Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[Raging Capybara]

. I’m surprised Xbox still even exists today

I'm too, but according to every leaked e-mail and rumors out there, it's a lock at this point they are not going to make any consoles anymore.

Series X|S was a pathetic but deserving end to the brand.

 

[WULULULULU]

Is Reach really that hated? I mean, I did like Reach originally as the 'conclusion' to the series (well, at the time) similar to MGSV. AKA, it's the prequel that takes place 'just before the start of the franchise' but that's just referring to the story.

Gameplay wise, all I can remember was Armor abilities and the DMR instead of Battle Rifle.

I mean in the case, the blueprint was Bungie's Destiny. The one game that turned live-service "gaming" into the mainstream.

 

[PAM Cooking Spray]

The one game that turned live-service "gaming" into the mainstream.

world of warcraft?

 

[WULULULULU]

world of warcraft?

I'm referring to the correlation between Halo Reach and Destiny. WoW just took a page from Everquest and added the Warcraft title after Frozen Throne succeeded.

 

[TVB]

I'm referring to the correlation between Halo Reach and Destiny. WoW just took a page from Everquest and added the Warcraft title after Frozen Throne succeeded.

So not Guild Wars?

 

[The Ugly One]

I'm too, but according to every leaked e-mail and rumors out there, it's a lock at this point they are not going to make any consoles anymore.

Series X|S was a pathetic but deserving end to the brand.

The decision that calling them "Xbox 2, Xbox 3," etc would confuse people, but "Xbox One X" and "Xbox Series X" are fine is itself one of the most confusing branding decisions I've ever heard of. I'm still never quite sure whether someone is talking about the current-gen or last-gen systems.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

I barely understand Xbox's naming convention. Last gen was Xbox One but there was an Xbox One S, right? I have no idea, guessing it's the Pro model equivalent.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

I barely understand Xbox's naming convention. Last gen was Xbox One but there was an Xbox One S, right? I have no idea, guessing it's the Pro model equivalent.

One X was the "pro" model

One S was more akin to a Playstation refresh or "slim" model. It was also digital only IIRC, or eventually became digital only.

With the "Series" line, X is the 4k model and S is the budget, digital only model.

 

[Pissmaster]

One S was more akin to a Playstation refresh or "slim" model. It was also digital only IIRC, or eventually became digital only.

Yeah, One S had a disc drive, and later got a refresh that was just the same but without the disc drive and $50 cheaper. "Xbox One S All Digital Edition", or "Xbox One S.A.D e)

With the "Series" line, X is the 4k model and S is the budget, digital only model.

X is the 4k model and that refresh that got leaked late last year showed its next model is slated to be digital only, too, because I guess they just really wanna kill the line once and for all.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

X is the 4k model and that refresh that got leaked late last year showed its next model is slated to be digital only

There's also been leaks that state the refresh was scrapped a while ago and that Xbox is foregoing a refresh to just release a new model. So it's really all up in the air.

I don't doubt that the future is all digital though. Neither Microsoft or Sony has been shy about this.

 

[The Ugly One]

Yeah, One S had a disc drive, and later got a refresh that was just the same but without the disc drive and $50 cheaper. "Xbox One S All Digital Edition", or "Xbox One S.A.D e)

"Xbox 2 and Xbox 3 confuse people. They will think we are a generation behind the PS3 and PS4. Xbone and Xbone SAD are good names for products. I am very smart."

 

[TVB]

The decision that calling them "Xbox 2, Xbox 3," etc would confuse people, but "Xbox One X" and "Xbox Series X" are fine is itself one of the most confusing branding decisions I've ever heard of. I'm still never quite sure whether someone is talking about the current-gen or last-gen systems.

The idea of naming Xbox 360 made sense not because of its 360 gigabites of graphics, but rather its the one console, as in the 360 number spins round onto one. But then, the focus group thought its next console, Xbox One, was the perfect name when it's not. It's just another "one console" following after "one console."

 

[skykiii]

Sooo... wasn't sure whether to heave my autistic thought here or into the Souls Thread. Seems more appropriate here, cuz I remember there was discussion months back about Soulsborne and how they actually suck or something.

I don't know if I agree with that so much, but there is one thing that always bothered me.

Frankly, they're a perfect example of how too much detail ruins a thing.

Here's what I mean:

Every single boss fight where you're facing a giant thing.... when you get right down to it, the fight is basically "you keep hitting them in their feet until that kills them. Somehow."

It's like, I can't take that seriously or really get "immersed." Its blatantly gamey. In a weird way old menu-based RPGs made more sense because I wasn't actually seeing what happened so I was free to make shit up. But here, I'm apparently in a world where everyone's major weakness is in their fucking heels, like Achilles fucked and created worlds full of monsters who all carried on his genetic weakness.

Anyway, just a thought.

 

[TheHarbinger]

Every single boss fight where you're facing a giant thing.... when you get right down to it, the fight is basically "you keep hitting them in their feet until that kills them. Somehow."

It's like, I can't take that seriously or really get "immersed." Its blatantly gamey.

The better you are at Demons Souls and its successors the more ridiculous the gameplay looks. Rolling around like a spastic to avoid giant swords and hammers and spells. Pausing mid combat against a 50ft tall monster to casually drink from your flask. Running in circles around a monster and whacking its tail over and over while it clumsily spins in a circle helplessly. The optimal strategies for most games tend to make the mechanic look broken or ridiculous. Souls games are no exception.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

One X was the "pro" model

One S was more akin to a Playstation refresh or "slim" model. It was also digital only IIRC, or eventually became digital only.

