Unpopular Video Game Opinions

[aleshemsky83]

I could see mario 64 vs banjo, but diddy kong racing better than mario kart? Blasphemous.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Diddy Kong Racing was a much deeper and better thought out racing game.

Mario Kart was far more accessible and that has its advantages.

 

[aleshemsky83]

IMO a lot of what he said does have merit.

I don't agree with everything he said but some points were bang on. Like is it really good game design to have you look up to find a switch to shoot? Is it good game design to let you automatically make jumps taking out any challenge for fear? Is it really good game design to have so many moments where enemies are invulnerable?

I'm not going to rag on OoT too much, I had a great time with it as a kid. Don't think I would now though.

to clarify the jump thing, isn't breath of the wild and zelda 2 the only zelda games with a jump button? Zeldas is not a platformer, I got no issue with a lack of jumping challenges.

I've actually seen these egoraptor videos, and like most analysis channels outside of every frame a painting, I'm not a fan of his. I really hated his megaman x videos. He praises basic game design -- teaching you basic gameplay mechanics on the first stage -- as genius. He also makes ridiculous illogical conclusions to prove that the game is "teaching" you in some areas, like the way he explains the game is "teaching" you to charge your buster because you vaguely see zero charge his. Also Megaman X is not the first game to let you charge your buster but he acts as if it is.

 

[JS19]

to clarify the jump thing, isn't breath of the wild and zelda 2 the only zelda games with a jump button? Zeldas is not a platformer, I got no issue with a lack of jumping challenges.

I've actually seen these egoraptor videos, and like most analysis channels outside of every frame a painting, I'm not a fan of his. I really hated his megaman x videos. He praises basic game design ("teaching" you -- really just making the level easy -- basic gameplay mechanics on the first stage) as genius. He also making ridiculous illogical conclusions to prove that the game is "teaching" you in some areas, like the way he explains the game is "teaching" you to charge your buster because you vaguely see zero charge his.

I will never forget when he said Castlevania 1 intentionally built around its infamous bad controls. That's when you know he took it too far.

 

[x Tame Impala]

RARE was always an overrated company. Their N64 games are not the pinnacle of 3D platformers like some think.

What about "Conker's Bad Fur Day"?!?!?

 

[Emperoreddy]

I really cannot see how he has made excellent points. He made a lot of stupid ones:

- Starting out with a strawman about "HURR DURR OOT IS DA BES" 'nerds' doesn't help his points at all. So there wasn't a point to do it. He does this even more so by derailing his video into a "**** YOU SKYWARD SWORD" **********. There's no focus or semblance of reasoning in his arguments and if anything, seems to suggest that he's taking his gripes as fact instead of opinion. More on this later.

- He then goes into a comparison about how NES and SNES Zelda experiences differed without actually taking context into account. NES was the beginning of high quality (at the time) 8-bit gaming, so there wasn't any formula to build off of vs. SNES games refining the formula. He ignores a lot of what made NES Zelda frustrating (not knowing where to go next unless you kill a LOT of time) under the pretense of exploration vs. LTTP being too much as if the player was a tourist in the game. I mean, it's one thing to like the NES style of Zelda, but considering he started the video by referencing "fair analysis", this comes off as very disingenuous and hypocritical.

- Makes a point about how Z-targeting and Exploration don't go hand-in-hand because of the dissonance in camera angles. This one is especially strange to me, because I haven't had problems with killing off bats in OOT and ALTTP. The problem is he's assuming you simultaneously explore whilst fighting in OOT, when that's not actually the case. There's a break in a focus for a reason, most dungeon rooms are designed around beating the enemy in order to progress, so exploration isn't necessary while you're fighting. He later refines this argument with the Iron Knuckle, but considering there isn't really much "exploration" (he overrates the pillar smashing).

- In the only point I think he made a compelling argument for is puzzle design, but even he's being biased with it. Instead of focusing on how LTTP and NES Zelda (to an extent) also had these problems, he harps on OOT for following Zelda tradition. Again, so much for "fair" analysis. It starts to sound like a hipster rather than a critic actually analyzing games (this wouldn't be a problem if the beginning wasn't what it was). To make this even worse, he praises NES Zelda's Darknuts + Fireball sequence, which had problems from the RNG fireballs to the tank controls that Link had.

- And now we come to the point where it's the dumbest one I've ever heard, and why I think he has no credibility. He says it's bad design to have spike "pucks" fly around the room when all it takes is literally spatial awareness to understand your location in relation to the rest of the room. Just because you can't see the puck half of the time, doesn't mean you can't take the information you already have and make an assumption about the direction it's going to go to. If I see the puck moving in a half-circle motion, then it's fair to assume that the puck is also making the same half-circle motion in my blindspot.

