone with a data cap, they'd hit their cap after only a few days.
For games it's completely unreachable for the vast majority again, you'd need to spend $600 on the GPU alone just to get a playable frame rate, and on top of that you have to spend another $600 if you want a semi-decent 4K compatible monitor. I'd much rather play at 1080p (1440p works too) with some nice AA and a smooth 120 FPS.[/QUOTE]
People didn't have 1080p for awhile. Also with 4K you don't really need as much anti-aliasing. I'd love a 4k monitor and a second r9 290 to power it so my screen could have a higher pixel density, but I'll probably have to settle on a korean 1440p monitor if I ever get a new one.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;46208391]Unskippable cutscenes in video games are just horrible.
Actually cut-scenes in video games really need to be cut back on, the story should be told through the gameplay, not a .avi. Movies will always be better at being movies than video games will.
An example could be the start of mass-effect 2 compared to halo combat evolved. In both games you're on a doomed that is currently being attacked. However, in halo you get to play through the ship, fighting enemies while seeing the whole place go to hell. Power in areas is lost, parts get destroyed, your buddies get slaughtered. There are a couple cut-scenes in there, but they're very short.
In mass effect 2, your ship is being attacked as well. But in this case you have to watch a cut-scene that's several minutes long, while the only game-play is you walking along the bridge of the ship.[/QUOTE]
unskippable cutscenes are terrible but MGS has a kind of unique issue of being only able to skip them. You can't pause etc. I say it's unique cos first time through you never know if the next cutscene or codec call is gonna be 30 seconds or 20 minutes (in MGS4's case they could stretch over 30.. The final sequence is literally a feature length movie- about 90 minutes but you could pause by that point) and boy is it a gamble to play a metal gear game for the first time if you're working on even a very basic schedule
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;46208416]unskippable cutscenes are terrible but MGS has a kind of unique issue of being only able to skip them. You can't pause etc. I say it's unique cos first time through you never know if the next cutscene or codec call is gonna be 30 seconds or 20 minutes (in MGS4's case they could stretch over 30.. The final sequence is literally a feature length movie- about 90 minutes but you could pause by that point)[/QUOTE]
Don't ye miss the days of the atari 2600 and its pause button
I don't like to mess around in games.
I always feel pretty weird when I play games like Battlefield or Grand Theft Auto Online with my IRL friends.
They don't like doing missions, capturing flags, or anything like that. They just stay in spawn and do weird stuff with vehicles and run each other over (Battlefield), or just do mindless mayhem (GTA).
I don't know if I'm weird or something.
It's like people here when they complain with Rockstar when they patch some glitch in GTA (like that glitch that throws you into sky really high for no reason, and the ones that let you go inside buildings), and they say that "They're removing fun from the game". I don't know, I never found doing glitches funny, again, maybe I'm just weird and I don't find funny what other people do find funny.
I really hate close combat scenes in movies that end up being blurry, shakily-filmed messes. I simply don't get it.
They hire professional stuntsmen or swordsmen, they elaborate rigorous choreography, they invest millions in props, post-processing, CGI, but all of this doesn't matter because they chose to use a cameraman who has Parkinson's. Why bother? They've got state-of-the-art equipment that can stabilize itself, software which can correct sway, but they choose to leave it in as it is anyway. Is it some form of artistic choice? Because the scene just ends up being garbage to me.
[QUOTE=Sgt. Nikolai;46208796]I don't like to mess around in games.
I always feel pretty weird when I play games like Battlefield or Grand Theft Auto Online with my IRL friends.
They don't like doing missions, capturing flags, or anything like that. They just stay in spawn and do weird stuff with vehicles and run each other over (Battlefield), or just do mindless mayhem (GTA).
I don't know if I'm weird or something.
It's like people here when they complain with Rockstar when they patch some glitch in GTA (like that glitch that throws you into sky really high for no reason, and the ones that let you go inside buildings), and they say that "They're removing fun from the game". I don't know, I never found doing glitches funny, again, maybe I'm just weird and I don't find funny what other people do find funny.[/QUOTE]
I like Sandbox games that have an objective but still give you the unlimited time and the freedom to use all the sandbox tools go get there. I'm allowed to mess around and mess with the kinks but I'm still given a direction to head into when I've had my fun with the tools. I get bored if I don't have objectives or a primary goal but at the same time I'm really shit at making up my own goals and directions.
But I suppose an example would be like in Dead Rising 2: Off the Record where in Sandbox Mode you have the tools and infinite time to do as you please but have little missions that can keep you busy but still allow you to make use of the unlimited tools and infinite time. Or how something like Terraria allows you to have this overall sandbox enviroment where you can go off and do what you want (i.e build houses and craft loads of stuff) but you still have objectives that constantly progress like defeating the bosses and collect the parts to make stronger weapons.
[QUOTE=_Axel;46209393]I really hate close combat scenes in movies that end up being blurry, shakily-filmed messes. I simply don't get it.
