Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

If the authors don't care about the story then why should I?
I think it's actually worse than the authors simply not caring about the story. I think the Japanese DO care about JRPG stories, but Japanese culture is totally cool with the same conventions, the same tropes, the same janky plot contrivances, and the same ass pulls over and over and over again.

I always think of the Kingdom Hearts series. You can't tell me Nomura and his team don't care a whole hell of a lot about the story and characters of that franchise - they're just cataclysmically terrible writers, so with every game they just slap another layer of needlessly convoluted nonsense on top of the world's most generic "overcoming an ancient evil though the power of friendship" anime plot.

Or that most games are still animated for 30FPS that is then interpolated to 60FPS.
Hey, don't knock interpolation. I'm never going to be some e-sports faggot who's concerned about MUH INPUT DELAY, but my eyes very much appreciate the smoothed animations.
 
Hey, don't knock interpolation. I'm never going to be some e-sports faggot who's concerned about MUH INPUT DELAY, but my eyes very much appreciate the smoothed animations.
Oh, don't take it that way, I'm absolutely not saying interpolation is bad. I'm just pointing out how 30FPS is still the (un)official standard for gaming, since that's basically "lifelike" movement.
 
I'll never not find it funny how so many people made a big deal about how you could play GTA V and RDR2 at 60 FPS on PC, but then it turned out that RAGE isn't actually designed around 60 FPS so every fucking fabric effect (flags, inflatable arm men, banners, dresses, etc.) look goofy as fuck moving around like they're underwater and shit.

You'd think it wouldn't be a big deal, but it's surprising just how many of these things end up being shown in loading areas for interiors in GTA V/Online, and how the dresses on women will just randomly wig out in RDR2.
 
If the authors don't care about the story then why should I?
You shouldn't. But I think people screeching "THIS GAYME CHANGED MY LIEF!" are setting an expectation for you the games can't meet which is probably effecting your appreciation of what they do offer.

Even my favorite JRPGs don't have life-changing stories, Chrono Trigger is amazing but its story isn't revolutionary or particularly well told, it's just solid and ties together with the time travel mechanics and decisions you make really well for an SNES game. That's part of what makes it good.

But I'd be lying to people and probably setting the game up for failure if I sold the story itself as hard as some people do with their favorites.
 
9 times out of 10 if someone tells me that a game, or specifically its story, changed their life, it turns out they played it when they were like 8-14 and never fucking realized that they were just some dumbass kid who had zero life experience to know any better. It doesn't take away from what the game meant to you at the time to get some fucking perspective and self awareness to realize you were just a kid playing a game.

It's why I think it is so prevalent among Kojima cultists and JRPG fans (and weebs in general, I guess)

Once I grew up and realized that none of these games had particularly great stories (or hell, even great gameplay or design), they actually become a lot more enjoyable because I'm not expecting the fucking world from them.
 
MGS2 was crazy but it did have a good story. The first one was kinda basic and had a simple twist
"Basic and simple" are the best kind of Japanese game stories. More complexity just leads to a bunch of nonsense with plot threads that go nowhere, plot conveniences that appear with zero foreshadowing, and sophomoric mental masturbation.

The vast, vast majority of MGS2's "story" was told in one giant exposition dump by two literal disembodied talking heads and had vanishingly little to do with the actual events of the game.
 
Last edited:
"Basic and simple" are the best kind of Japanese game stories. More complexity just leads to a bunch of nonsense with plot threads that go nowhere, plot conveniences that appear with zero foreshadowing, and sophomoric mental masturbation.

The vast, vast majority of MGS2's "story" was told in one giant exposition dump by a two literal disembodied talking heads and had vanishingly little to do with the actual events of the game.
They, to my remembrance, orchestrated the entire events of the game. There was a lot of foreshadowing too when you look back, that something was wrong with the events. Much of it was subtle and only something you'd notice upon revisiting it, at least until they hit you over the head recreating the Ocelot torture chamber.

There were a lot of plot conveniences though, MGS is pretty bad about that. Things just happen because they need to.

I'm not saying it was perfect, but it was good, very interesting.
 
They, to my remembrance, orchestrated the entire events of the game.
A long monologue at the end of a story by a shadowy figure saying "mwa-ha-ha, everything has gone according to keikaku" is not good storytelling.

There was a lot of foreshadowing too when you look back, that something was wrong with the events. Much of it was subtle and only something you'd notice upon revisiting it,
The idea that the structure of MGS2 is eerily similar to MGS1 for story reasons would hold more water if not for the fact that MGS1's structure was already eerily similar to Metal Gear 2 for no reason at all. The games all have the same beats because Kojima is a lazy hack.
 
Last edited:
A long monologue at the end of a story by a shadowy figure saying "mwa-ha-ha, everything has gone according to keikaku" is not good storytelling.
In isolation it's not, but there's a lot of layers with the characters and things didn't exactly conclude with things going their way, which leads into MGS4 (which butchered everything they setup). It's as much the execution and unique elements of how the story unfolded than just the story itself, it's a pretty good ride.

The idea that the structure MGS2 is eerily similar to MGS1 for story reasons would hold more water if not for the fact that MGS1's structure was already eerily similar to Metal Gear 2 for no reason at all. The games all have the same beats because Kojima is a lazy hack.
Fair, but let's be real, everybody started with MGS1, and I feel like MGS1 was purposefully designed in a way that lets it stand on it's own despite canonically being a sequel because they knew that.
 
If you don't mind me asking, at what age did you play Metal Gear Solid 2?
14 or 15 probably, but I'm trying to be objective. There's a lot of games I'm nostalgic for that I know aren't good, and to reiterate I'm not saying the story in MGS2 is phenomenal or anything, but it's certainly interesting (in its execution if nothing else).

...But maybe I could be subconsciously sprucing it up a bit.
 
I think it's actually worse than the authors simply not caring about the story. I think the Japanese DO care about JRPG stories, but Japanese culture is totally cool with the same conventions, the same tropes, the same janky plot contrivances, and the same ass pulls over and over and over again.
Seriously. It cannot be understated how bad the situation there is.

Even a game series that is supposed to be about mythological demons just lifts design cues from tokusatsu stuff now.
 
The only way anyone should be able to determine a difference is in blinded trials.

You know, like the ones where they tried blinded tests of sommeliers and it turned out that they can't tell the difference between the most expensive wines and those that are moderately priced.
 
9 times out of 10 if someone tells me that a game, or specifically its story, changed their life, it turns out they played it when they were like 8-14 and never fucking realized that they were just some dumbass kid who had zero life experience to know any better. It doesn't take away from what the game meant to you at the time to get some fucking perspective and self awareness to realize you were just a kid playing a game.
This is very, very true, and I am guilty of it myself. It's easy to remember the feelings a game gave us as kids, and that's enough to trick us into giving it undeserved praise years later. Revisiting some of my favorite 3D Zelda titles on the PC, updated with fanmade 4K texture packs, QoL mods, etc., was a wake-up call for me.

When I'm having discussions with 30-year-olds about video games and they insist a JRPG made in the late 90s was the "greatest game of all time" or similar hyperbole, it's super annoying. More often than not, it means they're not open to new experiences and you can't have rational back-and-forths with them.

I'll say unironically that Bloodborne changed my life, though. I did start playing that game at 14 and kept playing it for the next 4-5 years consistently. Every now and I again I return to it. I was a "casual" before that game who hated any sort of challenge or difficulty, now I crave it.

I also wouldn't have been able to reconnect to my long-distance crush, now spouse, if we hadn't shared our PSNs to play it together years ago. I dread to think what my life would be without Bloodborne, haha.
 
Back