Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

@TingLz: @DarthNocturnal: While I agree with you guys, I do feel some people hold Nintendo to higher Standards than Microsoft and Sony then get upset when Nintendo can't/doesn't meet them regardless if Microsoft or Sony meet those Standards.

@DarthNocturnal: All of that is very true, I just don't understand why people hold Nintendo to a higher standard and complain when Nintendo doesn't reach that Standard but are fine when Microsoft and Sony don't reach that standard.

I could quote some of the things you say about other companies...but I'd rather not.

And yet you can't seem to accept that some people don't like Nintendo, which I find baffling considering what you said about Sega. How are some of the examples you listed NOT constructive? Some people don't want amiibo or two screens. Some people don't like Nintendo's Youtube Creator Program or copyright strikes. Heck, I can show you some videos on why they don't like the creator program (mainly because there are already other companies like Google/Youtube and networks that already take some ad revenue).

Just tell me, do you honestly think that people will be happy if Nintendo fixes their issues? I highly doubt it.

No because not everyone thinks alike. You take a few criticisms and turn it around so that everyone is unhappy. While one crowd is satisfied, another is dissatisfied for a different reason. In short, you are committing what I call one of the internet's biggest sins: generalizing comments for a bigger crowd.

Er, aren't you the one criticizing the critics first?

Not if they wanted the figure in the first place. However, as I said in other places, there should at least be an alternative later for not owning the figure.

It's full priced with the figure. It's $50 otherwise.

Wind Waker was more justifiable because they clearly put effort into that remastering.

Actually the "effort" is about the same. Wind Waker is just more noticeable with its art style.

Actually, this has been a practice in the industry for a while with Game of the Year editions. But to each their own.

Er, I think you are proving Socar's point with this (potential) overreaction.

It's different from the first two. That's basically why

Wait, so you want other people to pay the same amount of money for content you had 2-3 years earlier? I don't think that's how it works

And why not just avoid the game rather than the entire system?

I think Splatoon music doesn't get enough recognition. It's sooo fresh, especially the lastest tracks.

Also, that drum fill at 1:10

It could be because Nintendo has and continues to make high quality games for like decades. They continue to make finished games and they so far haven't been doing that many microtransactions by much.

The ones for Sony and Microsoft are taken for granted majority of the times simply because their first party games can't compete to those of Nintendo so in the end, they will do whatever they can to get third party support. For Nintendo however, third party games come second because they know that their IP can't match to that of Nintendo's which probably explains why many have a high standard towards Nintendo which is depressing honestly.

I wouldn't say that is strickly true, alot of their games in the last year and a bit they have been relying on updates after release such as Splatoon, Smash Bros, Mario Maker etc.

I think he means the games are ready to play, as in they aren't broken upon release. Heck, the worst case scenario is Paper Jam, but even that is many steps above games like Assassin's Creed.

He could be but Artwark has taken to complaining in the Street Fighter thread recently about there isn't enough day one content, Capcom are hurting people etc so I assumed he was going in that direction again.

Eh, there are pros and cons to the Splatoon model.

Pros

Can potentially hold interest in the game for a longer period
All updates are free, so there is little negative reaction (see: Jim Sterling)
Allows developers more time to make content while players give feedback

Cons

Less content on release day
Some players may still complain

Honestly, I like the model.

I still find it annoying you can't play Rainmaker, Tower Control etc in casual or at all when a Splatfest is on but apart from that I've got no real complaints about Splatoon.

I honestly think there should be an official Hide and Seek mode and Splat the Opponents.

Why are people so upset about No Man's Sky being $60 when it's a forty-hour game? Most AAA games (aside from open world and sandbox games, which No Man's Sky is) only last around 6-8 hours, maybe more if you don't get tired of the multiplayer. It should be the Capcoms of the world that should be proving why they should be able to charge $60 for Street Fighter V, not the Hello Games of the world proving why they should be charging $60 for No Man's Sky.

That's not to say that $60 for a game is acceptable for a game like No Man's Sky, just that it's kind of ironic that for all of the people defending the $60 pricetag of Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege, no one is defending No Man's Sky.

@MrMario02: Probably becuase No Man's Sky was always advertised as an Indie project. Indie's don't normally charge $60 for a game because they normally are AAA quality. I am unsure of how good No Man's Sky is or how much real content there is, so I cannot judge. However, I can understand why people are so surprised at the price. I know I am going to wait for a sale for it.

If anyone honestly believed this, then they should never support old games...

You might as well have posted Jim Sterling's video.

Anyway, I do agree, but on the other hand I'm not going to buy No Man's Sky for €60 either. Not because I don't think it's not worth the price, but because I doubt it'll be able to hold my attention for more than 10 hours.

Kickstarter games are really starting to give excuses for those who donated money to make those games happen. All of a sudden, the game devs that left companies are worshiped like hell even if they don't show game play footage and if they don't even explain what the heck the game is. This of course I'm referring to Bloodstained. I could

I have no idea that fan art can exist even before the game even shows footage. Sure, you have images but they aren't final. Infact, your lovely Igarashi-san has somehow brainwashed you to pick which model you want for the final game when it should have been drumroll please.... ALL of them!

Why? Because this game got like five million bucks. Why can't we get all the three models instead of just sticking out to the winner? Doesn't that affect your money donation if your vote doesn't win that style?

Seriously if people ranting how cash grabbing Fates is for having split versions of the game is fine to give a damn whether the games are different in their own rights or not, but then looking at bloodstained which does the exact same thing that Fates did is fine to not give a damn because of what logic exactly? This further proves my point that Nintendo gets flak for wrong reasons.

You're not fine spending like what? 80$ for three games that supposedly are the same thing (which they aren't) but you're fine spending that same price for a piece of paper that is just a sketch of an underdeveloped game? Internet logic at its finest.

I was gonna post this on Bloodstained thread but no....its an unpopular opinion so its best to be here instead.

@Socar: Pledging on Kickstarter isn't the same as buying a game. The game is often a reward for Kickstarter, but you can also just wait until the game is released and buy it then. Nobody's forcing you to pledge $100 on Kickstarter.