Forums

Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Posts 12,101 to 12,120 of 12,217

FishyS

jedgamesguy wrote:

sunny63 wrote:

I'm going digital from here on out. I dislike materialism,.

Lmao I'm the complete opposite, I've bought more physical games than ever at this point. I don't see buying physical as materialism at all, at least when compared to the alternative, which is corporations playing with your games as they see fit. If companies delist a game from their shop, or the console gets discontinued, that's it, the game is wiped from existence for good. Sony and Microsoft know this, and that's why they offer digital only consoles without disc drives, to stop people from buying physical.

Buying games of any type is materialism 😝 Physical games are potentially clutter, but honestly not much difference otherwise.

jedgamesguy wrote:

Plus... y'know... I just wanna put the cartridge in and play the game.

I think you mean put in the cartridge amd download day-1 patches for an hour. 😝 Plus, no matter how you look at it, you can get digital games faster than it takes for them to be physically delivered or for you to go to the store. Digital pre-orders even download while you're asleep a few days before the game releases. Not that this actually matters, but just another example that a lot of the distinctions between physical and digital are a little silly.

FishyS

Switch Friend Code: SW-2425-4361-0241

Summer235

Isn't it still materialism even if you buy digital? Not trying to be a smartass, just a question. You're still buying something even if it's not physical.

I prefer physical because I know it's mine forever and it's not up to a company to say "Sike!" and take it.

Summer235

Switch Friend Code: SW-2910-0073-1053

dmcc0

@Summer235 I keep reading about some Greedy Corp that's going shut down access to all my digital games but it's not happened yet. I can still play (and re-download) my Wii games even though the store closed 5+ years ago. Same with any other stores that have closed (3DS/WiiU/Vita). I can't buy new stuff for those consoles, but I can't really do that physically either unless I buy used, which I guess is the main drawback of digital games.

I'm sure someone here will gladly point out I'm wrong, but I'm not aware of any games that you can't play once they've been delisted from digital stores if you've already paid for them (FTP/Live service stuff is different and usually don't have physical versions anyway). If they require a constant connection and the server has been shutdown etc then you're not going to be playing physically or digitally in those cases.

Full games on the cart/disc is becoming more uncommon too, especially if you consider patches and updates which most modern games seem to have now. You're physical version becomes more like a cart-/disc-shaped licence key or launcher.

Edited on by dmcc0

dmcc0

Xyphon22

Honestly, while I'll probably never go fully digital unless I have to, I'll probably start doing it more. My main reason for preferring physical has been being able to resell a game when I'm done to afford buying more games, but that has become too much of a hassle. Amazon doesn't let you anymore unless you register as a business, eBay is a hassle and after fees you don't get much anyway. I usually now just wait until Gamestop has some sort of deal like getting an extra 50% on trade-ins, but that still doesn't get anywhere near as much as I used to get from selling on Amazon. It's not worth the little bit of money you get from reselling anymore.

Xyphon22

3DS Friend Code: 5069-3937-8083

sunny63

@Summer235 Yeah lol entirely wrong word choice. I meant clutter. Game boxes look terrible on a shelf and all of mine are just sitting in a bin, not even holding the games they came with. Me and my brother just keep all of them in the box of TotK, which has the art we find prettiest.
@dmcc0 And yeah, exactly. I play singleplayer games mostly, and the only DLC I buy is the kind Pokemon, MK8 and BotW got, no mtx for me.

sunny63

Fizza

Online-multiplayer games are a hell of a lot more fun if you don't search them up on social media XD

Currently MIA for exams; see you all in a bit! o7
Mario Maker 2 Maker ID: YT1-0Q2-YFF
Please ask for permission before using my FC!
Currently Playing: ....nothing XD

Switch Friend Code: SW-3505-5480-3330 | Twitter:

