I played ME1 and I thought it was like the most 5/10 game I've ever played. The dialogue/writing was extremely boring and soulless. The characters had so little depth I actually laughed when I was expected to feel bad one of them died.
ME2 corrects that. The characters are the focus and it's pretty good for that. Unfortunately they majorly fricked up the main story, which takes a back seat to the character arcs, and in the process screwed over ME3 which had to wrap up the story in a single game.
>Terraria and Minecraft are objectively better open world games than the Witcher, Far Cry, RDR and even Zelda >cutscenes and story are always bad no matter what, and muh ratios are used by people who hate vidya and want to trojan horse more movieshit into the medium. A good game can survive without either >graphics are a means to an end and nothing more. If a game could survive while looking like an atari game, then every game could and should look like an atari game. no game needs a 500 million dollar budget spent on graphics >games shouldn't be larger than 10 GB >games shouldn't require more than 4GB of ram >a GTX 1080 should be considered high end, everything else is excessive >fanservice is repulsive because it means that people will hide a game's problems behind it. If you're looking at breasts, you're too busy to criticize a game's issues, like poor framerate or terrible optimization >it's perfectly reasonable to judge a game based on its fandom. If they do nothing but talk about porn and waifus and shipping, the game they like has no value
shouldn't require more than 4GB of ram
This is just a random number you pulled off
If you want a lot going in a game you're going to need to put that information somewhere
Think I agree with all of these except your space and RAM requirements, agree with the other anon that it seems like an arbitrary number you pulled out of your ass. I agree in principle that games shouldn't bloat their sizes though
I just see alot of modern console ports taking up at least 16 gb of ram, and for what? Some snoy walking sim or button masher? It feels like they're not optimizing their games properly.
Think I agree with all of these except your space and RAM requirements, agree with the other anon that it seems like an arbitrary number you pulled out of your ass. I agree in principle that games shouldn't bloat their sizes though
>graphics are a means to an end and nothing more. If a game could survive while looking like an atari game, then every game could and should look like an atari game. no game needs a 500 million dollar budget spent on graphics
Imagine the mechanically incredible games AAA studios could be making if they stopped relying on graphics as a crutch to sell their shit. Imagine an open world RPG where you can be a sneaky thief that can actually climb walls or jump up on roofs without having to interact with the right part of it and lock pick open a second story window to sneak inside and rob the place, while also being able to buy a ship and customize it to your liking and hire a crew and be a pirate, while also being able to be a mercenary captain renting your company out to engage in a huge battle of hundreds of not thousands of men where it's not just a mindless melee but two sides fighting strategically using actual formations and trying to draw the other side into a disadvantageous position, while also being able to seduce the local lords daughter and usurp his throne, while having dynamic random events occur like a werewolf attacking your home while you rest, etc. If we got an actual true RPG experience I wouldn't give a rats ass if it some 2d sprites in blocky 3d environment trash graphics.
When you can prove that you won't hide a bad game underneath breasts and waifus, then you can have your fanservice. Absolute gutter trash like Genshin Impact will forever be a testament to how low one's standards can go, provided you throw anime breasts at the problem.
I seriously don't see what's good about the original TWEWY besides artstyle (if you're 12yo and you're just discovering anime around the time the game released). The gameplay is dogshit.
The new Zelda games are boring
Lance is the most fun weapon in modern monster hunter
Stormblood was better than Heavensward
Hi Fi Rush is a better action rpg than FFXVI while not being an rpg
Good animations are more important than cutting edge graphics/perfect performance
Wild Hearts is a good Monster Hunter clone
OMORI absolutely sucks
Remakes should significantly change the gameplay and/or story rather than just update the visuals+minor QoL adjustments (aka more remakes like FF7 and less like Dead Space/Demons' Souls)
Dragon's Dogma Online was a better game than Dragon's Dogma
Ys Origin is the best Ys game
If you shill your game on /v i am not going to buy it, 4k for gaming was a mistake, if your game is over 50 GB, you can't compress shit, Witcher 3 was big and only 47 GB. If your game has a first day path over 10 GB, is garbage.
