Elitist1945
Member
Halo 3 > Halo 2
-
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
did you think this at the time?
because i wouldn't be as impressed now, but the warthog did control well imo, it just punished you for hitting or clipping anything. but it was an absolute blast at the time.
not so much now, but its solid.
edit:
halo 1 lan > halo 2 or 3
Wow and I thought I was the only one
Elitist1945
Member
Master Chief Collection is the first time I've played the Halo campaigns - so I probably wouldn't have thought this when it first came out.
probably has something to do with it.
i may be wrong but the only other vehicle that i remember back then was in CS. and that was abysmal.
does MCC have halo 1 online?
It's not outdated, it's, as you say, one of many theories. I think there's place for all games in the industry, diversity is a good thing. But I, personally, find no value in any game that isn't heavily gameplay-focused.
Correctomundo
Member
What about those of us born before 1985?
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I think the post is right in that some people hold that theory to be the best theory for games. The key is that thinking "Gameplay above all else" is fine, so long as you don't dismiss and crap on games that don't hold that philosophy. There's plenty of room for all of us in this industry.
Yeah, I agree with you on that score.
I'm not suggesting that Gameplay > All has no place in the industry, rather that it's one of many valid ways to approach game design.
My beef is with those who automatically dismiss anything that isn't Gameplay > All, snubbing classics like Gone Home or Europa Universalis just because they don't fit some narrow definition of twitch-based game design. G>A is great for productions that excel in that dept. But as you said, it's just one of many philosophies that bring us master-works in the field.
I wouldn't say "Gameplay > All", but rather I would change that to "Don't neglect gameplay". Gameplay is the fundamental part of video games, you take that away and they're not video games anymore.
The problem then would be "What constitutes gameplay?" which is a deeper discussion.
Super Smash Bros. Melee and Project M players are hurting the long-term health of the Smash competitive community by not moving on and embracing the new games. Melee and Project M will always have a place in tournaments as Friday games or side tourneys, but if you want Smash to have continued relevance in the competitive fighting scene you need to migrate.
Naughty_Doge
Member
Ahem:
As I clearly stated in my post.
The saddest part is that Bethesda always gets away with it. Always.
OuterLimits
Member
Some games are better on mobile devices. Well, tablets more so than phones.
XCOM for example is better on mobile compared to console and PC. It is one of the few games that is superior with touch controls.
XCOM for example is better on mobile compared to console and PC. It is one of the few games that is superior with touch controls.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I agree. And that gets us into a whole other area of people trying to dismiss games that don't adhere to want they expect games to have in terms of gameplay. And again, there's enough room in this industry for people who want all types of gameplay.
I'm sure a portion of it also was the fans who really wanted the open world zelda type game and it seems to be just that. I thought it looked pretty (and the jumping off the horse and shooting with your bow in mid air was kinda sweet), but we still know so little about the game atm it's hard to get too hyped up yet (besides it being zelda).
Then again i feel like it's the same for most Nintendo games. A lot of people really like Nintendo games i guess, and they go nuts when there's anything Nintendo related announced or shown that's at least semi-interesting.
Charlie0108
Member
Frame-rate, unless it's like ridiculously low, doesn't really bother me. In fact, I barely notice the difference. I don't understand people who say that 25 to 30 FPS is unplayable.
Having just finished it, I agree. I didn't notice the black bars were there after a while. My only major complaint is the PC version kept crashing on me until recently.
Ahem:
Bullshit. People play Bethesda games for their exploration, lore and sense of wonder. Sure, the story could be better and nowadays especially gameplay leaves a lot to be desired, but the statement of it all just being shit can't be any more false. I'd even go as far as to say if it actually had a somewhat engaging and deep gameplay, it would be (one of) the best series of all time. Now it's just great.
Quick edit: for if it wasn't clear, I was talking about the Elder Scrolls.
Georome
Member
Anyone who talks shit about Elder Scrolls games have either missed this whole concept, or they just don't remember what it was like when the game was new.
I fucking hate multiplatform games so much, it's not even funny. I hate the concept and reality of a developer having to spread thin its game on more than one platform, instead of being built from the ground up only for one particular platform's unique strengths and abilities.
