Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

It is a more consistent game if nothing else. The first two thirds of the first game will always be my favorite of the series, up until the famous twist, but everything thereafter is frankly dogshit.
I also think Bioshock 2 has more enjoyable level design and theming. In Bioshock 2 you get to go through Ryan Amusements which is a pretty damn funny parody of Disneyland meets Ayn Rand.
Years later Bioshock Infinite tried to rehash it with the Carnival. While I'm not going to argue that Infinite was entirely bad (got a huge laugh from the statue of John Wilkes Booth) I think 2 did a better job at satire.

In Bioshock the Objectivism went balls to the walls insane because Ryan refused to put a stop to video game-fantasy crystal meth/PCP. In Infinite the World's Fair of Columbia went insane because the USA was mad over Columbia getting too gung-ho during the Boxer Rebellion? I dunno maybe it's better explained in the game and I've forgotten it but Comstock/Booker turning himself into a cult leader and his wife becoming a Ghost Boss just went far into crazy fantasy. Where Bioshock 1 and 2 was also fantasy but the story felt grounded and laced with clear symbolism.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Pig Boss
Video game glitches shouldn't be fixed, especially if it's amusing and entertaining to play with unless it messes up the game as a whole or makes it unplayable. It adds more fun to the game. Or at least give an option to patch glitches by the own players choosing whether to update or not. So if you don't want the glitches on then you can disable them. For example, one part of a patch will have glitches while another part of the patch won't. I guess it's too much of a hassle but it's a cool thought. I find it charming rather than annoying. But it depends on how bad the glitches are. Unlike Cyberpunk 2077, that was a complete shit show.

On another note, I feel like a lot of modern video games aren't as interesting anymore. Unless you really look for them through indie games or otherwise. Mainly AAA titles. A lot of them play it safe when it comes to designing and developing new games. I remember playing vastly different and unique PS2 and PS3 games as a kid. Now everything feels the same. There's barely any creativity.
 
Last edited:
Frostpunk is actually rather enlightening about how fascism can rise and why it might not always be a bad thing all things considered.
Seriously, play The Last Autumn and you will want to throw down the fucking whip at these workers, they annoy you that fucking much.

"Yeah, we know this might be the end times, but, ya know, ya cant overwork us! We will go on strike! Over and over and over! We dont care that we will be frozen by the winter in just a few day's time. Workers unite!"

Gotta say, pretty based of Frostpunk to say workers union is just a bunch of annoying selfish lazy motherfuckers who cant and wont see the greater picture.

Edit: oh yeah, forgot to mention I hate The Last Autumn with a burning passion that challenges the great storm itself. What a fucking shit stain of an expansion.
 

Six Days in Fallujah has no place in today's gaming industry. The FPS market has homogenized into Hollywood set pieces, into GaaS for formulaic PvP multiplayer, NOW towards revisionism through social politics and monetization.

I'm not even talking about its subject matter. If you can make a game on WW2, WW1, Middle East, Vietnam, Fallujah shouldn't be excluded from that.

However, in today's age, how would such a game be marketed and monetized without losing its authenticity and intent? Maybe a single player only approach a la Wolfenstein? Tell the events in a Half Life fashion?

Multiplayer in such a title WOULD NOT last; it would go down the drain like Spec Ops: The Line's offering.
 
Contra Rouge Corps is a half decent game. A solid 6 out of 10.
contra.png

^that's unflattering
 
  • Like
Reactions: José Mourinho
Also Black Isle's successor made NWN2 - that game's original campaign is shit too.
To give the original NWN some credit, it was meant to be an online game with user created campaigns/settings and that's where all the fun was... supposed to be, but faggot role players with stupid rules started shitting it up. The time stop spell worked in multiplayer and there was an easy integer overflow exploit that could be used to get 255 of them, that made people salty.
 
I'll one-up you: the entire Jak trilogy is the most overrated series of PS2 games that exists. It's, as far as I know, once of the first series of truly awful games that nobody at the time noticed was bad due to the graphics.

Jak 1 is the best game in the series, but it's a glorified Banjo-Kazooie clone, and when the best game is a brainless collect-a-thon, you know we're in for a treat.
Jak 2 takes the ending of Jak 1 and just kind of ignores it, pivots to a new story on a non sequitur, and gives you an okay platformer broken up with bad shooting and even worse driving.
Jak 3 decides that apparently Jak 2 didn't do enough to ruin the coherence of the story and setting, throws the whole thing into the garbage again, launches off in a new direction that requires you basically to forget the first two games, and once again has bad shooting, mediocre platforming...and surprisingly decent driving. Really, the driving is pretty fun. The trilogy then ends with cheap sight gag instead of any kind of satisfying payoff.

Also, Daxter isn't funny.
I played the Jak trilogy for the first time a few weeks ago, I was pretty excited to finally play a franchise I had missed during my teens, but heard so much good about. Cue the deception.

First game felt like discount Spyro 1. The levels are colorful and all but the game is pretty boring. "Complete the levels, collect gems and oh, would you bother freeing dragons along the way too?" wasn't much but was much more engaging than "we need X power cells to progress, let's ask the villagers" and the villagers saying "please help me by collecting Y precursor orbs". Jak is flat. Daxter is annoying af.