Dark souls as a series was a mistake. Gameplay, artstyle, atmosphere and music are most important things in a video games, in that order
FF14 is one of the worst MMOs I've ever played and its entirely the playerbase's fault for constantly excusing the devs as each expansion further fricked the game and gave less content.
The belief that gameplay is king and that story and graphics don't matter is objectively wrong. If it was true then every game could simply be simple shapes or wireframes and do just as well. In reality, people do not play games solely for "gameplay" but rather to have a specific experience, alone or in group, such as "I want to be a wizard in medieval europe" or "I want to be a soldier in WW2". Thus, the most important part of the game is not gameplay, story, or whatever; it's the setting of the game and what your role is in it, to immerse yourself in that setting. Gameplay, graphics, story and music all combine together to put you in that setting. This is why Ganker is always complaining about "soulless" UI. This is why children's toys involve "knights" and "cowbows" and "ninjas" instead of "non-descript humanoid holding a stick". This is why chess pieces are named after medieval roles instead of being named after animals. Pretty much every classic games that created a genre had a setting that fit the gameplay and vice versa. The early fighting games all involved martial artists fighting in some kind of tournament because that setting fits the gameplay and vice versa. There's nothing that says you can't have a fighting game in a medieval fantasy setting, but the immersion it triggers in the player won't be as strong. Medieval fantasy makes you think about groups of adventurers exploring new lands, which is why that setting fits much better in role-playing game instead. This is why you see so many threads like "Why aren't there games about the Aztecs?" or "Why aren't there games about Indian mythology?" This is also why video games have stopped innovating; since the creation of new genres has been directly linked to the use of new settings, it goes without saying that reusing the same settings over and over has killed gameplay innovation.
Setting is king.
Actually, interesting story about that. Tetris was originally just the blocks with no setting or imagery. Western publishers would try to add a "setting" to the game to make it sell better. One version used war imageries. The developer hated that which is why future versions added Russian imageries; instead of letting western publishers add whatever they want, he'd give the game a setting himself, one that celebrated his country. This is the version that Nintendo obtained the rights for to sell on the Gameboy, which is the version that exploded in popularity. The background shows the Saint Basil’s Cathedral. The music tracks are popular Russian folk songs. The cover says "FROM RUSSIA WITH FUN!". This was the middle of the Cold War! It's this version that turned Tetris into a phenomenon.
>"Why aren't there games about the Aztecs?" or "Why aren't there games about Indian mythology?"
These aren't as present in the public consciousness as most european, japanese, or greek settings, sure, but the real answer is that no one wants to offend these groups. It's a PC nightmare trying to depict brown people and brown religious icons in a video game that will probably revolve around nothing but violence
It's not window dressing you moron, it's literally where the gameplay ideas are pulled from. Genres are not created by thinking about gameplay mechanics in an abstract way.
Nobody ever thought "I want to make a game where each player is a square they can move around the screen and pressing buttons makes smaller squares appear, with the goal of hitting the other player's big square with your small squares. Now what window dressing can I put around these mechanics?" That sounds fricking moronic. What happened is they thought "I want to make a game about martial artists fighting each other", then they thought up the mechanics of how that would play out.
Nobody ever thought "I want to be a square and move around on a 3D environment and I move the mouse around to try to click on squares to make them disappear, but if I stay in the line of sight of other squares for too long I take damage". That sounds moronic. What they thought was "I want to make a game where you have a gun and go around shooting nazis, how do I make that into a game?"
What you call the "window dressing" is the actual game idea, the gameplay mechanics are just the execution of that idea.
I don't like playing games that exist to apparently just make people mad >CS:GO >LOL >any battle royale
And I don't think people with anger issues should play them either.
Diablo-like Action RPGs (Daiblo, PoE, Torchlight, etc) are incredibly boring, no idea why these games are so popular.
Also, loot with randomized stats is an absolute garbage game mechanic.
I agree with normal criticism but the amount of Paper Mario gays who try to paint Origami King as a bad game is in really bad faith.
Nobody wants to be patient and learn the Ring System, it's not hard and the majority of people still enjoyed the boss battles.
People lie about "useless" when coins are very much heavy consumables both in battles and buying things from the store, especially collectibles.
