@ComradeThom
Not really.
Depend on the game. Yonder the Cloud Catcher Chronicles was one example a good Open World Adventure indie game.
I have finished the storyline on Switch on July 2018.
Skyward Sword is good actually, is not a real unpopular opinion. Half the people who dislike it just hate motion controls by default, so whatever."
Actually almost everyone that dislikes the game mentions also the biggest flaws as Fi (don't need to mentions why), rehash content (either in maps, dungeons and fights) and boring pacing.
No, I'd definitely say at least half of the takes I've seen have been nothing more than "motion control bad". I've seen this take hundreds, possibly thousands, of times over the past decade.
I think video games could actually cause violent behavior. Not on the scale that is often brought up when a politician needs a scapegoat. But for impressionable, unsupervised, stupid kids. I was one such child and I distinctly remember wanting to tournament fight all the other second graders.
@Losermagnet I always took it as the impressional people being impressed upon. If it’s not a video games then it’s books, music, movies, poetry, religion, sports, history or something else which will make them violent. Like a book inspired someone to kill John Lennon so unless there’s ban on all forms of everything then it makes no difference and teaching the psychos ways to managing their psychoness is the real solution.
There are valid concerns about video game violence, they just utterly pale in comparison to the sheer hypocritical embarrassment any time those concerns have appeared in the news.
Honestly, that's at least half my takes on anything. "There are valid concerns, but terrible and stupid people ruined those concerns with their hyperbole".
@jump@Matt_Barber@kkslider5552000
The reason I posted my opinion is I feel like this topic is often presented in a very black and white way: either games do cause violence, or they don't. As you three have said in various ways, we could see how games could contribute to such a thing under the right conditions. So, in other words, I don't think video games are completely harmless but I also agree thst they shouldn't be ostracized for material present in movies, books, etc..
Having said that, do you think that because video games allow someone to participate in violence that they are more of a risk than a movie or show? Personally...I dont see it. Using myself as an example again, as a kid I got hurt a lot more often imitating pro wrestling than anything with video games. But that's just me.
The irony here is that I absolutely hate fighting games now.
Switch friend code: SW-2223-7827-8798
Give me a heads-up if you're going to send a request please.
The best thing to occur for Super Mario 3D World was not that it was brought to the Nintendo Switch, but that its Switch release followed Super Mario Odyssey, a port of Super Mario 64 and a port of Super Mario Sunshine. The original release on Wii U came at the wrong time, following Super Mario Galaxy 2, Super Mario 3D Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2 and New Super Mario Bros. U. The game needed to follow a traditional 3D Mario game, one with open design, to be at its best. The timing of its Switch release has made it the fresh experience rather than the same experience.
"The secret to ultimate power lies in the Alimbic Cluster."
@Losermagnet I don't think video games or movies often encourage violence. I think they have the potential to do damage, if that was the artists intent. Like for example you could make a game that glorified genocide, or abuse. That just doesn't realistically happen though.
Whenever violence In video games comes up, it's usually because some kid in America has took a machine gun to his classmates and coincidently owns a copy of modern warfare. Blaming video games, is just a scapegoat for not doing anything about the bigger issues. Like why a member of the public has access to a gun in the first place.
The best thing to occur for Super Mario 3D World was not that it was brought to the Nintendo Switch, but that its Switch release followed Super Mario Odyssey, a port of Super Mario 64 and a port of Super Mario Sunshine. The original release on Wii U came at the wrong time, following Super Mario Galaxy 2, Super Mario 3D Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2 and New Super Mario Bros. U. The game needed to follow a traditional 3D Mario game, one with open design, to be at its best. The timing of its Switch release has made it the fresh experience rather than the same experience.
...is this an unpopular opinion? If it is, its because "now its on Switch" is a far more common thought people have had and not because anyone disagrees with the rest of your point.
The best thing to occur for Super Mario 3D World was not that it was brought to the Nintendo Switch, but that its Switch release followed Super Mario Odyssey, a port of Super Mario 64 and a port of Super Mario Sunshine. The original release on Wii U came at the wrong time, following Super Mario Galaxy 2, Super Mario 3D Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2 and New Super Mario Bros. U. The game needed to follow a traditional 3D Mario game, one with open design, to be at its best. The timing of its Switch release has made it the fresh experience rather than the same experience.
...is this an unpopular opinion? If it is, its because "now its on Switch" is a far more common thought people have had and not because anyone disagrees with the rest of your point.
I thought people in general within the scope of the Wii U's user base considered the original 3D World release to be a great game. Having really enjoyed the game now with the new release, I understand that when I considered 3D World the worst 3D Mario game that it really didn't have much to do with the game's quality but almost completely had to do with the timing of that kind of experience.
"The secret to ultimate power lies in the Alimbic Cluster."
@I-U I have to admit that I had the same feeling when I played the game in a cousin's house. Even at that time, the music feel jaded to me. But just like you, it was because of the long period without a classic star collecting 3D Mario like Odyssey, Galaxy or 64.