Xyphon22

I just talked about this in the Games I Recently Dropped thread, and I honestly don't know how unpopular this is but it seems like it might be, but the way Witcher 3 (and possibly other WRPGs, I don't really know or remember) handles weapon degradation is 10x worse than it is in BotW/TotK. Not being able to move when you reach too much carrying weight is horrible. And I would just be out there fighting monsters when suddenly the sword picture on my screen would turn red, meaning it's no good anymore. I still had it and could keep using it, mind you, it just wouldn't do much. And of course despite the fact that the entire time I played I only fought like 2 humans but a whole bunch of monsters, I had about a dozen steel swords (good against humans) but only the 1 silver sword (good against monsters). And could I just easily find a new one like in Zelda? Of course not. I'm in the middle of nowhere doing a quest and can't just pack up and wander who knows how far to the nearest town who may or may not have someone who can sell me one. Which would always take about half of my money for one silver sword, despite the fact that I did every quest I could find that my level was good enough to try. But at least those sharpening wheels I could find would make it better, right? Nope. Have to pay more money. Not saying this system is broken. It makes sense to not just be able to magically fix a broken sword (although if the problem is that it's blunted than those wheels probably should be able to fix that). It's just a lot worse than Zelda which everyone always complains about, and one of the reasons I finally just moved on to new games.

Xyphon22

3DS Friend Code: 5069-3937-8083

FishyS

@Xyphon22 FaIr point, but just because it's bad in a different game doesn't mean it isn't also awful in BotW. Weapon breakage was the main reason I never finished BotW — no matter what fight I was in, every single one of my weapons seemed to instantly disintegrate and I was left with nothing but the agonizingly weak bombs. It even happened in shrines which kind of soft-locked you sometimes. Awful mechanics no matter what game they are in.

Also, I always assumed Witcher 3 was a JRPG. Apparently it's Polish? I learned something.

Edited on by FishyS

FishyS

Switch Friend Code: SW-2425-4361-0241

Xyphon22

@FishyS Which makes it extra sad because I'm part Polish and wanted to like it more than I did.

And I didn't say Zelda's mechanics weren't bad, just that Witcher's are a lot worse. And I know Skyrim also at least has the weight mechanic, I don't remember about the weapon breaking thing because I made it even less far in that game before I grew tired of it. Although personally, I didn't mind the weapon mechanics in Zelda. If one of my weapons broke, there were always five more nearby. I never once in two full playthroughs of BotW and one of TotK found myself without a weapon, which is more than I can say with Witcher 3 even though I don't think I made it very far into the game.

Plus I forgot in my original post, I also had one point where my armor "broke" (the symbol on screen turned red and it wasn't useful anymore). At least in Zelda it is only the weapons.

Xyphon22

3DS Friend Code: 5069-3937-8083

Jalex_64

@Xyphon22 I agree with you regarding the BOTW/TOTK weapon breaking. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that the people complaining simply didn't expand their weapon inventory slots enough with Hestu.

This is the only scenario where I can see people having genuine issues as, like you, the difficulty in collecting them seemed to lessen for me the longer I played. There would be far less challenge if weapons lasted longer in the latter stages, when you've mastered combat and are much stronger.

Conversely, the survival elements of the games, particularly at the beginning when you have less hearts and stamina, when it's you against the world, were a big part of the game's identity for me and what made them so much fun.

Jalex_64

FishyS

Jalex_64 wrote:

I agree with you regarding the BOTW/TOTK weapon breaking. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that the people complaining simply didn't expand their weapon inventory slots enough with Hestu, which of course makes it abundantly easier to have a ready supply of weapons when needed.
This is the only scenario where I can see people having genuine issues as, like you, the difficulty in collecting them seemed to lessen for me the longer I played. There would be far less challenge if weapons lasted longer in the latter stages, when you've mastered combat and are much stronger.

Conversely, the survival elements of the games, particularly at the beginning when you have less hearts and stamina, when it's you against the world, were a big part of the game's identity for me and what made them so fun.

I've heard the 'this wouldn't be a problem if you played the game in the correct order' thing a lot as an excuse for weapon breaking in BotW but... it's literally an open world game. 😆 Correct order isn't even clear and playing your own way ideally is not supposed to destroy the experience. If you have something which makes the game less fun for the first 10s of hours if you 'play in the wrong order' (not easier or harder, simply less fun) then maybe that was bad game design for an open world game. And if the latter part of the game doesn't have enough difficulty unless you were artificially forced to farm weapons and weapon slots, maybe that is also bad game design. BotW has so much good game design that I feel like fans like to make excuses to cover up the few bad decisions.

I 100% agree that the heart and stamina system is great; that kind of thing is what makes Zelda Zelda. And it's fun that you can stock up on stamina early on and get almost anywhere with your 4 hearts and fight hard things. Or... it would be fun if you actually had a weapon that didn't break after 2 seconds. I would rather rely on combat skill, not inventory space...

