Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

I used to think that, but with so many games moving to action and with all the faggots with the attention spans of teenage girls acting like FF7 is the BEST THING EVAH.....fuck action combat. Outlaw it.

I guess sometimes you do need to put your foot down lol

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

I used to think that, but with so many games moving to action and with all the faggots with the attention spans of teenage girls acting like FF7 is the BEST THING EVAH.....fuck action combat. Outlaw it.

Then you might as well not play a video game. Just go full pen and paper with some figurines. Video games were built on action-combat simulation.

And again, action-combat RPGs are far more successful games than turn-based games. Hence why there's more of the former than the latter; more people bought the former, which suggested to the suits that it's what people want, which got them to make more of it.

Again, this is simple market economics. Caveman see thing make money, caveman sells more of thing to get more money.

Also, faggots with the attention spans of teenage girls have always been a thing with RPGs. Even turn-based ones. Even the older games. More modern action-RPG games just beat them at their game. After all, FF7 IS a turn-based game.

Turn-based games were a thing when we didn't have the technology to create action games with complex stats for each character. Now that's not longer the case, action-RPG games went on a boom and beat the JRPGs for the first time. Skyrim was the first WRPG that Japanese devs gave a shit about, because it was that much of a success. Not because it was built on the back of previous games, but because it's easy to pick up and play.

And gaming, in the end, is all about ease of access and play. The first video games didn't need statistics sheets and hours of stat-based mingling; they just have you picking up a controller and playing.

 

[BULLY HUNTER_78]

Has anyone in this thread had a chance to play Aliens: Dark Descent recently? I’ve been having a lot of fun with it. My only gripes are there are too many nigger NPCs and there’s an obvious self-insert girl boss psychologist, desperately pretending therapy is a legitimate science. So, naturally my marines become “traumatized” after mowing down waves of aliens in carefully constructed kill zones so she doesn’t spend the whole game with her thumb up her ass.

I like how I can customize all my marines to be a glorious Arian master race though. I also like how scary the aliens are at max difficulty, when they can one-shot my marines. I thought it was going to be turn-based like XCOM but they actually managed to make it more-or-less real-time.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Video games were built on action-combat simulation.

Not true, the very first games were turn-based, like Bertie the Brain.

And again, action-combat RPGs are far more successful games than turn-based games.

Spoiler

Pokemon.

Again, this is simple market economics. Caveman see thing make money, caveman sells more of thing to get more money.

What's baffling is that's not even true.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Not true, the very first games were turn-based, like Bertie the Brain.

Turn-based means you can put the controller down and take a shit while the AI waits on you to finish your turn. Not sure Pong does that.

Spoiler

Pokemon.

Pokemon is currently losing to Palworld.

What's baffling is that's not even true.

The last great push for WRPGs happened in the late 2000s to the early 2010s. Mass Effect 1-3, Fallout 3 and New Vegas, Elder Scrolls 4 and 5, Witcher 2 and 3, World of Warcraft, and SWTOR. This led to the height of WRPG craze and allowed them to beat the JRPGs. Most of them were not turn-based.

 

[Pissmaster]

"Morrowind players only think they like it, if they actually encountered a challenge they would run to a strategy guide", go fuck yourself with that. A lot of us did play the game and didn't need no goddamned strategy guide.

That's not what I said at all. I mentioned how new players won't know certain mechanics unless a guide or a friend tells them. This is because the game itself either doesn't explain things, or doesn't do it well. I can't remember, I haven't played Morrowind in a very long time. Regardless, I didn't have a guide, so I just bummed around for a while and shelved it. It was fun to explore when I wasn't getting hammered by enemies and had to put up with the worst combat I've ever seen in a game. Ys-style bumper car combat would have been an improvement over just mashing left click while staying stationary and having no visible feedback to ensure your attacks are connecting.

Why am I discussing a game I don't like that I haven't even played for at least 15 years?

And New Vegas - as I've said many times ITT, probably my favorite of all time - has been tainted by its fanbase of circlejerking Redditors and troons. I have deliberately talked shit about my favorite game just to annoy those faggots.

That's a game I liked a lot, but I'm just kinda done with it. Truth be told, it is heavily flawed, as everything seems to really, really direct you towards that ending where you take over New Vegas for yourself with help from Yes Man. It's really too bad the fanbase is as toxic as they come, too.