In my perfect videogame world, ALL the games released for the one current-gen console I own will be exclusive ONLY to that one console, never to come out for any other platform. There would be no multi-platform games. (God, I even hate that fucking word... "multiplatform.")
I wish it was like the PlayStation 2 days, where quite a number of its games were exclusive only to that console.
Frankly, it pisses the fuck out of me when certain members of this forum say something to the effect of, "But ALL gamers should be able to enjoy a certain game! It should be available to all gamers, regardless of what system they own!" Goddammit, it's those comments that make me want to say something that will get me banned.
In my perfect videogame world, ALL the games released for the one current-gen console I own will be exclusive ONLY to that one console, never to come out for any other platform. There would be no multi-platform games. (God, I even hate that fucking word... "multiplatform.")
I wish it was like the PlayStation 2 days, where quite a number of its games were exclusive only to that console.
Frankly, it pisses the fuck out of me when certain members of this forum say something to the effect of, "But ALL gamers should be able to enjoy a certain game! It should be available to all gamers, regardless of what system they own!" Goddammit, it's those comments that make me want to say something that will get me banned.
Princess Viola
Member
This is literally the worst fucking opinion I've seen in this thread recently.
but nothing he said was inherently wrong. All things being equal, you will never get the best output out of a console, if you're also worrying about other platforms.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
what the fuck
That's not really true I have never enjoyed any Elder Scrolls or Fallout titles because I feel that the exploration is lacking. You do way too much and go way to far for little reward or none at all. I have played most of them and never been anywhere near finishing a single one these titles do entirely to boredom within less than an hour of gameplay. Although thanks to "friends" who really enjoy the games I tried to give them chances most I've been able to put into any of them is about 15-20hrs before just saying it's too boring to continue. On another note I LOVE exploration in most games though and have spent untold amounts of hours running around in Just Cause 2, GTAs, and Dragon Ages.
You would have a very limited catalog to choose from in your ideal world. And probably a much higher priced one as well...
Pathfinder
Member
While this is the appropriate thread for controversial gaming opinions, your comment gets the Kevin Chang award.
Darryl M R
Member
I'm not a fan of Zelda's game or the universe, even when I was younger I enjoyed Pokemon much more than Zelda. I wish Pokemon games would go mobile.
PlayStation 2 had dozens upon dozens of console-exclusive titles. In that respect, the PS2's world wasn't limited at all. I just wish that same template was applied to my current-gen console.
Console-exclusive games will always have a certain specialness -- being built from the absolute ground up for a particular console's abilities. In that world, there is none if that 'lowest common denominator' shit that makes me sick to my stomach.
For a good console exclusive game, I'm willing to pay more money.
Pathfinder
Member
Sony doesn't have near the clout they had in the PS2 days to have a repeat of that kind of scenario, and they have no one to blame for that but themselves.
Infinite Stars
Member
Time for my opinions:
Final Fantasy X is one of the worst JRPG's ever made. The story is crap, the characters are crap, the gameplay is terrible even just as Turn based combat, everything about the game is just terrible excluding the music. Genuinely, if this game had come out mid life cycle of the PS2 like FF13 did, it would not have the level of love that people have for it.
Shin Megami Tensei
evil Survivor is a much better game gameplay wise then Fire Emblem:Awakening.
Epic Mickey(The first one) is a far better game then Donkey Kong 64.
Pokémon Black/Black 2 are the best games in the series, no questions asked. Everything about them is fantastic and it really is the Definiative Modern Pokemon Generation.
Skyrim is a mediocre game at best. The world is massive, yes, but the combat is crap. The lack of a dodge/counter mechanic is stupid when building a game with realtime combat. The game has nothing to motivate you to do anything. You are Always Dovakihn, and you always experience the same opening.
Radiant Historia is better then Chrono Trigger, though it's not by much. RH just feels better to me.
And finally:
Dragon Quest IX, if a few things were fixed, would be the GOAT Dragon Quest game.
