Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

That's kinda true, but as I've made clear recently, I prefer the overly minimal storytelling over something like hours of cutscenes, that may or may not be compelling. Like Zelda voice acting, I want nothing over something done poorly.

Some people like the vague lore, I'm indifferent, I just like the atmosphere it creates for the gameplay. The intro cutscene was basically all I really needed.

Here I come:

-Piracy is ironically the best way to preserve games and other media. And sometimes, they offer a better experience than the legal versions (cough*noDRM*cough).

-I really don't care if the game in question is physical or digital. As long as it's playable offline, then I'm fine.

-I believe cloud gaming will just coexist with both consoles and PC.

-I think Nintendo overprotects their IPs when it comes to fanmade content (not just games, but art, music, fiction, etc.). I think they're fine as long as they're free.

Man HGSS had some killer tracks. I boogied hard to that game corner jam.

Switch has the best OS of any Nintendo console. Having your most recently played games as most accessible just makes sense, and seeing your wider collection in alphabetical order is the easiest way to find thing.

It does the job so that minimal time is spent on the menu, and maximal time is spent playing games.

1. Evoland 1 & 2 from Evoland Legendary Edition are much much much better than FF VII and FF VII remake.

2. I prefer Super Princess Peach DS than Super Mario Bros series.

On that topic, I go one level further. IP is a concept that was created as a favor to creators to encourage them to make content. It's utilization nowadays is a bastardization of it's original intent.

I think that fan games should even be able to charge. I think the Pokemon series is a perfect example of this. The fan games end up doing far more interesting things than the main series has been doing, and have actively worked to make the games more enjoyable to older fans. I'm not planning on giving TPC my money any time soon, because the only interesting things they've done with the series in decades have been Pokemon Colloseum and Pokemon Go. But given that fans are producing content I WANT to play, I'd much rather give them my money.

I believe that once you publish a product, you have sacrificed the "ownership" of the ideas that are transmitted in that work. While I think the original producer should still be credited, the fact of the matter is that I know what Pikachu looks like off the top of my head. I can probably draw it to some mild degree of accuracy, and I can probably describe certain personality traits from my interpretation of the character. That doesn't belong to TPC. It's my own thought, even if it was influenced by a game I have played.

@iKhan Imagine if you made a series for kids, let’s take Peppa Pig for example and when you publish it you lose “ownership”. The next thing that will happen is that people will make bloody variants of Peppa Pig or sexy stuff like rule 34 of straight up porn.

Your intention was just a series for kids aiming to entertain them or just learn them something about friendship or something.

I would be pissed as hell if I saw someone just using my IP to change the idea I had with it. Let alone charge for it.
I would allow some things if they asked and maybe sign up a contract for it or something.

Now with games I have the same stance as with movies and/or series.
The only problem I have with games is that they should always be released on the next platform. The company’s always want to stop piracy from mostly their older games.

If you would make atleast a port if you older popular games it would be downloaded much less on the internet.

@iKhan I’m actually okay with companies maintaining the rights to their intellectual property. Like mentioned before I think the creators have right to the property they created themselves. Otherwise it would just be a madhouse of knockoffs and “rush to market” products trying to capitalize on fads. There is already enough of that.

Although I think companies should be encouraged to make their older media public and put in some sort of digital domain for anyone to access. So you have something like the NES Legend of Zelda available online for anyone to access legally. It would take a ton of convincing for Nintendo to surrender digital rights to such a famous game, but if it became the standard they might just hand it over. They obviously could digitally distribute or make physical cartridges on their own with their own bells and whistles if they wanted to, but a free version would also be available. The same could happen with movies and books. Just hire a good preservation team that is able to catalogue and restore this old media and have an app on every device that can access the digital database.

I know that sounds a bit like a dreamer thing, but right now you have copyrights that companies just sit on without doing anything with their classics. Without the fans, hackers, and emulator community a lot would be lost and unavailable, so I say just encourage companies to donate them to some government preservationists body and make it public.

There’s a lot to such a plan but it would be ideal to have something like that one day.

@NotTelevision I agree fully with you compadre.

@Anti-Matter can you tell me how the hell Evoland 1and/ or 2 is better a game that is better than Final Fantasy 7 remake? A game that is not even out yet. Are you from the future?

What you just said can not even be a freaking opinion. Also you comparing Evoland 1/2 to Final Fantasy is the same is like comparing Sims to a frying pan: it makes no sense at all.

@BrintaPap I think his reason was that there was one swear word in FF VII and he condemn every game that has even a pinch of violence or swearing.

If you have interest in girly kiddie games. Then he is your guy.

@BrintaPap
I have seen FF VII remake from the demo version at my local game shop (the shop owner played the Demo for a while) and it was.... Blah ! 🤮
The more realistic, the more i want to barf. 🤢
And also, i heard explicit swearing word from FF VII remake trailer. I hate profanity. Once i heard that word, i banned the game immediately. FF VII remake will NOT allowed to be in my gaming room.

I have watched Evoland 1 & 2 gameplay, despite of being traditional 2D and cartoonish 3D model, the gameplay looked very appealing. And i was thinking Final Fantasy Classics should be learn from Evoland 1 & 2. I saw something like FF VII from Evoland 1 (at the end of the chapter) and FF VII should be like Evoland 1 if FF VII got simple 3D model. Other FF classics such as FF V and VI should be like Evoland 2 in 3D model.

Indie did better than SquareEnix.

LOL

Never change, Anti-Matter. It takes all kinds.

@BrintaPap

Would it piss me off? Yes. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed.

