I feel that way about a lot of publishers, but I can hardly blame them. Especially Japanese publishers when they announce anything there will always be a lot of complainers saying "what the fuck is this? where's my next iteration in a series that's had 20 sequels already?".
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
I feel that way about a lot of publishers, but I can hardly blame them. Especially Japanese publishers when they announce anything there will always be a lot of complainers saying "what the fuck is this? where's my next iteration in a series that's had 20 sequels already?".
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
Nintendo makes one or two mainline Mario games per generation, and they don't feel samey or are full of new ideas(Galaxy 1 and 2 for example), they try new ideas on existing IP and I think that's fair game. The only time I have not been a huge fan of a series has been the "New" one, but they are limiting it to one game per console/handheld which is actually a pretty good idea.
To give some examples, Kid Icarus Uprising is a completely different game than the first games and yet it uses an old IP, almost every Kirby game is an experiment that could be a new IP but they just go with using Kirby as the MC. Since 1995 there have only been several Mario mainline games, if we count the 3D ones it's only 64, Sunshine, Galaxy 1+2, and Land3D/World3D, they are all pretty different and creative in their own way.
Not sure how controversial it is, but game difficulty settings, and unlockable difficulties are obsolete I think.
See Dark Souls - the game is difficult by itself, you need to learn it. The developer should make the game as difficult or "breezy" as they want. I don't get any more enjoyment out of games if I turn up the difficulty slider, or there are several examples of games that I enjoy more on higher difficulty settings because the game is too easy because there ARE difficulty settings.
Not prodiving such options is my wish, as I often go back and fourth between difficulties if I am stuck, or just frustrated - and after that feel cheap and lame.
See Dark Souls - the game is difficult by itself, you need to learn it. The developer should make the game as difficult or "breezy" as they want. I don't get any more enjoyment out of games if I turn up the difficulty slider, or there are several examples of games that I enjoy more on higher difficulty settings because the game is too easy because there ARE difficulty settings.
Not prodiving such options is my wish, as I often go back and fourth between difficulties if I am stuck, or just frustrated - and after that feel cheap and lame.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
You complain about Neogaf being 90% negativity, then devote half of your post to a eulogy on several series. What the fuck man.
GeordieMark
Member
They have played a tiny portion of the game. Lots of people played the alpha and beta builds of Destiny but were not overly impressed once they got their hands on the full game.
Do we not bemoan reviewers who rate games having only spent an hour or two playing them?
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is one of the worst successful games of the past generation.
Aside from combat mechanics and graphical fidelity, every aspect of the game defecates on past games in the series. Narratives may not be what every player approaches the game desiring, but what is present in Skyrim is only one notch above Destiny, which has been raked over the coals for that fault for the past two months. Yet you rarely hear anyone complain about Skyrim, aside from the odd forum post and CDProjekt RED jibe. You hear about how immersive it is, and dynamic, and how people have been playing it for 500 hours (with mods for the most part, admittedly), but the game itself is as barren as the mountains you ride your horse up at 10° angles, and as vapid as the eyes of the 2,486th draugr the game pits you against. It makes a mockery of adept worldbuilding to such an extent that it drains any fun to be had from the minute-to-minute combat and progression. The quests are so samey and derivative that I can't remember one from another, and the factions are so grievously short and dull that I can't remember a single character from them. They are incidental and worthless and forsaken to the tenets and expectations of anyone who enjoyed the quests and factions of the previous games.
Some games work fine without context: look at Minecraft. Yet aside from some nameless wandering bands of enemies and the odd dragon attack, Skyrim relies on the context of its lore and its quest narratives to complete the package. And it fails on a fundamental level.
Normally, I'd let it go. It's a three-year-old game, move on. Play The Elder Scrolls Online, which from my standards, winds up being a better game than Skyrim ever tried to be. Yet I feel that Bethesda hasn't learned its lessons. It met with so much success when it launched that I'm afraid they're going to rest on their storytelling laurels for the next game in the series. People were happy with a barren countryside to "make their own stories" and so they'll just give us another sandbox and call it a day. I'd feel so much better to hear them say that they made mistakes, and that they'd work to fix them in later entries, but they haven't. At this rate, I don't think I'd get The Elder Scrolls VI at launch because I don't trust them to learn from their mistakes...because I don't even know if they acknowledge them. Considering that it was one of my favourite series before this, I find that so depressing.
