Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[Day of the Cope]

I know this is an actually unpopular opinion because I've gotten shit for it from retards.

Anyone who actually believes that "ban waves" having any meaningful effect on cheaters/bots needs to have their fucking head caved it. Assume they worked, you're basically saying "the game will be unplayable for weeks, if not months, before you can actually enjoy it". The claim is the idea that "cheat developers won't know what got them caught" which anyone with a functional brain stem would realise is bullshit as cheat makers can simply roll out small changes to various groups until one get smacked. Then they look at the banned group who were all using the same version and then find out what got them banned and avoid it.

 

[TheHarbinger]

Anyone who actually believes that "ban waves" having any meaningful effect on cheaters/bots needs to have their fucking head caved it.

Pretty much the "ban waves" are just there for companies to appear like they are policing things, make money from bots having to buy more accounts, or some anti-cheat company has duped a developer into using their anti-cheat technology. But this is something you see in everything where it's more about optics than actual honesty and integrity. Look at how many cheaters in professional sports prosper with steroids and rigged equipment and get away with it.

It's not about banning cheaters. It's about convincing the average consumer or fan that things are being policed properly. When in fact they actually are not and the developers and owners are turning a blind eye.

 

[ArthuriusMartyrius]

Brood War was the first Starcraft entry where Metzen was the main writer IIRC and it shows. The original Starcraft's plot was mainly written by one of the programmers with some contribution from Metzen which is why it comes across as much more thought through.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Brood War's ending is the classic sci-fi and fantasy problem of the 'unstoppable army' or 'overpowered final boss'. Where the only things that can destroy them will basically be some contrived 'deus ex machina' device or 'chosen one' heroic figure that audiences will groan and roll their eyes over. They build the enemy faction up to be so incredibly powerful for the entire series. That by the time you get to the last chapters there is no logical way for the enemy to lose that will be satisfying beyond some inadequate and ponderous scenario. Terrans and Protoss will need everything to beat the Zerg.

The thing is, at least the ending in the original Starcraft meant something. You're the reason why the Overmind didn't wind up with an army of Protoss-Zerg hybrids as he conquers the galaxy; you defeated his forces and Tassadar nukes the bastard. But the end of Brood War isn't even joyous for the Zerg side, as Kerrigan feels hollow after the victory, whereas all her foes just lick their wounds for round 3 of galactic warfare. So even if you're getting into the whole spirit of playing as the bad guys, you can't even enjoy your victory. All that hard work to destroy three different armies as they bear down on your ass, and you get an ending that tastes like ashes.

This isn't like KOTOR 1 where your evil character smiles at their army as their infinite fleet rolls forth to conquer the galaxy. This isn't like Jedi Knight where your Dark Side character sits on Palpatine's throne. There's no joy to be had in defeating the other idiots, and it all just ends with Kerrigan becoming Marvel's Phoenix at the end. At least with Force Unleashed, the bad ending for the player is a set-up for DLC where the evil version of Starkiller takes Vader's place and fights the Original Trilogy characters in an alternate-universe version of the films. So at least you get a kick out of slapping around Obi-Wan and vaporizing his ghost.

Meanwhile, in SC2, you get a stupid evil version of Kerrigan who isn't even as fun to slap around, because the game wants to act like she's this Machiavellian monster, when really she's no different from any other comic villain who's got way too much power and not enough brains.

 

[huckbeine]

I forgot I have another controversial and unpopular opinion on video games

Anyone who likes Specs Ops: The Line and claim its story is genius and a masterstroke of a genius of a satire of military shooters is actually a smooth brained idiot.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009) is actually the better satire and commentary on military shooters than Specs Ops ever hoped to be. the airport stage is a better moral contest of the player than Spec Ops' white phosphorous scene. In MW2, instead of defending key military positions, you defend a burger town. In MW2 you are not fighting to stop and win the war, you are actually fighting to start a war.

 

[Day of the Cope]

the airport stage is a better moral contest of the player than Spec Ops' white phosphorous scene.

Yager Development said in an interview that they originally planned on actually having the story split off in two separate directions at that point. However, such a feat would require resources well outside what they had access to and had to be scrapped. That said, while people like to say that the white phosphorous scene is super on the nose, no one ever seems to talk about Walker's face reflecting in the monitor, the shift in lighting, and 4th wall breaking dialogue of how "there's no other choice".

 

[Gondola Enjoyer]

Yager Development said in an interview that they originally planned on actually having the story split off in two separate directions at that point. However, such a feat would require resources well outside what they had access to and had to be scrapped. That said, while people like to say that the white phosphorous scene is super on the nose, no one ever seems to talk about Walker's face reflecting in the monitor, the shift in lighting, and 4th wall breaking dialogue of how "there's no other choice".

People can screech all they want about "muh death of the author" but the lead writer also said the story of the game was actually about violent videogames, and how people don't think about all of the virtual people they're slaughtering during a gamespot (?) interview, rather than whatever politisperging message about American jingoism people want to assign that game.

Again, I get that it would've taken a lot of money and effort to make the game actually good, and have your message actually mean anything instead of forcing you to do the bad thing, and then insulting you for it, but Toby Fox also did just that alone with Undertale. Yeah, Undertale is significantly simpler to make than a full 3D, decent looking shooter, but since it lets you choose if you want to be good and do a fully pacificst run, something inbetween, or a full genocide run, it's honest, and the messaging means something. Not to mention that doing the genocide run also has gameplay repercussions of the game becoming hard as balls.

It's the exact same shit people blame TLOU2 for, but will suck the foreskin off of Spec Ops' dick over, along with the same kind of retarded statements coming out of the developers like "oh well, you always had a choice to just turn the game off!".

 

[Day of the Cope]

People can screech all they want about "muh death of the author" but the lead writer also said the story of the game was actually about violent videogames, and how people don't think about all of the virtual people they're slaughtering during a gamespot (?) interview, rather than whatever politisperging message about American jingoism people want to assign that game.

Yes, and Seinfeld isn't funny because we have cellphones today. People who say shit like this are the same people who feel the need to say what some people call soccer is called football in Europe.

It's the exact same shit people blame TLOU2 for, but will suck the foreskin off of Spec Ops' dick over, along with the same kind of retarded statements coming out of the developers like "oh well, you always had a choice to just turn the game off!".

Again, from all the available information, the plan was to have the story split off from the white prosperous scene where you either did or didn't use it, but having two completely different storylines is still an ambitious task for even the largest studios with larger budgets. But if we want to drag TLOU2 into the conversation, than I can say that at least SOTL committed to it's premise to the very end.

 

[Raging Capybara]

Anyone who likes Specs Ops: The Line and claim its story is genius and a masterstroke of a genius of a satire of military shooters is actually a smooth brained idiot.

Nobody has ever said that here in this thread, you are the first one.

My unpopular opinion (I swear I must be the only one in the universe) is that bethesda sucks.

 

[TVB]

My unpopular opinion (I swear I must be the only one in the universe) is that bethesda sucks.

No. No it's not an unpopular opinion. Pretty much everyone hates Bethesda and for a good reason

 

[Mega Black]

To me, the trilogy is Origins, Asylum, and City. Knight had some good ideas and combat, but the tank battles really went overboard. Slade should've had a boss fight in melee combat, not fucking tank battles.

I don't know how anyone can place Knight above Origins. Knight has fun traversal and presentation but dogshit everything else.

But if we want to drag TLOU2 into the conversation, than I can say that at least SOTL committed to it's premise to the very end.

People take Spec Ops very personally for some reason because it pokes the player for all the violence regularly committed in videogames but my unpopular opinion is that people are thin skinned faggots about it and that the game is entertaining.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

I don't know how anyone can place Knight above Origins. Knight has fun traversal and presentation but dogshit everything else.

Meanwhile Origins had fun boss fights and some well-presented drama, especially since it involves a younger Bruce Wayne.