With the "Series" line, X is the 4k model and S is the budget, digital only model.

If even a video game obsessed nerd like me doesn't follow this shit properly there's no way to deny their marketing team is retarded.

Sooo... wasn't sure whether to heave my autistic thought here or into the Souls Thread. Seems more appropriate here, cuz I remember there was discussion months back about Soulsborne and how they actually suck or something.

I don't know if I agree with that so much, but there is one thing that always bothered me.

Frankly, they're a perfect example of how too much detail ruins a thing.

Here's what I mean:

Every single boss fight where you're facing a giant thing.... when you get right down to it, the fight is basically "you keep hitting them in their feet until that kills them. Somehow."

It's like, I can't take that seriously or really get "immersed." Its blatantly gamey. In a weird way old menu-based RPGs made more sense because I wasn't actually seeing what happened so I was free to make shit up. But here, I'm apparently in a world where everyone's major weakness is in their fucking heels, like Achilles fucked and created worlds full of monsters who all carried on his genetic weakness.

Anyway, just a thought.

Yeah, I was playing Valkyria Revolution at one point and the first boss you fight is huge, and you just end up mainly attacking the feet. It just looks dumb, whether it even makes sense or not it isn't interesting. It didn't help that the combat sucked either.

 

[skykiii]

Yeah, I was playing Valkyria Revolution at one point and the first boss you fight is huge, and you just end up mainly attacking the feet. It just looks dumb, whether it even makes sense or not it isn't interesting. It didn't help that the combat sucked either.

Yeah I got to discussing this with friends offline, coming up with theories like "maybe when they hit zero HP is when they start worrying that they've gotten tetanus or gangrene and need to see a doctor."

In a weird way its something that made older games make more sense. Like in something like NES-era Dragon Warrior, sure presumably some of those monsters are big, but I don't actually see what I'm doing--the hero could be pulling some anime antics. When you actually SEE your character killing monsters by hitting their feet, it gets kinda silly.

To be fair though this goes for most games where you fight giant things. Even Breath of the Wild.

In fact probably the one game that doesn't have this issue is Shadow of the Colossus, where A) all the spots you stab colossi in are places where realistically a vital organ would be and B) the game hedges its bets by saying its magic anyway.

I never understood why that first colossus couldn't just reach onto its head and scratch you off or pick you up and throw you though.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

In fact probably the one game that doesn't have this issue is Shadow of the Colossus

God of War comes to mind too, but yeah, there's few games which actually let you do "realistic" looking damage. Even if you can hit other parts of the body it doesn't usually feel like you're hitting a particularly vulnerable spot. Like Kingdom Hearts, yeah, you're attacking specific points but it doesn't have that visceral feel of the games we mentioned.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

The better you are at Demons Souls and its successors the more ridiculous the gameplay looks. Rolling around like a spastic to avoid giant swords and hammers and spells. Pausing mid combat against a 50ft tall monster to casually drink from your flask. Running in circles around a monster and whacking its tail over and over while it clumsily spins in a circle helplessly. The optimal strategies for most games tend to make the mechanic look broken or ridiculous. Souls games are no exception.

Reminds me of how some Skyrim players would chug potions in the middle of a fight with a dragon or a giant. Or how some Fallout players jam multiple stimpacks in while they're fighting some Deathclaws or some power-armored dudes from the Brotherhood of Steel/Enclave. It just boils down to dodging, running around in circles, and chugging as much health items as possible to keep fighting. Realistically, that would look fucking hilarious. Imagine a guy who's circling his enemy while chugging health potions like Mountain Dew and whacking the enemy's foot again and again.

It just makes me wonder how these players would handle other games back in the old days. Jedi Outcast and Academy are not so clear-cut with their bosses; even if you have every advantage in the book, if a Dark Jedi enemy gets a lucky hit in, you get hurt. And if they get a critical hit, you're dead in a single slash. You have to position yourself so that your blade strikes can hit, but theirs can't, and you actually have to withdraw from battle to cast a healing spell if you get hit too often; you can't just cast it in the middle of battle or you'll get slaughtered by the enemy when you run out of energy. The fact that the enemy doesn't have predictable patterns would be a source of consternation for these players, since they're used to bad guys with patterns to predict.

Hell, I can just imagine Halo Reach's Elites giving them a hard time, since the higher-ranking Elites adapt to your tactics, not the other way around; if you take cover, they start chucking grenades. If you have a sniper weapon, they start zig-zagging or try to sneak past your vision so they can attack you from behind. If you stick them with a sticky grenade, they run at you so that you'll die when it explodes. Souls players are most comfortable facing enemies with predictable patterns; an enemy that isn't predictable, or one that predicts the player's actions, ought to give them pause.

 

[The Hardest R]

The idea of naming Xbox 360 made sense not because of its 360 gigabites of graphics, but rather its the one console, as in the 360 number spins round onto one. But then, the focus group thought its next console, Xbox One, was the perfect name when it's not. It's just another "one console" following after "one console."

They named it Xbox 360 precisely because they needed it to be called 3 to go head-to-head with the PlayStation 3. They called it Xbox One because they thought people would call it “The One,” which means people would suddenly just forget about the PlayStation 4 since it was not The One. If you think that’s dumb, well, they thought packaging the Kinect with it was a good idea too.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

If even a video game obsessed nerd like me doesn't follow this shit properly there's no way to deny their marketing team is retarded.

IDk. I think their general naming conventions are dumb (360, One, Series), but I think the "X" and "S" designations are pretty obvious, especially compared to "Pro" and "Slim"