Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

And again you're getting too hung up on the way I'm wording my arguments than the actual arguments themselves.

Thinking about the issue some more, I don't think it's really a hard and fast rule. It's more of a problem with some series for others depending on certain factors like the core gameplay and what elements are emphasized, the series' history and the amount of times that the gameplay's been repeated already, as well as personal opinion and tastes. Mario happens to be a perfect storm of all of these, the core gameplay of Mario is pretty simplistic and generic (yes, generic. In just about every sense of the word) and depends on gameplay a lot, the gameplay's been absolutely done to death and the series has been relatively stagnant for years, and I'm just not a fan of linear platformers and we've seen far too many of them.

As for DK, you could make the argument that since the series hadn't gotten new games for a while that it's okay, but again DK is a series that doesn't exactly have standout core gameplay and TF feels a tad too soon after Returns (only around a year or two), so the lack of change in its gameplay hurts. The game just needed more than what it offered. Like I've said, it's really more of a general trend than anything else, whether or not it's acceptable is more of a case by case basis.

Can we just leave this guy alone with his hating of platformers and talk about something else? Pleeeeeeeeease? Here's my unpopular opinion: WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT SOMETHINGS ELSE OTHER THAN ONE GUY'S OPINION OF 2D PLATFORMERS!

And to help us divulge away from this I'll try with one of my own- it's long overdue that indie games gets the credit and recognition that I believe they deserve. They should be judged on the same ground as AAA games, and when they're really good (like Undertale) they should be up for the same amount of awards as any other game. The fact that Underrale was shafted at 'The Game Awards' this year was a massive disappointment, and is a trend in gaming that needs to change soon.

Partially because internet arguments are harder to make since body language and tone are important in any argument.

Thinking about the issue some more, I don't think it's really a hard and fast rule. It's more of a problem with some series for others depending on certain factors like the core gameplay and what elements are emphasized, the series' history and the amount of times that the gameplay's been repeated already, as well as personal opinion and tastes.

I think it's mostly personal taste tbh. Some people like the formula that they are familiar with and want more of the same thing. Others want new changes and updates. A good example is Pokemon. Many fans are happy with the same formula, but to me it's getting quite stale.

Mario happens to be a perfect storm of all of these, the core gameplay of Mario is pretty simplistic and generic (yes, generic. In just about every sense of the word)

Generic as in it's a platformer, sure

and depends on gameplay a lot, the gameplay's been absolutely done to death and the series has been relatively stagnant for years, and I'm just not a fan of linear platformers and we've seen far too many of them.

As I said above, personal taste is the main reason.

As for DK, you could make the argument that since the series hadn't gotten new games for a while that it's okay, but again DK is a series that doesn't exactly have standout core gameplay and TF feels a tad too soon after Returns (only around a year or two), so the lack of change in its gameplay hurts.

Not really. It's a sequel in every sense, so it's okay imo to be more or less the same. You can't exactly expect a sequel to be completely different. Besides, Country Returns was critically acclaimed, so why even change what worked in the first place?

The game just needed more than what it offered. Like I've said, it's really more of a general trend than anything else, whether or not it's acceptable is more of a case by case basis.

It's definitely case-by-case and mostly personal tastes. If you weren't fond of the game series before, you'd definitely think the game series has become stale. Whereas huge fans will accept the redundancy and "genericness"

@TheLastLugia I'd be upset too, but The Game Awards is just a way for big AAA developers to make themselves feel better about themselves despite all of the ways they wronged the gaming community just that year. The idea that The Game Awards is a legitimate award show is only something that Geoff Keighly tells himself, clutching his pillow at night.

It's also a chance for big budget shooters to be humiliated by a game about squid kids inking each other

@TheLastLugia Well...they do get some recognition. Just not as highly as AAA games (Unless you're Minecraft, in which case everyone and their mother knows who you are.). They'll get a large following if they're good enough (or just use a bunch of jump-scares...not gonna name anyone), but they'll rarely end up becoming a name that everyone knows. Which is a shame, because there are a lot of indie games I enjoy (Shovel Knight is awesome, and Undertale is one of my favorite games this year.). I've even seen the idea of being indie used as an insult (Like during the Smash Ballot, where I've seen people say that Shantae and Shovel Knight didn't deserve to get in because they were indie and not as iconic as, say, Bomberman...granted, Bomberman in Smash would be kick-a$$, but my point still stands!). So being indie is a bad thing now? Wow. That is just plain stupid! Look, I don't care whether you were made by a large group of people or just a handful; as long as you're a good game, I like you.
@LztheQuack AND a chance for Konami to be called out on their BS (Seriously, I don't care what your stance on it is, Geoff Keighly doing that was awesome, and it earned him some respect from me.).

