Hot/Controversial/Bad takes

[DMN in the House]

8 hours ago, RPS said:

Someone said earlier that most indie games are shit. Opposite opinion most Western made AAA games. Too much focus on adding features rather than making those features engaging, interesting or precise. Indie games typically lack numerous features, but most of them do a good job of perfecting one or two features. This is why people have nostalgia for older games.

 

8 hours ago, Gabriel said:

I would rather sit down and play BroForce than 95% of AAA shooters for this exact reason.

I honestly think this is a case of oversaturation of mainstream FPSes (though, admittedly, all the dudes at work save me play that shit), and a few high profile flops (FallOut 76), because some great AAA titles came out last year. AC: Odyssey, GOW, RDR2, all amazing games, but not shooters.

[RPS]

AC and RDR2 were two games that I was specifically thinking about when it came to bulky games with too many features and none of which are engaging or interesting. RDR2 looks like an outstanding piece of art. But it does not look like a fun video game. 

 

[Arjen Robben]

On 12/02/2019 at 22:19, Chris2K said:

I don't understand the want/need for wild animals that you can hunt and kill in games, and I get more frustrated every time by developers making predatory animals more and more like mindless killing machines when in reality they would run away from you in a heartbeat.

I'd like to echo this. Does my head in in games where predators just automatically attack every single time. Can't play a game with sharks without them arrowing straight towards you, can't go near any big cat, or bear or anything. I wish it was random, like cougars in Red Dead just take you down on sight when I think the reality is that cougars will pretty rarely attack people? I'd like games to reflect that where the behaviour is random, a bear might attack you, it might not. A shark might attack you, it might just calmly swim around. I wish it was more of a case of randomness and situational. Swim around near a shark and it'll just calmly cruise around, start pissing about next to it and shit's gonna kick off cause you've agitated it.

[Josh]

1 hour ago, RPS said:

AC and RDR2 were two games that I was specifically thinking about when it came to bulky games with too many features and none of which are engaging or interesting. RDR2 looks like an outstanding piece of art. But it does not look like a fun video game. 

 

I can see where it might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but I just got back into video games after 15 years away. I started with RDR2 and I sunk in 75-100 hours and enjoyed every minute. Beautiful, emotionally engaging, and just fun to play.

[RPS]

14 minutes ago, Josh to the World said:

I can see where it might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but I just got back into video games after 15 years away. I started with RDR2 and I sunk in 75-100 hours and enjoyed every minute. Beautiful, emotionally engaging, and just fun to play.

I truthfully have never played the game, but from the descriptions and videos I have seen, I don't think I would like it. I am a sucker for precise controls and being immersed in the gameplay experience. The second I hit a button and the intended effect does not occur, I get upset. 

[Chris2K]

3 hours ago, Arjen Robben said:

I'd like to echo this. Does my head in in games where predators just automatically attack every single time. Can't play a game with sharks without them arrowing straight towards you, can't go near any big cat, or bear or anything. I wish it was random, like cougars in Red Dead just take you down on sight when I think the reality is that cougars will pretty rarely attack people? I'd like games to reflect that where the behaviour is random, a bear might attack you, it might not. A shark might attack you, it might just calmly swim around. I wish it was more of a case of randomness and situational. Swim around near a shark and it'll just calmly cruise around, start pissing about next to it and shit's gonna kick off cause you've agitated it.

I did the research, there have been five fatal cougar attacks in the last 22 years. Depending on where you go in RDR2 you could have that many in one game session.

[FLiam]

Zelda is overrated. 

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

Nintendo would be a lot better if they didn't "Mario-fy" (or their other main characters) so many of their games. 

 

In fact, Mario is a stupid console mascot.

[Rocky]

1 hour ago, Chris2K said:

I did the research, there have been five fatal cougar attacks in the last 22 years. Depending on where you go in RDR2 you could have that many in one game session.

Would the same numbers work 120 years ago when there were less people and more cougars?

[Chris2K]

Most likely yes, but I reckon you can switch out RDR2 with GTA V and have pretty much the same experience. Rockstar (and Ubisoft for that matter) just love their overly aggressive animals no matter what the time period. I have to think that there is the audience for it who enjoy the visceral feeling of battling a wild animal, regardless of whether that would happen in real life or not.

[OctoberRaven]

Come to think of it I don't think I ran into a single cougar when I played RDR2. Mind you I only played it for a little bit and was mostly fucking around the first city. Wolves and a couple bears, no cougars.

Also I think cougars are actually deadlier in GTAV then they are RDR1 because RDR1 you can potentially survive where in GTAV they just outright end you.

[apsham]

Yeah, I still have only run into a single cougar and it happened in the epilogue.

[Gorka]

Even if you're entertaining or there's plenty of valid points, I'm not going to watch your two and a half hour video on a video game's failures.

[Arjen Robben]

I still haven't seen a panther other than the legendary one which is scripted to some degree.

But yeah, it just seems to be the done thing in games where predators just attack on sight the moment you're within about 200ft of them. It's a shame cause it'd actually probably make it a lot more intense and exhilarating if the attacks were a lot more random rather than just "oh the map says there's bears/cougars/wolves here, guess I'm definitely having to fight a bear/cougar/wolf then". 

[OctoberRaven]

5 hours ago, apsham said:

Yeah, I still have only run into a single cougar and it happened in the epilogue.

Theory confirmed: Cougars just fucking hate John Marston.

[Ruki]

To The Moon is pretty shit and I'm not sure why everyone loved it. 

[Bobfoc]

8 minutes ago, Ruki said:

To The Moon is pretty shit and I'm not sure why everyone loved it. 

That's a timely comment. It's been confirmed today that it's coming to the Switch.

[Cymbols]

@OctoberRaven Not sure if there's a hard and fast rule, but you might wanna put your last post in spoiler tags. Fairly new game, and I know a couple of the guys on here are still playing through it.

[RPS]

21 hours ago, ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster said:

Nintendo would be a lot better if they didn't "Mario-fy" (or their other main characters) so many of their games. 

 

In fact, Mario is a stupid console mascot.

Explain. I don't understand your point. 

[Josh]

21 hours ago, Chris2K said:

I did the research, there have been five fatal cougar attacks in the last 22 years. Depending on where you go in RDR2 you could have that many in one game session.

And it’s way more fun for it.