On the opposite side of things, I distinctly remember back in the day reading an article that suggested the original New Super Mario Bros was a far more well liked game because it came out in 2006, when most people weren't really making 2D platformers. Compared to the NSMB games after it, which were surrounded by far more big budget 2d platformers and the rise of indie platformers.
That sounds about right. Because I remember when that game came out in 2006, it was really cool. It's the subsequent games that bothered me.
@kkslider5552000 I liked the New Super Mario Bros games, but they got progressively worse, and U marked the absolute low point in terms of originality. Some songs had been re-used in two games before, which tells a lot.
Currently playing:
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth
Persona 4 Golden
Dragon Quest XI S
F1 23
Xenoblade Chronicles 2
@Losermagnet I'm not opposed to violent video games. I think that in healthy doses violence can be harmless on a child, or an adult. If it enhances the experience of the video game instead of forming the entire backbone, it's justified. For me when buying a game with guns for example, I want guns to have a profound reason to be in the game. Uncharted is a good example because it's a secondary mechanism in the combat gameplay. Dedicated shooters are, to me, mindless cashgrabs that have no interest in developing a meaningful experience, but rather catering to people who like shooters.
As for glorifying violence if games do that, and actively promote killing, that's not good. One of the reasons I like the game "Death Stranding" on PS4, and to some small extent the idea of ambiguous games like Undertale, is because violence is seen like a last resort, and killing drastically changes the world around you. In the former killing humans fills the world with anti-matter demons, and in the latter you don't get the true ending if you kill a single enemy.
Sometimes when I meet a new person I'll ask what videogame console they have, and sometimes they'll have... not a wrong taste in games, but something that suggests they don't treat videogames like an artistic medium, but rather just a place to vent one's violent frustrations by mowing down hundreds of enemies. When I moved to a new country and started meeting people in school, people would ask me the same question in return, and dismiss me as soon as they realised that I'm not like them. But some people are able to see both sides and I can appreciate that.
But I can't respect people who look to video games just to shoot things. The two teenage boys who instigated the Columbine High shooting in 1999 played DOOM, and in videos they likened the shooting, when planning it, to DOOM. Paraphrased, and not exactly copied, but they said something along the lines of "It'll be like f*cking DOOM!" I'm not saying that everyone who exclusively plays shooters will become terrorists, but there's much more to video games than guns.
That's why in my own life even though I play action games frequently on PlayStation, like Horizon: Zero Dawn, Ghost of Tsushima, Death Stranding, and Red Dead Redemption II, I'm almost my own parent in terms of how I choose games. It's not that I'm trying to resist any kind of temptation, but I don't want to expose myself to that kind of violence. When I was younger I liked watching Mortal Kombat fatalities, and had a strange obsession with violence, so if these kinds of fascinations are normal in modern young gamers, it means parents should pay close attention to what they buy.
When I was in elementary school people in my grade (1), were all talking about Call of Duty, and various shooters. The thought that even now I haven't even touched one of those games... makes me glad I have understanding parents who invest themselves in understanding video games. That's part of the problem too because most parents would just give their child some money, and they would come home with GTA V.
Currently playing:
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth
Persona 4 Golden
Dragon Quest XI S
F1 23
Xenoblade Chronicles 2
I think I had an 8 year gap in between beating my first 2D Mario, Super Mario Land 2, and beating New Super Mario Brothers in 2006. I believe that it was the first 2D Mario I owned since Super Mario Land 2 as well, which was the first video game I owned. That gap in having that kind of experience did boost the game I'm sure, it definitely felt like a new experience. That too was when the DS was trying to start a 2.5D style, Sonic came in late 2005 with Sonic Rush then Super Mario with NSMB in mid-2006. I think that 2.5D style helped both games a lot in standing out at the time. Both ended up being my favorites in their respective series.
In theory it shouldn't have felt as fresh as it was at the time because I had bought all those Mario Advance games (and Mario 3 was the only one of those games I played much of before that point), but it still kinda did anyway. Not as much as those old games, but y'know, enough that I didn't even think of complaints like that until the Wii game came out.
Octopath had a connected story and the fact that they didn’t spoonfeed it to the player and they made the characters self motivated rather than the “chosen ones” to stop the great evil (even though they still end up doing that) and seeded the story through side quests as well as a the main characters was a refreshing change of pace from normal RPG storytelling. SaGa games and alliance alive are similar but I thought Octopath did a better job at throwing curveballs at the player.
But it was all one overarching story. I’m always annoyed when people act like the game had no story.
Taiko is good for the soul, Hoisa!
Japanese NNID:RyuNiiyamajp
Team Cupcake! 11/15/14
Team Spree! 4/17/19
I'm a Dream Fighter. Perfume is Love, Perfume is Life.
3DS Friend Code: 3737-9849-8413 | Nintendo Network ID: RyuNiiyama
Forums
Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions
Posts 8,001 to 8,020 of 12,253
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic