Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

Are you seriously comparing a physical action to a video game? I didn't know Half Life character physics was 1:1 with the average human being. My mistake. Next thing is you'll tell me that car handling in GTA IV mimics a real car because the cars are heavier with understeer.
You're also only adjusting movement in one dimension.

Do you jump while standing perfectly erect in real life, unable to lift your feet up even a micron in case your toes are slightly below the lip of the surface you're jumping to? Do you strap soap to the bottom of your shoes in real life so that you'll inexplicably skid along dry concrete after landing? Does your body have a bounding box that determines what you're standing on?
What's your point? I never said it's 1:1 to real life. I don't understand how people hate Xen because they have a lack of proprioception and are uncapable of realizing where their own model's feet are and how to land jumps. Maybe I'm just a giga autist but it all made perfect sense to me.

My biggest issue with Xen was dying like a retard until I figured out the shining blue ponds/teleporters are actually for regaining your health, running out of pistol and SMG ammo, and having to cheese my way through the Gonarch because the fucking spider got bugged. It's not a fun chapter at all because its boring, the platforming sections themselves were fairly easy.
 
I had more enjoyment with Daxter (the PSP prequel to the Jak & Daxter series) than its main trilogy. I wish there was more side content after you beat the game.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: The Foxtrot
What's your point? I never said it's 1:1 to real life. I don't understand how people hate Xen because they have a lack of proprioception and are uncapable of realizing where their own model's feet are and how to land jumps. Maybe I'm just a giga autist but it all made perfect sense to me.
Why would you ask "do you look at your feet while jumping IRL" to compare first person platforming in a video game? We're not platformers IRL.
 
I will shamelessly admit that I still love climbing towers and synchronizing the map.
I enjoy climbing towers when it actually feels like you're engaged with the climbing experience. The early AC games were engaging because you had to find the correct path to take up the towers as you couldn't just climb straight up. Even Far Cry and Dying Light were able to make the tower bullshit somewhat engaging because you had to engage with the environment. Being able to climb anything in BOTW was not engaging. The only limitations being a stamina gauge and rain didn't make that experience engaging, it just made that experience annoying.
 
There was a lot of dick measuring contests with achievements during the 360’s heyday. I’m sure there are turbospergs that still give a shit about achievements. I’m not sure anyone ever gave a fuck about PlayStation trophies. I knew niggas who rented games just because it offered easy achievements that would give you 1,000 points.
I still see it on any game that dares to not have achievements on steam. People begging for worthless exploitative skinner box shit.
 
I will shamelessly admit that I still love climbing towers and synchronizing the map.
I'll be honest, I never gave much of a shit about the "Ubisoft Formula". If I had fun, I had fun. But I was never a big fan of Assassins Creed and more of a Far Cry guy so that might explain it.

I just found the hypocrisy among many when BotW came out to be hilarious.

Climbing Towers and going to spots on a map wasn't the problem with any of the Ubisoft games I played or BotW for me.
 
Climbing Towers and going to spots on a map wasn't the problem with any of the Ubisoft games I played or BotW for me.
100% agree with this.

What pisses me is that I should love Far Cry, those games should be totally up my alley. What I hate though is that the game never gives you more than 1 minute of quiet time. You drive for a mile in a Far Cry and guards or a wild animal will show up trying to kill you.

It has always killed any immersion I had while enjoying the visuals. I feel Far Cry is built as an open world game but with the regular excitement a linear game would have and it feels annoying to me.
 
100%-ing a game is totally not gay
I like getting all the stuff that's actually in the game and completing all the tasks that are actually part of the game, but achievements can take a hike. They don't have to be dumber than in-game unlocks etc, but somehow they always are.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Mr. 0
I'm a simple asshat, as long as the game isn't preachy about the SJW part I'll be fine with a bunch of random ethnicities and sexualities. I just want a game where I'm not being forced into the grind loop of another popular multimillion dollar game and it's always online and it's filled with microtransactions and the writing is powersanded to be a marvel movie and so on. And translated to accurately reflect the original text if translated.
I don't want to get far into the Sweet Baby stuff but I believe that if you're there to make sure all ethnicities and sexualities are represented, you're not there to make a good, non-preachy game. In real life, there's people who you can accurately tell that they're not straight and/or trans by the way they look and sound in real life but those are relatively far and few between.

