Remove ads

What are controversial gaming opinions you have?

vicky_molokh said:
The remaster? It looks nice, but it has changes to the way fightercraft work that caused a lot of anger in some oldschool HW players among my circle. I only played a couple of missions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Actually they might have fixed that. I'll have to double check though.

Hykal94 said:
Should this be relevant with my purchase? How big of a change?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


vicky_molokh said:
Something to do with formations no longer being implemented using the same procedures as originally, which makes them less responsive, IIRC. Also some attacks no longer simulated through ballistics, which means dodging is no longer working as originally. I can ask a friend for a more clear answer if you want, as I barely played either version.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes and no. See the way it originally worked in Homeworld was that every projectile fired by a unit was tracked in real time. So if you have a dog fight going on you can visually see how your unit is doing. If a projectile hits it hits, if not it continues being tracked until it decays. This along with friendly fire meant you had to be somewhat mindful about formations used in your fleet. Fighting s capital ship? Use a sphere formation around the ship to maximize firepower and ensure every shot hits. Dogfighting? Change to claw to ensure all guns in the group are pointing at the target.

The remake changed this into using he Homeworld 2 system of dice rolls. Now instead of tracking projectiles, it just rolls to see if you hit, which made most formations useless as they no longer influenced the effectiveness of your units. No reason to risk you shilps in a sphere formation if they are just as likely to do damage in a safer strafing attack etc.

Its not bad per se, Homeworld 2 is a fine game, but it wasn't how the original did it and so it wasn't true to the old game. It was still fun to play on its own.

They might have fixed that though I'll have to check.

Astaroh-M said:
Relevant? Nah not really, the changes are just one of those things that you only notice (or care) if you played to original, the game is pretty good overall.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I disagree. It fundamentally changed how the game was played and made almost an entire feature of the game (formations) useless.
 
DestinyPlayer said:
From what I remember, BotW could be described as "someone took Shadow of the Colossus, stretched it way too much and sprinkled goblins around the place". Plus obligatory sandbox features.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It wasn't bad, per se. Just way, way overhyped. To the point where Aonuma decided he was going to use it as the blueprint for future Zelda installments.
 
NormalSightMan said:
To the point where Aonuma decided he was going to use it as the blueprint for future Zelda installments.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, it's been 20 years of basically the same on the main series because Ocarina of Time was so crazy good, so I'd say it's about bloody time. Maybe the OoT formula can be for "middle sized" titles, above the still-basically-tile-based current handheld lineup and the hard-to-make BotW style. Some theme-dungeons locking (types of? Like improved water travel to reach islands?) locations would be nice, as full open world is overplayed (anyone remember that this was done in Link to the Past? The Dark World was mostly open world)
 
Whether BoTWs gameplay and design holds up on a mechanic level seems like a moot point. A game doesn't have to have the best combat system, toughest puzzles, and be stuffed with meaningful content to be an amazing experience. Honestly the need for developers to pack their games with GAAAAAAMEPLAAAAY is why most other open world games feel tiresome. They lack the simplicity abd clarity of what it wants to bebe BotW.
 
Reveen said:
Whether BoTWs gameplay and design holds up on a mechanic level seems like a moot point. A game doesn't have to have the best combat system, toughest puzzles, and be stuffed with meaningful content to be an amazing experience. Honestly the need for developers to pack their games with GAAAAAAMEPLAAAAY is why most other open world games feel tiresome. They lack the simplicity abd clarity of what it wants to bebe BotW.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
...Well, what you call 'simplicity and clarity' I call 'a lack of direction to the experience'. I'll freely admit that the open world is one of the best I've seen this decade, but ultimately I never found any substance to the game beyond Standard Open World Checklist Gameplay. Well, okay, that and the robust AI interactions, but if I want to mess with AI, I'll just go play MGSV instead.

I personally believe it's the framework of a fantastic game, with very little of what makes a game actually great in my eyes. (But then, I hold the original Nier as one of my favorite games of all time, even though when measured as a game it is undeniably a steaming pile of garbage.) So while I found BotW to be overall rather dull, I don't feel like it's the wrong idea to use it as the basis for future Zelda games. They just need to, y'know, actually flesh it out.
 
BOTW: The climbing is so boring. why can you not rest to regain stamina on a cliff. Why does rain make climbing impossible. Climbing is so slow, if you jump most off the time you fail to climb and so you gotta be so fucking SLOW.
 
Morphic Tide said:
That's what our fingerprints are for. Being able to keep a grip on wet objects. Have you tried to climb wet rock?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes. It's slippery. You don't have nearly as good as a grip when it's wet compared to when it's dry. Also you tend to slip with your feet, which is very fucking dangerous. It's not impossible, but it's very difficult and tiring.
And guess what? BotW makes climbing when it's raining difficult (because Link slips over the wet rock) AND tiring (the stamina depletes faster).
 
Mutton said:
It's the best cover based TPS out there probably, but in the end while I liked it that's not saying a huge amount.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It has social links that change the course of the story and some genuinely shocking twists and turns once you hit the third act. It actively gets better as you play it.

