- Joined
- Jan 10, 2024
That's because DSP is boring as fuck. They aren't for everyone though, I agree. Just like Metal Gear
Unpopular Opinions about Video Games
- Thread starter punchabunch
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2023
I've really gotten tired of pointless dialogue options in a lot of games and I feel a lot of games just don't need dialogue options. There is really only 2 dialogue systems that matter:
Most games nowadays just provide like 4 dialogue options that don't branch the questline, they don't change people's opinion of you, and they don't provide more lore. You're just saying something different, the NPC has a specific response to that dialogue option, and then the conversation continues on exactly the same. And no, the "I'm going to kill you now" dialogue option that starts combat isn't really branching unless it directly relates to the questline and there's a follow up to the resolution of that combat.
- You have the option to continue the conversation but there's also dialogue options throughout the conversation so you can inquire more about the current topic or lore. That way you can learn more about stuff if you find engaging and care about while saving you from being forced to listen to stupid shit you don't actually care about. This solves a lot of problems regarding exposition dumping on the player. I was watching someone play Strangers of Paradise and it was really cathartic seeing the player character immediately interrupt some guy as he's about give some speech by putting his hand up and saying "just tell us about the MacGuffin". It would be really neat if that was an actual option instead of a scripted segment.
- Dialogue options cause opinion changes of characters that may lead to branching quests or the dialogue option branches by itself. Like the Strangers of Paradise example, if that interruption was a dialogue option instead of a scripted moment, it would be cool if it made the character dislike you more and may have resulted in your character not recognizing key story information when it comes up because you skipped his speech, thus causing changes in the story.
Most games nowadays just provide like 4 dialogue options that don't branch the questline, they don't change people's opinion of you, and they don't provide more lore. You're just saying something different, the NPC has a specific response to that dialogue option, and then the conversation continues on exactly the same. And no, the "I'm going to kill you now" dialogue option that starts combat isn't really branching unless it directly relates to the questline and there's a follow up to the resolution of that combat.
Scarthew
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2021
sounds like you're playing shit games.
Honka Honka Burning Love
In Clown World, the only god is the one who Honks.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2021
I've always wondered if the Overwatch mechanic (and variations) has ever been used outside of XCOM. Just to see how bad they might have fucked it up.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2025
I think the concept (or some semblance of it) goes all the way back to tabletop RPGs. Although back there I think it was "readied actions" and you could have your character pop a crossbow bolt at the first thing to peep its head around the corner.
As for in video games though I would probably need to do more extensive research.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2021
It’s not that Breath of Fire didn't have nonsense before this, but 3 was where the stupidity took command. Having some halfwit Chief bark at me to haul in a pile of expert-level fish so I could churn out some god damn sushi roll.
And what were those cameos from Breath of Fire 2? What kind of joke was that? It’s a cruel reminder of a game I’d rather be playing.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2024
The Digimon games have been absolutely top quality since Cyber Sleuth while Pokemon has steadily declined in quality. This shows that oversaturation isn't a net positive
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2024
Pokémon needs to innovate badly, apart from duel battles literally nothing has changed or been added in 15+ years.
I've literally played RPG Maker hentai games that do unique shit with the whole monster battling formula.
Like if you have multiple Dark type Lolimon or whatever then the one that's battling gets an attack boost based on how many Dark types are in reserve.
That cool right? And it's simple, Pokémon could easily implement shit like that and they just don't for whatever reason.
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2024
I did see the new game Z to A or whatever, borrows the combat system from Digimon World: Next Order. A lot of Digimon fans were butthurt but I think that's awesome. If it helps keep Pokemon relevant it only helps as a lot of old Pokemon fans are also old Digimon fans, they are not mutually exclusive. If people like the combat system and story they might try it because of the similarities. It isn't bad. Now, excuse me as I get burned alive by a mob of angry Mon fans from both sides
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2024
More of a general complaint, but I remember when warnings like this were telling you that the finished game would look better. Now those warnings are either a way to placate retards (they'll fix it later) or it means we're looking at a bullshot and the game won't look as good.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2024
I have never understood the adoration for the stalker games. I bought the first at release and dropped it after the first fight and not because I lost, I won the fight, but because the gameplay loop is shit. I even tried years later to come back to it and use all the mods that everyone says makes the game not suck and it still sucks. I also don't like games that are overtly antagonistic to the player which is a cornerstone of slav game design.
Stalker was also the first game I ever bought based on steam features or recommends it whatever it was back then and discouraged me from buying anything that way for years
Stalker was also the first game I ever bought based on steam features or recommends it whatever it was back then and discouraged me from buying anything that way for years
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2024
i completely disagree, i can't stand the new fixation on majima. he worked as a side character, a foil to kiryu's stoicism and self-seriousness, he's just obnoxious on his own. akiyama is better when it comes to being a silly main character.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
Valykria Chronicles has it as a passive so that scouts can't just tank a million bullets and capture the flag. Code Name Steam had it too, but I found that game to really suck, so I can't say much more than that.
Ibanez RG 350EX
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2024
Divinity: Original Sin 2 has quite possibly the worst, dumbest mechanical addition that I've ever seen in any sequel.
As with the first game, there are a whole bunch of classes that you can mix and match, all sorts of elemental spells, all kinds of status effects, and all sorts of environmental effects that interact with elemental spells. Unfortunately, the physical/magical shields added to every character in DOS2 incentivizes ignoring all of that, making a team of characters that all do the same kind of damage, and spamming your biggest hitting moves as quickly as possible with almost zero regard for any other tactics. Until you take down an enemy's shield, nothing besides inflicting maximum damage matters and once you do have those shields down, you're already at such an overwhelming advantage that trying any interesting tactics is largely a waste of time.
It's as if they didn't playtest the game at all. How do you add a mechanic that negates your entire carefully constructed combat system and not notice?
As with the first game, there are a whole bunch of classes that you can mix and match, all sorts of elemental spells, all kinds of status effects, and all sorts of environmental effects that interact with elemental spells. Unfortunately, the physical/magical shields added to every character in DOS2 incentivizes ignoring all of that, making a team of characters that all do the same kind of damage, and spamming your biggest hitting moves as quickly as possible with almost zero regard for any other tactics. Until you take down an enemy's shield, nothing besides inflicting maximum damage matters and once you do have those shields down, you're already at such an overwhelming advantage that trying any interesting tactics is largely a waste of time.
It's as if they didn't playtest the game at all. How do you add a mechanic that negates your entire carefully constructed combat system and not notice?
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
Tank controls are fine. People get really fucking upset when they're featured in a survival horror game, but when "3D"/camera relative controls are introduced, they complain about the character wobbling all over the place and stumbling into monsters.
BUT, even if you think tank controls are stupid in survival horror games, I think we can at least agree tank controls are fine in a tank game, right? ...Right? Well, seeing almost all the top reviews of a tank game demo complain about tank controls makes it seem like no, not even tanks are allowed tank controls.
Even though overwatch is the worst offender, a lot of these kinds of games have an unfun meta.
BUT, even if you think tank controls are stupid in survival horror games, I think we can at least agree tank controls are fine in a tank game, right? ...Right? Well, seeing almost all the top reviews of a tank game demo complain about tank controls makes it seem like no, not even tanks are allowed tank controls.
Almost any turn based strategy game with guns uses it. Chaos Gate, Gears Tactics, and likely more I'm not thinking of right now. Even board games like Space Hulk use it.
Even though overwatch is the worst offender, a lot of these kinds of games have an unfun meta.
Scarthew
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2021
invisible inc. but it's not an issue there from what I've experienced since you need to play agressively to race the clock waiting for the enemy to walk into you is a mistake. Also avoiding enemies is the best practice.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2021
Putting both Chaos Gate (specifically Daemonhunters) and unfun in the same sentence is a rather apt way of describing it. Despite being singleplayer, the meta has changed multiple times, often with disastrous results.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
The more I think about it...
Of the five main-line Elder Scrolls games, I think you could make a strong argument that three of them are each potentially the "best in the series", entirely dependent on what you want out of the game.
That leaves Arena and Oblivion.
Of the five main-line Elder Scrolls games, I think you could make a strong argument that three of them are each potentially the "best in the series", entirely dependent on what you want out of the game.
- Daggerfall is incredibly broad in scope. You can "live" the world in a way you can't the others. It's got unendingly fiddly systems and mechanics and you can play a single playthrough for years, probably, and never run out of things to do - even if becomes pointlessly repetitive. It's the best of them if you want an "RPG-as-a-simulation" experience.
- Morrowind has a very interesting story and world building. The systems suffer from Daggerfall, but they are also more refined. Unfortunately, early 3D engine limitations kick it's butt in places: the combat is dull as dishwater (only when it isn't frustrating as piss), the world is tiny. But if you want an RPG as a story to get invested in, it's probably the best of the main line titles.
- Skyrim has a fairly dull and trite story, with a handful of notable exceptions. It was riding the fantasy zeitgeist at the time very hard, took few chances. (Again, with a few notable exceptions). The systems have been simplified almost out of existence. But if you want an open-world, free-roaming action-RPG for a zero-to-hero good time, it has the most polished *combat* mechanics by far of the five.
That leaves Arena and Oblivion.
- Arena just... Points for ambition, I guess, but it's not fun to play, and frankly it never was. I honestly don't know how it sold well enough for us to get Daggerfall, but I'm glad it did. And it's even more pointless and shallow than Daggerfall.
- Oblivion is neither fish nor fowl. It simplified too much away from Morrowind and the story was, honestly, kind of bad. But while it's better than morrowind, from a strictly gameplay perspective, it's nowhere near as refined and polished as Skyrim. And honestly Skyrim's story is significantly better, even if it is more trite. Oblivion has some standout questlines - the Dark Brotherhood is rightly lauded as being great, for example, and the Shivering Isles expansion was great - but... Basically, because Skyrim exists, there's no real reason to play Oblivion ever again. At least to me. The things I would want Oblivion for, Skyrim does better.
Ibanez RG 350EX
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2024
Unless you want quests that aren't tedious, perfectly by-the-numbers checklists. Oblivion was far, far better at making you feel like events were taking place, rather than an endless string of sterile, perfectly predictable "go here, navigate dungeon, kill guy, retrieve item" busywork.
The game was far from perfect, but at least it made an attempt to keep the player's interest.