And even then, they want to ignore and pretend the rest of the game doesn't exist, the superior map design, the awesome dungeons, the music, the character writing, the most respect Paper Bowser has ever received without being a dumbass, Professor Toad talking like a TTYD character, Olivia genuinely being one of the best partners in a game, etc.
NOPE, all squandered, and treated like dogshit because Paper Mario gays won't shut the frick up about designs. Frick off
lonesome road was good
mass effect 2 and 3 were ok. also, the mako was shit and exploring barren planets in 1 was boring as frick (1 was still soul though).
swtor was an ok game but but a terrible kotor game
link's awakening dx is underrated and is one of the best zelda games
prime 2 was good
"halo 1-3 were good" used to be one but i think most people here accept that now
todd's games are mostly fine. also, combat in morrowind sucks absolute balls (everything else about it is good though).
modern wow has some redeeming qualities, though it's still a shitshow
ff14 and wow are both good in their own way and it's completely fine to enjoy both
pokemon gen 4 is shit because the exploration isn't fun, the best gens were 2, 3, and 5
It was, it finally gave us shit we wanted to see, even if it messy, it was awesome.
Plus the gameplay is really fun, I enjoyed it more than 2 even though 2 technically had better variety and styles, 3 just felt great to combat.
Also the Triple Titan fight and Davy Jones are complete Kino
>What's the gaming opinion?
Video game developers need to think about ergonomic stress when designing their games. I'm 30 now, I've been gaming since I was like 5. My thumb is currently suffering, nothing too bad I'll get it fixed, but I fear for my enjoyment of games in the future.
Breath of the wild kindof sucks but it's still better than Tears of the Kingdom.
BOTW's map was carefully designed with the campaign in mind, while in TOTK they just change some shit around like a romhack. BOTW's pacing was also way better and didn't have nearly as much menu usage. TOTK's "improvements" are incredibly superficial. "Unique" bosses look better than the blights but are braindead to Wind Waker levels. Gloom hands are scarier than guardians, at least until you realize the game has like 7 total and they just die if you run more than ten feet from them. The depths are just dogshit. Cheesing a shrine in BOTW was actually kindof tricky whereas in TOTK everything can be broken with bomb flower arrows and rocket shields. And TOTK has the stupidest story I've ever seen in a game. The context unskippable text spam in the beginning was horrible, Great Plateau absolutely BTFOs the Great Sky Island/Lookout landing bullshit to get the glider.
Only "true" improvement I can say TOTK has is the faster loading is great, BOTW's load times were horrible. But overall if BOTW was a 7/10 game TOTK is a 5.5/10 at best. It's not going to age well at all.
I think souls games are mediocre by design and should never have gotten any awards or public attention. >inb4 rewarding difficulty
That's literally why it's mediocre, the difficulty is just a way to hide how boring and unpolished they are, the combat can be summed into roll, wait for open, attack, and rinse and repeat.
I like to explore devastated lands dude. Like the city in Nier Tomato. no really, if you think there are better games from that point of view, I'll be happy to know them
Open world games are a chore. If I wanted to spend 20 minutes walking somewhere to do a short odd job, and get paid just enough to buy a new pair of pants or something, I'd become a handyman.
TLOU II is Naughty Dog's best game and a great TPS. It's also better than TEW1/2, RE4, RE4:RE, and Uncharted. My biggest issue is the pacing and bloated level segments where you explore empty space while walking and talking.
JA2 and Xcom are fricking boring, and filled with endless busywork, thanks to their granular amounts of detail and awful UIs and controls. No. Patches and source ports wont fix them entirely. In fact, I think adding tons of mechanics to turn based games actually makes them much worse to play as opposed to being better.
Openworld games are only interesting when you add PvP elements to them. That's why Hunt and Tarkov are fricking legions beyond the single player ones.
OS2 is a great CRPG and it's way better than FO1/2, Underrail, and all of Troika's games.
Apex is a great game with a high skill ceiling and intense firefights. it's one of the best MP games ever made.
Platformers made an awful transition to 3D and i think Ratchet and Jak focusing on combat made them much more interesting.
Valve screwed over the Artifact fanbase by cancelling the Artifact 2.0 beta without even allowing users to invite friends like they said they would in January 2021 and does not deserve your financial support for these gross consumer-unfriendly practices.
Disco Elysium is interesting and compelling specifically because of the generally socialist perspective of its creators, which was crucial in informing the setting and the characters in it, elevating the plot, and creating realistic and relatable themes. This is true despite the multiple metaphors and analogies used to criticize or make fun of specific aspects of real life socialists and socialism
That op is a homosexual
That's just a fact.
ME2 is the worst game in trilogy
I played ME1 and I thought it was like the most 5/10 game I've ever played. The dialogue/writing was extremely boring and soulless. The characters had so little depth I actually laughed when I was expected to feel bad one of them died.
ME2 corrects that. The characters are the focus and it's pretty good for that. Unfortunately they majorly fricked up the main story, which takes a back seat to the character arcs, and in the process screwed over ME3 which had to wrap up the story in a single game.
I played the remastered edition and got lost in ine of the first missions because the minimap was asss and didnt tell me where to go
It's the best. You are wrong
Controller is more fun than mouse and keyboard.
t. PC enjoyer
zelda is overrated
OP is straight as an arrow
>Terraria and Minecraft are objectively better open world games than the Witcher, Far Cry, RDR and even Zelda
>cutscenes and story are always bad no matter what, and muh ratios are used by people who hate vidya and want to trojan horse more movieshit into the medium. A good game can survive without either
>graphics are a means to an end and nothing more. If a game could survive while looking like an atari game, then every game could and should look like an atari game. no game needs a 500 million dollar budget spent on graphics
>games shouldn't be larger than 10 GB
>games shouldn't require more than 4GB of ram
>a GTX 1080 should be considered high end, everything else is excessive
>fanservice is repulsive because it means that people will hide a game's problems behind it. If you're looking at breasts, you're too busy to criticize a game's issues, like poor framerate or terrible optimization
>it's perfectly reasonable to judge a game based on its fandom. If they do nothing but talk about porn and waifus and shipping, the game they like has no value
shouldn't require more than 4GB of ram
This is just a random number you pulled off
If you want a lot going in a game you're going to need to put that information somewhere
I just see alot of modern console ports taking up at least 16 gb of ram, and for what? Some snoy walking sim or button masher? It feels like they're not optimizing their games properly.
Think I agree with all of these except your space and RAM requirements, agree with the other anon that it seems like an arbitrary number you pulled out of your ass. I agree in principle that games shouldn't bloat their sizes though
>graphics are a means to an end and nothing more. If a game could survive while looking like an atari game, then every game could and should look like an atari game. no game needs a 500 million dollar budget spent on graphics
Imagine the mechanically incredible games AAA studios could be making if they stopped relying on graphics as a crutch to sell their shit. Imagine an open world RPG where you can be a sneaky thief that can actually climb walls or jump up on roofs without having to interact with the right part of it and lock pick open a second story window to sneak inside and rob the place, while also being able to buy a ship and customize it to your liking and hire a crew and be a pirate, while also being able to be a mercenary captain renting your company out to engage in a huge battle of hundreds of not thousands of men where it's not just a mindless melee but two sides fighting strategically using actual formations and trying to draw the other side into a disadvantageous position, while also being able to seduce the local lords daughter and usurp his throne, while having dynamic random events occur like a werewolf attacking your home while you rest, etc. If we got an actual true RPG experience I wouldn't give a rats ass if it some 2d sprites in blocky 3d environment trash graphics.
>fanservice is repulsive because blah blah blah
and you talk about others trying to trojan horse their bad standards
When you can prove that you won't hide a bad game underneath breasts and waifus, then you can have your fanservice. Absolute gutter trash like Genshin Impact will forever be a testament to how low one's standards can go, provided you throw anime breasts at the problem.
>reee technology should stagnate because I'm a stupid underage thirdie or NEET leech and can't afford to keep up
>a 3 hour walking sim should be 500 gb in size, require an rtx 5000, and need 64 gb of ram
>you disagree? you must be a poorgay chud!
>games can either be perfectly optimized technological marvels like cusker's revenge or bloated snoy movie games and there's no inbetween
well, you cant have 4k and 144hz unless the game looks like shit. so pick one or the other.