And I'll give a lot to any game that makes me fight a former comrade-turned-lover-turned-enemy that lets me use core game mechanics to respond to all of her taunts with "I love you". That got me right in the sweet spot.
 
ZerbanDaGreat said:
It has social links that change the course of the story and some genuinely shocking twists and turns once you hit the third act. It actively gets better as you play it.

And I'll give a lot to any game that makes me fight a former comrade-turned-lover-turned-enemy that lets me use core game mechanics to respond to all of her taunts with "I love you". That got me right in the sweet spot.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The original NWN campaign let you do that with Aribeth the (fallen) Paladin, and you can actually convince her to surrender, but you find out in the sequel that the king had her executed while you were still recovering from the final battle.
 
ZerbanDaGreat said:
It has social links that change the course of the story and some genuinely shocking twists and turns once you hit the third act. It actively gets better as you play it.

And I'll give a lot to any game that makes me fight a former comrade-turned-lover-turned-enemy that lets me use core game mechanics to respond to all of her taunts with "I love you". That got me right in the sweet spot.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but in the end it's still cover based shooting which is an issue. I enjoyed it, but the gameplay is held back by the genre
 
Binary Domain is an excellent concept executed alright-ish and held back by its budget and pacing.

There's this one section where it's basically a turret section with a boss fight followed almost immediately by another turret section followed immediately by a boss fight. It's exhausting if you're playing it in a few sittings which most players will.

The AI has this terrible tendency to run in front of your shootystick and don't actually contribute that much in battle. It'd be nice if there was some Mass Effect-ish special moves that only certain teammates can do.

Your two British teammates aren't very fleshed out other than "Angry Tough Britman" and "Competent Tough Britgirl". It needlessly shoved in a Japanese resistance fighter (and some cop that lasts one shooty section), it forces you to go through a good chunk of the game with your LI and FRENCH ROBOT COWBOY (which is great and all but forcing you is not good) for like what? 40% of the game?

And while I fucking love Big Bo I'm sure black folk might not like him so much. He's literally a walking stereotype of "Big Black Best Friend"

But despite all this, it's still a competent shooty game with buff Adam Sandler as the MC and its cheesiness is very much charming. I recommend it, just don't expect super tight gameplay or anything.
 
Too many tactical games use hit/miss as completely arbitrary difficulty that just pisses off the player. If my guy is right in an aliens face in X-Com, his bullets shouldn't go flying off at angles out of his gun in order to miss it. Or my new favourite, if I have an enemy stunned in Battle Brothers, he should not be able to fucking dodge the next attack.

This is how you turn hard tactical games into bullshit tactical games. By leaving everything purely to the math even when you really fucking shouldn't.
 
Last edited:
Flare said:
You try climbing wet rock.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I didn't realize that the legend of Zelda was supposed to be a realistic rock climbing simulator.

Also fuck the horses. Horse that act like real horses are not fun video game horses. Stamina goes away like that when you sprint so you really kind of need the horse to get around before you've got enough shrines done to teleport.
 
De3ta said:
Also fuck the horses. Horse that act like real horses are not fun video game horses. Stamina goes away like that when you sprint so you really kind of need the horse to get around before you've got enough shrines done to teleport.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You mean, the same horses that automatically follow roads and pathways? Yeah, soooo hard.
 
Vyslanté said:
You mean, the same horses that automatically follow roads and pathways? Yeah, soooo hard.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

One: can it with the sass. Two: I've never had those fuckers follow the road properly. I try and let them go along the road and they end up veering into a Cliffside every dang time.

Like is it so hard to accept that getting around in this game isn't very fun controls and mechanic wise? I like exploring and I still hate the actual process of doing it. Rock climbing is boring as shit.
 
De3ta said:
One: can it with the sass. Two: I've never had those fuckers follow the road properly. I try and let them go along the road and they end up veering into a Cliffside every dang time.

Like is it so hard to accept that getting around in this game isn't very fun controls and mechanic wise? I like exploring and I still hate the actual process of doing it. Rock climbing is boring as shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Rock climbing is meh, and having to wait for the rain to end before being able to do so is annoying; but the only time I've seen a horse do whatever it wanted was just after taking it. Afterwards, they pretty much always follow paths.
 
Exterminatus said:
I know Trails in the Sky did a thing where you had a core set of characters (Estelle and Joshua) with a rotating cast of supporting characters for each chapter until literally the final dungeon. I found it worked pretty well for introducing the other characters outside of the two protagonists.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ford Prefect said:
Cold Steel had a ridiculously large main party but typically you were given different parts of the class in different parts of the game, meaning you had to experiment with party comp. and in classic Trails fashion there was an almost equally large cast of side characters that you sometimes got to play with. The sequel had more flexibility through most of the game, but it presumed you were familiar with each character and their strengths (ie. That you knew that Laura + Fie = the future).

Of course, they're JRPGS so they know what the main character is like, even accounting for customisability, so the overall party is easy to balance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That tends to be pretty common in the Trails games in general. The first game you'll have less control over who is in your party, but it gives a good introduction to each member and let's you learn how best to utilize them. Then the second game lets you go nuts with them from the start.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top