Aside from combat mechanics and graphical fidelity, every aspect of the game defecates on past games in the series. Narratives may not be what every player approaches the game desiring, but what is present in Skyrim is only one notch above Destiny, which has been raked over the coals for that fault for the past two months. Yet you rarely hear anyone complain about Skyrim, aside from the odd forum post and CDProjekt RED jibe. You hear about how immersive it is, and dynamic, and how people have been playing it for 500 hours (with mods for the most part, admittedly), but the game itself is as barren as the mountains you ride your horse up at 10° angles, and as vapid as the eyes of the 2,486th draugr the game pits you against. It makes a mockery of adept worldbuilding to such an extent that it drains any fun to be had from the minute-to-minute combat and progression. The quests are so samey and derivative that I can't remember one from another, and the factions are so grievously short and dull that I can't remember a single character from them. They are incidental and worthless and forsaken to the tenets and expectations of anyone who enjoyed the quests and factions of the previous games.
Some games work fine without context: look at Minecraft. Yet aside from some nameless wandering bands of enemies and the odd dragon attack, Skyrim relies on the context of its lore and its quest narratives to complete the package. And it fails on a fundamental level.
Normally, I'd let it go. It's a three-year-old game, move on. Play The Elder Scrolls Online, which from my standards, winds up being a better game than Skyrim ever tried to be. Yet I feel that Bethesda hasn't learned its lessons. It met with so much success when it launched that I'm afraid they're going to rest on their storytelling laurels for the next game in the series. People were happy with a barren countryside to "make their own stories" and so they'll just give us another sandbox and call it a day. I'd feel so much better to hear them say that they made mistakes, and that they'd work to fix them in later entries, but they haven't. At this rate, I don't think I'd get The Elder Scrolls VI at launch because I don't trust them to learn from their mistakes...because I don't even know if they acknowledge them. Considering that it was one of my favourite series before this, I find that so depressing.
Scrupulous
Banned
I agree with the general sentiment of Skyrim being bad. Besides its world (frankly it bored the shit out of me but others disagree so we'll call that point a wash) and graphical fidelity, it's a step down in all aspects from even Oblivion. All the RPG-ness has either been torn out or greatly streamlined, leading to a game shallower than a baby's pool and an exercise in tedium and rote-ness devoid of meaningful decision making.
Woah what
Efren is G.O.A.T.
Member
1. I couldn't care less about the Smash Bros. franchise but I can see why it has such an appeal for local multiplayer.
2. DOOM 3 was awesome and the light/shadow dynamic made it very immersive and tense.
3. Splinter Cell Conviction was a very good game....it was just a very bad Splinter Cell game.
2. DOOM 3 was awesome and the light/shadow dynamic made it very immersive and tense.
3. Splinter Cell Conviction was a very good game....it was just a very bad Splinter Cell game.
RellyRell28
Banned
Zelda should have voice acting and the fact we went this far without it is a fucking crime which allowed Nintendo fans to be brainwashed into thinking it's good.
*drops mic and walks away*
*drops mic and walks away*
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
I wish I could. I live in the United States, so it isn't readily available. If it does get released here, I'm game, but I'm not willing to jump through a ton of hoops to play.
Absolutely agree. I had my share of fun in Oblivion (before its completely inept level scaling made it a chore to play), but Skyrim bore me to tears very quickly - like you said, it felt like a step down in all aspects outside of graphics (well, duh).
I'd say Skyrim's world is on par with Oblivion's, both were rather samey and unmemorable, but Oblivion was still and RPG game and Skyrim was just a sandbox with no direction and nothing actually fun or satisfying to do, just a bunch of different tedious activities and broken, shallow systems. And it didn't even have that much actual content, you literally saw everything it had to offer during the first one or two hours (up until the first dragon, that is). After that it was just more and more of the same.
