Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[Watcher]

I thought the Witcher 2's combat was really satisfying even though everyone I've ever talked to didn't like it.

I do legitimately like TW2's combat system but I think the reason why a lot of people dislike it is because of how challenging it is, especially at the start.

Like someone I know disliked the game and posted a video where he died constantly to the fight against Aryan LaValette at the start of the game and almost everyone in his comments section told him he sucked at the game and that he was playing too passively (IE he wasn't attacking his flank, he was just dodging and attacking him face on when he had a shield. And the best way to kill him in that fight is to use Quen and/or Yyrden and trap him)

I know a lot of people that didn't like TW2 entirely because you die quite a lot at the start of the game. I personally really liked that part. I felt the criticisms toward TW2 had more to do with the storytelling and the characters. I never felt the combat systems in either Witcher game were a dealbreaker to me, but I'm a person that clocked 150 hours into Morrowind.

 

[GeorgeDaMoose]

I do legitimately like TW2's combat system but I think the reason why a lot of people dislike it is because of how challenging it is, especially at the start.

Like someone I know disliked the game and posted a video where he died constantly to the fight against Aryan LaValette at the start of the game and almost everyone in his comments section told him he sucked at the game and that he was playing too passively (IE he wasn't attacking his flank, he was just dodging and attacking him face on when he had a shield. And the best way to kill him in that fight is to use Quen and/or Yyrden and trap him)

I know a lot of people that didn't like TW2 entirely because you die quite a lot at the start of the game. I personally really liked that part. I felt the criticisms toward TW2 had more to do with the storytelling and the characters. I never felt the combat systems in either Witcher game were a dealbreaker to me, but I'm a person that clocked 150 hours into Morrowind.

Was he fighting Aryan LaValette with his soldier friends or did he duel him? I honestly haven't fought him since my very first playthrough because I like to keep him alive so I'm not sure what he's like.
Anyways, I don't think the game is challenging. I think it explains itself very poorly, but once you understand the systems it works well.
I didn't die too much at the beginning. I think the only spots that really gave me trouble was the Nekker infested cave during the Malena quest and the shrine of Veyopatis during the Melitele's Heart quest. Swarms of enemies were tough as shit because of all that backstab damage Geralt takes and that's my main gripe with the game. Because of how poorly TW2 explains itself, you aren't really informed on the horrors of backstabs. Once I got rid of all the extra bonus damage Geralt took from behind, groups became fun to fight. Especially with an upgraded Igni sign.
On the topic of The Witcher combat, I couldn't stand the combat of the first game. I didn't get around to playing that game up until very recently because of the combat. But damn, Geralt had some sick moves and finishers in that game. That finisher where Geralt held his sword by the blade and used the pommel as a hammer was pure eye candy for me.

 

[Watcher]

Was he fighting Aryan LaValette with his soldier friends or did he duel him? I honestly haven't fought him since my very first playthrough because I like to keep him alive so I'm not sure what he's like.

He dueled him

Anyways, I don't think the game is challenging. I think it explains itself very poorly, but once you understand the systems it works well.

The Witcher 2 is a very challenging game. For one they added an additional difficulty system post release (Dark Mode) that makes the game even harder. The hardest fight in the game (The first fight against Letho) occurs midway through the game and the remainder is much easier by comparison (The second fight with Letho is basically the same fight but you're so absurdly powerful by that point you just lay waste to him. Only the dragon compares in difficulty and even for that it's an optional fight and you just need a ton of Quen spam.)

I didn't die too much at the beginning.

The first time I played TW2 I died constantly to fights like the one at the beginning where you have to kill a bunch of enemies to free a Ballista. And later when you have to free the courtyard and you have to kill like 10 guys, one of them being really armored. From what I've seen of playthroughs of the game people tend to die the most during ACT 1 and the prologue. Which is why the game is frequently criticized for having a "reverse difficulty curve".

On the topic of The Witcher combat, I couldn't stand the combat of the first game. I didn't get around to playing that game up until very recently because of the combat. But damn, Geralt had some sick moves and finishers in that game. That finisher where Geralt held his sword by the blade and used the pommel as a hammer was pure eye candy for me.

Much of the criticisms I have toward TW2 are stuff that was just done better in TW1. Stuff like the characters and the dialogue.

In the Witcher 1 there's an extremely good bit of dialogue that you can completely miss really early on. After you first meet with Shany in the tavern in chapter 1 she asks where your silver sword is. And then mentions crudely that Witchers are supposed to have two swords, one for humans and one for monsters. And Geralt corrects her and says "Both are for monsters".

That was a bit of dialogue that really stuck with me throughout the game because it was reiterated in the characters you meet and the choices you get. There's a lot of philosophy in some of the conversations you have with characters like Zoltan, who's a socially progressive Dwarf who wants to settle down. And Geralt has conversations with him about stuff like if he should also retire and if his career as a monster slayer is even worth pursuing anymore.