Second game felt very unnecessarily dark and edgy, maybe they saw Warriors Within and Shadow the Edgehog and were afraid that their game would look too childish and be mocked. The platforming was awful, I didn't play much.

Third game I played even less because the gameplay was just as terrible as Jak II.

Lost Frontier was better but still too boring. I didn't play Daxter.

Not sure how this franchise became successful at all, it's worse than games from the previous generation, and on its own generation, is surrounded by better platformers and furry-starred games alike. Jak is a textbook example of rose-tinted glasses.
 
Chrono Cross is a good game. I see it getting shit on a lot and none of these people ever seem to have a valid argument for why they dislike it. It just comes across as Chrono Trigger autists going “REEEEE ITS NOT THE SAME AS BEFORE!!!”

Still has one of the best soundtracks from any rpg I’ve played as well. Another World still gets stuck in my head
 
Chrono Cross is a good game. I see it getting shit on a lot and none of these people ever seem to have a valid argument for why they dislike it. It just comes across as Chrono Trigger autists going “REEEEE ITS NOT THE SAME AS BEFORE!!!”

Still has one of the best soundtracks from any rpg I’ve played as well. Another World still gets stuck in my head
Maybe it has something to do with a roster size of over 40+ and most of the characters fall into two categories, Good and Sucks. And add to the fact that the Good characters are only about 20% of the roster, could have just shrunk the roster down and maybe put some more effort into the good characters or make the story a little more coherent or both.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kulee Baba
Maybe it has something to do with a roster size of over 40+ and most of the characters fall into two categories, Good and Sucks. And add to the fact that the Good characters are only about 20% of the roster, could have just shrunk the roster down and maybe put some more effort into the good characters or make the story a little more coherent or both.
Other RPGs have pulled this off like the 4 Cold Steel games and they had a couple dozen active party members by the end. The Whole final Dungeon was a multi stage process of sending 4 groups of 4 to each disable a lock and then sending the other people to fight the main boss.

The previous games had the final boss requiring multiple teams to take them down and you needed to set up a full party for each phase so you needed like 12 characters and their back ups.
 
Other RPGs have pulled this off like the 4 Cold Steel games and they had a couple dozen active party members by the end. The Whole final Dungeon was a multi stage process of sending 4 groups of 4 to each disable a lock and then sending the other people to fight the main boss.

The previous games had the final boss requiring multiple teams to take them down and you needed to set up a full party for each phase so you needed like 12 characters and their back ups.
Yea FF6 did it also with a few multi party dungeons and there were only a few stinkers compared to CCross.
 
The Diablo-like arpg subgenre overall is just garbage.

I say this as someone who's poured thousands of hours into it. The genre has existed for 25 years and there's your Gold Standard titles: Diablo 2, Path of Exile - then there's everything else. In 25 years, there's 2 standout titles. Some people will argue titles like Grim Dawn or Titan Quest are also up there with the greats, but that's arguable (I personally like Grim Dawn but the aesthetic and clunkiness can be off putting). Opinions will differ but the consensus is D2 and PoE stand head and shoulders above the rest. And even saying all of that, PoE can pose problems in that it's a game you'll need a guide to be able to enjoy it and deal with minimal frustration.

I guess if you don't care about endgame YMMV, but I'd argue that the endgame is when the game truly begins.
 
FF 4 on the DS was great, its just normies couldnt stand the greater challenge because they are so used with FF4 being the most casual of the SNES trilogy.

If kid me could beat Zeromus, so can your grown ass .


Also, speaking on that, FF5's job system is still the best that the series ever had (and the fact that the remasters ignored any improvements from the GBA port is stupid as fucking hell)


And Galuf's death was far sadder than Aerith's
This is probably more about me being an oldfag but it'd be way more interesting to see someone like Kain than Cloud and Sephiroth. He has a cool design and a cool moveset, but I also happen to think that VII is a horribly overrated average at best game so there you go.

Honestly, I dare say that The Warrior of Light would be best to represent Final Fantasy (he was legit the first hero of the series and the most traditional and noble of the bunch).
But then you remember that FF7 is the most casual normie friendly entry of the series so of course we both not only one but TWO representives.

Which is hilarious because Square Enix, at least for a while, developted a fucking grudge with Nintendo after 6.
I tried playing Far Cry 3 recently... and let me just say, it reminds me exactly of why I never play Ubisoft games: these games feel like a fucking CHORE.

So many fucking mechanics I can't be arsed to care about, so many lazy game design choices and things that I hate in a game, so many mechanics that basically punish you for... uh, doing exactly what the game wants you to do. Perfect punishment for your children if they're mis behaving: force them to play an hour of any Far Cry game.

I think the problem is that Far Cry 3's gameplay isnt anything to write about nowadays and worse of all, the franchise hasnt progressed much from it since.

Chrono Cross is a good game. I see it getting shit on a lot and none of these people ever seem to have a valid argument for why they dislike it. It just comes across as Chrono Trigger autists going “REEEEE ITS NOT THE SAME AS BEFORE!!!”

Still has one of the best soundtracks from any rpg I’ve played as well. Another World still gets stuck in my head

C.C is a good game

Just not a good sequel
 
Back