I wouldn't give a flying fuck about any of it if Morrowind wasn't one of my all-time favourites, and a borderline obsession of mine years ago. It's such a disappointment to see that it will be most likely never matched, much less surpassed.
Oh, I so agree! Difficulty sliders are stupid. Some people praise being able to choose your own challenge level, but no matter what you're only going to get artificial difficulty. Having a well designed game that picks a certain level of challenge and makes that challenge fair and fun, is 1000x better than a difficulty slider.
Having difficulty control be part of the game mechanics is a much better solution to the problem of a difficulty slider. For example, in Dark Souls you can earn Humanity, this can be used to kindle bonfires, giving you extra Estus Flask. There. You've made the game slightly easier by using resources you've earned in game. That is so much better than having a difficulty slider which is flawed for some of the reasons that you mentioned.
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
I can agree with that, despite paying for it. I thought the same about XBox Live as well until I stopped and switched to PS4. It should not cost money to pay multiplayer games online.
For me the problem with difficulty is that it's always the same bullshit
Your enemies take less damage while you take more damage
The first game that i played that really nailed difficulty levels was Goldeneye 64. You had additional and more difficult objectives for each level as you increased the difficulty.
Granted not every game can lend itself to this method of scaling difficulty but devs really aren't trying when it comes to offering up some kind of interesting difficulty mechanics.
The sad reality now is that with every game trying to be rollercoaster ride from start to finish both in scope and in budget, the thing that's most important to devs/pubs is that people can/will finish the game and see it through.
IDKAboutThat
Member
The people who bitch about W101 being overrated have only been stymied by one of the higher skill barriers in recent gaming memory, and must get good if they want their opinion to matter
The rest just have bad taste
The rest just have bad taste
3DimensionalAperture
Banned
- I think Super Mario 64 is one of the most overrated games of all time and is a borderline terrible piece of shit (I mean yes, the controls at that time were sublime and it was unbelievable to move Mario himself around like that... but that in itself is not a good game) that spends too much time focused on collectathoning and misses the point of what made Mario so much fun: platforming. I also feel like many of the games that arose because of SM64 only took a terrible formula and made it worse.
- If people want to use a PC as their primary games machine then more power to them. However, the PC userbase is appalling and its rampant elitism strikes me as less of a group of people that plays video games and more of a group of technocrats with a sick fetish for graphics and computer hardware.
- I don't understand why people call games like The Witcher, Deus Ex, The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, etc RPGs when they have no party systems with designated ROLES assigned to each party member.
- If people want to use a PC as their primary games machine then more power to them. However, the PC userbase is appalling and its rampant elitism strikes me as less of a group of people that plays video games and more of a group of technocrats with a sick fetish for graphics and computer hardware.
- I don't understand why people call games like The Witcher, Deus Ex, The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, etc RPGs when they have no party systems with designated ROLES assigned to each party member.
Character action games are one of the few games to actually care about different difficulties. The default "Normal" is for newcomers of the series while a "Hard" is for veterans, and both are unlocked from the start (as well as Easy/Easy Automatic but lol). On top of that, there's usually an "Extreme" difficulty level that unlocks after beating the game on "Normal" or "Hard", and the reason for that is the game can start throwing advanced enemies from the get-go since you retain all weapons and upgrades from the previous playthrough so you already have the tools to deal with them.
Increasing difficulty only marginally increases their health, but drastically increases their damage to force the player to be better, and increases their aggressiveness as well (time between attacks and whether they gang up on you). Bosses also tend to get new attacks or additional phases. Built-in mechanics may also stop working (for example Bayonetta's Witch Time doesn't work from dodging on the highest difficulty), essentially taking the training wheel off.
Unfortunately almost no one takes that amount of care when balancing difficulty modes, it's a real shame.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
-Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie have way too many collectables and it makes the entire game feel very overwhelming.
-I can't see why everybody likes Super Mario RPG. It hasn't aged well from a graphical standpoint. Timed hits are a pain in the ass to pull off and Paper Mario/Mario and Luigi are much better games.