I'll take both
I seriously don't see what's good about the original TWEWY besides artstyle (if you're 12yo and you're just discovering anime around the time the game released). The gameplay is dogshit.
That Undertale is NOT the greatest game of all time.
The new Zelda games are boring
Lance is the most fun weapon in modern monster hunter
Stormblood was better than Heavensward
Hi Fi Rush is a better action rpg than FFXVI while not being an rpg
Good animations are more important than cutting edge graphics/perfect performance
Wild Hearts is a good Monster Hunter clone
OMORI absolutely sucks
Remakes should significantly change the gameplay and/or story rather than just update the visuals+minor QoL adjustments (aka more remakes like FF7 and less like Dead Space/Demons' Souls)
Dragon's Dogma Online was a better game than Dragon's Dogma
Ys Origin is the best Ys game
long gif, 1119 frames. seems to end with a farting cartoon animal.
>what is this homosexual anime shit? That’s not how this works
>ring! ring! ring!
>awe yeah, here we go
0/10 was expecting lil cheetus
You didn’t wait long enough
HOLY SHIT I TAKE IT BACK FORGIVE ME
had to open in photoshop to see the end
some guy pouring pepper on a dog's nose and it sneezes in agony and then farts at the end
>no yuri auschwitz
2/10
If you shill your game on /v i am not going to buy it, 4k for gaming was a mistake, if your game is over 50 GB, you can't compress shit, Witcher 3 was big and only 47 GB. If your game has a first day path over 10 GB, is garbage.
Dark souls as a series was a mistake. Gameplay, artstyle, atmosphere and music are most important things in a video games, in that order
When you tell Ganker that gaming now is better than the 90s
FF14 is one of the worst MMOs I've ever played and its entirely the playerbase's fault for constantly excusing the devs as each expansion further fricked the game and gave less content.
The belief that gameplay is king and that story and graphics don't matter is objectively wrong. If it was true then every game could simply be simple shapes or wireframes and do just as well. In reality, people do not play games solely for "gameplay" but rather to have a specific experience, alone or in group, such as "I want to be a wizard in medieval europe" or "I want to be a soldier in WW2". Thus, the most important part of the game is not gameplay, story, or whatever; it's the setting of the game and what your role is in it, to immerse yourself in that setting. Gameplay, graphics, story and music all combine together to put you in that setting. This is why Ganker is always complaining about "soulless" UI. This is why children's toys involve "knights" and "cowbows" and "ninjas" instead of "non-descript humanoid holding a stick". This is why chess pieces are named after medieval roles instead of being named after animals. Pretty much every classic games that created a genre had a setting that fit the gameplay and vice versa. The early fighting games all involved martial artists fighting in some kind of tournament because that setting fits the gameplay and vice versa. There's nothing that says you can't have a fighting game in a medieval fantasy setting, but the immersion it triggers in the player won't be as strong. Medieval fantasy makes you think about groups of adventurers exploring new lands, which is why that setting fits much better in role-playing game instead. This is why you see so many threads like "Why aren't there games about the Aztecs?" or "Why aren't there games about Indian mythology?" This is also why video games have stopped innovating; since the creation of new genres has been directly linked to the use of new settings, it goes without saying that reusing the same settings over and over has killed gameplay innovation.
Setting is king.
It's silly to say that it's objectively wrong. Plenty of popular games don't have much of a setting, like Tetris.
Actually, interesting story about that. Tetris was originally just the blocks with no setting or imagery. Western publishers would try to add a "setting" to the game to make it sell better. One version used war imageries. The developer hated that which is why future versions added Russian imageries; instead of letting western publishers add whatever they want, he'd give the game a setting himself, one that celebrated his country. This is the version that Nintendo obtained the rights for to sell on the Gameboy, which is the version that exploded in popularity. The background shows the Saint Basil’s Cathedral. The music tracks are popular Russian folk songs. The cover says "FROM RUSSIA WITH FUN!". This was the middle of the Cold War! It's this version that turned Tetris into a phenomenon.
>"Why aren't there games about the Aztecs?" or "Why aren't there games about Indian mythology?"
