None of the dark souls elements are even prominent. Seems like wasted potential. With that kind of thing, you have to fully commit and they didn't
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Your controversial gaming opinions?
- Thread starter tgrfawcett
- Start date
I'm playing with split joycons when at home, slumped on my couch, one joy con in each hand, and there are no other controller that comes close to this. Joycons are by far the best controllers nowadays, and I'll never use a single monobloc controler ever again.
I find that the last few sections in the game really boost it, but a lot of aspects before that weren't that great.
I had a lot more fun with Soul Blazer and Terranigma (except for some of those star stones quests).
especially like their bonfire equivalent which feels completely arbitrary and just there for the sake of being there
i don't expect them to move away from that stuff in a sequel but i really wish they would
Gamers generally don't understand what they want and developers generally know best, since they are the only ones with genuine game design knowledge in most cases.
GameCube is the best Nintendo console ever - For its time and even right now - Considering its controller is brought back several times.
Nintendo Wii was the worst Nintendo console and almost ruined the industry by releasing so many garbage titles that still sold because the target audiences were Parents and Old Couples and non-gamers. SMH!
Nintendo Wii was the worst Nintendo console and almost ruined the industry by releasing so many garbage titles that still sold because the target audiences were Parents and Old Couples and non-gamers. SMH!
Several times for one game series. It's basically the Smash equivalent of a fight stick for old school street fighter players.
Still, being brought back and is still sold in the market - Says a lot - Best Nintendo Controller ever released...
Castlevania 64 is a game with a lot of hidden potential. If it were remade with proper tweaks and the issued ironed out, it would be a great entry in the CV franchise.
I don't prefer PC gaming and don't think every game should be on the platform, mostly because it favors rich gamers having a better experience than everyone else. (I dislike micro-transactions for the same reason.) I want the ooos and ahhhs of state of the art graphics in a game to not be left to be only experienced by the already privileged in life - or atleast that excitement be quelled by other gamers that will inevitably inform you that they experience better. Money has enough advantages in life already, let's limit what it does to gaming. Also, $800+ video cards should not exist. Until we make inroads on economic mobility and income inequality in the world, my views will likely remain this way.
I hate MTXs as much as the next person but I commonly find myself torn about the evolution surrounding the discourse on Microtransactions.
When MTX started becoming normalized in earnest a few years ago, the push back seemed largely geared around the idea that people just didn't want to be nickel and dimed, they didn't want to keep paying for content that they felt they were entitled to when they bought the game and that it was inherently having a negative effect on game design because devs were purposely leaving things out to purposely charge for them.
Then lootboxes hit the scene and people hated them as well (myself included) because of the added RNG element that made it even more difficult to engage with content that was already in the game. And as predatory and exploitative as they are, the prevailing rebuttal from the gaming industry and it's defenders was that if you don't like them don't buy them. They're just there for the hardcore fans who engage with the game at an extremely high level. The message ultimately being just because we don't like design elements of the way these games are created that it doesn't mean that game devs should/would remove those elements especally when those games (and the MTXs associated with them) were still selling like hotcakes
Then almost overnight it felt like someone screamed:
which helped move the needle in putting pressure on the gaming industry but now all discourse is rooted around this angle which bothers me for two reasons:
1) some times it feels like people disingenuously stand behind this reasoning because its the only arguments that's gained any traction that seems to be leading to change.
2) it furthers the stigma that "only kids play video games" because purportedly they're the only ones who need protecting. The exploitative and predatory practices of MTXs shouldn't be a conversation that simply relegated to it's impact on children.
When MTX started becoming normalized in earnest a few years ago, the push back seemed largely geared around the idea that people just didn't want to be nickel and dimed, they didn't want to keep paying for content that they felt they were entitled to when they bought the game and that it was inherently having a negative effect on game design because devs were purposely leaving things out to purposely charge for them.
Then lootboxes hit the scene and people hated them as well (myself included) because of the added RNG element that made it even more difficult to engage with content that was already in the game. And as predatory and exploitative as they are, the prevailing rebuttal from the gaming industry and it's defenders was that if you don't like them don't buy them. They're just there for the hardcore fans who engage with the game at an extremely high level. The message ultimately being just because we don't like design elements of the way these games are created that it doesn't mean that game devs should/would remove those elements especally when those games (and the MTXs associated with them) were still selling like hotcakes
Then almost overnight it felt like someone screamed:
which helped move the needle in putting pressure on the gaming industry but now all discourse is rooted around this angle which bothers me for two reasons:
1) some times it feels like people disingenuously stand behind this reasoning because its the only arguments that's gained any traction that seems to be leading to change.
2) it furthers the stigma that "only kids play video games" because purportedly they're the only ones who need protecting. The exploitative and predatory practices of MTXs shouldn't be a conversation that simply relegated to it's impact on children.