- The treasure chest is an opinion thing that he treats as fact. He makes the cutscenes seem like a really big deal when at worst its YMMV. This is why I posted the Wind Waker photo, Arin has a bad habit of avoiding text or even visual clues and then gets mad why he didn't have the information that was already given to him. Takes it even farther when he makes the argument about the story getting in the way. I mean we get it, he doesn't like 3D games for their story, and cutscenes, but treating it as if people shouldn't find that fun is odd and disregards that people have different ideas of fun.

I mean, Arin's video reads like a D-student's essay. There are some good points in there somewhere but he never actually addresses them in the way you would expect. One good example, he goes on and on about exploration, and ignores that OOT's exploration was asinine with having a huge world but empty and nothing to do. He doesn't argue how sidequests in OOT were pointless until MM came along.

I would look to Somecallmejohnny and Matthewmatosis's analyses of OOT before ever considering Arin's.



I can see why people would say that (especially when you hear overwhelming positivity, and people start to ignore the flaws). But, personally I think Rare games were better versions of Nintendo's games. For instance, Diddy Kong Racing was a better kart racer than Mario Kart in terms of skill, tracks, and content. And I like Mario 64 as a 3D platformer, but I always thought Banjo-Kazooie was the better platformer. I wouldn't go as far as to say pinnacle, but they did the genre some justice IMO.

inb4floodofresponsessaying"BLASPHEMOUS"

He comes off insulted that a game dared provide story and context to what you are doing. No one is required to like plot or context, but it isn't a flaw to have it. Plenty of people like to know why they are killing things, or doing this or that, or just knowing why weird **** is happening around them. It is basic immersion.

He has a terrible habit of micro-analyzing mechanics, taking them out of context, and bending them to praise the game he likes or **** on the game he hates. He doesn't realize how the Darknut room in LoZ is the same as any of the other rooms in OoT with Stalfos or Wolves needing to be killed to open a door.

Same with his argument on puzzles. His point that there is a greater satisfaction in solving the puzzle over a reward, but he then goes out of control. He seems offended that the game dared even reward the player for solving the puzzle or giving them a reason to do it in the first place. As if the gamer should just find the puzzle, solve it, and just look back and be happy they did it and walk away. Why even bother? You need a reason for the player to bother with engaging a puzzle. There is nothing wrong with solving a room puzzle and getting a key or opening a door as a reward.

He complains that the camera jolts to the goal in a room, but again it is 3D. You need to do something to draw a gamer's eye so they know what the goal is. Games have gotten more subtle in cases as technology marched on it drawing the players eye to the goal or key parts of the puzzle. He hates switches despite the obvious ones being teaching tools early in the game to be incorporated into more complicated puzzles later. Something he spends the entire Megaman X video praising. Plus LttP is also very switch heavy, but he ignored that.

He sucks at the game and understanding where anything is in a 3D space so yeah he would hate the spike pucks. Though funny enough he *****es that the forced jumps are too easy and suggests putting moving spike pucks on the platforms to create a challenge. He completely ignores that A: Those challenges exist in the game (even with floaty ice controls to make it a double *****) and B: He would suck royally at these challenges and hate them as he just spend 10 minutes saying before.

God. Yeah this annoys me more than it should, but yeah it annoys me.

I feel like a genuine flaw with OoT is that it is way to strict in its adherence to LttP's formula. It is the same game with a Z-Axis. Get sword, get three shiny macguffions, get better sword, get seven more shiny macguffions, final boss. MM gets so much praise because it completely abandoned that formula and put such a focus on side quests.

 

[Emperoreddy]

What about "Conker's Bad Fur Day"?!?!?

Maybe the most overrated RARE game of all. I don't think the actual game is fun to play at all.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Throwing toilet paper at a giant poop monster wasn't awesome for you?

 

[JS19]

He comes off insulted that a game dared provide story and context to what you are doing. No one is required to like plot or context, but it isn't a flaw to have it. Plenty of people like to know why they are killing things, or doing this or that, or just knowing why weird **** is happening around them. It is basic immersion.

He has a terrible habit of micro-analyzing mechanics, taking them out of context, and bending them to praise the game he likes or **** on the game he hates. He doesn't realize how the Darknut room in LoZ is the same as any of the other rooms in OoT with Stalfos or Wolves needing to be killed to open a door.