 

[Scarthew]

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009) is actually the better satire and commentary on military shooters than Specs Ops ever hoped to be. the airport stage is a better moral contest of the player than Spec Ops' white phosphorous scene. In MW2, instead of defending key military positions, you defend a burger town. In MW2 you are not fighting to stop and win the war, you are actually fighting to start a war.

metal gear solid did that over a decade before it.

 

[Spud]

metal gear solid did that over a decade before it.

Metal gear solid doesn't let me mag dump an airport of civilians though. That's why it's the better game

 

[Ibanez RG 350EX]

Anyone who likes Specs Ops: The Line and claim its story is genius and a masterstroke of a genius of a satire of military shooters is actually a smooth brained idiot.

I first played Spec Ops The Line on a lark without looking into any of the online mental masturbation about it and thought it was just an interesting departure from standard heroic dude-bro military shooters that were still mega-popular at the time. The way it portrayed the situation as a bleak, awful descent into madness worked for me and was refreshingly different at the time.

If you don't get too into the weeds about "oh, it's a meta-commentary on the player and it's blaming you personally" and all that crap (even if the devs intended that), I think it's a perfectly satisfying experience.

 

[TVB]

Metal gear solid doesn't let me mag dump an airport of civilians though. That's why it's the better game

I'd say MGS 2 and 3 have improved mapping skills, but are still not as easy to navigate as OG MW1 or 2

 

[God of Nothing]

Fallout 4's ridiculous application of speech is what the speech skill actually is in all CRPGs or RPGs or whatever the hell you want to categorize it. You can go on and on about the logic behind the speech options you get, but you can't deny how fucking stupid it is that you're capable of defusing all situations with words. Age of Decadence was a little more honest by giving the same option every time but having it depend on the level of your skill if the person believes you or follows through. It is bad writing and cheap. The "imperfect" outcomes have far more weight and impact than them.

 

[Scarthew]

Metal gear solid doesn't let me mag dump an airport of civilians though. That's why it's the better game

it lets you mag dump an airport full of russians.

 

[TheHarbinger]

Fallout 4's ridiculous application of speech is what the speech skill actually is in all CRPGs or RPGs or whatever the hell you want to categorize it. You can go on and on about the logic behind the speech options you get, but you can't deny how fucking stupid it is that you're capable of defusing all situations with words.

Pretty much any RPG with speech in it has never had it balanced properly. With speech in New Vegas you don't even need to read the actual conversations or understand the game to just brute force your way through any situation. You just mindlessly 'A click' the [Speech 100] button over and over like you are in a old school Final Fantasy random encounter against a low level mob and spamming the 'attack' button over and over. There is no skill or player agency or depth to playing a 'speech' oriented character in most RPGs because of how brainless and vacuous the speech mechanics are designed.

If the [Speech 100] options were not marked and you had to actually figure out a nuanced conversation it might be more immersive. But being able to defeat Lanius in New Vegas by spamming [Speech 100] and [Barter 100] options without reading a single world of dialog really exposes the game design for the worse.

 

[God of Nothing]

Pretty much any RPG with speech in it has never had it balanced properly. With speech in New Vegas you don't even need to read the actual conversations or understand the game to just brute force your way through any situation. You just mindlessly 'A click' the [Speech 100] button over and over like you are in a old school Final Fantasy random encounter against a low level mob and spamming the 'attack' button over and over. There is no skill or player agency or depth to playing a 'speech' oriented character in most RPGs because of how brainless and vacuous the speech mechanics are designed.

If the [Speech 100] options were not marked and you had to actually figure out a nuanced conversation it might be more immersive. But being able to defeat Lanius in New Vegas by spamming [Speech 100] and [Barter 100] options without reading a single world of dialog really exposes the game design for the worse.

Talking down Lanius doesn't even make sense. There are so many headcanon arguments for why he does it rather than actual arguments the game itself presents. Everything you know and learn about The Legion tells you defeat or retreat is not an option for them, much less their highest in command. And suddenly you're talking the mythical butcher into running away, presumably to preserve his legend (ignoring how running away destroys it to begin with).

Lanius should've been another Frank Horrigan.