Remove ads

What are controversial gaming opinions you have?

I do like how, in the Dominions series, casting Wish does just open up a prompt for what you wish for, with the caveat that trying to make a Wish the game doesn't recognize gets the caster struck by lightning, stabbed by 25 spears and soul-slain.
 
I saw an upcoming game described as a Celestoidvania. This beautiful word has convinced me that all genre titles should be banned. All games should be described as what game they most resemble. If its one of the 5% of games that isn't just a blatant follow-the-leader on another specific game, no biggie just describe in terms as a horrifying frankenstein amalgation of whichever games they most resemble rather tha humoring the concept of an independent identity. Also its ok to stick to the ancient examples whenever possible to indicate your senior citizen status, it doesn't matter if 90% of the genre Metroidvania field is just ripping off Hollow Knight now, keep describing it as some game that came out in the 80s.
 
Last edited:
Adloquium said:
Would that not lead to either a "turtles all the way down" situation if games can only be described in terms of predecessors? Or circular reasoning if Game A is described as similar to Game B, and Game B is in turn described as similar to Game A.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Every game has to be described as a varying number of repeats of the word "Pong".

Team Fortress 2 is a Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong Pong.
 
NemoMarx said:
Just use the FFX combat system again. Why did you do that exactly once and then forget about it. It's fine! There's several other jrpg series that basically use the same one now, like Trails, it clearly works, just give me a turn based rpg without the real time stuff again!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

this

stop reinventing the wheel

give me the ffv job system, the ffx battle system, a few new tilesets and character sprites, and a new story every 24-36 months in a pixel remaster system game
 
firefossil said:
I saw an upcoming game described as a Celestoidvania. This beautiful word has convinced me that all genre titles should be banned. All games should be described as what game they most resemble. If its one of the 5% of games that isn't just a blatant follow-the-leader on another specific game, no biggie just describe in terms as a horrifying frankenstein amalgation of whichever games they most resemble rather tha humoring the concept of an independent identity. Also its ok to stick to the ancient examples whenever possible to indicate your senior citizen status, it doesn't matter if 90% of the genre Metroidvania field is just ripping off Hollow Knight now, keep describing it as some game that came out in the 80s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Seriously speaking, at the very beginning of the game, one genre is called "Doom Clones", "Diablo Clones", and so on.
 
That's just how it be when there's only one or two (popular and well known) games in a genre to be basing opinions off of. When the only FPS 90% of gamers know is Doom, then similar games quickly become "this is a lot like Doom". Or for a somewhat more recent take, when Dark Souls took off and people starting making similar games, out came the words "Souls-like", especially for ones that were quite literally just "Dark Souls but X".

We'll call it the Boss Baby Effect.

 
Last edited:
Tbf a lot of those games were very Doom-like.

It is hilarious to go back to the beginning though and find out about the dozens of Pong clones that people made trying to cash in. Truly nothing is new under the sun.
 
yeah and a lot of games really are "dark souls with a twist" (intentionally, like keeping kickable ladders and bonfires) or hollow Knight likes or etc

it's a useful stage in genre naming. there are actual games that resemble the original rogue that you might want to call rogue-like.
 
Comrade Future said:
Seriously speaking, at the very beginning of the game, one genre is called "Doom Clones", "Diablo Clones", and so on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This isn't a joke. Back in 1996, Eidos put out Tomb Raider, as in the first one; it originally launched in Europe on Sega Saturn, with the Windows (MS-DOS) and Playstation releases following in short order. It was not the first third-person video game, unsurprisingly, both Crash Bandicoot and Super Mario 64, which it had some things in common with (mostly platforming and perhaps exploration) predated it that year; plenty of other video games used cameras that could be called third-person but did follow the character in real time, like Little Big Adventure in 1994. However, in Windows (and in the console market), it was overwhelmingly viewed as the first, or nearly the first, third-person shooter in a 3D world space, with both the player, and their opponents, occupying concrete spaces.

The term third-person shooter probably existed, but it didn't really enter the industry vernacular until a little later I think. Instead, at least in English we saw the rise of the "Tomb Raider clones", i.e. 3D world games with a third-person camera and combat (with ranged or close weapons). Not surprising, given that Tomb Raider naturally inspired its own imitators top, but for a short time it was applied broadly to games that clearly weren't trying to be Tomb Raider (or, for that matter, did not feature a female lead, which was still a little bit of a rarity outside Japan).
 
Last edited:
Omegahugger said:
I do like how, in the Dominions series, casting Wish does just open up a prompt for what you wish for, with the caveat that trying to make a Wish the game doesn't recognize gets the caster struck by lightning, stabbed by 25 spears and soul-slain.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No? It does reject prompts if you mess up, either in terms of entering a command that doesn't exist or using an improper parameter. At least since 5.
 
