Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Rayman platformers are way better than Mario platformers, which have become bland and repetitive.
I didn't like 3D World.
Final Fantasy 7 sucks, 6 was better.
O3O

I am playing through Super Mario 64 and I am not enjoying that much. To many times I feel completely lost on certain missions.

I think the Playstation Vita, despite its lack of AAA support, has had some of the most innovative and memorable exclusives so far this gen.

I hate the AWFUL camera controls and slippery feel Mario has in that game. Easily my least favorite of the Mario platformers thus far.

When people say "it has no games," what they really mean is "it has no AAA western games that I would rather play on home console anyway."

And yeah, I agree that the slim model is better. I'm glad I held out for it.

It has so game like the Wii U doesn't have games. Lack of many of the major third party games, but plenty of unique (exclusive) games to make it worth the buy. I'm actually considering the slim too. I haven't tried it myself though video's did show a big difference between the slim and the old to me. But the other advantages like the ones you mention and the small interior storage(for the second account) do make it an interesting option.

I enjoy Super Smash Bros a lot. And one of the most fun things about Super Smash Bros is that it's quite easy to understand for casuals who just play when they're visiting. It's also quite easy to become adequate at it. So if they could embrace competitive play fully, as well as keeping it as casual for those who prefer that style, I'd welcome it.

No. It should definitely come back, but there is no reason to revive a dead franchise and have it replace a franchise which actually sells consoles.

Agree to some degree.

I love the GameCube, but I think the control is chunky and uncomfortable to hold, and therefore I prefer the Wii and WiiU simply because of the controls.

I don't have the qualifications or information necessary to know whether he's a good president or a bad one. I suspect the same goes for you.

Agreed.

Never enjoyed Super Smash when I was younger, so I never really grew to love Melee.

Agreed.

If the gimmick is good, then go for it, but I think Nintendo should have a controller like the Pro Controller as the default option bundled with the console, and then keep the wii-motes as secondary controllers. The wii-motes made games like Mario Kart Wii so much more accessible for casual gamers, as well as making people interested in Wii Sports and other niche titles. It also gave us the best Metroid gameplay, imo, with the Prime trilogy.

That isn't an unpopular opinion. Most people agree or at least aren't against. It's Nintendo that holds the unpopular opinion there.

I find the N64 has to many games that were "good for its time" while lots of other generations have had games that are just good. For people without Nostalgia for that generation it is one of the more difficult generations to like, in my opinion. Like I said earlier, I'm having a tough time with Super Mario 64, what some call a masterpiece.

I remember a period when I had both a SNES and a N64, and the SNES undoubtedly got far more use. To be fair though, probably at least 25% of my time on Wii U is still playing SNES games. Just a phenomenal system.

Thank you for pointing out the definition of strategy.

PROTIP: To defeat the Cyberdemon, shoot at it until it dies.

1.Smash is basically designed to be competitive. The only reason why you'd play single player is because of unlocking stuff to do multiplayer.

2.The problem with that is F-Zero is harder than Mario Kart therefore making it less accessible though I agree that F-Zero needs a comeback.

3.Its weird to see SEGA fanboys still supporting SEGA despite their stupidity at times. Fanboys are fanboys whether you like it or not. In my experience being a Nintendo fanboy, Nintendo has rarely let me down or has disappointed me in any way which is something you can easily see from companies like Konami, Capcom or SEGA for that matter who easily let their fans down. Sure Nintendo is lost in their own world and they have yet to catch up with others but in terms of business and making profit, they learn from it and do stuff that works. The 3DS sold well because it took what was good from the DS and made it better.

4.You say Nintendo fanboys are down right bad and here you are praising the Gamecube better than the PS2? I too love the Gamecube but even I'll admit that the PS2 downright beated the Gamecube.

5.For everyone claiming Iwata is the bad CEO, Let's not forget that it was him that made Nintendo go back to business. The only reason why he's not doing well is because of his misunderstanding of such stuff like Region Locking and Let's plays.

6.I agree that I enjoy the Metroid games a lot better than the Zelda games but keep in mind that Metroid was inspired by combining elements of both Mario and Zelda. I guess part of me that loves Metroid is because of it being a platformer and it makes me feel in situations where if I'm stuck, I can do things myself without a guide which is something that's difficult to do in a Zelda game.