"Muh writing is better in Morrowind/Fallout 1/2/NV!" Fuck off and die, neckbeards. I play vidya to have fun, not get in dick-measuring contests with strangers online.

Hell, I never even bothered with Fallout 1 & 2. They're way too janky for my tastes.

Not true, the very first games were turn-based, like Bertie the Brain.

Yup. It is considerably easy to just have it sit in a loop as it waits for a user's response than to design an intricate yet fair action-based system.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Turn-based means you can put the controller down and take a shit while the AI waits on you to finish your turn. Not sure Pong does that.

Good thing we're not talking about Pong, since you said "video games were built on action-combat simulation".

Pokemon is currently losing to Palworld.

And thank goodness it is, it's woke trash with terrible monster designs, plus it's such glitchy trash now that it makes gen 1 look well programmed.

This is what happens when the best get lazy or lose their way, has nothing whatsoever to do with Pokemon being turn-based or it would've been dethroned decades ago.

The last great push for WRPGs happened in the late 2000s to the early 2010s. Mass Effect 1-3, Fallout 3 and New Vegas, Elder Scrolls 4 and 5, Witcher 2 and 3, World of Warcraft, and SWTOR. This led to the height of WRPG craze and allowed them to beat the JRPGs. Most of them were not turn-based.

They didn't beat JRPGs so much as JRPGs best themselves. They largely shifted development to handhelds because they seemed to struggle with HD development, so even juggernauts like Dragon Quest ended up there. 7th gen was rough for the genre, and had little to do with WRPGs.

 

[skykiii]

Pokemon is currently losing to Palworld.

The keyword is "currently."

Plus there could be multiple factors there. I highly doubt every single Palworld fan is going "OMG its not turn based, that makes it automatically better!" In fact I've never heard anyone cite that as a reason at all, nevermind a major reason.

A few years back I even recall people saying the opposite with regards to Bravely Default, which was shockingly popular despite (or perhaps because) it returned to a more classic RPG mold. Jim Sterling among other people made a video mocking how video game companies just "decided" people didn't like a thing anymore even when all evidence was saying otherwise.

EDIT: Also, we all know the best Elder Scrolls game is Daggerfall.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Good thing we're not talking about Pong, since you said "video games were built on action-combat simulation".

But Pong has more in common with that than turn based, don't it? And many early games were based on action combat, like say, every videogame with spaceships back in the 80s.

And thank goodness it is, it's woke trash with terrible monster designs, plus it's such glitchy trash now that it makes gen 1 look well programmed.

This is what happens when the best get lazy or lose their way, has nothing whatsoever to do with Pokemon being turn-based or it would've been dethroned decades ago.

The fact that it is turn-based means it should've had a change decades ago. It just didn't get dethroned because the franchise was bigger, thanks to anime and pokemon cards. They should've had more of those Pokemon battle games where Pokemon fight in real-time, to go along with the turn-based games.

They didn't beat JRPGs so much as JRPGs best themselves. They largely shifted development to handhelds because they seemed to struggle with HD development, so even juggernauts like Dragon Quest ended up there. 7th gen was rough for the genre, and had little to do with WRPGs.

They still had high-scale console development. I remember FF13 being a major release on console that got outpaced by Mass Effect 2, and there were still other JRPGs on console like Star Ocean.

That's a game I liked a lot, but I'm just kinda done with it. Truth be told, it is heavily flawed, as everything seems to really, really direct you towards that ending where you take over New Vegas for yourself with help from Yes Man. It's really too bad the fanbase is as toxic as they come, too.

Basically, yes. The story implies that the Legion will fall apart the moment Caesar dies, the NCR is too big for its own good to the point where it's beginning to hurt them, and that House is an egotistical tyrant who decides to kill or spare people based on his own whims. They even added comedy in the Yes-Man ending where you throw the NCR general off the dam.

Biggest flaw in FNV is ''THE BEAR AND THE BULL''.

 

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

Video games were built on action-combat simulation.

Actually a lot of games were built on what text based games like Adventure were doing first.

And many early games were based on action combat, like say, every videogame with spaceships back in the 80s.

Moreso turn based like Ultima.