They hire professional stuntsmen or swordsmen, they elaborate rigorous choreography, they invest millions in props, post-processing, CGI, but all of this doesn't matter because they chose to use a cameraman who has Parkinson's. Why bother? They've got state-of-the-art equipment that can stabilize itself, software which can correct sway, but they choose to leave it in as it is anyway. Is it some form of artistic choice? Because the scene just ends up being garbage to me.[/QUOTE]
Quantum of Solace fucking sucked because of this and pretty much everything else about it lol
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;46209645]Quantum of Solace fucking sucked because of this and pretty much everything else about it lol[/QUOTE]
Quantum of Solace sucked because its plot was nearly incomprehensible
[QUOTE=Sonic Fan;46209427]I like Sandbox games that have an objective but still give you the unlimited time and the freedom to use all the sandbox tools go get there. I'm allowed to mess around and mess with the kinks but I'm still given a direction to head into when I've had my fun with the tools. I get bored if I don't have objectives or a primary goal but at the same time I'm really shit at making up my own goals and directions.
But I suppose an example would be like in Dead Rising 2: Off the Record where in Sandbox Mode you have the tools and infinite time to do as you please but have little missions that can keep you busy but still allow you to make use of the unlimited tools and infinite time. Or how something like Terraria allows you to have this overall sandbox enviroment where you can go off and do what you want (i.e build houses and craft loads of stuff) but you still have objectives that constantly progress like defeating the bosses and collect the parts to make stronger weapons.[/QUOTE]
This is me.
I need some sort of objective, otherwise I don't find anything to do.
Branston is the nectar of the gods
[QUOTE=bdd458;46210205]This is me.
I need some sort of objective, otherwise I don't find anything to do.[/QUOTE]
this is exactly the reason why I didn't like Just Cause. There were objectives, but the missions were dull and the level design had nothing in it, just some towers and vehicles to blow up. It was okay but I felt like it was trying to push me towards running around just doing whatever, and I had no motivation to do the missions.
[QUOTE=Schmaaa;46210385]this is exactly the reason why I didn't like Just Cause. There were objectives, but the missions were dull and the level design had nothing in it, just some towers and vehicles to blow up. It was okay but I felt like it was trying to push me towards running around just doing whatever, and I had no motivation to do the missions.[/QUOTE]
One of the reasons I really like Shadow of Mordor is because the Nemesis system gives some sort of real context to me for roaming around the Open World, it's nice.
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;46191210]I guess this isn't really "unpopular" but kinda controversial, I literally cannot wrap my head around how some people prefer 30fps to 60fps when it comes to video games.[/QUOTE]
I agree, and it's honestly kind of worrying because it shouldn't even be controversial to begin with. 60+FPS > 30 for gaming. End of story. I'll settle for 30 if I [I]absolutely have to[/I], like if I decide I want to play an Uncharted game on my PS3 or whatever. But having those running at a solid 60FPS would sure as hell be preferable to 30ish (or lower in certain areas). If I happen to be playing some kind of turn based RTS game it won't matter quite as much. That's one of the few times where I'll say "okay if it runs at 30, whatever."
I'll admit that I am spoiled with my PC games. The last time I stopped by a friend's place and fired up Dark Souls on his PS3, it just felt gross on that hardware. I'm just too used to playing most titles at 60FPS on my own machine. GTA V feels really terrible, that game just chugs along. Watching the buildings pass by in populated areas is really painful while driving, it often looks like a slideshow.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;46208391]Unskippable cutscenes in video games are just horrible.
Actually cut-scenes in video games really need to be cut back on, the story should be told through the gameplay, not a .avi. Movies will always be better at being movies than video games will.[/QUOTE]
Games that insist on having cutscenes also need to have a volume slider for them too. I'm surprised how often games that have cutscenes don't actually include any way to separately set the volume of cutscenes. The Ys games on Steam are a perfect example of this. I love those games but cutscenes are always set to 100% volume unless you change the game's volume through Windows' volume center.
[QUOTE=bdd458;46211399]One of the reasons I really like Shadow of Mordor is because the Nemesis system gives some sort of real context to me for roaming around the Open World, it's nice.[/QUOTE]
My favorite part about Shadow of Mordor is that it refuses to even start on my computer despite the fact I more than meet the recommended requirements. Validating files, uninstalling and reinstalling, following their instructions for fixing crashes, the recent patch which claimed it should fix the crash I'm getting, none of those actually do anything. I just get stuck in a loop with Steam popping up the "now preparing Shadow of Mordor" window then the game's process starting up, the window never coming up, the process exiting without any errors, then Steam bring back up the "now preparing..." window and starting it all over again until I manually catch the process in task mangler and force quit it.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;46208393]I think this recent push for 4K is utterly stupid, I mean we're still having issues getting everything to work at 1080p, the benefits of 4K just don't seem worth it when you consider the fact that the resources required to download & watch movies and play games at these super high resolutions is insanely high.
For movies and TV 4K is just a pipe-dream, at least for the next decade, no one has a 4K TV, the vast majority of people can't stream 4K video, downloading a single 4K video on the average connection would take an eternity, and finally 4k is completely inaccessible to anyone with a data cap, they'd hit their cap after only a few days.
For games it's completely unreachable for the vast majority again, you'd need to spend $600 on the GPU alone just to get a playable frame rate, and on top of that you have to spend another $600 if you want a semi-decent 4K compatible monitor. I'd much rather play at 1080p (1440p works too) with some nice AA and a smooth 120 FPS.[/QUOTE]
TV companies ar pushing 4K because they need a gimmick to get people to buy TVs. They can't push larger TVs any more because they're at the point where making them bigger just makes then inconvenient. That's why they pushed 3D so fucking hard even though there are absolutely no 3D programs because they aren't worth the cost. No one bought 3D TVs because they were a blatant ploy to get people to spend 1,500$/€/£ to replace their perfectly functional TVs.
That's why the 3 main features of TVs these days are:
Smart TVs, an actually useful concept
4K TVs, pointless as many TV stations aren't even in FullHD yet, and the ones that are aren't going to upgrade to 4K for many years
and curved TVs, which might be good if you intend on watching TV alone, in a perfectly positioned seat, but otherwise pointless and often counter-productive.
the whole "2spooky skelington xD" shit is awfully unfunny
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMgkt9jdjTU[/media]
Unpopular opinion: this song isn't awful, and as a matter of fact, pretty cool. pretty much only thing by yung lean i like
I especially like how ominous the beat feels
Despite his reputation, Yung Lean has some pretty legit songs.
i really don't care for nes nostalgia and i cant wait until snes nostalgia takes over
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;46218891]I thought the joke was the fact it wasn't funny?[/QUOTE]
If it is, that still doesn't make it a good joke.
I like the Fast and the Furious movies,including 5 and 6
[QUOTE=Zotobom;46219895]I like the Fast and the Furious movies,including 5 and 6[/QUOTE]
5 and 6 are kinda absurd though. Especially the scene at the end of 5 where they're towing the big ass safe around town using it as a freaking weapon.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;46218745][url]http://i.imgur.com/9ySkOrc.png[/url][/QUOTE]
You just proved his point. It's a painfully unfunny joke.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;46219976]5 and 6 are kinda absurd though. Especially the scene at the end of 5 where they're towing the big ass safe around town using it as a freaking weapon.[/QUOTE]
And thats why I love it. I like cars,the humor is often pretty funny and I always welcome ridiculousness in movies. And don't forget that weird fucking wedge car that flipped people over lol
Best part:
[video=youtube;RlYCSz23G1M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlYCSz23G1M[/video]
That was unscripted so Ludacris' reaction was genuine :v:
[QUOTE=Zotobom;46220850]And thats why I love it. I like cars,the humor is often pretty funny and I always welcome ridiculousness in movies. And don't forget that weird fucking wedge car that flipped people over lol[/QUOTE]
That safe scene is the only one I just can't get over, lol. I can deal with some unrealistic stuff like the wedge car or that some super precise drivers were the biggest criminal threat and that they'd need to go to another high level criminal group to deal with them. That safe though, it's like it weighed absolutely nothing unless they were taking off or trying to hit someone with it. Rest of both movies were fine if a bit cheesy at points though and I'm actually looking forward to see how the next one turns out.
[QUOTE=_Axel;46209393]I really hate close combat scenes in movies that end up being blurry, shakily-filmed messes. I simply don't get it.
They hire professional stuntsmen or swordsmen, they elaborate rigorous choreography, they invest millions in props, post-processing, CGI, but all of this doesn't matter because they chose to use a cameraman who has Parkinson's. Why bother? They've got state-of-the-art equipment that can stabilize itself, software which can correct sway, but they choose to leave it in as it is anyway. Is it some form of artistic choice? Because the scene just ends up being garbage to me.[/QUOTE]
They don't want people to know that they got lazy and didn't think of any real choreography and just had the actors get into a sissy slapping fight with each other while the camera guy has a seizure.
[editline]lel[/editline]
This sums up pretty decently what I mean.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVs7C_If1Ko[/media]
[QUOTE=RustledJimmys;46218652]the whole "2spooky skelington xD" shit is awfully unfunny[/QUOTE]
That said, this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u_v9H24PfY[/media]
Is still great.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;46223129]Yeah that's what I was going for, genius.
I guess it being made in MsPaint wasn't obvious enough[/QUOTE]
Says the user with a skeleton avatar. Even ironic memes aren't funny.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;46223129]Yeah that's what I was going for, genius.
I guess it being made in MsPaint wasn't obvious enough[/QUOTE]
Doing anything ironically is still doing it.
Back To The Future on NES, E.T. on Atari 2600, they're far from the worst games ever. They're playable, and if you give them some time, they're honestly pretty decent games. Not incredible ones but they're far from the worst ever.
I would say that a game like Big Rigs is a more eligible candidate for worst game ever, since that game is just plain broken, but they still sold it to people who didn't know better.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.