Same with his argument on puzzles. His point that there is a greater satisfaction in solving the puzzle over a reward, but he then goes out of control. He seems offended that the game dared even reward the player for solving the puzzle or giving them a reason to do it in the first place. As if the gamer should just find the puzzle, solve it, and just look back and be happy they did it and walk away. Why even bother? You need a reason for the player to bother with engaging a puzzle. There is nothing wrong with solving a room puzzle and getting a key or opening a door as a reward.

He complains that the camera jolts to the goal in a room, but again it is 3D. You need to do something to draw a gamer's eye so they know what the goal is. Games have gotten more subtle in cases as technology marched on it drawing the players eye to the goal or key parts of the puzzle. He hates switches despite the obvious ones being teaching tools early in the game to be incorporated into more complicated puzzles later. Something he spends the entire Megaman X video praising. Plus LttP is also very switch heavy, but he ignored that.

He sucks at the game and understanding where anything is in a 3D space so yeah he would hate the spike pucks. Though funny enough he *****es that the forced jumps are too easy and suggests putting moving spike pucks on the platforms to create a challenge. He completely ignores that A: Those challenges exist in the game (even with floaty ice controls to make it a double *****) and B: He would suck royally at these challenges and hate them as he just spend 10 minutes saying before.

God. Yeah this annoys me more than it should, but yeah it annoys me.

Agreed on all fronts, the most annoying thing about this for me is that a lot of people who didn't play OOT took Arin's words to heart and sparked debate between people who played the game and people who didn't, but were Egoraptor fans. You end up with people who know nothing about the game but acting like they know everything.

I feel like a genuine flaw with OoT is that it is way to strict in its adherence to LttP's formula. It is the same game with a Z-Axis. Get sword, get three shiny macguffions, get better sword, get seven more shiny macguffions, final boss. MM gets so much praise because it completely abandoned that formula and put such a focus on side quests.

This is something I also agree with, and primarily the reason behind why I think OOT's "innovations" are drastically overrated. It has a strict adherence to ALTTP, and if you ask me now, I think they're practically the same game. The only real differences are the camera angles, and the perspectives. This is also why I think MM is and remains criminally underrated. It deserves all the credit for taking the Zelda formula and doing something new with it. The dungeon designs are amongst the best in the series for me (emphasis on quality instead of quantity), Termina is ACTUALLY FUN TO EXPLORE AROUND for once due to its interesting design (something they promptly abandoned with Twilight Princess), and the 3-day mechanic is a much needed refreshing mechanic.

 

[Voodoo Child]

For me, I never even look at story or difficulty for Zelda games. Essentially every Zelda story is the same and very by-the-numbers, and while there are some varying levels of difficulty for the games, ultimately they're all on the easy scale.

Skyward Sword had the best gameplay and dungeons, but the map killed it for me. The Skyworld was unforgivably barren. How can you have all that space and put nothing but a few mini-games and a pub outside of Skyloft? Even Skyloft felt a bit underwhelming. Also, the way they had the different gameworlds sectioned off and the amount of back-tracking you had to do just made it feel a lot smaller. There were still some very interesting locations, but it just didn't feel like a lot of other Zelda games to me.

I actually have them all and have played them recently. For me it's 1. Skyward Sword, 2. Wind Waker 3. Twilight Princess.

The map is a bummer and what's worse is it's not easily fixed, but a few connecting passages would have helped immensely. Skyloft to me was satisfactory, not good not bad.

The Lanayru Desert area alone is the best Zelda area since Clocktown. Dungeons overall are fairly strong (The first is the weakest, but 2nd weakest is the Fire Sanctuary, not bad), bosses are good and you mentioned difficulty and I get it; I love Zelda and have since I was just a boy, and I'm not sure but I have an inkling that if Nintendo makes Zelda games for a certain age, it's 8-12. A game can't be too hard but unlike with the previous two games, there's a healthy challenge with SS.

Wind Waker is a lot of fun and definitely nails the little things, but people say the sky is empty, the sea isn't that much better. Link also feels very overpowered here. The dungeons and bosses, meh. SS had a new control scheme so they implemented a new style of bosses, WW has Gohma, Bongo Bongo and the worm thing from Majora's Mask, though admittedly a wicked Ganon fight and the dungeons...Dragon Roost Cavern, the Earth Temple, Tower of the Gods and the Forsaken Fortress were good, but the rest...

TP had a cool gritty look but felt lifeless. The first 3 dungeons fall flat (Arbiter's Grounds, Snowpeak and City in the Sky were cool, but Twilight Palace...wtf!?), bosses good (Stallord, Argorok) and bad (Armogohma), but What let me down most? They spend the game building Zant as a badass man behind the curtain, only to bring about Ganon last second and make him just a kooky wacko, a narrative failure.