Glad to see I'm not missing something. When I set up my SNES one of the first things I wanted to do was play through all of Quintet's games. I'd always heard good things and missed out when I was a kid. Anyway Soul Blazer and Actraiser are now two of my favourite SNES games. But I stalled hard on Illusion of Gaia, it's like they bolted a really RPG onto Soul Blazer. I'm just not feeling it.
I want to push through and try the Japanese version of Actraiser 2. I've heard it's much better than the US version.
I live in a tiny developing country and PC gaming is more popular than console gaming. PC gaming is what you make it. Not every hardcore PC gamer is rich or privileged and if you think so then I don't know what on Earth you've been paying attention to. Do you think we're all playing on $2000 rigs or something?
Platform exclusives is something which reward people with money, because they are the one who will be able to afford to own all the platforms ( and as of this generation, the best/most expensive iteration of those platform with the ps4 pro and xbox one X ).
No. Not if you mean the sort of Bayonetta/DMC type of Hack&Slash. At its best it would be a game with functional lightsaber hits that can cut anything in half as long as you can reach it, and have Sith enemies that are adept at blocking and just 2 or 3 clean hits kill them.
The last thing I want is for video games to "AAA"-ify Star Wars. Force Unleashed did that, Fallen Order respects it slightly more, but the Dark Souls element isn't the best solution either.
PC gaming always consisted of cheap PCs vs expensive rigs ever since the Commodore days. Ironically when companies like Amstrad launched cheap IBM computer clones to compete with the expensive business rigs, they were slandered by the computer press as being inferior in quality.
The last of us is the most overrated game, it has clunky bad gameplay that people mostly like because it feels savage and visceral, the plot while nicely directed (at times) and acted is a dumb and cliché "zombies (totally not zombies *wink*), but we humans are really the monsters" story, that would be instantly forgotten if it was a movie.
If the game was a multiplatform game from a new or unknown developer and without the nice graphics, it would be a 6/10 game that nobody would care about.
If the game was a multiplatform game from a new or unknown developer and without the nice graphics, it would be a 6/10 game that nobody would care about.
Last edited:
The lack of what I would consider true analysis and evaluation of video games and the interactive medium is holding the industry back.
Yes I'm aware of a few good Youtube channels.
I'm talking something on the same level as academic film criticism, which is a separate entity from news-style film reviews.
Games are treated solely as a consumer product, not a higher art form, and the industry prefers it that way.
Yes I'm aware of a few good Youtube channels.
I'm talking something on the same level as academic film criticism, which is a separate entity from news-style film reviews.
Games are treated solely as a consumer product, not a higher art form, and the industry prefers it that way.
Not alone. The stage variety, environments, and design feel closest to the classic action formula than most other entries. It just had a lot of technical issues and the control scheme could have used more tweaking.
There is a lot to appreciate though for sure.
Oh ok good because it is, just thought that the RE4/REmake 1 people are that strong.
Heres mine:
Pretty much all of the Playstation 4 exclusive games are actually pretty mediocre and if they were multi-platform games instead of exclusives they would be seen as completely average games and not the masterpieces that many call them. The ones that I feel deserve the praise though are God of War, Ratchet and Clank, Persona 5 and Shadow of the Colossus. Admittedly, I have not played MLB The Show (Not a sports game kind of guy) or MediEvil but I also have not heard those praised religiously like the other exclusive games.
I would also like to state that I did enjoy these games (except for Uncharted weirdly enough), just not as much as I was expecting to and still found them to be average games
Pretty much all of the Playstation 4 exclusive games are actually pretty mediocre and if they were multi-platform games instead of exclusives they would be seen as completely average games and not the masterpieces that many call them. The ones that I feel deserve the praise though are God of War, Ratchet and Clank, Persona 5 and Shadow of the Colossus. Admittedly, I have not played MLB The Show (Not a sports game kind of guy) or MediEvil but I also have not heard those praised religiously like the other exclusive games.
I would also like to state that I did enjoy these games (except for Uncharted weirdly enough), just not as much as I was expecting to and still found them to be average games
I really wish Nioh had more level and enemy variety though
Skyrim has some of the worst combat I've seen in a game. Straight up terrible.
Also Final Fantasy VI is an overall mediocre game, with VII, IX and XII all being better.
That's a very interesting take on Sony's 1st party games. What I found to be very interesting is the top 20 best selling games of the decade that NPD revealed just recently. If you look at the top 20 best selling games from 2000 to 2019, not a single Sony game charted in the top 20. Granted, the vast majority of these games are understandably multiplatform titles. However, there are still games that were released on just one platform that charted during these 20 years, like Halo 2, Halo 3, Mario Kart Wii. For all of Sony's dominance since they've entered the market with the PS1, it's interesting to see that not a single Sony title charted in the top 20 in the past 20 years in the US.