They still had high-scale console development. I remember FF13 being a major release on console that got outpaced by Mass Effect 2, and there were still other JRPGs on console like Star Ocean.

You're right that a lot of the AAA games stayed on consoles, but Ness is right that the AA stuff and more eccentric stuff like visual novels mostly shifted to either PSP or DS.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Actually a lot of games were built on what text based games like Adventure were doing first.

Moreso turn based like Ultima.

The real-time games came first and were more well-known and had more players.

You're right that a lot of the AAA games stayed on consoles, but Ness is right that the AA stuff and more eccentric stuff like visual novels mostly shifted to either PSP or DS.

Visual novels are more like a ''choose your own adventure'' book in digital form, not a JRPG. They have more in common with say, Telltale games or David Cage games.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

But Pong has more in common with that than turn based, don't it?

Not sure why you're clinging to Pong now, but sure, since it's action based. You brought up the origin of games, which wasn't Pong nor action-combat simulation.

And many early games were based on action combat, like say, every videogame with spaceships back in the 80s.

In arcades yeah, there were lots of games which were not action on computers however.

The fact that it is turn-based means it should've had a change decades ago.

Why?

It just didn't get dethroned because the franchise was bigger, thanks to anime and pokemon cards.

No, because the games were deemed good. The anime and cards came after the games, those are only popular because of the video games.

And citing card games to show why turn-based games didn't get dethroned is funny.

They should've had more of those Pokemon battle games where Pokemon fight in real-time, to go along with the turn-based games.

Couldn't hurt I guess.

They still had high-scale console development. I remember FF13 being a major release on console that got outpaced by Mass Effect 2, and there were still other JRPGs on console like Star Ocean.

I didn't say there were none, but it's undeniable the number of them dropped off hard, and not because of WRPGs. The previous 3 generations had a ton more of them, WRPGs didn't just come in and kick their asses out of the industry suddenly. Their quantity and quality immediately tanked, like FF13.

 

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

Why?

He doesn't like to admit he sucks at them.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Not sure why you're clinging to Pong now, but sure, since it's action based. You brought up the origin of games, which wasn't Pong nor action-combat simulation.

It sure as hell wasn't turn-based combat. The first video game was Spacewar, a dogfighting game where two ships try to destroy the other.

In arcades yeah, there were lots of games which were not action on computers however.

There were also lots of action games on computers, too.

Why?

Because it's gotten old? Because it's gotten formulaic? Because it hadn't changed for so goddamn long?

No, because the games were deemed good. The anime and cards came after the games, those are only popular because of the video games.

The anime and cards did more to promote the brand than the games did. And no, many kids who collected those cards or watched the anime never played a Pokemon video game in their life.

And citing card games to show why turn-based games didn't get dethroned is funny.

Not really. The card game was the realm of little kids; most grown-ups outgrew them, and kids stop collecting them once they turn 10.

I didn't say there were none, but it's undeniable the number of them dropped off hard, and not because of WRPGs. The previous 3 generations had a ton more of them, WRPGs didn't just come in and kick their asses out of the industry suddenly. Their quantity and quality immediately tanked, like FF13.

They tanked because the WRPG formula was becoming more popular; the action-game RPG formula. Eventually, Japanese devs started copying that formula for future games, including FF16.

He doesn't like to admit he sucks at them.

Oh, boy. I was waiting for a comment like this.

No, I was actually good at them. Pretty good. For the longest time, I thought of turn-based combat as the only combat acceptable for an RPG. It's just that the illusion of turn-based being the only form of workable RPG combat was shattered for me when I first played Mass Effect. Fully real-time, and it worked well. Last time I played a real-time combat RPG prior to that was Morrowind, and that game bored the shit out of me, so I didn't give the idea of realtime RPG combat much thought. But Mass Effect made it work, and I fell in love with that game within the first few hours.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

It sure as hell wasn't turn-based combat. The first video game was Spacewar, a dogfighting game where two ships try to destroy the other.

I don't think that's true, it seems to be Bertie the Brain.

There were also lots of action games on computers, too.

I don't know the genre breakdown but sure, though I'd expect less of those.

Because it's gotten old? Because it's gotten formulaic? Because it hadn't changed for so goddamn long?

I'm pretty sure in regard to RPGs, action actually predates turn-based, at least in Japan, so technically it's action games that are getting old.

Pokemon did get too formulaic, after gen 2 they really got lazy.

As for not changing in a long time, so what? Should Tekken become turn-based or a first-person shooter then? I mean it's been so long, after all.

The anime and cards did more to promote the brand than the games did.

There wouldn't be a brand without the games.

And no, many kids who collected those cards or watched the anime never played a Pokemon video game in their life.

I'd expect so, the anime was free on TV so there's a much lower barrier of entry, same for cards to a lesser extent.

Not really. The card game was the realm of little kids; most grown-ups outgrew them, and kids stop collecting them once they turn 10.

They had official adult tournaments back in the day, I think they still do, but I'm not sure why this matters (if it's even true). I mean, are you implying that the card game is for kids but not the video games...?

They tanked because the WRPG formula was becoming more popular; the action-game RPG formula.

Source?

PS3 had very few AAA JRPGs right from the beginning, so I find that unlikely. They both seem to cater to different audiences despite there being overlap, so it's not like there were a bunch of amazing JRPGs that just got crushed by western games.

Eventually, Japanese devs started copying that formula for future games, including FF16.

How'd that turn out for FF?

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

I don't think that's true, it seems to be Bertie the Brain.

I suppose so. But Spacewar, and games like it, dominated the early history of video games, from the 70s-90s. Turn-based games did not become mainstream until the advent of JRPGs on consoles such as the SNES and PS1.

I'm pretty sure in regard to RPGs, action actually predates turn-based, at least in Japan, so technically it's action games that are getting old.

Last I checked, most JRPGs were mostly turn-based. Especially during the heyday of JRPGs prior to the rise of WRPGs in the late 2000s. If you described a game as a JRPG in say, 1994-2004, it's probably going to be a turn-based game.

FF7, for instance, was turn-based.

Pokemon did get too formulaic, after gen 2 they really got lazy.

That they did. Gen 2 was the last time I cared a lot about Pokemon.

As for not changing in a long time, so what? Should Tekken become turn-based or a first-person shooter then? I mean it's been so long, after all.

Tekken is a fighting game. Pokemon is an RPG game. RPGs, however, have moved past just having only turn-based combat.

There wouldn't be a brand without the games.

Yes, but the anime carried the brand farther than the games did. Kids who have never touched a gameboy or even a Nintendo console know what Pokemon is thanks to the cartoon.

I'd expect so, the anime was free on TV so there's a much lower barrier of entry, same for cards to a lesser extent.

My point exactly. Pokemon's true rise was from the anime and the card game. The video games were a nice thing to the side compared to those two.

They had official adult tournaments back in the day, I think they still do, but I'm not sure why this matters (if it's even true). I mean, are you implying that the card game is for kids but not the video games...?

Most of those official tournaments are for kids. If a 30-year-old sweaty nerd showed up for one of them, he's going to look very weird, especially when the contestants go up against someone old enough to be their dad.

The games on the other hand, can be played by both kids and adults. And today's kids prefer real-time action games. Hence why games like Fortnite and Palworld are doing rather well.

PS3 had very few AAA JRPGs right from the beginning, so I find that unlikely. They both seem to cater to different audiences despite there being overlap, so it's not like there were a bunch of amazing JRPGs that just got crushed by western games.

That is the point. WRPGs were becoming more dominant so the traditional JRPG companies began to invest in other things. Square invested in Deus Ex, for instance. Pokemon's mother company Nintendo spent those years cranking out motion control games, adventure games, and party games.

How'd that turn out for FF?

Pretty well, actually. FF16's review scores are very high, ranging from the high 80s to the mid-90s. And there was also Breath of the Wild, which was a huge success, and it copied the Skyrim formula.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

But Spacewar, and games like it, dominated the early history of video games, from the 70s-90s.

Not entirely true, but they did in arcades and on home consoles, but not computers.

And I mean, it's easy to see why, a shitty Mario clone was a lot simpler to push out than a Final Fantasy clone. It doesn't necessarily mean there's less appetite for such games just because we're flooded by easier to make action games.