Plus, even in the "we want everybody to feel accepted and welcomed"-type works, that "everybody" comes with a big asterisk. I don't think they're even capable of making, say, an unironic (as in, benign/heroic) white Christian conservative.
 
What pisses me is that I should love Far Cry, those games should be totally up my alley. What I hate though is that the game never gives you more than 1 minute of quiet time. You drive for a mile in a Far Cry and guards or a wild animal will show up trying to kill you.

It has always killed any immersion I had while enjoying the visuals. I feel Far Cry is built as an open world game but with the regular excitement a linear game would have and it feels annoying to me.
This is what stopped me from playing Far Cry 5 for beyond the first couple of hours.
I was a big fan of 2 & got 3 at release, loved both a lot.
At first I didn't know why I liked 3 but disliked 5 so heavily, but I'm pretty sure this is it.
In 3, while in unliberated areas you still have patrols going around, they aren't spammed at you, so you feel more free to do the base clear in that area a bit later, while you're hunting and skinning and stuff like that.

I swear to god 5 indirectly forces you to clear outposts before letting you do anything else. I at one point had like a 5 car pileup in under 90 seconds because enemy patrols wouldn't stop spawning and all I wanted to do was hunt.

Where 3 more or less let you do stuff at your own pace, 5 just railroads you to get through sidecontent ASAP so you get back to the story. Railroady is a keyword for 5 overall I would say.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Kulee Baba
don't think they're even capable of making, say, an unironic (as in, benign/heroic) white Christian conservative.
I can fully picture the white soyboys in gaming whipping themselves and shedding tears as they're forced to make their dads their enemy HEROIC. It would be the most hilarious thing in gaming.

I don't know how many outright Christian protagonists we'll get in games - I say this since a lot of games are aimed towards hooking China and the Middle East onto them as well as being accessible as possible without setting off controversy, so I'd imagine we'd only get easily editable out clips of dialog or text at the most unless it was a Christian game. For conservatism, I could see a game subtly encourage its politics and the hero do it without even alerting most sjws - I think a lot of conservative politics can appeal to a wide audience. It's the hot button topics like immigration and abortion that would be harder to portray, but even then, I don't want a game preaching to me about either side. I could see an alien invasion plot and how most aliens who do come are secretly snatching people's bodies or something really bad so the argument to keep them out is strong, or a sidequest in a dramatic game where you can help someone decide to keep their baby or not and the lady ends up much happier with the baby because that's what she wanted the whole time but was scared to say. The problem is there's not that many conservatives who can be free to make larger budget games anyway. And even the indie ones have to play nice with the endless well of SJW graduates in the development sphere.
 
I can fully picture the white soyboys in gaming whipping themselves and shedding tears as they're forced to make their dads their enemy HEROIC. It would be the most hilarious thing in gaming.

I don't know how many outright Christian protagonists we'll get in games - I say this since a lot of games are aimed towards hooking China and the Middle East onto them as well as being accessible as possible without setting off controversy, so I'd imagine we'd only get easily editable out clips of dialog or text at the most unless it was a Christian game. For conservatism, I could see a game subtly encourage its politics and the hero do it without even alerting most sjws - I think a lot of conservative politics can appeal to a wide audience. It's the hot button topics like immigration and abortion that would be harder to portray, but even then, I don't want a game preaching to me about either side. I could see an alien invasion plot and how most aliens who do come are secretly snatching people's bodies or something really bad so the argument to keep them out is strong, or a sidequest in a dramatic game where you can help someone decide to keep their baby or not and the lady ends up much happier with the baby because that's what she wanted the whole time but was scared to say. The problem is there's not that many conservatives who can be free to make larger budget games anyway. And even the indie ones have to play nice with the endless well of SJW graduates in the development sphere.

A Christian NPC isn't the point, the point is that as long as you're trying to make "different ethnicities and sexualities" you aren't trying to make a good video game anymore, and even that applies to "Christian video games", when you seek to tell a message, the cost is that it's not fun anymore.

When it comes to what you value or want to satirize is very different than trying to tell an explicit message, especially what is known about the developer. A classic example of this is Will Wright having a pro-rail, anti-highway perspective. Therefore, all the SimCity games (like SimCity 2000, encourage rail. (While this has had somewhat disastrous consequences long-term in people unable to discern computer games from reality), it still works because it takes a backseat to the main game, because Will Wright was also smart enough to realize that something fun and entertaining to play is the main goal, and your personal policies and values come second. When you have disclaimers that "diverse" people developed the game, those "personal policies and values" don't come second, they come first. That's what people are pissed about. When they say "no politics in my vidya", they're talking about that, not light satire and some left-wing values from the 1990s...yet you have people who are either dishonest or retarded and try to conflate the two.
 
don't know how many outright Christian protagonists we'll get in games - I say this since a lot of games are aimed towards hooking China and the Middle East onto them as well as being accessible as possible without setting off controversy, so I'd imagine we'd only get easily editable out clips of dialog or text at the most unless it was a Christian game.
Likely zero. How many Christians are INTO high profile games beyond mobile or puzzle games? I know there's ONE game: The Bible Game.
 
When you have disclaimers that "diverse" people developed the game, those "personal policies and values" don't come second, they come first. That's what people are pissed about. When they say "no politics in my vidya", they're talking about that, not light satire and some left-wing values from the 1990s...yet you have people who are either dishonest or retarded and try to conflate the two.
I must have been really tired last night and shit at my opinion because holy shit I agree with all that you said. My apologies. I never wanted to argue for woke preachers to ruin the games (because they see the game as a preaching tool and not A GAME TO HAVE FUN WITH).

My problem was it felt like the thread was mostly saying that once we remove the woke, all our problems would go away. It feels like if we remove woke from games, then a vacuum could be created and a new potential lecturer disguised as a moral high ground could appear or the same thing could happen again with similar values. Removing and exposing the development practices that help the hardcore woke to get a stranglehold on games would hopefully help in the long run to refocus games onto being games first in my mind. If you get rid of the DEI/BRIDGE incentive, you remove at least the financial legs for the top to care about, helping cut the woke. I have no idea how many higher ups directing company business are truly into the cult of woke versus lipservicing it to get money and keep employees feeling "good" that their product created is morally good.

The only other way to cut down on the cult of woke in games IMO, aside from hurting money and game sales, is to actually enact some sort of cultural shift in college campuses that help slap the political shit out of some professors. I have no idea how possible that is or if it has to happen naturally with old guard cycling out for new people. I think trying to only go for woke is wrong because if we remove the woke and end up with almost the same problems but there's no brown tranny midgets, it still feels like an L. It won't fix companies trying to shittly copy the most popular game then pump microtransactions in and still make the most bland appealing story written by 7 different people so it feels like a disjointed clusterfuck. It would be a lot less annoying and I'd love to have more games without the wokestappo smearing their shit everywhere, I just want the overall quality of the productions fixed more.
 
I will shamelessly admit that I still love climbing towers and synchronizing the map.
I'll be honest, I never gave much of a shit about the "Ubisoft Formula". If I had fun, I had fun. But I was never a big fan of Assassins Creed and more of a Far Cry guy so that might explain it.
It's a good mechanic. I'll stand by Far Cry 3 doing it well (not played the sequels).

The real problem with the Ubisoft formula is they applied to everything. Even racing games.
 
Gamers really need to stop defending game devs. I'm tired clicking hour long video shitting on some predatory AAA game and the first 20 minutes being dedicaed to "please don't take this as me bullying the small bean developers uwu, I love them so much uwu"

Newsflash, those devs hate your fucking guts. Every single thing that ever pissed anyone off about a game was physically put there by a developer. They are the jackboot enforcers that happily follow the marching orders of those greedy execs everyone scapegoats. I genuinely thought that after having to sit in the money man seat during the Kickstart fad and seeing how devs burn through that money with nothing to show for it over and over again, people would finally realize "oh, these people who applied for and accepted a job to rape my wallet might not be the victims..."
 
Back