-Motion controls are the most brilliant innovation this past generation
-Final Fantasy VII deserves all its praise.
- Mewtwo is a sucky character in Super Smash Bros. Melee and I don't care that he's back in Wii U/3DS. In fact Lucario is a much better character.
-Mobile gaming needs to be taken more seriously while F2P needs to die because it is ruining it.
-The so-called "PC Master Race" has ruined PC gaming for me.
-I can't see why everybody likes Super Mario RPG. It hasn't aged well from a graphical standpoint. Timed hits are a pain in the ass to pull off and Paper Mario/Mario and Luigi are much better games.
-Motion controls are the most brilliant innovation this past generation
-Final Fantasy VII deserves all its praise.
- Mewtwo is a sucky character in Super Smash Bros. Melee and I don't care that he's back in Wii U/3DS. In fact Lucario is a much better character.
-Mobile gaming needs to be taken more seriously while F2P needs to die because it is ruining it.
-The so-called "PC Master Race" has ruined PC gaming for me.
bobawesome
Member
B-b-but GAF told me such a thing doesn't exist!
Summer Haze
Banned
The Bayonetta games are super overrated and are nothing more than shallow, flashy, hack and slashers. I seriously have no idea why those games are so highly thought of.
Forza > Gran Turismo ALL DAY ERRDAY.
Destiny is fucking boring and is nothing more than a shallow grind-fest with the poorest excuse for a "story" that I've ever seen in a videogame. It's Bungie's poorest work so far, by a country mile.
Bad Company 2 is the best Battlefield game, including the main BF games (yes, even BF2). And also, Rush Mode is not only better than Conquest, it's the best MP mode of all time.
GTA V + San Andreas > Vice City.
Forza > Gran Turismo ALL DAY ERRDAY.
Destiny is fucking boring and is nothing more than a shallow grind-fest with the poorest excuse for a "story" that I've ever seen in a videogame. It's Bungie's poorest work so far, by a country mile.
Bad Company 2 is the best Battlefield game, including the main BF games (yes, even BF2). And also, Rush Mode is not only better than Conquest, it's the best MP mode of all time.
GTA V + San Andreas > Vice City.
I think GTA 4 and 5 are beyond overrated and are terrible. I think saints row 3 and sleeping dos are better.
I can't get into Wind Waker and I think I have come to the terms that I am just not a fan of Zelda games.
The soul series has killed my of my love for hyper action games like DMC GOW etc...
I don't get the appeal of Mario and don't understand his popularity. Does he have a personalty and if so what is it?
I think Bio shock 2 is a good game and don't understand the hate.
I think Mass Effect 3 is a good game
It feels good to vent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can't get into Wind Waker and I think I have come to the terms that I am just not a fan of Zelda games.
The soul series has killed my of my love for hyper action games like DMC GOW etc...
I don't get the appeal of Mario and don't understand his popularity. Does he have a personalty and if so what is it?
I think Bio shock 2 is a good game and don't understand the hate.
I think Mass Effect 3 is a good game
It feels good to vent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can agree with this, it certainly tricked me into thinking I'd love Blacklist just as much.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
I don't understand the hype behind ANY Smash Bros game. It's like the sort of B Tier game you pick up on the cheap if you own a console, not a system seller or must have.
When people say "graphics aren't important", I wonder why they bother with new hardware.
When people say "graphics aren't important", I wonder why they bother with new hardware.
BloodMoney
Banned
Ken Levine's games have gotten progressively worse.
3DimensionalAperture
Banned
Because of games only available for that hardware.
What makes SSB a B tier game, though? They have solid gameplay and lots of content.
Also, as has been mentioned, we buy new systems to buy new games
Mango The Magician
Banned
I've posted in here several times before, but I got a new one at least I think it's new sorry if it's a repeat. I searched but nothing similar showed up.