Sorry if that came off as a little antagonistic, but it is the unpopular opinion thread. And the issue did ruin my experience with the game and make me stop playing.

Edited on by FishyS

FishyS

Switch Friend Code: SW-2425-4361-0241

Jalex_64

FishyS wrote:

I've heard the 'this wouldn't be a problem if you played the game in the right order' thing a lot as an excuse for weapon breaking in BotW but... it's literally an open world game. 😆 Correct order isn't even clear and playing your own way ideally is not supposed to destroy the experience. If you have something which makes the game less fun for the first 10s of hours if you 'play in the wrong order' (not easier or harder, simply less fun) then maybe that was bad game design for an open world game. And if the latter part of the game doesn't have enough difficulty unless you were artificially forced to farm weapons amd weapon slots, maybe that is also bad game design. BotW has so much good game design that I feel like fans like to make excuses to cover up the few bad decisions.

I 100% agree that the heart and stamina system is great; that kind of thing is what makes Zelda Zelda. And it's fun that you can stock up on stamina early on and get almost anywhere with your 4 hearts and fight hard things. Or... it would be fun if you actually had a weapon that didn't break after 2 seconds. I would rather rely on combat skill, not inventory space...

Hopefully we can both agree that 'less fun' is a highly subjective term, particularly when many players enjoyed those first 10-15 hours far more than any other part of the game. Personally, the risk of running out of weapons, thereby facing imminent death made the stakes that much higher and the game that much more gripping. However, if you focused on the shrines to improve your health, keeping combat to a minimum, this was far less of an issue. The game didn't force you take this route but it was the obvious one if you wanted to survive and thrive.

You can say that open world games should allow the player to complete tasks in any order as if there is a set defined rule, when the vast majority of open world games require you to be more selective about the order if you wish to gain what's widely considered the kinder experience, whether that be Skyrim, Cyberpunk, Elden Ring or Witcher. There is always an easier and harder route.

As for making excuses, this is genuinely just my opinion. I enjoy the weapon mechanics and admit there are flaws in the game but for me this simply wasn't one of them. It was a bold strategy by Nintendo to make the mechanics much more dynamic and interesting and on the whole, I feel it paid off.

Jalex_64

FishyS

@Jalex_64 Keep in mind, I played the game in the order that 'seemed natural'; I wasn't trying to play strangely.
Some games tell you what to do which is fine, but BotW really didn't so I guessed and apparently I 'guessed wrong'. I am pretty sure I ended up fighting monsters which were very over-leveled for my status in the game. Which was fun! What is less fun is fighting an epic battle for 10 minutes where getting hit once would kill you and then.... having to walk away because you have no weapon. Having to run away because the monster is hard would have been much more satisfying.

And yes, I agree fun is very much subjective. But for a game with remarkable unanimity that most of the design decisions were good, maybe the one thing that lots of people dislike (in a game where not much is disliked) could have been improved. I suspect Nintendo could have not had weapon breakage and still had you love the game just as much. Or they could have done what many games with weapons breakage do and let you keep a low-powered weapon by default so you never run out completely (I do not count the bombs because they are not fun to use). Only having the good weapons break wouldn't have been super logical but a metal sword shattering after a couple swipes isn't logical regardless so why not.

It's a moot point since it is what it is. I didn't play TotK, but I do love Zelda as a franchise and will be curious what they decide to do in the next 3D game. I hope they go back to the Zelda roots regarding weapons; it's part of what makes Zelda different than other franchises and I thought it was a pity they threw that away.

Note that I would argue BotW didn't do anything particularly creative with weapons breakage — they copied what some other open games do. I would guess because it is unclear how to deal with the unlocking-map-portions-with-weapon-upgrades traditional Zelda formula when you want an open world game. However TotK certainly went crazily creative with weapons, no arguing there.

Edited on by FishyS

FishyS

Switch Friend Code: SW-2425-4361-0241

VoidofLight

Buying digital in this day and age is something I won't be doing. I care about game preservation and replaying games I enjoy, even if I won't ever have that "first experience" ever again. Seeing how Sony, Funimation, and Ubisoft are actually ripping away people's purchases makes me firmly against buying digital anymore. I'd rather own what I've paid for- and want to be able to replay old games at any time.