These aren't as present in the public consciousness as most european, japanese, or greek settings, sure, but the real answer is that no one wants to offend these groups. It's a PC nightmare trying to depict brown people and brown religious icons in a video game that will probably revolve around nothing but violence
>window dressing is king
most moronic opinion in this thread
It's not window dressing you moron, it's literally where the gameplay ideas are pulled from. Genres are not created by thinking about gameplay mechanics in an abstract way.
Nobody ever thought "I want to make a game where each player is a square they can move around the screen and pressing buttons makes smaller squares appear, with the goal of hitting the other player's big square with your small squares. Now what window dressing can I put around these mechanics?" That sounds fricking moronic. What happened is they thought "I want to make a game about martial artists fighting each other", then they thought up the mechanics of how that would play out.
Nobody ever thought "I want to be a square and move around on a 3D environment and I move the mouse around to try to click on squares to make them disappear, but if I stay in the line of sight of other squares for too long I take damage". That sounds moronic. What they thought was "I want to make a game where you have a gun and go around shooting nazis, how do I make that into a game?"
What you call the "window dressing" is the actual game idea, the gameplay mechanics are just the execution of that idea.
I don't like playing games that exist to apparently just make people mad
>CS:GO
>LOL
>any battle royale
And I don't think people with anger issues should play them either.
Shadow of the Colossus simply wasn't that good.
ffxvi was a great game
CRPGs would be better without combat
Splinter Cell Conviction was an entertaining, enjoyable game.
Chrono Trigger is not one of the best games ever made, let alone one of the best RPGs ever.
Black folk.
Play what you want and dont bother anyone else.
People only hate watch dogs 1 because they were asshurt that it had been downgraded, then they try to rationalize it by calling the whole game bad
wd1 was fun
"pokemon games are still great despite the glitches and bad graphics and cut content"
Final Fantasy XVI is a Final Fantasy
Scorn was GOTY
Diablo-like Action RPGs (Daiblo, PoE, Torchlight, etc) are incredibly boring, no idea why these games are so popular.
Also, loot with randomized stats is an absolute garbage game mechanic.
I agree with normal criticism but the amount of Paper Mario gays who try to paint Origami King as a bad game is in really bad faith.
Nobody wants to be patient and learn the Ring System, it's not hard and the majority of people still enjoyed the boss battles.
People lie about "useless" when coins are very much heavy consumables both in battles and buying things from the store, especially collectibles.
And even then, they want to ignore and pretend the rest of the game doesn't exist, the superior map design, the awesome dungeons, the music, the character writing, the most respect Paper Bowser has ever received without being a dumbass, Professor Toad talking like a TTYD character, Olivia genuinely being one of the best partners in a game, etc.
NOPE, all squandered, and treated like dogshit because Paper Mario gays won't shut the frick up about designs. Frick off
lonesome road was good
mass effect 2 and 3 were ok. also, the mako was shit and exploring barren planets in 1 was boring as frick (1 was still soul though).
swtor was an ok game but but a terrible kotor game
link's awakening dx is underrated and is one of the best zelda games
prime 2 was good
"halo 1-3 were good" used to be one but i think most people here accept that now
todd's games are mostly fine. also, combat in morrowind sucks absolute balls (everything else about it is good though).
modern wow has some redeeming qualities, though it's still a shitshow
ff14 and wow are both good in their own way and it's completely fine to enjoy both
pokemon gen 4 is shit because the exploration isn't fun, the best gens were 2, 3, and 5
>you are all wrong
yes people are dumb sheep homosexuals
KH3 was good.
It was, it finally gave us shit we wanted to see, even if it messy, it was awesome.
Plus the gameplay is really fun, I enjoyed it more than 2 even though 2 technically had better variety and styles, 3 just felt great to combat.
Also the Triple Titan fight and Davy Jones are complete Kino
>What's the gaming opinion?
Video game developers need to think about ergonomic stress when designing their games. I'm 30 now, I've been gaming since I was like 5. My thumb is currently suffering, nothing too bad I'll get it fixed, but I fear for my enjoyment of games in the future.
This is why boomers all play turn-based genres like RPGs, strategy and 4X
Yeah I'm playing fewer and fewer games requiring fast movements and such, and more and more games like Battle Brothers, Darkest Dungeon, etc.
Also, in the past months I've been unable to play Chiv 2. It's very sad, I used to be really good but now I'm just a 1:1 K/D shitter.
Sports games are the ultimate midwit filter.
Handhelds were never good
Breath of the wild kindof sucks but it's still better than Tears of the Kingdom.
BOTW's map was carefully designed with the campaign in mind, while in TOTK they just change some shit around like a romhack. BOTW's pacing was also way better and didn't have nearly as much menu usage. TOTK's "improvements" are incredibly superficial. "Unique" bosses look better than the blights but are braindead to Wind Waker levels. Gloom hands are scarier than guardians, at least until you realize the game has like 7 total and they just die if you run more than ten feet from them. The depths are just dogshit. Cheesing a shrine in BOTW was actually kindof tricky whereas in TOTK everything can be broken with bomb flower arrows and rocket shields. And TOTK has the stupidest story I've ever seen in a game. The context unskippable text spam in the beginning was horrible, Great Plateau absolutely BTFOs the Great Sky Island/Lookout landing bullshit to get the glider.
Only "true" improvement I can say TOTK has is the faster loading is great, BOTW's load times were horrible. But overall if BOTW was a 7/10 game TOTK is a 5.5/10 at best. It's not going to age well at all.
Dark Souls games are not fun.
minecraft is the best game to have ever existed
I think souls games are mediocre by design and should never have gotten any awards or public attention.
>inb4 rewarding difficulty
That's literally why it's mediocre, the difficulty is just a way to hide how boring and unpolished they are, the combat can be summed into roll, wait for open, attack, and rinse and repeat.
tell me a game where exploration is more exciting than dark souls 1.
If combat is a fricking chore and every corner there's two idiots waiting for you I'd wouldn't call that exciting.
I like to explore devastated lands dude. Like the city in Nier Tomato. no really, if you think there are better games from that point of view, I'll be happy to know them
Open world games are a chore. If I wanted to spend 20 minutes walking somewhere to do a short odd job, and get paid just enough to buy a new pair of pants or something, I'd become a handyman.
Persona 3 is the worst JRPG I have ever played and that story is terrible
Videogames do not have to be fun in order to be enjoyable.
Every game that allows you to play as different races should let you play as a skeketon
TLOU II is Naughty Dog's best game and a great TPS. It's also better than TEW1/2, RE4, RE4:RE, and Uncharted. My biggest issue is the pacing and bloated level segments where you explore empty space while walking and talking.
JA2 and Xcom are fricking boring, and filled with endless busywork, thanks to their granular amounts of detail and awful UIs and controls. No. Patches and source ports wont fix them entirely. In fact, I think adding tons of mechanics to turn based games actually makes them much worse to play as opposed to being better.
Openworld games are only interesting when you add PvP elements to them. That's why Hunt and Tarkov are fricking legions beyond the single player ones.
OS2 is a great CRPG and it's way better than FO1/2, Underrail, and all of Troika's games.
Apex is a great game with a high skill ceiling and intense firefights. it's one of the best MP games ever made.
Platformers made an awful transition to 3D and i think Ratchet and Jak focusing on combat made them much more interesting.
Dark Souls 2 is more fun than Dark Souls 3
Valve screwed over the Artifact fanbase by cancelling the Artifact 2.0 beta without even allowing users to invite friends like they said they would in January 2021 and does not deserve your financial support for these gross consumer-unfriendly practices.
FF13 is good
Graphical fidelity can make a game more memorable and help every other part of the game do what it wants to do
It can also help motivate the player to WANT to play it, git gud, etc.
dark souls is bad
unnskipable cutscenes in hard boss fights are soulful as frick.
Muh Vegas a shit
RDR2 had a bad story.
Disco Elysium is interesting and compelling specifically because of the generally socialist perspective of its creators, which was crucial in informing the setting and the characters in it, elevating the plot, and creating realistic and relatable themes. This is true despite the multiple metaphors and analogies used to criticize or make fun of specific aspects of real life socialists and socialism
bump
Things I don't like should be censored