I haven't played Persona 5 but I'm 100% sure I would agree with this if I did ❤
c'mon wii wasnt that bad. now wii u, that was a total failure
The original three Dragon Quest games deserve a proper remake and not ugly mobile ports on Switch.
Oh, wait it says "controversial"
Oh, wait it says "controversial"
Nintendo console rankings:
1. Switch
2. SNES
3. Wii
4. Wii U
5. NES
6. Gamecube
7. N64
3DS is better than all of these.
1. Switch
2. SNES
3. Wii
4. Wii U
5. NES
6. Gamecube
7. N64
3DS is better than all of these.
You know, after playing Nier: Automata, I got reminded of those irritating sections in Illusion of Gaia where you have to wait for a long time for stuff to happen (the raft and the cave.
Terranigma is a better ame. Haven't played Soul Blazer though.
Posting this from the top 10 bosses thread:
I think that Absolute Radiance in Hollow Knight is a poorly-designed boss, and is a black mark on the game's otherwise stellar boss design. There are four main issues with the fight:
I think that Absolute Radiance in Hollow Knight is a poorly-designed boss, and is a black mark on the game's otherwise stellar boss design. There are four main issues with the fight:
- Her teleportation, especially in phase 2, where she can teleport above the spikes, which pretty much renders her invincible as long as she's there, and in phase 4, where she can teleport to the other side of a very large arena that's difficult to traverse.
- The triple-beam attack, and how it targets the player doesn't seem to be consistent at all (sometimes, it will fire randomly, and other times, it tracks the player's movement). This exists in the normal Radiance fight, but it's not an issue there as it's charge-up is a lot longer, giving players time to react (which doesn't really exist against Absolute Radiance)
- Since Absolute Radiance attacks much more aggressively, her attacks can now overlap with each other in combinations that are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to avoid.
- Absolute Radiance's attacks also have the tendency to blend in with the background, making them difficult to see.
Wait, so you want PC gamers not to have access to more games because they're "rich gamers" and "privileged"? You realize that during the entire lifespan of a console generation that a gaming PC that can outperform consoles can be had for not much more than the PS4 Pro or One X when they were initially released? Not to mention the countless people who play on old PC's or ones purchased secondhand that are cheaper than consoles are now? Also, in what world does spending an extra $100-200 on a gaming PC compared to a gaming console make you rich?
Lastly, do you know that graphics cards aren't only used for gaming? More expensive cards may be used for other graphic-intensive applications that people use professionally. Not just for those rotten, rich, PC gamers.
Last edited:
I see. So, instead of spending an extra $200-300 to upgrade the PC that I would have bought anyway, you think I should spend up to five times that buying current-gen consoles, depending on how many of those arbitrarily-barred-from-PC titles I want to play. Thanks for looking out for my wallet. Don't forget that I would still need a computer.
Not to mention that this scenario hinges on software developers choosing to deliberately cut off an entire potential market just to spite the fraction of their customers who own expensive hardware. I'm sure they'll all jump at the idea.
You sound a little hostile there. It's only games dude.
Speaking for myself, I don't mind making time for games on the longer side, if they justify their length; but I think this generation we've really seen a rise of games that have been artificially lengthened for the sake of it.
Theres a difference between being long and having actual reason to be that long, and being long and bloated to pad out how long the game is so people feel like theyre getting their moneys worth
Certainly a failure sales wise, but it had one of the best ever Nintendo libraries. Even more impressive given its relatively short lifespan.
I don't like too much choice in games. A big reason most modern big titles turn me off these days is that everything is too complicated. Stats all over the place. Numbers. Menus. Skill trees RPG stuff. Too many systems and it just overwhelms me. Too much choice in how to play or approach a game. That stuff used to be reserved for RPGs and that was fine. I just wouldn't play RPG's. Now seemingly every big title is about stuffing in loads of systems and RPG elements, and all I want is some goddamn simplicity. Give me a simple set of mechanics and just ask me to work with that and master that as I progress. So few big titles do that these days. Everything wants to be an RPG and it's a massive turn off.
When you give me options it really makes me struggle. I have massive FOMO. What am I supposed to equip? What to spend shit on? What if I'm making the wrong choices ahhh. I just like it when games have a clear right way to play. I get overwhelmed cant make choices and end up dropping games.
When you give me options it really makes me struggle. I have massive FOMO. What am I supposed to equip? What to spend shit on? What if I'm making the wrong choices ahhh. I just like it when games have a clear right way to play. I get overwhelmed cant make choices and end up dropping games.
skyrim also has some really garbage quests and guilds storylines, uninteresting characters, and just overall unininspiring gameplay loop. I find it hard to believe that people who have played any other open world rpg or even oblivion can find skyrim to be a great game.
I was going to let this slide, but I think some of you are misrepresenting what I meant, and actually making a lot of assumptions about what I think about PC gamers among other things. This is not intended as an us-vs-them argument.
I think you missed my point. You're saying "we're" as if I don't own and currently primarily game on a PC. I know good and well there are loads of poor PC gamers, I'm talking about the range of experiences it gives. It allows people to buy better playing versions of the same game when I would rather just have 1 experience. It is unfair that the consoles are likely unafforadable in your country - and I really do wish the console model was more affordable in the developing world.
I'm talking about rich gamers getting better experiences on the same game. Having all consoles gives you more options, but you will play the same experience of the game. I'm no fan of the pro/x upgrades - though the difference especially ps4-pro is minimal compared to the range that PC is giving.
I'm not calling PC gamers rich and privileged, I'm talking about rich gamers getting better experiences of the same game. It's the fact the platform allows vastly better experiences for richer gamers - It gives a wide range. I've seen it first hand what a 9900k and an overclocked 2080ti can do and seen how mid range PC hardware does - The fact of the matter is there's a huge difference (graphically). I do realize your points 100%, though my point remains that the platform gives different experiences based on how much you spend and that spending cap is very high. Yes, I've worked in CAD environments, Nvidia Quadro is a thing for professional environments - I'm talking about gaming cards. I've been primarily a PC gamer for the last 2 years, I don't view all pc gamers as rich nor rotten.
I'm talking about rich gamers getting a better experience of the same game; I empathize for your specific budgeting issues. And no I'm not looking out for you specifically. I think yes they should cut off potential market - and not to spite gamers, but to ensure that those that do play the game have the same rewarding experience.
I think you missed my point. You're saying "we're" as if I don't own and currently primarily game on a PC. I know good and well there are loads of poor PC gamers, I'm talking about the range of experiences it gives. It allows people to buy better playing versions of the same game when I would rather just have 1 experience. It is unfair that the consoles are likely unafforadable in your country - and I really do wish the console model was more affordable in the developing world.
I'm talking about rich gamers getting better experiences on the same game. Having all consoles gives you more options, but you will play the same experience of the game. I'm no fan of the pro/x upgrades - though the difference especially ps4-pro is minimal compared to the range that PC is giving.
I'm not calling PC gamers rich and privileged, I'm talking about rich gamers getting better experiences of the same game. It's the fact the platform allows vastly better experiences for richer gamers - It gives a wide range. I've seen it first hand what a 9900k and an overclocked 2080ti can do and seen how mid range PC hardware does - The fact of the matter is there's a huge difference (graphically). I do realize your points 100%, though my point remains that the platform gives different experiences based on how much you spend and that spending cap is very high. Yes, I've worked in CAD environments, Nvidia Quadro is a thing for professional environments - I'm talking about gaming cards. I've been primarily a PC gamer for the last 2 years, I don't view all pc gamers as rich nor rotten.
I'm talking about rich gamers getting a better experience of the same game; I empathize for your specific budgeting issues. And no I'm not looking out for you specifically. I think yes they should cut off potential market - and not to spite gamers, but to ensure that those that do play the game have the same rewarding experience.
Oh I get what you mean, I just think it's important to note that while it's true that PC gaming reward you more and more the more money you can sink into it, arguing against games on PC because of that is also arguing against accessibility for games.
I can't disagree that PC gaming "favors rich gamers having a better experience than everyone else" it's true, but arguing for exclusivity/lack of PC version is also arguing against people who don't haves the means of owning multiple platforms, could use favoring a platform with better regional pricing, etc.. It's possibly removing the ability for some to play a game for the sake of not allowing others to have a better experience with it than you ( that better experience becoming cheaper every year for people who wait for it, without the need of hoping that a remaster or remake will be made ).
How does it affect you in any way if someone is playing a game with better performance and graphics than you? This whole thing basically boils down to you wanting to prevent a certain category of gamers to miss out completely on games because of your own jealousy and/or envy. If PC gamers have access to Uncharted 4, you still have access to the same Uncharted 4 you always did. You're not missing out on anything. I stand by what I said that just because someone put their hard-earned money down on a hefty gaming PC instead of potentially 1-3 consoles, does not make them rich. Maybe instead of saving up for 9 months to buy a PS4, they saved up for 18 months to buy a gaming PC? That person should be penalized because they have now been upgraded to a "rich gamer" bracket? What about multi-platform games that already come to PC anyway? Should they limit everyone to the "low" preset to be fair to the folks that bought the game on console?