Come back tomorrow, and I'll explain why Uncharted 2 is most definitely better than the Last of Us and 3 is probably better (haven't yet played 4, summer...)

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Uncharted 2 is the most overrated Naughty Dog game ever.

 

[Carolinas Identity*]

Throwing toilet paper at a giant poop monster wasn't awesome for you?

GOAT post is GOAT

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

Uncharted 2 is the most overrated Naughty Dog game ever.

Naughty Dog also made Crash Bandicoot, so I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Speaking of Uncharted...

The new generation of Tomb Raider games are better than Uncharted.

 

[x Tame Impala]

2K NHL games went extinct for a reason and bringing that series back would do nothing for EA "being forced to make better games". After EA upped the realism, 2K couldn't compete and their games became total trash because of it. There isn't enough of a market/financial incentive for EA to fix the mountains of problems their NHL series has.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I actually have them all and have played them recently. For me it's 1. Skyward Sword, 2. Wind Waker 3. Twilight Princess.

The map is a bummer and what's worse is it's not easily fixed, but a few connecting passages would have helped immensely. Skyloft to me was satisfactory, not good not bad.

The Lanayru Desert area alone is the best Zelda area since Clocktown. Dungeons overall are fairly strong (The first is the weakest, but 2nd weakest is the Fire Sanctuary, not bad), bosses are good and you mentioned difficulty and I get it; I love Zelda and have since I was just a boy, and I'm not sure but I have an inkling that if Nintendo makes Zelda games for a certain age, it's 8-12. A game can't be too hard but unlike with the previous two games, there's a healthy challenge with SS.

Wind Waker is a lot of fun and definitely nails the little things, but people say the sky is empty, the sea isn't that much better. Link also feels very overpowered here. The dungeons and bosses, meh. SS had a new control scheme so they implemented a new style of bosses, WW has Gohma, Bongo Bongo and the worm thing from Majora's Mask, though admittedly a wicked Ganon fight and the dungeons...Dragon Roost Cavern, the Earth Temple, Tower of the Gods and the Forsaken Fortress were good, but the rest...

TP had a cool gritty look but felt lifeless. The first 3 dungeons fall flat (Arbiter's Grounds, Snowpeak and City in the Sky were cool, but Twilight Palace...wtf!?), bosses good (Stallord, Argorok) and bad (Armogohma), but What let me down most? They spend the game building Zant as a badass man behind the curtain, only to bring about Ganon last second and make him just a kooky wacko, a narrative failure.

Come back tomorrow, and I'll explain why Uncharted 2 is most definitely better than the Last of Us and 3 is probably better (haven't yet played 4, summer...)

It's been a while since I've played them, but the way I remember it is that every island in Wind Waker had at least something. You had that fish giving you a tidbit about every single one of the 49 island squares. Sure, some of them were pretty minimalist, but I feel like there was a defining quality about every one of them that made it stand out to at least some degree. It wasn't like there was just a rock sitting in the middle of the sea with a treasure chest sitting there for you to open like in Skyward Sword; there was at least always some kind of trial associated with it. You had things like the "X-Eyed Reef" islands and the 3 triangle islands which were a bit boring, but all of them serve a purpose still, and there was at least a purpose or thing to do at every location.

In the Skyworld in Skyward Sword, you had Skyloft, that pumpkin pub thing, the bamboo mini-game, the color-wheel mini-game, the island full of bugs, and Beedle's Island. You of course had that storm cloud section as well, but that isn't accessible from the get-go, and it's pretty minimalist as well. Am I missing anything? Because that's all I remember.

Outside of that, it's essentially just a bunch of indistinguishable rocks with some of them having treasure chests plopped onto them. And even in the locations I mentioned, there really isn't much to them. The mini-game islands are just that, and offer nothing beyond that. They essentially equate to the most uninteresting islands in the Wind Waker. The only locations that offer some semblance of charm or intrigue are Skyloft (which is admittedly a ton as the main hub in the game), and to a much lesser degree, the pumpkin pub island. I understand that the Skyworld is only part of the game, but as the section that connects everything, I thought it was massively underdeveloped.

I do agree with you on the game still having some of the best locations (the sand sea section in particular was AMAZING), but the way it's set up just left me with a bit of a sour taste. There was a bit of a Dark Souls thing going on where you could unlock passages that made things more accessible within each region, but I agree with you that it would have been nice to have that BETWEEN regions. It almost felt like the Skyworld was the open world, and it branched off very basically into 3 "levels". I didn't really get that open world feel in each region, even though they were very sizable and intricate. Just felt disconnected.

