Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Mario Kart 64 is not a fun game.
I have false memories of it. I played it with my friend in the NSO app the other day, and we sucked really bad at it, it's impossible to control and the courses are pretty bad overall. Both of us also thought Star Cup was our favorite, just to find out it had some of the worst courses in the entire game lol

And we were really excited for Yoshi's Valley, but it's impossible to take the skinny road without falling down.
Banshee Road or whatever its called is the most difficult course. We had to play it like 5 times to get in 4th place and be able to go to the next course.

Call of Duty and its various ripoffs and Final Fantasy XIII did serious damage to the word "linear" and its never fully recovered.

I mostly just hate both extremes in most cases, especially in 3d games. Like companies don't realize that there is a middle ground between "hallway simulator" and "open world the literal size of a US state".

@kkslider5552000 Games like Tales of Arise do well with the more linear areas, but then you have things like Pokemon Sun and Moon and Sword and Shield, where the game is legit just a hallway simulator.

@VoidofLight "Pokemon Sun and Moon and Sword and Shield, where the game is legit just a hallway simulator"

Its sad, because its true.

Pokemon Black and White aren't all that great.

I mean, they're good (like most Pokemon games IMO), but there seems to be a growing feeling online that B&W were the "good old days" of Pokemon, or even the peak of the series. I imagine this is because we're getting to the point where people who grew up with B&W are of the age to be very vocal on the internet, and to feel a lot of nostalgia towards these titles (we saw this with RSE and DPPt previously, and it still exists with RBY and GSC in my age group). But personally, I find them to be significantly less enjoyable than previous entries, and I'd argue that they started (or scaled up) a few of the things that people criticise gens 6-8 for.

• I'll start by saying the graphics are great, especially in-battle. I'm not a fan of the UI in this game, including the sterile tone induced by "black and white" theming, but that's a matter of personal preference.
• While I commend the idea of "rebooting" the Pokedex by only including new species in the main game, and I actually really like some of the new designs here (I, for one, adore Trubbish), I think in practice this kinda fell flat. Too many Pokemon just felt like uglier versions of Pokemon I had used before. And, while I appreciate some types getting relatively good representation this gen (Bug and Grass in particular), it did feel like some other core types got shafted in the process (Water). I also find Unova to have one of the weakest selections of starter Pokemon.
• Too add: too many of the new Pokemon are either available too late, or evolve at too high a level. Why introduce two new bird Pokemon on the final route? Why do we have Pokemon that evolve in the 60s?
• While the story is pretty decent (and arguably the best in the Pokemon main series)...the cost of this is railroading the player through the region, a trend that would continue in future games. I'll admit that the greater emphasis on cutscenes was not a new thing to Black and White (there were a fair number of unnecessary cutscenes introduced into HGSS to my chagrin), but I believe this to be the game where it went to the extreme, with every sequence of the game punctuated by character interactions, and pretty much everything in the game having to be done in a specific order. I think the Gym Leader involvement in pretty much every step of the journey is emblematic of this. Although some like the increased role of Gym Leaders in the story, I found this resulted in the essentially the same loop for every city: arrive in city, meet gym leader, solve gym leader problem, do gym, leave city - all with no player agency in the order of this sequence.
• Region design. While I'm unsure if I'd call it the worst region in Pokemon (I need to replay gens 6-8 to refresh my memory on those), it is a far cry from regions 1-4. The main criticism of this region is that it's linear - which I've touched upon above, and is somewhat rectified in the sequels Black 2 and White 2. The main game is essentially city > route > city > route, whereas at least previous games had split pathways and backtracking to mix things up a bit. One positive thing I'll say is that, unlike Alola and Galar, the routes are quite open and there's a decent amount of exploration to be done within them, and there are a few reasons to revisit routes once you have progressed in the story. However, beyond that, the main thing that bothers me about the region is that it is that it lacks cohesion. Based on New York City, Unova is a sprawling metropolis with some of the most "urban" cities we've ever seen in Pokemon. But why is it that I can step out of one of these cities to arrive in a desert? Or an electro-charged cave? Kanto, the most urban of the previous regions, at least had a believable topography with the most extreme biomes in the corner of the map (rather than dotted between cities). It feels like they had to tick some biome boxes and just put them wherever was convenient on the map. I know Pokemon worlds have never done a great job of feeling "lived in", but more than any other entry in the series, progressing through Unova feels like going through a Super Mario Bros map rather than a region that people are meant to live in.

I do appreciate this game's ambition but to me it just feels like a lot of steps in the wrong direction.

@TrainerRosa Not to mention Lumiose City was the biggest and most ambitious urban environment in the series to date. Loved the way the game actually shifted camera angles to increase this feeling of scope.. And yeah, that shift to 3D battles at the time was massive.

Also had the best in-game multiplayer suite of any of the mainline games.

And the OST is probably one of the best in the series.

X/Y really felt like it was flexing the 3DS hardware in the best ways.

X and Y got the short end of the stick, given that it was the first 3D pokemon. They had to cut tons of content and cut a bunch of story content as well.

Also, Black and White was the start of the series getting more linear, but I still love those games. The more linear structure didn’t bother me, given the game still lets you breath and play it. The routes still have places to explore despite the game guiding you into the next town. Compared to the Alola games, Unova isn’t that linear. Alola is far more linear, far more hand holding, and all of it’s routes are small halls that have little to no reason to go back to them.

@VoidofLight oh no I agree when it comes to Alola. It's the constant handholding and lack of exploration that make it difficult for me to go back to that region. In fact, I'm even tempted to say that SM and USUM are the only main series games I don't enjoy.

I remember enjoying X and Y a lot at the time but they're bizarrely the only Pokemon games I've never gone back to, so I'm not sure how I'd feel about them these days.

I don't think a linear, story-driven Pokemon game is a bad thing - but if they go for it, it needs to be all-out IMO. I haven't really enjoyed the storytelling in main series Pokemon enough to warrant the restrictions on exploration that it affords. In particular if they go for a "story-focused" game they need to ditch the typical setup of Prof with 3 starters, gyms plus league, and go for something a bit more out there. I think Colosseum and XD were reasonably successful in this regard.

@TrainerRosa Actually, I started Pokemon X recently, I'm loving it so far. Was even up late one night playing it.

Picked up the game over a year ago, and haven't gotten around to playing it until recently, mostly bought it being the last copy a store had. I'm glad I got around to it. Honestly, I wanted it because I really liked Fennikin from the anime, and mained Braixen when I got Pokken Tournament on Wii U (I really feel this is an underrated and overlooked fighter personally).

B&W had a pretty solid campaign, so yeah, I didn't mind the linearity all that much. What I object to linearity + a crap main quest. That game, to date, is the only Pokemon game I've played with actually emotionally interesting characters and a story that could measure up to other JRPGs.

The soft reboot approach was also satisfying, since it meant escaping from generations of baggage. Felt like it could have represented a new start for the series.

@Ralizah Agreed. The story itself made the linearity worth it. I get tons of people praise Sun and Moon for having the "best pokemon story", but I couldn't enjoy it. The characters seemed kind of flat in comparison to Black and White's characters, and Lillie wasn't very interesting.

@Ralizah @VoidofLight I don't find the story to be all that great tbh. While the general theming is interesting, and I like the climax and how it shakes up the traditional approach to the Pokemon league...most of the cutscenes just feel like padding with no real substance. I don't think the characters are particularly interesting either - Bianca and Cheren have development arcs but they can be summarised in a sentence - the only positive for me with regards to characters is that N and Ghetsis are some of the best villains in the series (which isn't saying much...)

@Buizel I mean, in terms of actual JRPGs, the story is incredibly lacking. For pokemon's standards however, the story itself is probably the best the games ever had. Most pokemon titles are way worse when it comes to story, always presenting alright ideas, but never truly living up to them. Even Legends Arceus, one of the better stories in a while, is incredibly rough when compared to games like Final Fantasy, Persona, or Yokai Watch.

@VoidofLight Exactly (although I wouldn't necessarily agree about Yokai Watch). Which is why I'm pretty bummed that they made such sacrifices for story. SM is the extreme example, where I often feel like I'm playing a mediocre RPG rather than a Pokemon game.

Essentially, I think Pokemon games need to make a decision between player agency and an actually engaging story. I feel the earlier Pokemon games leaned well towards the former, but the sidestepping to the latter (without fully committing) has put me off some of the more recent games a little. And I believe this to have started with Black and White.

@TrainerRosa Awesome. I like Fennekin in the anime, I thought Serena's Fennekin was really cute, so I wanted Pokemon X just to have Fennekin in my party. Being someone who just started, I'm loving the game so far. Had Aquacorde Town's music stuck in my head too.

@Sunsy If you were to go onto Pokemon's official site and to their Pokemon TV section right now, all of the XY seasons of the anime are currently on there! Highly recommend them personally, some of the best in the entire show's run. Pokemon TV is (somewhat amazingly) also on Switch if you would prefer to watch them on there.

By the way, bask in the glory that is Geosenge Town's theme once you get there, it is a masterpiece.

It might be an unpopular opinion around these parts that I loved Pokemon Sun when I played it at launch. I didn't care about the linearity or handholdiness, I just loved the new Pokemon, the sunny region, even the storyline and lore surrounding Pokemon like Type: Null. The trials were a nice change of pace from gyms as well.

Whether I would enjoy it as much if I played it now is another matter. I tried replaying Platinum recently - my first Pokemon game, which I adored as a kid - and I couldn't bring myself to keep going with it. I don't know why because I do still like the battle system of Pokemon, but the traditional gameplay as a whole just feels tedious to me now. It's a shame, I do still have a lot of affection for the DS era of Pokemon but it seems I don't actually enjoy playing them any more. Maybe one day I'll be in the right mindset for it. In the meantime I'm glad Game Freak is trying new things with mainline Pokemon these days; Legends is fantastic.

I think Kinect is more appealing to me than PSVR since Kinect was basically Eyetoy 2.0 with better games.

Unpopular opinion: I like the way that the Souls series, BOTW and MGS Phantom Pain tell the story of the games. I think that when people say that there's "no story" in them, they are missing all the dialogue and clues about them, they are just not presented the way that we are used to. In the Souls series, there's SO MUCH information if you read the items. In Phantom Pain, there's many recorded tapes. BOTW might be the less story focused Zelda, but there's still a lot told through Link's memmories and talking to people. I also like games using conventional ways to tell a story, but I have seen these games being criticized by this when there's room for both. I find more realistic and engaging to have aspects about the story left out and to simply imagine and investigate as much as possible to understand what really happened. Also, what you experience through the gameplay is telling a good chunk of the story, so for these games that are more "gameplay-focused", you are still witnessing and doing the story constantly. Decisions like in the Souls series, like when joining a covenant or helping or killing an NPC are harder and more significant because just like in real life, you have many doubts,limited questionable information and your own judgement to take them as your only tools. It's realistic not to have all the information available.

Again, to clarify, I also like games that tell all the story, there's definitely space for both. But it's sad that not many people appreciate this about these games and that many are missing out on the lore of them, which is really rich.This also allows the gaming community to speculate and work together to discover the secrets in them.

@roy130390 Item descriptions don't count as proper storytelling. Lore is fine, but it needs to be accompanied by an actual narrative framework of some sort that's developed over the course of the game. Otherwise it's just like you're reading the rough notes compiled for an unfinished manuscript.

BotW tackles the storytelling issue well, IMO, insofar as it provides a minimalistic narrative framework that works well in the context of an open world game and actually rewards the player with more development of the characters and backstory when they find certain locations in the world. So the gameplay loop and narrative development harmonize into one seamless experience. You also have more linear chunks of gameplay structured around the divine beasts that help it to hold together as well.

I think Elden Ring actually works better than other Soulslikes I've played in this context as well. The narrative framework is fairly clear and established at the beginning of the game, and while it lacks the harmonious marriage of narrative development and goal-focused exploration that BotW features, exploring does allow for more interaction with NPCs, who are written a bit more straight-forwardly in this game. There's still the cryptic blather filled with Proper Nouns, of course, but I've generally been piecing together the structure of this world without having to go diving into youtube lore videos.

Haven't played MGS V yet, but if you're entirely reliant on tape recordings to understand what's going on, I'd say it has probably failed on a narrative level. Which is even more devastating insofar as the MGS games were well-known for being rich with story-telling and character development.