Even with copyright restrictions, franchises are bastardized and either violate the creator's original intents or violate what the franchise has become to its audience.

Comics were originally targeted towards children, but now there are R-rated Batman animated movies, and Harley Quinn drops f-bombs everywhere. Paper Mario has been transformed into a shell of it's former self. In these two cases it was due to creator changing, but you also have examples like George Lucas and J.K. Rowling where the creator fails to understand why their property resonated with people, and damages the world that they themselves created.

With all that said, I don't think any of those cases shouldn't have been allowed to happen, even when I find them objectionable. At the end of the day, we as consumers of media create a conception of the characters and stories we see that aren't always completely in-line with what the creator intended. I don't believe that necessarily makes them less significant. In fact, I think it would allow for multiple versions of characters to be available, and allow people to find a conception of a franchise that most resonates with them. I don't think a creator has any right to tell me how I can perceive his or her characters, and how I can share it with others. My understanding of their characters has become wholly my own upon reading/watching/playing their work. IMO that's the great part of ideas, they aren't zero sum, where two people can simultaneously have the same one.(unlike, say, a baseball, where if you give it to me, you no longer have it)

I do think it would make sense to have some sort of logo or certification that shows that a product is "from the original creator" or "approved by the original creator". Not only so that the creator can maintain some control over what is perceived as "canon", but also so that people can easily find work from creators who do produce a consistent product that resonates with people

Final Fantasy VII remake not being turn based was the best choice for a remake.

This is less unpopular than it was a year or two ago, but I don't get people who want to just play the exact same game with better graphics when the game already exists. Granted, I understand it more considering how dated the original looks, but I'm playing the original and largely enjoying it a lot. But that means, I would have no reason to play the remake myself ever if it was the same gameplay. I'm not spending 60 bucks for the same experience but prettier. Not done it for the many Zelda remakes (got WW HD for free, thx Nintendo and Mario Kart 8), not doing it here. And if I wanted to see how its updated, Youtube exists, I could just watch it. It also doesn't make sense because regardless, this has taken an eternity, don't spend all that time for the same thing. Give us a new version of this classic.

But as a counterpoint, Final Fantasy XVI should be turn based. It is time for a mainline FF return to classic JRPG gameplay. I don't want the old game remade to be turn based, I want the new one to be.

The Animal Crossing one island controversy resurfaces something that I feel is becoming more and more an issue with certain games nowadays. I’m fine with the option being there to be clear, but if it never comes does that make the game truly irredeemable?

It seems like atypical and unique design choices developers make in a game are just being stamped out. As a result, more games are just starting to feel like different variations on the on the same idea. Make all the fighters totally balenced for tournaments, include a ton of custom stats for all playstyles, include a steady difficulty curve so there are no random spikes, tutorialize and make the mechanic obvious so the player never feels lost, introduce fast travel early so people don’t need to spend so much time walking, include X amount of save points so people don’t get frustrated...

I’m fine with many of these things in games and yes a lot of this is “by the book” and “correct” game design, but you are also losing something in the process. Elements of surprise (not surprise mechanics I know what you’re thinking 😀) are something I’ve come to appreciate more in games as I’ve gotten older. Those quirks differentiate certain games and make them more of a special experience as a result.

Added: Though yes, when you are talking about something so broad you need to analyze mechanics on a game by game basis.

Which seems like a unpopular opinion on here (Which I guess makes sense in some ways). I find game companies like Nintendo that strike down fans that just want to make something that other fans in the community would enjoy in good fun and entertainment, disgustingly greedy. I find their use of "protecting" just a safe way to say they don't want anyone to enjoy anything they've made unless they buy their products. Not allowing fans to freely share what they made for each other unless its the ones they pick and choose. I just cant understand this morally that I gave up arguing with people about this.

@Ardisan Be happy to be free to complain about that. When Sony shut down a free fan game they also shut down reports and complains about it. Nintendo is far from being the biggest control freak company of the industry.

@Ardisan The biggest issue here is, where do you draw the line? What do they do when a precedent is set?
Someone making homemade crochet characters and selling them at a convention, for example. Are they hurting Nintendos business or keeping revenue from Nintendo? Not likely. But then a big company does it, on a large scale on a distribution network. The very well could be, and not only from Nintendo, but the company that Nintendo licensed to do it officially.
I can imagine it'd be harder to shut down the large company, because legally you're allowing people to do it.
I get what you're saying, but where's the line? How do you manage allowing some and not others without official licensing? How do smaller companies keep their IPs and products safe from theft by larger companies? These same restrictions that large companies use that people hate so much are also what protects the small. I never see a realistic solution to this offered.
I'm not really arguing against your point, because I can see both sides, but what's the solution? Big companies have to let their IP be used by whomever and small companies don't? Only small or individual projects are allowed, but large ones not? Everyone can use whatever they want, however they want? Then the loopholes....what would stop Sony from creating a small company to use Nintendo IP to make "fan games" and sell it on Sony systems? It becomes a legal nightmare unless you blanket block everything. Just curious as to what your solution to this would be.

I mean the solution is that Nintendo has no need to care this much about IP laws that are only useful for protecting smaller companies in the first place. That's it, that's the entire solution. A lot of companies have been either ignoring or directly working with fans who make quality stuff for a decade. All video game companies that are all still around because surprise, surprise, fans don't have the marketing budget of the people who own the IP they're using. And in the first place, figuring out a reasonable balance of these things is probably not that difficult compared to the work people in these companies do.

tbh I could've just said "slippery slope fallacy" and just not written a real post, because that's all it is