 

[Trap Jesus]

2K NHL games went extinct for a reason and bringing that series back would do nothing for EA "being forced to make better games". After EA upped the realism, 2K couldn't compete and their games became total trash because of it. There isn't enough of a market/financial incentive for EA to fix the mountains of problems their NHL series has.

After I believe 07? for EA where they introduced re-worked more realistic gameplay, I felt it was essentially over for 2K as well. I popped in 2K7 not too long ago just out of curiosity, and the gameplay was just atrocious, even for the time period. It felt like an 80s arcade game or something.

Something 2K always did well though was franchise mode. I can remember in 2K5 how unbelievably deep it was. That is something I miss. If you want a franchise simulation, honestly I'd stack what 2K games did from over 10 years ago up to what EA does now.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

2K NHL games went extinct for a reason and bringing that series back would do nothing for EA "being forced to make better games". After EA upped the realism, 2K couldn't compete and their games became total trash because of it. There isn't enough of a market/financial incentive for EA to fix the mountains of problems their NHL series has.

Disagree on this one. I always had much more fun playing the 2k series over EA starting at 2k3. That's when the advantage really began for 2k as NHL2003 might be the worst hockey game ever made.

The customization of 2k, old school rosters, sliders, and a franchise mode that is probably still better than EAs put it ahead for me. The only thing 2k never really got right was their weird crab goalies and their graphics weren't as good.

I much preferred 2ks gameplay to EA, the only thing that really got me back into EA hockey was EASHL but I think they started to ruin it, although I'm sure some people disagree with that.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

After I believe 07? for EA where they introduced re-worked more realistic gameplay, I felt it was essentially over for 2K as well. I popped in 2K7 not too long ago just out of curiosity, and the gameplay was just atrocious, even for the time period. It felt like an 80s arcade game or something.

Something 2K always did well though was franchise mode. I can remember in 2K5 how unbelievably deep it was. That is something I miss. If you want a franchise simulation, honestly I'd stack what 2K games did from over 10 years ago up to what EA does now.

Sliders could make 2k pure arcade or pure sim, which I found pure sim too be boring. That's what made 2k great, you could essentially play the game any way you'd like. EA didn't have near the same customization. I wonder how you would feel about going back and playing 07 and if you wouldn't think it feels pure arcade as well.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Should've clarified the time period. Maybe as early as NHL 08, but definitely NHL 09 is when the EA series started lapping 2K.

I agree completely about the franchise mode though. 2k5 is still one of my favorite hockey games of all time. I still remember the trivia and air hockey in your trophy room

 

[The Nuge]

Disagree on this one. I always had much more fun playing the 2k series over EA starting at 2k3. That's when the advantage really began for 2k as NHL2003 might be the worst hockey game ever made.

The customization of 2k, old school rosters, sliders, and a franchise mode that is probably still better than EAs put it ahead for me. The only thing 2k never really got right was their weird crab goalies and their graphics weren't as good.

I much preferred 2ks gameplay to EA, the only thing that really got me back into EA hockey was EASHL but I think they started to ruin it, although I'm sure some people disagree with that.

What?! NHL 03 is my favourite hockey game ever

Should've clarified the time period. Maybe as early as NHL 08, but definitely NHL 09 is when the EA series started lapping 2K.

I agree completely about the franchise mode though. 2k5 is still one of my favorite hockey games of all time. I still remember the trivia and air hockey in your trophy room

Ya 2k5 was awesome

 

[tmurfin]

Speaking of 2k, here's one, NBA 2K games are overrated. I love basketball games, but the last couple of 2k's I played just felt clunky, and the "career" mode or whatever forces the story on you. Instead of just letting you play. That being said, I haven't played 17 yet.

 

[Dick Sledge]

Speaking of 2k, here's one, NBA 2K games are overrated. I love basketball games, but the last couple of 2k's I played just felt clunky, and the "career" mode or whatever forces the story on you. Instead of just letting you play. That being said, I haven't played 17 yet.

I couldn't agree with this more. I got NBA 2k16 for free on ps4 and its was just a weird cluttered nightmare to playm. I uninstalled it.

 

[tmurfin]

I couldn't agree with this more. I got NBA 2k16 for free on ps4 and its was just a weird cluttered nightmare to playm. I uninstalled it.

Yah I bought the hype.. "Greatest sports game of all time!!!".. Played a few games and immediately thought something was wrong, it felt broken almost.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

What?! NHL 03 is my favourite hockey game ever



Ya 2k5 was awesome

Are you sure sure sure it was 2003 and not 2004? 2004 wasn't too shabby and working the PP in 2004 was actually fun as hell. I would think there are very very very verrrrry few people who enjoyed 2003.