Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

I just realized, that with the very advanced livery editors in today's racing games, and the amazing liveries that you can create with them, makes me thankful that those are the equivalent of various cosmetic microtransactions in other games, i.e. weapon and character skins, but liveries are free and created mostly by the community. And it's probably thankful that racing games haven't decided to monetize liveries (I think), when they just monetize the cars instead.
From what I heard, Forza's livery editor is "out of date."


I do miss features in games where you can customize aspects in multiplayer at will. Most famous example is Treyarch CoDs with the emblem creator. I believe developers don't have features like this anymore because of the manpower it'd take to moderate community creations.
 
Exactly, the perfect difficulty is one that forces you to engage with more of the game mechanics, not less. For example in Witcher 3 when I play on normal I would walk into monster fights half cocked and still do fine, but on harder difficulties I actually need to do homework on what the monster is and prepare accordingly with potions and oils or else I get trounced.
And Witcher 3 is pretty lenient even on that. Witcher 2 was so much worse at assfucking you for not understanding the Witcher profession.
 
True. I just finished Cyberpunk 2077 with the secret ending and the final boss "supossed" was improved in the last patch.
Man, i just whacked the shit of him like in 3 minutes just using a special electric batton. My level reached the cap long ago and one of the skills capped too. In the highest difficulty.

For as much as I shill CDPR, I'll say they've always been shit about level progression. With how you're always able to hit the level cap ~75% into the game, it's like they have no confidence in or expect people to play through the side content.
 
Gotham Knights could've been better if they just ripped off the Arkham games' combat and didn't make the story about ''LOL RICH PEOPLE BAD''. It's very jarring considering the main good guy is a fucking billionaire who usually picks on poor muggers.
 
Most famous example is Treyarch CoDs with the emblem creator. I believe developers don't have features like this anymore because of the manpower it'd take to moderate community creations.
AC6 has a robust emblem creator, so the dreams not dead yet. Moderating user generated content should huge deal in children games like Lego or Roblox, and frankly creative tools should be tightly controlled or outright removed in games with children being the target audience if the jannies can't keep up. For CoD emblems, I think it is less about children (it is an M rated series after all) and more to do with Twitch Streamers and Esports (which they partner with and promote frequently). Last thing CoD devs want is big juicy anime titties or naughty words flashing on screen after getting killed, with can get a streamer suspended for NSFW content or be shown to thousands during an officially sponsored tournament.
 
Gaming's last golden age was the FPS/shooter boom of the late 2000s and early 2010s. But since it was focused on pleasing dude-bros, and the modern politically-correct establishment hates that, they abandoned what was a successful formula to appease an audience that did not exist.

They could've appeased any other audience, from the Skyrim audience, to the JRPG audience, to countless other gaming niches, but they focused too much on politically-correct nonsense and graphics power-flexing, to the exclusion of all else. Which resulted in most of the gaming world getting their butts kicked by Nintendo, who does nothing but repeat old successful patterns and sell party games to soccer moms.
 
Bioware games have shit final bosses.
ME1: character which constantly jumps around the fight arena
ME2: character who has a weak spot labeled "weak spot" and moves out of sight
ME3: I'm not sure what the final boss was, either it was a giant arena that spammed endless enemies, or it was a dude that you beat with dialogue options and a QTE
DAO: dragon hype ended up being meh
DA2: fight granny
DAI: big joke of a fight, probably one of the easiest in the game
 
I pretty much played those games on New Game Plus where they don't signal the enemy about to hit you. Makes it harder and more challenging; you actually have to watch the enemy as he moves in to punch you in the face.
If you've autistically played and replayed the Arkham games as much as I have, you get pretty good at figuring out the thugs' attack animations. But yeah especially on NG+/Knightmare mode, you definitely can't just spam the counter button, especially once you start getting guys like the knife thugs coming at you.
 
Even fallout NV I think luck is just for crits and gambling, it doesn't improve base chances to hit.
It also effects loot chance iirc. This can have a huge knock on effect as almost every dumpster will have cigarettes (great value-weight ratio early to mid game) and ammo (use to shoot, or near weightless sell items). If it doesn't, then it's also good as it allows access to scrounger and fortune finder, that do similar things.

I think Valkeria Chronicals does Xcom shooting better than Xcom because instead of using percentages it uses a reticle that you manually aim.
I'm current playing Phoenix Point and it has a similar system. I'm still torn on if I like it or not. There's a really bizarre tactic of waiting for certain animations to play so you have a better shot.

I think technically the original Xcom has a similar system where bullets are simulated, as it's possible to miss 100% shots. (Even over 100% shots.)

Mechanicus has hits being guaranteed. It's a good system, but again, not sure if I prefer it or not. It does get rid of the RNG elements, but it introduces some other problems like iffy line of sight questions.

One of Gallop's lesser known games Ghost Recon on 3DS had a system where you did guaranteed minimum damage, with a chance to do extra based on things like cover and range.

From what I heard, Forza's livery editor is "out of date."
I miss Rainbow 6 Vegas where you could import your photo for your face on the Xbox 360 version. There used to be pictures of people took pictures of their pets so you had weird mutant dog and cat people running around.

I believe developers don't have features like this anymore because of the manpower it'd take to moderate community creations.
I'm torn on it. On the one hand, I love driving around in the Jurassic Park jeeps and cool anime cars. On the other, I hated when the game was full of pride flags and horrid anime cars.
 
Jumpy skeleton Saren in Mass Effect was fun to me because it reminded me of mega man X and the wolf robot.

Plus, unlike in most action movies, you get to convince your enemy to eat his gun.
 
If you've autistically played and replayed the Arkham games as much as I have, you get pretty good at figuring out the thugs' attack animations. But yeah especially on NG+/Knightmare mode, you definitely can't just spam the counter button, especially once you start getting guys like the knife thugs coming at you.
Exactly. But the knife thugs can easily be killed by that perk that lets you insta-kill them when you counter them several times.

Jumpy skeleton Saren in Mass Effect was fun to me because it reminded me of mega man X and the wolf robot.

Plus, unlike in most action movies, you get to convince your enemy to eat his gun.
It's more fun to fight him twice. Also, jumpy skeleton Saren isn't that hard once you blow past his shields and use Lift on him. He just floats serenely as your dudes gun him down.

Also, a fully-upgraded shotgun with explosive ammo can stagger him when his shields go down.

Bioware games have shit final bosses.
ME1: character which constantly jumps around the fight arena
That makes him challenging, unless you have fully-upgraded biotics and shotgun.
ME2: character who has a weak spot labeled "weak spot" and moves out of sight
He can one-hit-kill you and he has soldiers to aid him, making it challenging. Of course, snipers and soldiers can pretty much fuck the weak spot into the dirt.
ME3: I'm not sure what the final boss was, either it was a giant arena that spammed endless enemies, or it was a dude that you beat with dialogue options and a QTE
There was no final boss; Casey Hudson wanted to do something artsy by not having a final boss. It failed.
DAO: dragon hype ended up being meh
Exactly what I said about Legatus Lanius and Frank Horrigan going up against max-level players who can eat the damage they dish out and deal more damage in turn.
DA2: fight granny
LOL that was funny. But rather cliche. Religious lady turns out to be nuts. How predictable.
DAI: big joke of a fight, probably one of the easiest in the game
That fight made me laugh, given the character they made into the final boss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadfan666xxx000
There's a really bizarre tactic of waiting for certain animations to play so you have a better shot.
Isn't that common in shooters? Like in Grand Theft Auto Online where you'd wait for enemies to stand up again because 99% of the time headshots don't register when enemies are on the ground, and bodyshots do no damage whatsoever. Or Earth Defense Force 5, where, if you're going for headshots on the colonists, you wait for them to do their flinching animation so you get a better shot at the head instead of hitting a hand.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Judge Dredd
I picked the Stormcloaks because i love my romanticised Viking shit (real life Viks were little shits, but damn it, the idea behind them is so cool!) and the only thing i'd complain about in the storyline is not giving you an option to lead the Stormcloaks yourself, having overtaken Ulfric by force or by some other method.