Synthesis said:
This isn't a joke. Back in 1996, Eidos put out Tomb Raider, as in the first one; it originally launched in Europe on Sega Saturn, with the Windows (MS-DOS) and Playstation releases following in short order. It was not the first third-person video game, unsurprisingly, both Crash Bandicoot and Super Mario 64, which it had some things in common with (mostly platforming and perhaps exploration) predated it that year; plenty of other video games used cameras that could be called third-person but did follow the character in real time, like Little Big Adventure in 1994. However, in Windows (and in the console market), it was overwhelmingly viewed as the first, or nearly the first, third-person shooter in a 3D world space, with both the player, and their opponents, occupying concrete spaces.

The term third-person shooter probably existed, but it didn't really enter the industry vernacular until a little later I think. Instead, at least in English we saw the rise of the "Tomb Raider clones", i.e. 3D world games with a third-person camera and combat (with ranged or close weapons). Not surprising, given that Tomb Raider naturally inspired its own imitators top, but for a short time it was applied broadly to games that clearly weren't trying to be Tomb Raider (or, for that matter, did not feature a female lead, which was still a little bit of a rarity outside Japan).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It seems that Tomb Raider is not a shooter.
 
Comrade Future said:
It seems that Tomb Raider is not a shooter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not by our current definitions, technically no. Maybe the franchise relaunch in 2013 would be considered such, but the 1996 title? The gun combat is limited and a little infrequent. But in the common vernacular, no one was really sure how to describe it, and--in contrast to Crash Bandicoot or Super Mario 64--the shooting was a fundamental requirement in a few areas, so that was the classification briefly. It was definitely considered one of the earliest third-person shooters before more emphasis was made to distinguish it as an adventure game that just happened to feature shooting; that sub-genre really became associated with the "Tomb Raider-clones."
 
Last edited:
Tomb Raider shooting is basically Resident Evil shooting with more agility to account for fighting velociraptors instead of zombies. Though arguably the extra moves make the tank controls more of a pain in the ass, and the natural results of human with gun vs dinosaur were more convincingly portrayed in Dino Crisis anyway.
 
Reveen said:
Tomb Raider shooting is basically Resident Evil shooting with more agility to account for fighting velociraptors instead of zombies. Though arguably the extra moves make the tank controls more of a pain in the ass, and the natural results of human with gun vs dinosaur were more convincingly portrayed in Dino Crisis anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The shooting...and everything else in the game, really...in Tomb Raider is informed by the fact that it doesn't have a fixed camera. Whereas Resident Evil does (or at the time, did). So, unsurprisingly, the ends result ends up being extremely different for that alone. Dino Crisis has that unusual not-quite-fixed "dolly" camera that tracks, in keeping with Capcom's directing (?) choices of the time.

Of course, Resident Evil did eventually get a moving camera (technically before RE4, I think? That's just the most famed example). Unlike Tomb Raider, it was still missing probably the second most important feature of gun combat in Tomb Raider: moving while shooting. Resident Evil, I think, didn't get that until 2012 (!) as a far as I know, and eventually made the shift over entirely. Tomb Raider had it from the start, which was probably the justification for auto-aim in the first place (the later sequels had manual aim control for very specific uses), and in fact the game would probably be impossible to beat without it.

This isn't to say one is better than the other! They're actually just quite different. The auto-aim is the main point of commonality.
 
I like the repititivty of Darkest Dungeon 1 and 2. It's fun seeing how your normal milk run can turn into 1v1ing a boss with your crazy homeless guy and just tinkering with party compositions
 
So, this is pure and total minor detail complaint:
In Starcraft, Kerigan's transformation is a massive disappointment, and barely counts as a change overall.

Just a few bone wings and a skin replacement, with the rest of the body still entirely human. It is dull, and the fact that she ended up the face of the zerg is annoying.
Admittedly most furries go for zergling or hydralisk for actual artwork, but the most generic "converted human" ends up the main face of the faction and the main character that gets the focus.


... I have not actually played Starcraft 2, and I do know that there are a good number more zerg characters there, but even then Kerigan is still the focus of things.
 
E.I.G. said:
... I have not actually played Starcraft 2, and I do know that there are a good number more zerg characters there, but even then Kerigan is still the focus of things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I will say this, as someone who has played Starcraft 2 while it won't solve your disappointment (as you say she is indeed the face of the Zerg) there are some phenomenally alien Zerg. Ironically some of them aren't even pure Zerg, there are infested Terran characters who are dramatically more Zergified (and thus more interesting/appealing). You may have seen their designs but seeing them in game does make a world of difference, at least IMO.

If you can look past her unfortunate design then you'll have some top tier Zerg there. And the gameplay systems also do not disappoint.
 
WestOrEast said:
Why should a game have a major female character and not make her into masturbation bait? What's even the point of having her around then? #JustBlizzardThings
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Let's be real, it's particularly unfortunate given Blizzard's internal culture but this is by no means a "Blizzard thing". Choosing sex appeal over any other design consideration is by no means unique to them, especially in science fiction.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top