Anyways...I'd seriously quit playing Zelda, and potentially all Nintendo games in general if one of their major characters were significantly changed, especially Link. The character is in no way, at least in my opinion that's been formed over the seventeen years I've played Zelda, an avatar so there is no need to change him or make him chageable. In fact, I'd argue that the only thing Link needs is to probably get rid of the naming ability, but it's fine if it stays. Oh and changing him and then hiding it by pretending that the changed version of him is just a sibling or something is just as offensive to me. If we so desperately need another character like Link that can appeal to a different crowd, then make a new character who is completely unique to itself that doesn't borrow anything from Link.
So basically don't change Link or I'm out. It's bad enough that I've had to spend basically the last four months straight worrying about this straight, I just hope Aonuma knows this, I mean to some he's an avatar but to an equal amount he isn't.
Anyways...I'd seriously quit playing Zelda, and potentially all Nintendo games in general if one of their major characters were significantly changed, especially Link. The character is in no way, at least in my opinion that's been formed over the seventeen years I've played Zelda, an avatar so there is no need to change him or make him chageable. In fact, I'd argue that the only thing Link needs is to probably get rid of the naming ability, but it's fine if it stays. Oh and changing him and then hiding it by pretending that the changed version of him is just a sibling or something is just as offensive to me. If we so desperately need another character like Link that can appeal to a different crowd, then make a new character who is completely unique to itself that doesn't borrow anything from Link.
So basically don't change Link or I'm out. It's bad enough that I've had to spend basically the last four months straight worrying about this straight, I just hope Aonuma knows this, I mean to some he's an avatar but to an equal amount he isn't.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
Then, surely, if it's just about the games and not graphics, older consoles have a much larger selection and working backwards would make more sense.
SOME of the stuff originally intended for Xbox One and PS4 would have been really cool.
Mostly the Kinect/Camera being packed with every console.
Being able to instantaneously videochat with friends in your living room is an awesome idea.
It's all the other always online, being unable to turn the cameras off that really aborted some cool ideas before they were even born.
Mostly the Kinect/Camera being packed with every console.
Being able to instantaneously videochat with friends in your living room is an awesome idea.
It's all the other always online, being unable to turn the cameras off that really aborted some cool ideas before they were even born.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
It's a game where famous gaming icons fight each other, has unique and excellent fighting mechanics that differentiate it from your Street Fighters and Mortal Kombats, and gets a lot of marketing put behind it. What's there not to understand?
But I want to play both new and old games. I buy systems when they get games I want to play, not by default because of their fancy graphics. This is not really hard to get.
3DimensionalAperture
Banned
You're under some warped impression that the main difference between old and new games is graphics.
QuantumZebra
Member
System Shock 2 = GOAT
Bioshock: Infinite = had to put down the controller and breath just to keep forcing myself through it
bobawesome
Member
GAF isn't obsessed with the Vita outside of PSN threads.
Yep, I feel bad for the people who started TES with Oblivion and Skyrim. They missed out on a true classic. Even with the absolutely putrid combat, that game was such a joy to play. And then once you were done, the game had no limits on how you could mess around with it. Throw in the excellent mods for it, and it's one of the greatest of all time, imo.
I don't agree with the sentiment, but I can at least say that "RPG" is the absolute worst descriptor in gaming. The difference between Dark Souls, Fallout 2, Divinity: Original Sin, Alpha Protocol, Tales of ___, Persona, System Shock 2, World of Warcraft, Mass Effect and New Vegas is huge, yet they are all called RPGs. Makes little sense to me, and I don't see it changing any time soon.
FINAL FANTASY!!!
Why does there have to be like 20 of them? Tell the fucking story already!
MINECRAFT
This game could've came out 30 years ago - it looks like shit, and what is the god-awful point?
3DimensionalAperture
Banned
Most of those games you listed shouldn't be considered RPGs. Tales of, WoW, and Persona have party systems where each member of the party serves a different role. That is fundamental to what constitutes a ROLE PLAYING GAME. Those other games have RPG elements, in which you can level up and customize your character to a certain extent. Those elements aren't definitive of RPGs though. Team Fortress is more of an RPG than Fallout in the grand scheme of things.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
I couldn't get into or enjoy Vagrant Story because I didn't enjoy the gameplay.