It makes sense to be just another pawn of the Empire since they're a much bigger force, but the Cloaks should've had that option available considering youre playing as the Jesus of Skyrim
 
Unpopular opinion: location-based hit detection, especially headshots, has ruined first-person shooters, because it's expected to be in every game. Realism in games should be a spectrum, but in basically every game that isn't an outright milsim, the players expect pinpoint accuracy + instakill headshots, so aiming at the center of mass is objectively the wrong way to play in every single FPS now.

I love Xcom, but won't play it above normal because the game rigs the dice in the CPUs favour.

No, it doesn't. This has been investigated again and again. The RNG in XCOM exhibits no discernible bias and behaves exactly like you'd expect it to. Human brains just aren't wired to understand randomness, so if something has a 5% of failure, and they fail twice, they think the game is rigged, when in fact the only way to prevent double-failures is to rig the game.
 
Last edited:
It also effects loot chance iirc. This can have a huge knock on effect as almost every dumpster will have cigarettes (great value-weight ratio early to mid game) and ammo (use to shoot, or near weightless sell items). If it doesn't, then it's also good as it allows access to scrounger and fortune finder, that do similar things.
Luck doesn't affect loot chance at all, plus scrounger and fortune finder aren't that useful, you're better off starting with 7 or 8 luck and clearing out casinos and you'll be rolling in caps, I think with 8 luck you're basically guaranteed to clear out blackjack tables eventually, at 9 at 10 it's just way faster. That being said, there's really no excuse not to have high luck for most builds, crit builds are insane in New Vegas unless you're doing something like explosives or automatic weapons since they get zero or barely any benefit from crits.
 
No, it doesn't. This has been investigated again and again. The RNG in XCOM exhibits no discernible bias and behaves exactly like you'd expect it to. Human brains just aren't wired to understand randomness, so if something has a 5% of failure, and they fail twice, they think the game is rigged, when in fact the only way to prevent double-failures is to rig the game.
Randomness bias always reminds me of that funny story about how iTunes' engineers had to make the way it randomly chooses songs less random in order to appear more random. Because the simple random implementation had too many repeats, or would linger on a single artist for too long.

That being said, if I were designing a game where critical events are RNG-based, you can bet your cherry red ass I would make it appear random, but it wouldn't be random at all. If an attack has a 50% chance to hit, and the player misses, the next opportunity will still display 50%, but will silently kick up to 55%. Another miss? 60%. And so on and so forth until you're guaranteed a hit. The player won't care because they're just happy to progress, and will feel luckier than they actually are. Of course, I'd try to do playtesting to get the percentage curves to feel honest, because players would eventually catch on that they're winning a few too many hits than they should.
 
Games are too easy these days, and that makes them all boring and gay. Every single game is just "press forward to win" now, and it's boring as fuck.
don't buy new games, emulate, save state, action replay, fast forward, old ones and relive that retro experience at a lower cost and time scale freeing up time for more productive activities
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lowlife Adventures
I think it was....Civ IV where they talked about how they had to tweak the dice rolls because while players could accept not winning a 2:1 strength fight with a crushing outcome, they would get pretty upset with the same outcome at say 20:10.

In a way I agree with the players because the latter would cause more snowballing, but I guarantee that's not what most people are thinking about because apparently quite a few people have a hard time understanding rng.
 
Self identified "gamers" are gay, if video game player is your personality you are almost certainly a weeping, easily hurt loser who is not only undesirable to women but also likely schizophrenic and highly probably overweight and ugly etc. You also deserve to be stigmatized etc.

Its literally the same as a niggerball fanatic who's entire persona is based around niggers running and jumping about etc.
 
Last edited:
I think it was....Civ IV where they talked about how they had to tweak the dice rolls because while players could accept not winning a 2:1 strength fight with a crushing outcome, they would get pretty upset with the same outcome at say 20:10.

In a way I agree with the players because the latter would cause more snowballing, but I guarantee that's not what most people are thinking about because apparently quite a few people have a hard time understanding rng.
I can see that kind of making sense, though, because losing two of your guys to your enemy's one can be justified that your enemy just has one especially badass guy. It would be way less probable in a real life scenario for your enemy to happen to have ten badasses that can take on two guys at once. Even though there's nothing actually supporting the unit's individuality in Civ 4, and it's all dice rolls. That's a point where role playing and mechanics clash.
 
Back