Final Fantasy X is one of the worst JRPG's ever made. The story is crap, the characters are crap, the gameplay is terrible even just as Turn based combat, everything about the game is just terrible excluding the music. Genuinely, if this game had come out mid life cycle of the PS2 like FF13 did, it would not have the level of love that people have for it.
Shin Megami Tensei
evil Survivor is a much better game gameplay wise then Fire Emblem:Awakening.Epic Mickey(The first one) is a far better game then Donkey Kong 64.
Pokémon Black/Black 2 are the best games in the series, no questions asked. Everything about them is fantastic and it really is the Definiative Modern Pokemon Generation.
Skyrim is a mediocre game at best. The world is massive, yes, but the combat is crap. The lack of a dodge/counter mechanic is stupid when building a game with realtime combat. The game has nothing to motivate you to do anything. You are Always Dovakihn, and you always experience the same opening.
Radiant Historia is better then Chrono Trigger, though it's not by much. RH just feels better to me.
And finally:
Dragon Quest IX, if a few things were fixed, would be the GOAT Dragon Quest game.
I am in almost full agreement with you on these. I would not cal FFX "one of the worst" jrpgs though, and I think the combat isn't terrible either.
Well
this certainly earns a spot on the controversial opinion thread's wall of fame
This, on the other hand, is probably not a controversial opinion. Cross gen games are fucking stupid.
uncleslappy
nethack is my favorite dark souls clone
Chiming in on the multiplatform discussion, what pisses me off more is the multi-gen games. AAA releases are still coming out for last gen consoles. And listen, I get it, you have to make money and more people own PS3s/360s than own PS4/XBOnes.
But at some point this is going to backfire. Previous gen gamers are getting lower quality versions, and current gen gamers are getting gipped out of an experience that's maximized for current hardware. Plus, what's the incentive for me to upgrade to next gen when everything is still coming out for my PS3? Knack? Is that it?
But at some point this is going to backfire. Previous gen gamers are getting lower quality versions, and current gen gamers are getting gipped out of an experience that's maximized for current hardware. Plus, what's the incentive for me to upgrade to next gen when everything is still coming out for my PS3? Knack? Is that it?
Pathfinder
Member
Well, for one thing, you get upgraded graphical effects, resolution, and frame rate on the current gen versions of multigen games.
Destiny, Watch Dogs, Titanfall, etc all looked better on PS4 and Xbox One consoles than they did on PS3/XB360 consoles.
It's a damn shame.
I swear to god I'm not kidding when I say that I'm willing to pay $80 for a new, built-from-the-ground-up, current-gen console-exclusive Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear Solid, Elder Scrolls or even a new IP... I don't care -- as long as it's exclusive to one, and ONLY one, platform.
Pathfinder
Member
It's not just the games that would be more expensive in your described scenario.
The consoles themselves would be much more expensive as a result.
I don't care if they're more expensive. The current-gen consoles launched at $400 - $500. I would be willing to pay DOUBLE that in my ideal console-exclusive world.
Maybe with 10x the amount of teams working on them possibly that was a different time than now though and working only with first party studios all spending time making games for the system? No doubt it would be epic but more or less it would be like owning a Wii U now with just Nintendo titles a fantastic catalog but also very limited in terms of quantity.
Pathfinder
Member
The problem is something like that just isn't sustainable in today's market. Look at what happened to the 3DO. It was the hotness of its time, but its heavy asking price caused extreme exclusivity and lack of quality titles. Developers didn't want to spend lots of time investing in games for the console because it wasn't selling all that well, regardless of it being more powerful than other consoles on the market during that time.
In my world, third party developers would also be making exclusives, just like in the past. I'd rather spend $80 on one phenomenal, epic, console-exclusive game, than have 80 free merely "great" multiplatform games.
QUALITY always, always, always above quantity.
BouncyFrag
Member
I try to judge the current state of gaming not by the crappy games that folks are constantly bitching about but by the good ones.
You'd pay double for an underpowered console because there's no competition in the console space so there's no reason for a power race. What are you gonna do, buy the other, stronger con- oh wait.
Without competition, everything will stagnate.