Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

There are plenty of games I'm not interested in, doesn't mean I'm dissatisfied with them. Really the only justifiable feelings of (dis)satisfaction are had from purchasing and playing the game for yourself.

If you also wanted a more casual board game than Mario Party. I own amiibo festival and get enjoyment out of it.

Just because a game isn't what you wanted doesn't make that game bad or not worth it. It just makes that game different than what you wanted. “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

he is saying you can't be dissatisfied by a product you haven't played. You can not be interested in a game but to be satisfied or dissatisfied, you need to play it.

Shaneoh is right to an extent. I had negative opinions on certain games until I actually played them. The same is true for the opposite. I'm looking at you, Sticker Star! >:[

The Animal Crossing game I can understand, but Federation Force? I've seen mostly positive opinions on it when people actually played the demo. Because, what a shocker, people jumped the gun and blasted it for its appearance. This reminds me once again of Wind Waker.

@CreamyDream You can be dissatisfied with a game's announcement, sure. But can you be dissatisfied with a game without playing it? Those are two different things. It is like being dissatisfied by a cookie without eating it or being dissatisfied by a car without driving it.

Do you need to experience something the way it should be to be satisfied or dissatisfied? Which is different from not liking something.

@CreamyDream
But that isn't dissatisfaction. That is disappointment. They are different.

Well, maybe it's not supposed to do that. Nintendo had an idea and wanted to put a familiar name on it to attract people...but had the opposite effect. Think Star Fox Adventures as another good example of adding a familiar name to a new concept, or Kirby's Epic Yarn.

Um, I'd equate that to wanting a Metroid game and getting Super Mario 3D World...

That's pretty much it.

Yep, it works both ways. Sucks when you think you'll enjoy a game and then it turns out you don't.

See, to me it's like looking at the menu and seeing whale burgers. You can disagree with the use of whale meat on a morale ground and choose not to order it, that's fine (I'd agree with you), but being dissatisfied with the portion size and taste, even though you didn't order and eat it, is bizarre.

That's the problem, it's unreasonable to expect anything (at this point in my life I expected to be employed, married, have kids, and own a house. With only two out of four, I actually think I'm doing rather well). The only thing we should be reasonably expecting out of a piece of software is that it is devoid of bugs and malware (which sadly, isn't always the case). Do away with expectation, it will not be met exactly as you want it (if at all), which only fuels disappointment and unhappiness.

ah-ha!
you understand the manliness.
you really do

He's giving them credit for something they should have done a while ago. But the game's not out yet, so they can still completely screw it up

The Sonic games are not only much better platformers than Mario, but also much better games.

Mario's quality is consistent, unlike Sonic's but the Genesis offering is better than any Mario I've played. I grew up on the SNES and the Genesis both and I liked games on both. But I didn't find Mario to be much enjoyable.

You may have to be more specific. You're dealing with a wide range of quality

Even as a Sonic fan, I'd have to agree that specific examples, as well as a multitude of qualifiers are mandatory for this discussion.

@Lzeon I appreciate the level of trolling in this thread.

Who's trolling? Sonic as a franchise has games that range from good quality (according to fans) to awful and unplayable quality. Mario has rarely if ever had a broken game made by Nintendo.

Here's a few:

I think Rare's Nintendo 64 games were usually better than Nintendo's. I mean, everyone accepts their games were generally good, but I think the likes of Banjo-Kazooie and Diddy Kong Racing were simply better games than their Nintendo made counterparts.

I also think that while Mario is a great series, Donkey Kong Country, Wario Land and Yoshi's Island sometimes does things a lot better in general. Probably because said games feel a lot more inspired than many of the Mario platformers do.

I mean, you're not wrong.

I do think Banjo Kazooie had the advantage that Mario 64 changed how 3D gaming worked and then literally didn't release another Mario platformer until the GCN, but even then, Banjo Kazooie is one of my two favorite 3D platformers.

Yeah, I can agree with most of these. Wario Land especially has impressed me so far (I've played several stages of the first 4 games and a bit of Shake It! on the Wii...so, the DS game and the GCN game are the only ones I gotta get around to before I declare it my favorite Ninty platforming series).

I have Wario World, so I'll get around to it eventually. I'm at least curious about the DS Wario game. I think it's on the Wii U VC, so I'll play it there someday.