In TW2 they increased the budget and while there were a lot more "epic" scenes in the game there was less of that subtly in the writing. Where just a simple line of dialogue conveys significantly more than it lets on from a first glance.

 

[GeorgeDaMoose]

The Witcher 2 is a very challenging game. For one they added an additional difficulty system post release (Dark Mode) that makes the game even harder. The hardest fight in the game (The first fight against Letho) occurs midway through the game and the remainder is much easier by comparison (The second fight with Letho is basically the same fight but you're so absurdly powerful by that point you just lay waste to him. Only the dragon compares in difficulty and even for that it's an optional fight and you just need a ton of Quen spam.)

The first time I played TW2 I died constantly to fights like the one at the beginning where you have to kill a bunch of enemies to free a Ballista. And later when you have to free the courtyard and you have to kill like 10 guys, one of them being really armored. From what I've seen of playthroughs of the game people tend to die the most during ACT 1 and the prologue. Which is why the game is frequently criticized for having a "reverse difficulty curve".

Much of the criticisms I have toward TW2 are stuff that was just done better in TW1. Stuff like the characters and the dialogue.

In the Witcher 1 there's an extremely good bit of dialogue that you can completely miss really early on. After you first meet with Shany in the tavern in chapter 1 she asks where your silver sword is. And then mentions crudely that Witchers are supposed to have two swords, one for humans and one for monsters. And Geralt corrects her and says "Both are for monsters".

That was a bit of dialogue that really stuck with me throughout the game because it was reiterated in the characters you meet and the choices you get. There's a lot of philosophy in some of the conversations you have with characters like Zoltan, who's a socially progressive Dwarf who wants to settle down. And Geralt has conversations with him about stuff like if he should also retire and if his career as a monster slayer is even worth pursuing anymore.

In TW2 they increased the budget and while there were a lot more "epic" scenes in the game there was less of that subtly in the writing. Where just a simple line of dialogue conveys significantly more than it lets on from a first glance.

I didn't find Dark mode to be all that hard really. The new item sets that were added were really OP and it didn't feel too far off from Hard. Even playing without the sets was fairly easy for me. That's just me though.
Yeah the game really does have a reverse difficulty curve, but I liked that. It gave me a better sense of progression. By Chapter 3 I felt like a professional Witcher that could take down any pleb or monster.
Oh God, the dialogue was brilliant in The Witcher. "That sword is for monsters!" is possibly the most satisfying line I have ever heard in a game. The speech Geralt gives to the mob of townsfolk was absolutely delicious too. The character interactions were easily my favorite thing in that game. I didn't really care much for Zoltan's dialogue in The WItcher 1, but that was probably because I was more focused on how horrifying he looked rather than what was being discussed. His conversation with Geralt on Witchers and their value in the current world was interesting, but besides that he was rather unremarkable to me.
I agree that there were a lot more epic scenes in TW2 than in TW1 and the dialogue lacked a lot of the subtlety that was in the previous game. But there were still some great moments in TW2 for me like the final chat with Letho and talking with Iorveth in Vergen.

 

[Watcher]

I see no trouble with turn-based RPGs, be they JRPG or WRPG. It's a simple paradigm that works, so the way to make it better isn't to scrap it outright, it's to make it better and more involving. One way is the Mario RPG method of allowing the player some level of input during gameplay; another is the Etrian method of making combat so strategy-oriented and tense that the battles themselves are perfectly engrossing on their own.

It seems you can split people who like RPGs into two camps nowadays.

People who like turn based rpgs, and people who don't.

It didn't seem to use to be this way but I've seen far more people who absolutely loathe turn based rpgs in recent years. Even hybrids like Baldur's Gate (Which plays like a real time RPG but is actually a turn based game) get the shaft from people.

 

[Hawker Hurricane]

I have one though I don't know if people are starting to come around to the idea or not...
I think Arkham Origins is one of the best Arkham Games.
Let me back up: I think the story is pretty solid in terms of quality, the gameplay is just as good as any Arkham Game (the FreeFlow system was introduced awesome and no one tried to fix it because it's didn't need to be fixed), I liked the DLC for it (and that changing BatSuits was integrated into the game, though I wish it had more than a cosmetic effect), I have a soft spot for Batman Stories that take place around Christmas, and the only thing wrong with the game is it was released about two months too early and needed more testing for random bugs and story flag issues, which have since been fixed.

 

[Jaimas]

I subscribe to a school of thought that all the Etrian Odyssey games, unless somehow otherwise noted, take place in the same world. This is not a very popular theory despite being supported in many ways:

* Etrian I and II are confirmed for taking place in the same world, with characters in both High Lagaard and Etria referencing one another by name.