For example, why do you think licensed game trash usually chose not to do RPGs? Because it was cheaper, faster, and easier to do a platformer or beat em up or shooter...or because people don't like turn-based RPGs? In the mid 90's they were extremely popular, but sorry, Disney isn't interested in a 4-disc epic for The Emperor's New Groove, and you shouldn't be surprised by that.

Last I checked, most JRPGs were mostly turn-based. Especially during the heyday of JRPGs prior to the rise of WRPGs in the late 2000s. If you described a game as a JRPG in say, 1994-2004, it's probably going to be a turn-based game.

You are changing the subject from "which came first" to "which is more common". And even the answer to the latter depends on if it's AAA or not, turn-based is largely relegated to low-budget now.

Tekken is a fighting game. Pokemon is an RPG game. RPGs, however, have moved past just having only turn-based combat.

And maybe Tekken can move past combo-based fighting mechanics to shooter mechanics. Yakuza changed moved past its genre, Tekken can too!

Your entire premise is flawed though, starting from the assertion that turn-based is inferior, and that action is better, also implying that turn-based JRPGs came first--they did not.

My point exactly. Pokemon's true rise was from the anime and the card game. The video games were a nice thing to the side compared to those two.

That's just not true though. I mean, if you really want to look where the majority of revenue comes from I think it's merchandising, not just the cards or games or anime. I'd have to double check though.

Most of those official tournaments are for kids. If a 30-year-old sweaty nerd showed up for one of them, he's going to look very weird, especially when the contestants go up against someone old enough to be their dad.

I think the age divisions are separate. But regardless, they still show up.

The games on the other hand, can be played by both kids and adults. And today's kids prefer real-time action games. Hence why games like Fortnite and Palworld are doing rather well.

Of course they do, they're simpler. I literally couldn't comprehend turn-based JRPGs as a kid, I rented them randomly a few times and had no idea what to do. But the average gamer is an adult I believe, 18-34 is the main target demographic I think since they spend the most.

That is the point. WRPGs were becoming more dominant so the traditional JRPG companies began to invest in other things. Square invested in Deus Ex, for instance. Pokemon's mother company Nintendo spent those years cranking out motion control games, adventure games, and party games.

They were becoming more dominant because they existed, and AAA JRPGs barely did. It's not because people prefer WRPGs or dislike turn-based, as you insist. It's because the few that were around sucked ass.

Of course, on handhelds they thrived. DS and PSP were like continuation of the PS1/PS2 era where JRPGs were common. They didn't have to struggle with HD development, which even tripped up Nintendo. I have no idea why that transition was so hard for Japs in general, but it was, and hit JRPGs hardest.

Square invested in Deus Ex

Again, how'd that turn out?

Pretty well, actually. FF16's review scores are very high, ranging from the high 80s to the mid-90s. And there was also Breath of the Wild, which was a huge success

Ah, now you're resorting to scores, but your original argument was about how well they sold, not how well they scored.

I f you want to shift to scores, well... I'll happily oblige, do tell me how FF16 compares to the better games in the series in that regard.

 

[Señora Airi]

Incidentally love how people are making this complaint about Identity Politics when fucking Japan has had the same problem for decades, and not just in video games.

I'll disagree, but they have their own problem of an unearned power fantasy (ie Harems fall over themselves wanting to be with you despite being an average joe) for the otaku outsider, rather than the Marvel method of making current characters black or a woman.

 

[whogoesthere]

the older CoD titles perfected the idea of progression through an online environment.

I know they get a lot of shit, but they really did nail that with the CoD4 and the few games after that I played. You still had the tools to do well, but the unlocks were nice. They also kept them coming, so it didn't feel like a fucking second job just to unlock something.

 

[skykiii]

Because it's gotten old? Because it's gotten formulaic? Because it hadn't changed for so goddamn long?

that's... not a reason for something to change, dude.

This reminds me of when games were first going 3D and people thought being 2D was stuck in the past.... and yet almost immediately we found out that some ideas simply don't benefit from being 3D or are in fact actively worse in that format.

Same with turn-based. A turn-based strategy game allows for a level of depth that real-time simply does not. I play both and the latter very often comes down to just training your muscle memory to do a certain thing very fast (which is probably why asians are good at them), whereas the former is more brain-centric.

There's a reason Go, Othello, and Chess (the three best games ever made) are still turn-based.