Replaying media is much more than just wanting to recapture a feeling that you used to have. In a story-based RPG- it would be experiencing the narrative again, and discovering the deeper themes or where things were actually foreshadowed. I've replayed the Xenoblade games a good bit, and each time I realize something new about the narrative or world. Stuff that furthers my enjoyment of those stories. Replaying a game that isn't story based can still lead to relaxation, fun, or just completing something that you didn't even bother completing in the first place.

I just think that the whole argument of "Physical game buyers care about materialism," or "The only reason you'd buy a physical game is to resell it after being bored," is a narrow way of looking at things. Especially given that not everyone has a ton of money- and people want to actually keep what they purchased in the first place. I don't want a corporation coming in and telling me if I can or can't play a game I just purchased.

"It is fate. Many have tried, yet none have ever managed to escape it's flow."

Xyphon22

@NeonPizza Ironically, Gamestop started a 50% trade in deal like a day after I posted that, and then trade in 2 select games to get $50 off Paper Mario. So in the last 3 days I've traded in 4 games and gotten around $70 plus Paper Mario for them (I'm counting in the $10 I still owed for Paper Mario, I actually got around $80 for the first 2 games). So sometimes it's still possible to get good deals and why I'll never go fully digital. But yeah, there's too many awesome new games and too little time in my day to ever feel the desire to go back and replay games I've already beaten unless they are all-time favorites. I recently finally picked up Xenoblade 3. I know I am going to love it, and I also know there is no way on earth I am ever going to play it more than once because it is going to be far too long to bother with that no matter how much I enjoy it. Once will be enough, and I'll probably sell it when I finally finish it in about 3 years.

But the game I probably most want right now that I don't already have is AI: The Somnium Files: Nirvana Initiative. I got the original when it went on sale for $20 and have been waiting for this one to do something similar. Instead, I think it costs more on Amazon now than when it came out, and Gamestop doesn't even have it in their system as a game that exists. But it has been on sale on the eShop for like $27, so next time that happens, I'll probably just get it digitally which I never would have done before. You have to pick and choose and find what's best for you, but I would never argue with anyone who wants to go all-physical or all-digital. Whatever floats your boat.

Xyphon22

3DS Friend Code: 5069-3937-8083

Matt_Barber

A report in 2022 suggested that around 94% of video games sales that year were digital-only.

https://gamingbolt.com/over-94-of-all-worldwide-game-sales-in...

That should come as no surprise when you consider that mobile and PC gaming is about three quarters of the market, and you've basically got no choice buy to buy games as downloads.

However, even consoles were still 78% digital sales. I've no doubt that the Switch is the strongest remaining bastion of physical media, because cartridges still have that extra level of mystique about them that mere optical discs lack. However, even there, it's good to have a decent selection of games that you don't have to swap out one at a time.

Ultimately, what matters most to me is that - in the event that a game is enough of a keeper - I get to hang on to it and can still play it at some unspecified time in the future. Again, I'm not too worried about this on PC and mobile where I've already rolled my purchases forward to new devices multiple times. It's just that with consoles, and particularly Nintendo, there seems considerably less chance of this happening.

Matt_Barber

FishyS

@Matt_Barber Nintendo has actually done pretty well. Wii basically had the first Nintendo eShop and you can still redownload purchases there 18 years later. It's true that you can't play those digital purchases on modern consoles... but you can't play the Wii physical purchases on modern consoles either.

Seeing as they seem to be making Nintendo accounts more universal, I'm hoping we will see digital games moving along.

That said, even though you technically still own old mobile games, most of mine are unable to be installed on modern phones for compatibility or security reasons. I imagine Nintendo might similarly let us keep our games while it is convenient and then not when it is inconvenient. I feel like Windows is the only place they have really strived to keep everything back-compatible, even if you want to play something from way back in the 90s.

FishyS

Switch Friend Code: SW-2425-4361-0241

Matt_Barber

@FishyS Yes, it's still possible to re-download Wii games, but only to the original console, so long as it's in working order. If it's died, you've sold it, or it's just packed away in a box somewhere, you're out of luck. You can't just pick up any old Wii and play them, such were the limitations of its online infrastructure.

Physical Wii games will run on any console from the same region, however, and you can even play them on a Wii U, which is a slightly more modern console. It's obviously a lot less restrictive.

I suppose that Nintendo have the potential to do better now that we've got accounts that can be used across multiple consoles, and we could even have games spanning generations without all-or-nothing system transfers, but I'm not going to get my hopes up too much.

Matt_Barber

Overzeal

Every major game released this year is bad.

Overzeal

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic