SmokedMeat
Gamer™
You find Zelda in general to be boring, and that's fine.
Sorry if I came off as condescending, but usually people explain their stance a little. Otherwise you just look like you're trolling.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
You find Zelda in general to be boring, and that's fine.
Sorry if I came off as condescending, but usually people explain their stance a little. Otherwise you just look like you're trolling.
LordRaptor
Member
Quite possibly it's a little bit of "fighting misinformation with misinformation". Someone says "PC's are really expensive and it takes ages to get any game running and you have to play with config settings to get it running at the right resolution, and you always have to upgrade every 2 years", and it's like... How do you begin to unpack that amount of ignorance? So maybe people don't try to, and just say "It's cheaper!" Because that's an argument that everyone can understand, and that doesn't require explaining how much easier life is now under Win10 and Steam than it was under Win95 and 5 CD retail releases.
But... it's totally different?
I do agree that both systems are pretty ace though. There has been a trend of super-mobile FPS games in the past few years that I really dig.
I'd go so far as to say Halo 5's was actually more complex (you had more tools at you disposal) where Titanfall 1 went for that super-simple, robust and easy to use.
Titanfall 2 is a different beast altogether. It's a thing of beauty.
Lights and Waves
Member
You can check my post history, I've always praised Skyward Sword.
Have you beaten BotW yet? Do that first, then we'll talk.
LinkSlayer64
Member
No, all trophies are garbage, and bragging rights are asinine.
Wind Waker is overrated as fuck.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Sounds good!
I'm hoping SS gets Remastered as I'd like to give it another go.
D Bo Chops
Member
For Honour is boring, repetitive, and not worth $60. Played for a week and got absolutely turned off. I also "got good" in this time period but still didnt have any fun.
Omnistalgic
Member
Meta matters when its a game you're fond of, it doesn't when it's one you're fond of but doesn't score that well.
GAF LOGIC
GAF LOGIC
LordRaptor
Member
All the beta did was remind me how much I used to fucking love Jedi Academy ;_;
Napalm_Frank
Member
Crash Team Racing is the best Naughty Dog game by far.
If judging only by gameplay, this isn't that big of a stretch.
FloweryMarston
Member
Are you really saying that the critical reception of naughty is absolutely objective but mainline nintendo game aren't?
The uncharted Collection has the same metascore as TP HD, these are rereleases, where the updates are judged and compared to the original, as well as how much they aged. Nintendo has been getting a LOT of flack lately and their games have been scoring horribly, the press didn't give a pass to federation force, triforce heroes, amiibo festival, pokemon go, 1-2 switch, star fox zero, they absolutely destroyed these games. The press didn't give a pass to metroid other m.
You are talking like the gap between a 96 and a 98 are some HUGE thing as if naughty dog doesn't absolutely destroy everything else in game of the year awards every time they release a game.
I 100% support the metascore of wind waker and uncharted 2. Both game blew my socks off when i played them at the time and i hold them dearly to me. You sometimes may not agree with the overall aggregate, and that's okay, but stop with this shit thinking that one company definetely deserves all the praise and the other doesn't.
I think the Mario Kart series as a whole is a lot better than every other racing game series, including similar kart racers like DKR and Sonic and Sega All-Stars Racing Transformed and stuff like F-Zero/Wipeout as well as more traditional racers. I think all of them are worth playing because MK isn't really that similar to the others, but when I play non-MK racers I typically have a lot less fun. Usually it comes down to the controls/handling; I think Mario Kart just feels a lot better than other racing games, and I can pull off movement a lot more easily.
I wonder if people who claim that various classics are overrated just weren't around when these games were new.
I'm currently playing through HL2 again and it's still god-damn incredible. Just as fun as it was back in the day. Yet I always seem to hear online about how "overrated" it is.
There's two concepts in play here. One is period context, the other is test of time.
Some games feel timeless and (deservedly) untouchable. Examples would include Zelda:LTTP, Galaga, Doom 1 & 2, Ms. Pac-Man.
Others feel dated now and are scorned as false pretenders. GoldenEye N64, Mortal Kombat, Altered Beast, FF VII, Ptifall and more.
Fact is that all of these games completely enraptured audiences. They blew everyone's mind compared to what was on the scene at the time.
If you're too young to have experienced the zeitgeist, that's fine. But it's no excuse to dismiss legitimate classics out of ignorance. It's okay that you weren't there, but historical context is important.
You might as well talk about how overrated Elvis is. Cause if you think he's lame, you weren't there to see the walls he broke down.
I'm currently playing through HL2 again and it's still god-damn incredible. Just as fun as it was back in the day. Yet I always seem to hear online about how "overrated" it is.
There's two concepts in play here. One is period context, the other is test of time.
Some games feel timeless and (deservedly) untouchable. Examples would include Zelda:LTTP, Galaga, Doom 1 & 2, Ms. Pac-Man.
Others feel dated now and are scorned as false pretenders. GoldenEye N64, Mortal Kombat, Altered Beast, FF VII, Ptifall and more.
Fact is that all of these games completely enraptured audiences. They blew everyone's mind compared to what was on the scene at the time.
If you're too young to have experienced the zeitgeist, that's fine. But it's no excuse to dismiss legitimate classics out of ignorance. It's okay that you weren't there, but historical context is important.
You might as well talk about how overrated Elvis is. Cause if you think he's lame, you weren't there to see the walls he broke down.
aLaxLuthor
Member
I'm one of those people who think HL2 is over-rated, but, in my defense, I thought it wasn't as good as HL1 when I first played it.
From a period context:
* It required steam at launch, which if you were around for you remember. It didn't work. Not hyperbole, not exageration, I mean I bought the game, all 5 discs of it, and couldnt play it for days because steam was crippled from everyone hitting it at once. In a historical context, this will always colour my opinion of the game.
* The story is barely told, and relies too heavily on a third chapter which we all know is never coming. Even if it were to arrive I still think that HL2 did a poor job to telling the story. You could glean what happend how the combine arrived etc from the environment, but there was no compelling narrative to push you through the story.
That being said. I have no problem with people who love it, and technically it was miles ahead of everything else out at the time. I always felt it was a better demo of the tech that Valve had built than it was a game.
As for my controversial opinion:
MGSV is far and away the best of the series. I played them all for the first time in the last 18 months. 1 is OK but hard to go back to, 2 is insane and crazy sexist, 3 is probably the best of the first 4, 4 was completely forgettable, outside of the metal gear vs metal gear fight.
After playing about... an hour and a half or 2 hours of Until Dawn, I have this to say:
Games are given too much leeway to make a good impression. If a 300 page book doesn't grab me within even 20 pages, I feel I have the right to put it down. If a 2 hour movie doesn't grab me in the first in 15/20 minutes, I feel the same - I can say I gave it a shot, but it doesn't interest me.
The first couple of hours of Until Dawn story bore me, with characters who are either bland, annoying, stupid, or all 3. Yet I just said to me wife that "Maybe it'll get better in a bit".
Why should a game expect me to put in time - which, when you're older, married and have a job is a premium - on the hope that it gets better? Why shouldn't I expect a game be written well-enough that it can hook the player within an hour?
Games are given too much leeway to make a good impression. If a 300 page book doesn't grab me within even 20 pages, I feel I have the right to put it down. If a 2 hour movie doesn't grab me in the first in 15/20 minutes, I feel the same - I can say I gave it a shot, but it doesn't interest me.
The first couple of hours of Until Dawn story bore me, with characters who are either bland, annoying, stupid, or all 3. Yet I just said to me wife that "Maybe it'll get better in a bit".
Why should a game expect me to put in time - which, when you're older, married and have a job is a premium - on the hope that it gets better? Why shouldn't I expect a game be written well-enough that it can hook the player within an hour?
LordRaptor
Member
I think HL2 gets this because it basically established the modern AAA fps campaign mode template - linear, big setpieces, heavily scripted, checkpoint saves.
Its close enough to a contemporary title to be judged on that basis.
If FPS games had remained in the Unreal / Doom / Quake vein, it would probably still feel fresh (in the way that Serious Sam feels fresh, because not many people make games like that nowadays)
What timeline is this?
I know fanboys can get rabid around these parts, but I certainly hope this isn't considered a controversial opinion lol.
I really enjoyed the 25 hours I spent with it, the first 10 or 15 were particularly fantastic, but I doubt it's going to make my GOTY lists. It's like an 8 out of ten game for me with some stuff it does better than most other games, particularly the physics engine and the little gameplay details.
Zelda games have shitty, derivative stories.
They are excellent games because of fun game play, excellent puzzles, phenomenal score and interesting boss design.
I wouldn't care if the story of the next Zelda was just "complete these crazy trials because it would amuse Princess Zelda", I would still lap it up like the thirsty b#$% that I am because it would still be fun AF.
They are excellent games because of fun game play, excellent puzzles, phenomenal score and interesting boss design.
I wouldn't care if the story of the next Zelda was just "complete these crazy trials because it would amuse Princess Zelda", I would still lap it up like the thirsty b#$% that I am because it would still be fun AF.
paragonpro
Banned
I dont think its sexist to have sexualized characters in a game so long as it skews towards both genders
Cpt Conifer
Member
Breath of Fire V would have been better if it had come out on the DC instead of the PS2 (or barring that, the Xbox).
While the artstyle is phenomenal, it suffers from the absolute worst, most stereotypical traits of the PS2. The shimmering, probably through the interlacing technique common on the system, is almost headache inducing in its garishness. Everything is muddy and washed out, although the framerate is smooth. The whole thing they were going for would have lent itself better to the DC's strengths and limitations, both graphically and even in terms of the single-stick controller.
There are some games you can look at, particularly those that make heavy use of particle effects and use more simplistic textures as a form of stylistic abstraction, such as the ZOE series, and say "Yeah, this almost certainly worked best on PS2", but BoFV isn't one of them.
While the artstyle is phenomenal, it suffers from the absolute worst, most stereotypical traits of the PS2. The shimmering, probably through the interlacing technique common on the system, is almost headache inducing in its garishness. Everything is muddy and washed out, although the framerate is smooth. The whole thing they were going for would have lent itself better to the DC's strengths and limitations, both graphically and even in terms of the single-stick controller.
There are some games you can look at, particularly those that make heavy use of particle effects and use more simplistic textures as a form of stylistic abstraction, such as the ZOE series, and say "Yeah, this almost certainly worked best on PS2", but BoFV isn't one of them.
LordRaptor
Member
Youtube / Twitter drama topics are literally the worst.
They're usually barely tangentially related to anything to do with videogames, and just end up as pages of people telling each other to go fuck themselves / fuck that dude / fuck that company until a lock or the next outrage.
They're usually barely tangentially related to anything to do with videogames, and just end up as pages of people telling each other to go fuck themselves / fuck that dude / fuck that company until a lock or the next outrage.
Freeman76
Member
I have a very controversial view on Horizon, as its one of the most over rated games I've played in years.
Borrows mechanics from far too many games, way too much Witcher sense gameplay, and although the gameworld is great it feels unlived in. The cities are total crap, design wise breathtaking but nothing in them. Floaty jumping, combat feels like poking a massive metal dinosaur with a stick, no feedback, poor human fights.
The gameworld and story made me play until around 60% through the story and then I stopped trying to make myself finish it. Sold it and made a pound profit, then bought Nier and have not looked back once.
Borrows mechanics from far too many games, way too much Witcher sense gameplay, and although the gameworld is great it feels unlived in. The cities are total crap, design wise breathtaking but nothing in them. Floaty jumping, combat feels like poking a massive metal dinosaur with a stick, no feedback, poor human fights.
The gameworld and story made me play until around 60% through the story and then I stopped trying to make myself finish it. Sold it and made a pound profit, then bought Nier and have not looked back once.
Metroid Prime (1 especially) got a lot of props where it deserved for the time but I always thought still that it's really quite under appreciated for what it really is.
I always thought of this game as a masterpiece, in so many ways, shapes and forms, and wished that more gamers had played it and wouldn't have dismissed it because "it's on a Nintendo console." (I heard it so many times, it's too bad, really). It is such a great sci-fi game and story. I wish a lot of my friends who were die-hard fanboys for either PS or MS or PC would have been multiplatform like I am and just enjoyed this game as much as I did. Such a perfect transition from a 2D gameplay to a 3D one. <3
There, I said it. lol.
I always thought of this game as a masterpiece, in so many ways, shapes and forms, and wished that more gamers had played it and wouldn't have dismissed it because "it's on a Nintendo console." (I heard it so many times, it's too bad, really). It is such a great sci-fi game and story. I wish a lot of my friends who were die-hard fanboys for either PS or MS or PC would have been multiplatform like I am and just enjoyed this game as much as I did. Such a perfect transition from a 2D gameplay to a 3D one. <3
There, I said it. lol.
Napalm_Frank
Member
Here's my hot take: I tried Metroid Prime and I cannot for the life of me understand the hype coming from other FPS games like Half Life 2 and Far Cry back in the day.
And other hot take: anyone who says Metroid Prime isn't FPS is a crazy person.
I can appreciate adventure elements in games but on Gamecube alone Resident Evil 4 just annihilates MP on fun factor.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
Horizon is, genuinely, the best open world game I've ever played. I don't think there's any area it particularly EXCELS in, as such, but it's very much like The Last of Us in that sense, the sum of the parts is greater than the individual parts. Everything comes together really well and it's still keeping me coming back and also wanting more before I've even finished the game.
Edit: Horizon is to open world games as The Last of Us is to third person action adventure games. There, I said it.
Edit: Horizon is to open world games as The Last of Us is to third person action adventure games. There, I said it.
LordRaptor
Member
mattwhite924
Member
Prime came out about 2 years before HL2 and Far Cry, so those games didn't really affect it's impact.
Also it's not an FPS, it's a metroidvania.
MGS2 is my favorite MGS. Not sure how controversial that really is, but yeah.
Implying that 10/10 should signal perfection? Perfection is an impossible standard to live up to, and why have a scale to 10 if the top score is never used?
Implying that 10/10 should signal perfection? Perfection is an impossible standard to live up to, and why have a scale to 10 if the top score is never used?
Both MGSV and BotW have numerous faults, but they're both easily 10/10 for me (so far, not that far into Zelda yet. Sometimes the good just outweighs the bad. 10/10 /=/ perfect, otherwise there's no point in it existing.
John Kowalski
Banned
I think thinking that a game is good measured on whether you like it or not is very egocentric and egotistical
How else would you tell whether a game is good? The reason most people just use "this game is good," as a synonym for "I like this game," is because there's not really any other way to quantify whether or not a game is good. There's no industry consensus as to what is/isn't considered good game design.
I mean there are games you like you can see through and while that perspective isn't persuasive, it does seem the more reasonable perspective.
Or games you don't like that you can see the quality in and put a clear finger on why you can't get it and why others can, without that being their bad taste at work.
Moreover, your sense of quality is vastly differentiated.
Obviously, your sense of good and bad game is the starting point. But you can think about it more critically and more aware of the critical landscape.
Nothing you said was controversial in the slightest. Most people who have something against prime are mostly the people who have a obvious anti FPS bias. Not that it matters anyway since Prime did translated Metroid into 3D as well as OOT did for Zelda.
Prime is more of a true Metroid game than Other M and Fusion were by a long shot. Regardless of the FPS perspective. It did not even play like your typical FPS at the time anyway.
Can it not be both? People describe Dark Souls as a metroidvania as well, but it's also an ARPG. So why is Metroid Prime a metroidvania but not also an FPS? Genuine question since I haven't played Metroid Prime.
Strangelove77
Member
We need to see more full frontal male nudity in our games.
I dunno man. Penis glitches can be nightmare inducing.
But the "critical landscape," isn't really something that's well defined. I also don't necessarily agree with aspects of game design that the critical landscape emphasizes, so I don't have to subscribe to the same ideas of what does/doesn't make a good game.
For me, a lot of the time when people say a game is "objectively good," I think what they really mean is that they think it's a well-designed or crafted game. But there's nothing that says "well-designed," is a better way to define "good game," than just "a game that I like". And like you said, whether or not you think a game is good/bad is still a starting point for whether or not a game is "well-designed".....which means that it's still ultimately an egocentric opinion. Also, think of it like this: Hypothetically, let's say there's a game that I think is boring and don't like but ultimately well designed. Then I go on the internet and talk to other people and that's actually an opinion a lot of other people seem to hold. Under the definition of "well crafted = good," that game would still be a good game. Why would that be a good or useful definition if most people don't actually like the game?
Also, I can see why others might like a game, but I can see why other people might like ANY game. I've yet to play a single game that I think is so completely devoid of quality that I think it would fail to appeal to anyone.
And also, you're right in that my sense of quality is differentiated from everyone else's, but everyone else also seems to think that different games are good.
Savantcore
Unconfirmed Member
Trying to play Ocarina of Time and it's not really grabbing me. I know that it's pretty dated, but I can play plenty other games from the same time that are a lot more fun. Mah.
Wesley-Sigma
Member
The narrative that 'Games are only getting better.' is pushed by people who are ignorant of game design and mechanics.
klabautermann
Member
I don't like western games period pretty much.
I hate Uncharted, Elder Scrolls, Fall Out, and most of anything else you could think of.
The Last of Us was decent, but not as good as people say it is.
I have no interest in playing the Overwatch, Horizon or Witcher 3 at any point ever.
Ocarina of Time isn't even one of my top 5 favorite Zelda games. (Wind Waker is the best followed by Majora's Mask)
I hate Uncharted, Elder Scrolls, Fall Out, and most of anything else you could think of.
The Last of Us was decent, but not as good as people say it is.
I have no interest in playing the Overwatch, Horizon or Witcher 3 at any point ever.
Ocarina of Time isn't even one of my top 5 favorite Zelda games. (Wind Waker is the best followed by Majora's Mask)