7.I'm not into the Smash series so I can't say that Melee is the best of them all because Melee is the only game I've played.

8.The fact that hackers are able to make things region free on Nintendo consoles is just laughable. But besides the process of getting different games from different regions, does it affect much in terms of sales?

9.Its funny that whenever Nintendo makes gimmicky technology, Sony and Microsoft do the same thing. The Vita has a touch pad at the back which sounds gimmicky compared to the 3DS touch screen.

I fail to understand the point of people hating gimmicky technology because the games themselves are centered through gimmicks that are actually worse than the gimmicky controls. Platform games often have these do or die situations that force the player to do things quick which is bad if the controls are bad and I have played a lot of games where the controls aren't that great and frustrate me a LOT (I'm looking at you Super Meat Boy! XD)

Even if Nintendo removes gimmicky controls, they still can't satisfy the fanboys because of the other things Nintendo has to keep in mind like reviving old franchises.

[/quote]

Keep in mind these are opinions. Smash 4 and Brawl removed almost half of what made Melee so good competitively, hence I say FULLY embrace competitive scene as in, bringing back advanced techniques like L-Canceling, Wave Dashing and so on, promoting offense play, etc.

Well, make an easy mode, Fire Emblem Awakening made a casual mode and people had an easier time enjoying the game.

Nintendo's own fanboys are extremely annoying in my eyes although I identify myself as a Nintendo fan. Nintendo has let me down a LOT this generation.

Again, these are opinions, yes, the PS2 destroyed the GameCube however, when I go back and play a PS2 game, they look muddy as hell and generally, they just don't age well due to the console's inferior specs. Don't have that problem with the Gamecube

Iwata and his board of directors kept losing loyal fans every generation and in one generation managed to lose pretty much all the third party support. That is pathetic in my eyes.

Regarding gimmicky controllers, ever since the Wii days, Nintendo has been focusing on making the controls work with their games instead of focusing on making the experience unforgettable and fun.

Using Hero Mode as a difficulty level in Zelda games is one of the most asinine things Nintendo has ever done from a game design perspective. I don't understand how developers so brilliant fail to distinguish between punishing and challenging. Hero Mode is the former, not making enemies harder to take down, just making it easier to die.

Hero Mode is basically the low-heart challenges people regularly do anyways, though. What did you expect, them to make regular enemies take a zillion hits to take down? Because that's usually the alternative for an optional difficulty setting most wouldn't touch regardless. And adding health isn't difficult, it's tedious. Just ask Square-Enix, they're the masters of tedious "difficulty"...

No, I'd like them to make enemies smarter. Either more aggressive or more defensive. That's what an actual difficulty setting is supposed to do.

I never play low-heart challenges because they make the game punishing and they remove the aspect of collecting heart containers from the game.

Except that wouldn't work for a lot of 3D Zelda games unless you design the whole game around them. Those games treat enemies as part of the puzzle aspect, and making enemies more complicated would basically mean that you're making more complicated puzzles. The dungeon layout has to be accomodating as well. Difficulty settings in general are a bad idea for a lot of games, and there's a reason Zelda went so long without them. Hero mode is basically the best that they could do. I'll agree that it's not great, and personally I would've preferred it if they didn't bother, and instead put those resources to use adding more worthwhile optional content (a hard dungeon you don't have to complete but provides you with an upgraded version of a weapon, for instance), but considering the popularity of self-limiting challenges and speedruns of Zelda games (seriously, I can't believe how many people did stuff like that even before streaming was a thing), I'm sure it made sense to Nintendo at least...

I think just making the enemies twice as fast would be fine.

(The second quest on the NES Legend of Zelda is a damn good effort especially considering the limitations).

Second Quest in the NES game pretty much proved why Zelda shouldn't have hard modes...

Because Hard actually means Hard for once ? (And success which is possible is only gained by actually putting some effort in).

Because Hard meant a lot of annoyingly poopy puzzles that no one could figure out without a guide. The combat was fine, but everything else was sloppy as hell.