* Etrian III has multiple references to Etrian I and II, including Lindwurm, who essentially confirms that the Forest Folk survived Etrian I

* Etrian Untold confirms multiple Yggdrasils, each to deal with a critical problem coming from the coming apocalypse (Etria's was for Pollution; Armoroad's for flooding, et al)

* Etrian IV does as well and references Armoroad

I could go on, but I'd fill this thread up with a page and a half of theorycraft. What I'll instead point at is the suspected locations of each Yggdrasil:

Etria: Japan. This is one of the only confirmed locations.

High Lagaard: Somewhere in western europe, specifically around Germany. This is backed with many of the locals speaking German.

Armoroad: Armoroad is placed, according to most, in or around Australia.

Tharsis: Most common analysis of Tharsis places it in Africa, owing to the food and climate crisis of the region, but the very nature of Etrian IV's world map makes this difficult to countenance.

I'll be updating accordingly when the three new Etrian games we're getting this year come out (Etrian Mystery Dungeon, Etrian IV, Etrian Untold 2).

 

[GeorgeDaMoose]

I have one though I don't know if people are starting to come around to the idea or not...
I think Arkham Origins is one of the best Arkham Games.
Let me back up: I think the story is pretty solid in terms of quality, the gameplay is just as good as any Arkham Game (the FreeFlow system was introduced awesome and no one tried to fix it because it's didn't need to be fixed), I liked the DLC for it (and that changing BatSuits was integrated into the game, though I wish it had more than a cosmetic effect), I have a soft spot for Batman Stories that take place around Christmas, and the only thing wrong with the game is it was released about two months too early and needed more testing for random bugs and story flag issues, which have since been fixed.

I agree, the combat and story were good. What bothered me was how Batman had more advanced gadgets in Origins than in City, the map felt pretty much the same size as City, and that all of the assassin fights were disappointing. Like, Jesus Christ don't hype fucking Deathstroke up if you're only going to see him for 5 minutes.

 

[TM Ambrose]

• Kingdom Hearts is an extremely autistic game that I thoroughly enjoyed.
• Also I think the entirety of the Dragon Age series is shit.
• Skyrim is an overhyped video game that so many people enjoy sperging about. While it is a good game it is vastly overrated.
• Quick Time Events can be really fun depending on what they are, how often they are used and if they include the possibility for an extra reward (Dark Cloud is the reason I say this)

 

[Hawker Hurricane]

I agree, the combat and story were good. What bothered me was how Batman had more advanced gadgets in Origins than in City, the map felt pretty much the same size as City, and that all of the assassin fights were disappointing. Like, Jesus Christ don't hype fucking Deathstroke up if you're only going to see him for 5 minutes.

I agree with those points but at the same time I feel like the gadgetry being better could be a result of a less experienced, more zealous Batman, and some of the offensive stuff might have been retired in favor of stuff that had less potential to be lethal, or it could have been stuff that he had but didn't feel the need to use in the later games because the more experienced batman didn't feel he needed THAT much gadgetry, I guess I'm just saying there are ways to spin it. I stand by the decision because I'm of the opinion that just because a game is a prequel it doesn't have to suffer inferior mechanics or not advance the gameplay for the sake of story integrity.

EDIT: Actually, I just remembered the "Cold, Cold Heart" DLC came up with a reason that the Glue Grenades weren't in Asylum or City, at the beginning Alfred tells you that the Glue Grenade formula was unstable and degraded into dust in between Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve.

 

[Omegamage]

I think that FFV is the best in the main series, that FFTA2 is the best Final Fantasy Tactics, that Zelda 2 is the best in the series, that the CDI games look fun, and that OoT is boring.

EDIT: And that Fire Emblem Awakening is the worst in the series.

 

[Jaimas]

I think that FFV is the best in the main series, that FFTA2 is the best Final Fantasy Tactics, that Zelda 2 is the best in the series, that the CDI games look fun, and that OoT is boring.

EDIT: And that Fire Emblem Awakening is the worst in the series.

The CD-I Zeldas aren't terrible. They look way better than they actually are, though, especially if you were a fan of Zelda 2.

 

[Overcast]

I never really liked the idea of shoe horning in Nintendo themed costumes in games like Bayonetta or MH4U. They just feel so out of place. A lot of them don't even look that good either IMO. I know that's kind of a silly and petty complaint, but that's just how I feel.

It's fine if you like using them, but they kinda take me out of the experience somewhat.

 

[The Fair Lady]

I never really liked the idea of shoe horning in Nintendo themed costumes in games like Bayonetta or MH4U. They just feel so out of place. A lot of them don't even look that good either IMO. I know that's kind of a silly and petty complaint, but that's just how I feel.