That's what context is for. If you'd actually bothered to read my entire post instead of looking only at the buzzwords you wouldn't be confused about what I'm saying.

Pretty sure it's more complicated by that. Even if you like a formula you can easily get bored with something if it repeats enough. That happened with me with the 2D Mario games, I use to like them but at this point I'm just plain sick of seeing them.

Pokemon's an interesting case. The general progression formula and the League structure is repetitive, sure, but on the flip side Pokemon is constantly making changes to its battle formula and in other such areas. Look at what we've gotten in XY, 3D graphics, Mega Evolution, Fairy type, the PSS, trainer customization, those are some pretty big changes.

Generic as in there's not much to the gameplay. There's little more to it than running, jumping, and collecting coins. Mario is somewhat of a blank slate series, its mechanics lend themselves to almost anything you can think of, but by themselves the games feel somewhat dull and empty. So Mario needs creative gameplay ideas more than other series.

Only that last part is subjective, and it's definitely not the main reason.

Not when they're that close together. If they release two similar playing games close together they can cannibalize each other and reduce people's interest in both. Giving Returns a 3DS port doesn't really help that either. If they want to release two similar games close together it's usually a good idea to put a twist on the gameplay in some way to make it feel different. Majora's Mask is a good example of this, OoT and MM were only 2 years apart but they made Majora's Mask feel different with the 3 day system.

I take offense to the notion that unconditional loyalty defines someone as a huge fan, I can be a huge fan of a series while still being critical of its flaws. In fact, I'd say it's better to be a critical fan because it shows that you care about the series' quality and identity and want to see it remain fun and high quality.

Super Smash Bros. for Wii U has enough 1 player content.

Pikmin 3 could use some extra levels, but the game isn't short.

How odd due to the following post...

Pokemon's an interesting case. The general progression formula and the League structure is repetitive, sure, but on the flip side Pokemon is constantly making changes to its battle formula and in other such areas. Look at what we've gotten in XY, 3D graphics, Mega Evolution, Fairy type, the PSS, trainer customization, those are some pretty big changes.

I feel the opposite. Despite these changes, I still think the series is stale as moldy bread. I hated the idea of Mega Evolutions since most of them were already powerful Pokemon, so it changed nothing but made the meta worse in a lot of cases. The fairy type helped a bit, but I got bored of the games still. If they did more spinoffs like Colosseum, I may regain interest, but meh otherwise.

Maybe the New series, but I don't think of this at all with any of the other series.

Er, isn't calling a series stale subjective anyway?

Uh, except they are 3 1/2 years apart. Most sequels on average are closer than this.

Giving Returns a 3DS port doesn't really help that either. If they want to release two similar games close together it's usually a good idea to put a twist on the gameplay in some way to make it feel different. Majora's Mask is a good example of this, OoT and MM were only 2 years apart but they made Majora's Mask feel different with the 3 day system.

Which ironically caused it to be hated by a good portion of the Zelda community. But again, it's all about personal taste.

I was speaking in general terms though. You don't have to have unconditional loyalty to be a fan. Heck, I'd argue that good fans are the ones who point out the flaws too. My point there is that huge fans are generally more accepting of redundancy because that is what they are comfortable with. If you change too much, you risk alienating the fans. See Sega and Sonic.

But once again, I want to point to personal tastes. Many fans don't want their favorite series to change too much while others want to see more change. The idea of a series being repetitive and stale is mostly subjective.

This opinion is false simply because Viewtiful Joe is a beat-em-up, not a platformer. Comparing different genres is like apples and oranges, you just prefer one over the other.

You know what's generic? @Bolt_Strike's arguments.

An opinion can't be wrong.

There more grandiloquent than generic.

Well, it kind of can. If you have an opinion that 2+2=3 then that opinion is wrong.

@AlliMeadow That's not an opinion. That's a belief.

@MrMario02: You probably ought to define how you're using the words "opinion" and "belief."

It feels like this forum is only meant to start arguments and insult each other. Awesome. Here's my contribution:

I like having to wait for games to be released, and I like it when they get delayed. It gives me a chance to work on games I own and haven't played through yet.

1) Super Mario Sunshine is the worst video game of all time.
2) Every RPG that doesn't have an ATB/CTB combat system (like Final Fantasy 9 or 10) or a turn-based combat system (like Mario & Luigi / Paper Mario) sucks.
3) Bubsy 3D isn't as bad as everyone says. They all get too worked up on the graphics. Also, Bubsy 3D is way more fun than Super Mario Sunshine (and Super Mario 3D World).
4) The Dolphin Emulator completely destroys the GameCube and Wii feature-wise (that's actually a fact and a given since emulators naturally have features beyond the capabilities of the original hardware, so yeah: Emulators > real consoles.)
5) Time limits in 3D platform games suck (Super Mario 3D World).
6) The Wii U is the worst video game console of all time. (not sure if this opinion is unpopular though)
7) Pokemon is boring. (that doesn't mean that I hate the Pokémon games, I'm just way more into the Mario / early Final Fantasy RPG games, I guess)
8) Every Mario Party that came after Mario Party 8 sucked (NdCube sucks).
9) Censoring sexually explicit content in games is great (Bravely Default, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Fatal Frame, etc) as such content should not be included in video games.
10) The PS1 games look better than the N64 games, graphics-wise.
11) Waluigi is the best video game character of all time.
12) Super Smash Bros. Brawl is the best entry in the Smash franchise.
13) "Mario Smash Football" for the GC is better than "Super Mario Strikers: Charged" for Wii.
14) "Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour" is the best Mario game of all time.
15) Bubsy The Bobcat is a better character than Sonic The Hedgehog.
16) The Super Mario Bros. movie is awesome.

So yeah, these are my (unpopular?) gaming opinions.

No, the 3D series does this too. They're also simple platformers that involve little more than running, jumping, and collecting coins. Only the collectathons have really had deep and intricate mechanics, they all had bigger movesets and a more complex and intricate progression, and Sunshine and Galaxy had unique themes and complex mechanics that allowed you to interact with the levels on a deeper level.

You're the one who called it a sequel in the first place. So is it a sequel or not? You're contradicting yourself.

As I've said before, Mario and Sonic are opposite extremes in how they handle sequels, there's a happy medium in between the two where they can change the gameplay without it alienating the fanbase.

Not really. It's not simply a matter of taste, those preferences are rooted in objective facts and patterns. They're more objective than subjective.

1. Super Mario 3D World is my favorite Mario game.
2. I dislike all the Yoshi games except for Wooly World. Only reason I bought it was that it was on sale and I found the yarn-style cute.
3. The Wii U is my favorite console yet. Mostly because of the variety of games I enjoy on the console, but also because of the VC. I also love the Pro-controller.
4. I think Gameplay is more important than story when I play a game. I never get drawn into the story, but sometimes I do get drawn into the world of a game (Xenoblade) or like the characters (Fire Emblem), but I don't play those games for the story, and for the latter I wouldn't mind it just being consecutive battles with increased difficulty.
5. I found every Sonic game I've played is boring. This also goes for the "incredible" Sonic the Hedgehog 2.
6. I like New Super Mario Bros U more than Super Mario World.
7. I think Donkey Kong Country is too difficult, but that might just be the VC release. The maneuvering is to difficult, especially while jumping.
8. I prefer the 2D Metroid games over the Prime series.
9. I still look forward to Metroid Prime: Federation Force.
10. I also prefer the 2D Zelda games over the 3D games.
11. Windwaker was so boring to me that I never played more than 2 hours.
12. Captain Toad is one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played.
13. Retro games are overrated. Yes, some old games were great and still are. I've grown up with video games since I was a little kid, but I still find newer games to generally be better. Sure, the New Super Mario Bros. series isn't as original as the original Bros games, but the controls feels better, the stages are more fun, and I love the addition of the star coins. The same goes for most series I've played since I was young.

Eh, I still enjoy 3D World a lot more than the New series.

You're the one who called it a sequel in the first place. So is it a sequel or not? You're contradicting yourself.

What are you talking about? I never said they weren't sequels. I was arguing against your point that they are so close together (about 2 years you claimed if I remember correctly).

As I've said before, Mario and Sonic are opposite extremes in how they handle sequels, there's a happy medium in between the two where they can change the gameplay without it alienating the fanbase.

Tis true. I prefer the Mario path tbh.

Not really. It's not simply a matter of taste, those preferences are rooted in objective facts and patterns. They're more objective than subjective.

Opinions are subjective, even if they are based on facts.

Objective: Mario series relies on a formulaic gameplay.
Subjective: Fans prefer this formula.