Petty or not, I agree. I don't really like silly alternate costumes in general. They kinda break the immersion.

 

[c-no]

As far as armor goes in games, I never really gave much of a care in being for or against boobplate/chainmail bikini in games like Skyrim. At best, I wouldn't care and at worst, I could roll my eyes (especially if it is the ludicrous kind. Wouldn't do it at say steel plate armor in Skyrim) but I'd never give a care about the logic when considering how you have things like a giant flying lizard or still walking after having a javelin sized arrow hit your head.

I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion but I don't dislike the cutscenes in Twin Snakes that differed. I can admit I don't watch them much but I honestly don't care about the tank or hind d cutscenes that differed from the original.

 

[XH 502]

Petty or not, I agree. I don't really like silly alternate costumes in general. They kinda break the immersion.

I will say, however, that I quite enjoyed putting Jeanne in a Varia Suit.

 

[Splendid]

I'm glad that Agarest 2 got censored, I don't want to see half naked or fully naked loli girls.

 

[Hawker Hurricane]

I really liked The Joker's voice in Injustice, I think it was the perfect voice for the way The Joker was written in that game.

 

[AN/ALR56]

I think ryse was a good game.
I really enjoyed the game,especially its awesome dub for portuguese,a feeling of nostalgia from dubbed classical movies from the 60s,like cleopatra.
Too shot though,and repetitive,multiplayer is lacking and the story ends very abruptly.
7/10.

Other game i liked that people hated a lot was far cry 2.
I played this game insanely,did all major missions and side quests.
I really enjoyed it,driving on the desert with the awesome lighting tech and beautiful sound really immersed me into it,i could almost feel the dry,hot wind in my face.
The story was awesome,especially if you get all the jackal tapes to understand it,the criticism of western involvement into civil wars in africa is amazing

Combat is really decent,the feeling of being caught while trying to hide from a enemy in the grass is epic,you can really feel the adrenaline,you can set fire to the grass to make the enemy afraid and confused,using it to escape in a stolen technical.
Bugs and the incredibly anoying enemy patrols and checkpoints that respawn and the confusing story for most(you have to focus your attention on dialog and the in-game journal to understand it completely)are the bad sides of this greatly under rated game.

 

[Watcher]

Other game i liked that people hated a lot was far cry 2.
I played this game insanely,did all major missions and side quests.
I really enjoyed it,driving on the desert with the awesome lighting tech and beautiful sound really immersed me into it,i could almost feel the dry,hot wind in my face.
The story was awesome,especially if you get all the jackal tapes to understand it,the criticism of western involvement into civil wars in africa is amazing

Combat is really decent,the feeling of being caught while trying to hide from a enemy in the grass is epic,you can really feel the adrenaline,you can set fire to the grass to make the enemy afraid and confused,using it to escape in a stolen technical.
Bugs and the incredibly anoying enemy patrols and checkpoints that respawn and the confusing story for most(you have to focus your attention on dialog and the in-game journal to understand it completely)are the bad sides of this greatly under rated game.

There were actually elements of Far Cry 2 I felt were downgraded in 3.

The best example people tend to agree with me on was the weapon system. In Far Cry 2 you carried 4 weapons. Your machete, a sidearm (some kind of pistol, the flare gun or the sawed off shotgun), a primary weapon and the special weapons (RPG, LMG etc)

What made this unique was the player also had safe houses where you could save the game and store your weapons. It gave you an additional incentive to find safe houses because they kept an extra "kit" of your weapons for when you'd wanna go into a mission with a different set of weapons. (IE: If you wanted to fight that next mission with your assault rifle instead of the sniper rifle.

With Far Cry 3 they made combat much more forgiving, and this is best shown in the weapon system and the takedown system. Where you could carry 4 assault rifles if you wanted to and there was no reason to tailor your load out to a specific play style unless you intentionally went out of your way to do so.

There was also the health system which was a very noticeable downgrade over Far Cry 2. In FC3 health items were more sparse but you could heal yourself without them very slowly. However there was no way to switch between what kind of healing you wanted to do. This meant even if you just tripped and got a tiny bit of fall damage you'd have to expend an entire health item to heal it.

In FC2 you had three ways to heal yourself. Synerettes, water and saving. Synerettes healed you fully and you could find them at outposts or in mission areas, and you could locate them on your map. Water was found wherever and healed a single health tic. And saving could be done at a safe house. Moreover if you took damage but it didn't fully remove a health tic it'd regenerate gradually. I really liked this and as a result fall damage wasn't as annoying as it was in FC3.

There were numerous other reasons but those were the big two behind why I preferred FC2 to FC3. That and it had probably my favourite implementation of weapon degradation (and given the setting it actually makes complete sense why it exists in the game).